Horcruxes

Potteraholic Wed Jul 20, 2011 5:54 pm

This topic serves as an archive of a thread from the Harry Potter Lexicon Forum as hosted on World Crossing, which ceased operation on April 15, 2011. It was copied/saved by Lady Arabella and reformatted/reposted by Potteraholic. ~Potteraholic

Kip Carter - Jul 18, 2005 4:57 am
Edited Dec 13, 2006 10:52 pm

dizzy lizzy suggested this new thread with, "I've seen some rather imaginative and good ideas regarding Horcruxes and I am thinking they deserve a thread of their own. There seems to be two or three separate places that are discussing Horcruxes at the moment."

Note: There were 2 Horcrux threads on World Crossing:

• thread 1 - dated 18 Jul 2005 to 11 Dec 2006 with 2,969 posts.
• thread 2 – dated 11 Dec 2006 to 8 Aug 2009 with 1,297 posts.

Both threads will be reposted in this one thread in two sections. This post is the Main Index for both sections. The links below will take you to an indexed list of all the posts in each thread, posted in groups of 50 entries per post.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Wed Jul 20, 2011 6:10 pm

This post contains an index of posts for the thread Horcruxes (18 Jul 2005 to 11 Dec 2006).

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Horcruxes (18 Jul 2005 to 11 Dec 2006) - Index I
(click on any #_ to #_ line to read a batch of posts.)

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Wed Jul 20, 2011 6:21 pm

This post contains an index of posts for the thread Horcruxes (11 Dec 2006 to 8 Aug 2009).

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Horcruxes (11 Dec 2006 to 8 Aug 2009) - Index II
(click on any #_ to #_ line to read a batch of posts.)

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Wed Jul 20, 2011 6:34 pm

Thora - Jul 18, 2005 4:43 am (#1 of 2969)

Well this will be a pathetic first post on this thread, but here it is.

I just wanted to point out that there are two Gryffindor possessions in the headmaster’s office, the sword and the Sorting Hat. Perhaps an already enchanted item can't be used as a Horcrux, but I thought it was worth mentioning.

Thora

septentrion - Jul 18, 2005 5:04 am (#2 of 2969)

Nagini is supposed by DD to be the last Horcrux he has created. Could DD have a hint to that after Harry has seen Arthur's attack in the ministry through Nagini's eyes ? Remember, when Harry told DD what he saw, DD took a silver instrument and snakes made of smoke emerged, and DD made that mysterious comment : "but in essence divided ?" That sentence has everybody puzzled, but it could be a reference to LV's soul, in essence divided : one part in Nagini, one part in LV who was currently possessing his snake.

Elanor - Jul 18, 2005 5:08 am (#3 of 2969)
Edited Jul 18, 2005 6:08 am

Very good idea Septentrion! I love it! It could also explain why, this time, Harry was more powerfully "involved" -for lack of a better word- into the vision than he usually was, because, in a way, Voldemort was there twice.

Mattew Bates - Jul 18, 2005 6:32 am (#4 of 2969)

I have a sneaking suspicion that I know what the last Horcrux is, and it doesn't make me happy. We all know that Harry has a bit of Voldemort's powers in him. What it that's because he has a bit of Voldemort's soul in him? If that is the case, then for Voldy to truly die, Harry must die, too.

My only hope is that dying for a short tie would be enough, and a CPR revival would let Harry live after the end.

essie125 - Jul 18, 2005 6:43 am (#5 of 2969)

Could the basilisk have been a Horcrux as well? For Harry's sake I hope it was. That + the Horcrux taken by R.A.B. ( if he/she really got the opportunity to destroy it) makes 4 destroyed. That leaves 2 more + LV. Unfortunately for Harry I think there are unfortunately still 4 left. I believe that LV did find a Gryffindor thing to seal his sole in.

Nearly Legless Mick - Jul 18, 2005 6:43 am (#6 of 2969)
Edited Jul 18, 2005 7:47 am

I think Harry, and all of us are assuming that he has to destroy the remaining Horcruxes, and then kill the now mortal LV.

But I'm not sure about the last part. The original LV was already "killed" by the backfiring AK he fired at Harry. LV only survived as a kind of shadow (less than a ghost) because of the Horcruxes, so if the remaining Horcruxes are destroyed will it really be necessary to "kill" LV again?

Granted he now has a living body, but the original seventh of his soul was destroyed (assumption). If all the other sevenths are also destroyed, perhaps the new body will become an empty shell, with no consciousness occupying it. Already I don't think his current body has any of LV's soul in it, but LV survives because fractions of his soul are stored elsewhere.

I'm really not sure about it - this is very complex magic after all, but perhaps Harry can "kill" LV by destroying the Horcruxes alone, therefore he won't need to actually "kill" LV himself, if you follow my drift.

I might not have explained this very well, so here is a quick summary of my main question:

LV split his soul in 7 parts contained in himself and six Horcruxes. If the part that remained in himself was destroyed when he first attacked Harry, surely it won't need destroying again.

That's the main question, but it does throw up many others. One upshot is that if LV survives the destruction of the remaining Horcruxes does that mean that he survives with no soul at all?

What impact on all this would the "rebirth" at the end of GOF have had? Could he have a few more bits of soul to go around now? A new soul from the rebirth, plus any remaining Horcruxes.

My personal feeling is that the rebirth was just a body, and didn't affect the soul situation at all.

And will LV weaken as more and more fractions of his soul are destroyed?

This is just so complicated - I'm sorry but I find it a very difficult subject to make a coherent post about it, but I'd love to read and try to understand what the rest of you think.

Mattew Bates - Jul 18, 2005 6:51 am (#7 of 2969)

essie, I don't think the basilisk could be a Horcrux. Voldemort wasn't able to get back into Hogwarts in able to find a final relic, so how could he have enchanted the basilisk? That's not to say there isn't a Horcrux there; it simply would have had to be smuggled in. I'm kind of shaky on that, however. I think Voldy is more risk-averse than that.

Bluenote1313 - Jul 18, 2005 6:57 am (#8 of 2969)

I don't think the basilisk was one either. It would mean that two of them were snakes. A bit of overkill. I think that either DD got them right or that we have seen them all. The memories DD has and acquired helped him determine what they were, without DD or the memories, how can Harry possibly hope to discover what the remaining are. I guess I will have to go back and reread the books to see if I missed something

What do we have now? The diary (destroyed), the ring (destroyed), the locket (missing), the cup (missing), Nagini (with LV) and Voldemort himself. We are missing that 7th one...the one that is assumed to be a Gryffindor item. We have seen the sword and hat, both doubtful. Have we seen any other GG relics around?

So Sirius - Jul 18, 2005 7:00 am (#9 of 2969)

I think Harry enveloped LV's soul, to speak, when the curse rebounded, he's definitely marked, but I don't think he's a Horcrux because, I think you have to use an incantation to designate one into being one. Killing in itself isn't all you have to do. And after Voldy lost his body he wouldn't have been able to do that to Harry.

Trisha Dobel - Jul 18, 2005 7:00 am (#10 of 2969)

I do not think that Voldemort has any type of a relic from Gryffindor, I personally think that the last Horcrux is something of Ravenclaw, like DD suggested. I think that Harry will use Gryffindor’s sword to help defeat Voldemort and possibly other Horcruxes in the end.

So Sirius - Jul 18, 2005 7:00 am (#11 of 2969)
Edited Jul 18, 2005 8:49 am

I think Harry enveloped LV's soul, to speak, when the curse rebounded, he's definitely marked, but I don't think he's a Horcrux because, I think you have to use an incantation to designate one into being one. Killing in itself isn't all you have to do. And after Voldy lost his body he wouldn't have been able to do that to Harry. Unless of course, there's a way to designate everything you kill into being one, then Harry would certainly fall into being one, possibly the something or object from Gryffindor.

They've destroyed the ring and the diary, that's 2. There's the cup, the snake, something from Gryffindor and something from Ravenclaw and LV would be the last or 7th part. I think Hermione will figure out what the Gryffindor and Ravenclaw objects are.

I think about the prophecy and the wording, perhaps Harry’s power is not only love, but knowing about the Horcruxes and having the ability to destroy them, just as LV has the ability to make them?

J Hood - Jul 18, 2005 7:10 am (#12 of 2969)

Is there any clue as how you destroy the Horcruxes? I mean we know that DD destroyed one and it blackened his hand, but he never said how he did it. I realize that Harry will come up with the solutions of how to do it or at least Hermione will, but doesn't that seem like a huge task to take on even larger then just facing Voldemort.

veraco - Jul 18, 2005 7:18 am (#13 of 2969)

I have already post this in the other Horcrux tread, but I will post it here also to see what you think about it.

I do not think Harry is one of Voldy’s Horcruxes. But I think He might have been part of a similar bit of magic perform by his mother.

Now that we know for sure how one talented wizard can change a spell to act in one way or another, I think Lily, knowing the danger his son was in, perform a similar charm or spell that the one need it in order to make a Horcrux, but in this case, the one doing the killing would be Voldy and the soul or love being trapped will be Lily’s.

So that when Voldemort went to Godric’s Hollow and killed her instead of his son, even went she plead him to take her instead, he seal the charm she had previously put in her son and instead of killing Harry’s soul he destroy the "Horcrux" Lily could have left in Harry, and therefore the scar in Harry's forehead that looks awfully a lot like the broken Horcrux-ring in the UK Cover.

We now know that destroying a Horcrux is a dangerous business. For Dumbledore was and injured hand, and for Voldy and Unforgivable Curse rebound.

I also think that the lingering protection in Harry’s blood was part of this charm performed by his mother, as is the protection he can find in the Dursleys' home.

Maybe I’m just crazy but I like this theory, especially since I remember someone else’s post, can’t remember where or when, that said the scar in Harry’s forehead might be last place his mother kissed him.

TGF - Jul 18, 2005 8:55 am (#14 of 2969)

I've been trying to push this theory for two days now, but here we go again...

I think that RAB is Regulus and that he found and stored a few of the Horcruxes at 12 Grimmauld Place. I'm also of the opinion that Mundungus will have stolen and sold a few of them, creating the need for Harry to hunt down Mundungus and tell him who he sold his stolen goods to.

septentrion - Jul 18, 2005 9:05 am (#15 of 2969)

Yes, there was a locket which nobody could open in the junk of 12 Grimmauld Place. We don't know for sure what it has become.

Don't you think Snape would know how to destroy a Horcrux ? After all, he helped DD after he had destroyed one, he may get some useful details at the time. If that is the case, the question is : will he give the information to Harry ? If yes, how will he convince Harry he doesn't lie? Perhaps by showing him how to do on a real Horcrux and dying in the process ?

Kwikspell - Jul 18, 2005 10:24 am (#16 of 2969)

I'm not entirely positive that Nagini is a Horcrux. I got the impression that Dumbledore assumed she was because of the close relationship that LV has with the snake, but it was really mentioned as an example of a living creature who was also a Horcrux.

I do think it's possible that Harry's scar is an unintentional Horcrux. I think LV intended to create another Horcrux that night while killing Harry, but when the AK backfired, so did the spell and the fragment of LV's soul ended up in Harry's scar. We know the scar is important because JKR has told us this and we know that DD referred to it as Harry's connection to LV. It would make sense if this connection was actually part of LV's soul. Of course, I'm not wild about the implications for Harry's longevity if this theory turns out to be true, but maybe there's a way to get rid of the scar while sparing Harry's life.

Verbina - Jul 18, 2005 11:41 am (#17 of 2969)

Is it possible that Voldemort is unaware of how much of a connection that scar made between Harry and himself? He was unaware until OotP that Harry was able to sense his strength and emotion. So even if Harry did wind up with part of Voldemort's soul, Voldemort may not realize how much. Weak perhaps but must be considered.

I do believe the last Horcrux is a Ravenclaw item and is still in Hogwarts. The reasons for thinking it is a Ravenclaw item is that we have been told by JKR that we will learn more about the Grey Lady yet she was not mentioned once in this book (at least that I recall) It is very possible that the Grey Lady may know something of it.

I believe it is still at Hogwarts because Voldemort keeps trying to get into the school. After he finished school, he wanted to stay on. After a few years he returned to try to get a job teaching, something that Dumbledore didn't believe was is main reason for being there. Dumbledore said that Hogwarts is a place of old magic and secrets that Voldemort wants to get. Perhaps a Horcrux? Also, Dumbledore said himself that he was unable to get a great deal of memories about Voldemort either in school or out. So it is very possible that he was able to make a Horcrux while in school that Dumbledore is unaware of.

I also have a question...a Horcrux is made after the wizard/witch kills. But is it one death, one Horcrux? I ask because he killed three people and the ring was the result. One Horcrux from three deaths. He killed the old woman and the locket and the cup were the result...two Horcruxes from one death? The diary - would that have been from the result of the death of Moaning Myrtle? Trying to clarify and track the deaths here I guess.

alisa - Jul 18, 2005 12:42 pm (#18 of 2969)

I think Harry or his scar is obviously a Horcrux. Why couldn't Voldemort possess Harry? Because it would be like trying to reunite two parts of a split soul, which isn't meant to be. And also, why did the Sorting Hat want to put Harry in Slytherin originally? Because it was confused by the overwhelming presence of LV's soul in a young boy who didn't have his own identity yet, really. And, obviously, why does Harry have traits of LV and some of his gifts?

frogface - Jul 18, 2005 1:31 pm (#19 of 2969)

I'd say it’s quite probable that you're right, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that it’s obvious. We'll just have to wait and see I guess.

dizzy lizzy - Jul 18, 2005 2:12 pm (#20 of 2969)
Edited Jul 18, 2005 3:15 pm

Woot! My suggestion for a Horcrux thread was successful. Due to the lovely miracle of time zones, I've just got up from my much-needed beauty sleep! So I'm sorry I wasn't able to post earlier and express my thoughts earlier. And this is the longest post I've ever made on this forum .

I posted a similar statement on the Horcrux chapter thread , but I will repeat it here in a slightly different form here. Because I've had a lot of time thinking about it.

I think Horcruxes are made when a wizard chooses to kill deliberately in order to make a Horcrux. Either Dumbledore said to Harry or Slughorn said to Tom, that a spell was needed at the same time. This leads me to believe that a Horcrux can only be made by a wizard who is aware that he/she is going to split their soul deliberately.

So if I follow that line of logic, I also think that a wizard, such as an Auror (or Harry for that matter when the time comes) does kill, they may or may not necessarily lose a bit of their soul. If they do, then it just flits away unnoticed.

To me it is the spell said at the time of the murder that allows the wizard to catch the piece of soul and encase it. No spell...No Catch.

Verbina asked a couple of posts ago whether the multiple deaths related to multiple Horcruxes. I don't think so. I think Voldemort killed Tom Riddle (his father) in order to generate a Horcrux, but killed the grandparents to stop them talking. This is going to sound really weird, but I think Voldemort killed Tom Riddle first in order to use the distress generate by the parents to help create the Horcrux. By that logic, perhaps you need a multiple death or just witnesses, whose emotional despair at witnessing a death, actually helps generate the right atmosphere and environment.

Now having said all that here is a list of known Horcruxes and their fate so far:

Diary: Destroyed by Harry in CoS.

Ring: Destroyed by DD in HBP. Could the ring have done more damage to DD because the soul inside it was more corrupt??

Locket: Stolen by R.A.B and possibly hidden away in 12GP.

Hufflepuff's cup: I'm going out on a limb here and saying that the cup Voldemort stole from Hepzibah Smith is the 4th Horcrux.

Gryffindor/Ravenclaw relic: Again I think this Horcrux is a physical relic and as Voldemort has had trouble getting access to a Gryffindor relic; I think, like others, Ravenclaw's Grey Lady knows what is the Horcrux here.

Nagini: For no real reason than except for Dumbledore's logic. I think Nagini is Voldemort's last Horcrux.

Lord Voldemort: Unless he is totally soulless, Voldemort has one small skerrick of soul left in his body, he is his own Horcrux.

I'll leave my post here and come back and post more thoughts later.

Lizzy

Trisha Dobel - Jul 18, 2005 2:19 pm (#21 of 2969)

Lizzy I totally agree with what you just said. I think that the unknown Horcrux is something to do with Ravenclaw. I also think that Harry will use Gryffindor’s sword to defeat the Horcruxes that represent the other houses (which Voldemort took). I think the concept of Gryffindor being the brave one of four founders will also play into destroying the Horcruxes.

The Wandless Wizard - Jul 18, 2005 2:28 pm (#22 of 2969)

dizzy lizzy wrote: I think Horcruxes are made when a wizard chooses to kill deliberately in order to make a Horcrux

I disagree. Slughorn says that killing causes the split and that a wizard who wants to make a Horcrux "takes advantage" of that split. So in my mind, the soul is torn regardless of what the intent of the killing is. Then a Dark Wizard can cast the spell and move the torn piece of his soul into a Horcrux. I think even good wizards killing for good reasons (self-defense, protecting others) tear their soul. However, I think, and this is just my own thinking (maybe wishful thinking), that with time a soul can be healed. So if Harry kills Voldemort, his soul will rip. But if he manages to live beyond that, his soul will slowly heal with the help of his friends.

As for Nagini being a Horcrux, the best evidence for this is in OotP. We finally know what DD was talking about when he said "But in essence divided?" after Arthur was attacked by Nagini. When Voldemort occupied Nagini, Voldemort's soul was in the snake. But there were actually two pieces of his soul in there and they were "in essence divided". Voldemort, for the purpose of possession, put the soul he carries in his body into Nagini. However, there was already a bit of Voldemort's soul in there because she is a Horcrux. So there were 2 pieces of Voldemort's soul in Nagini and they were in essence divided. I have no idea how the little silver instrument knew this, but it seems clear now that is how DD discovered Nagini was a Horcrux.

-TWW

Astragynia Winifred Posy Miranda Yseult Cawdor - Jul 18, 2005 3:33 pm (#23 of 2969)
Edited Jul 18, 2005 4:35 pm

The Wandless Wizard wrote: So in my mind, the soul is torn regardless of what the intent of the killing is. Then a Dark Wizard can cast the spell and move the torn piece of his soul into a Horcrux.

I agree with the first bit - however, I think the Horcrux spell already has to be set in motion BEFORE the person is killed. After all, if an Auror who had just been forced to kill in self-defense could suddenly go "Oh, at least I can make a Horcrux now," it wouldn't be very Dark magic, would it? I think the fact that the murder has to be premeditated, as part of the ritual of the spell, is what makes Horcruxes so completely abhorrent.

Which means: if Voldemort was planning to make his sixth Horcrux that night in Godric's Hollow through killing Harry, most of the spell was already in place, so in all the confusion over sacrificial love the Horcrux spell could easily have "mis-fired" somehow, and wound up in Harry.

Or, Voldemort might have planned all along to use the infant Harry's corpse as his Horcrux - it's gruesome, I know, but it would certainly be an interesting twist on "something of Gryffindor's." (This pretty much supposes the "descendant of Gryffindor" theory, though). This would mean that the Horcrux spell worked perfectly - (Voldie's soul was already torn by just having killed Harry's parents) the only complication was that the "corpse" continued to live!

Diagon Nilly - Jul 18, 2005 3:43 pm (#24 of 2969)

TGF, you thief! That was my theory! :p

That's okay, I owe you one. With that said, I agree with TGF.

Also, I'm so sure that Harry is the last Horcrux that I'd bet all my HP special editions on it. I'll tell ya why:

Voldy was actively looking for a Ravenclaw and Gryffindor relic to put his soul into. No real word on if he found it or not, but he probably did. However, I imagine Voldy would have started preparing to give his soul to these relics before he even found them - so he'd be "ready" as I'm guessing it's quite complex magic. If he found the Ravenclaw relic (and I'm only guessing he did), he'd be really REALLY ready for the Gryffindor relic once he got to Harry. Well, it's been implied that Harry might be a descendant of Gryffindor from his father’s side (as Dumbledore said, only a "true" Gryffindor could have pulled the sword from the Sorting Hat). Therefore, Voldy might have accidently created his last Horcrux without realizing he was doing it. Killing Lily right before only sealed that deal - if that's what it takes to really make a Horcrux happen.

Would the pieces of soul in these Horcruxes have Voldy's personality, or are they just a sort of life energy? I'm guessing just an energy, as Harry doesn't have Voldy's personality - just some of his powers.

Dragonesss - Jul 18, 2005 4:40 pm (#25 of 2969)

When DD said Voldemort likes trophies I remember about Tom Riddle’s Special Award for the school, one in the Trophy Room. He might have jinxed it when he visited DD. We don’t know how much time you can have between killing and ‘depositing’ part of your soul in the object.

The Sword and the Lion - Jul 18, 2005 5:38 pm (#26 of 2969)
Edited Jul 18, 2005 6:42 pm

Hmmm -- I wonder how the destruction of the Horcruxes in the next book will effect Lord Voldemort's appearance. Will Lord Voldemort begin to assume the look of Tom Riddle once more? We will have to wait and see because we did not get a chance to glance Voldemort in the HBP.

I do believe that Harry could be the last Horcruxes for a few reasons.

1) When Harry discovers Riddle's Diary in the Chamber of Secrets, Tom Riddle's name looks familiar to Harry, " ... like an old lost friend ..." if I remember correctly.

2) If Harry was an heir of Gryffindor which has been widely speculated about for ages, perhaps Voldemort sought to make Harry his victim for a trophy.

3) The essence divided scene in the OoTP which someone has pointed out in a previous post.

I really hope that Harry is not the last Horcrux, but it does seem that Harry and Voldemort are linked -- they even have brother wands.

Oh, one last question -- why is the number seven considered to be lucky? Have I missed something?

J Hood - Jul 18, 2005 5:56 pm (#27 of 2969)

I really don't think that Harry is the last Horcrux for the simple reason that he didn't die. As DD said, Voldemort was planning on making Harry the final Horcrux, but when he didn't die he couldn't do it. In order for the soul to be divided and a Horcrux be created, the person needs to kill the intended victim. Since he never succeeded he was force to make is final Horcrux later.

firebolt - Jul 18, 2005 6:02 pm (#28 of 2969)

I forgot about the linked wands - I think that's another piece of evidence for Harry's scar being a Horcrux. I just posted this on the Chapter 23 thread, but I think Voldemort could have created the scar Horcrux when he killed Lily and/or James. I don't think Harry would have to die for this to be the case, but he would have to have the scar removed. The diary Horcrux was destroyed, but the ring survived - maybe Harry could survive also.

I was one of the early supporters of the "Harry is a Horcrux" theory, but there is strong evidence against it also, especially the fact that Voldemort sincerely tries to kill Harry in books 2 and 4. Why would he kill him if he could capture him and keep him alive and the Horcrux safe?

I love the idea of Harry using the Gryffindor sword to kill Voldemort. I'm uncomfortable with him using AK, and I think he could use a "regular" weapon to kill Voldemort once all of the Horcruxes were destroyed and V was mortal. Also, if the missing Horcrux was a Ravenclaw item, the quest theme of the next book would involve a little house unity - the Hufflepuffs might have to help him locate the cup and the Ravenclaws would help find the Ravenclaw thing.

Nate - Jul 18, 2005 7:53 pm (#29 of 2969)

There is a glaring problem with the idea that LV intended to make Harry a Horcrux and it is this. He believed through the prophecy that he had to kill Harry, so it would be INCREDIBLY DUMB for you to install a piece of your soul in something which you'd either kill or be killed by. LV is not DUMB and would not even consider attempting to make Harry a Horcrux, unintentionally it is still unlikely as LV was not planning on doing it for the above reasons.

Had to point that out.

Aqualu Nifey - Jul 18, 2005 9:02 pm (#30 of 2969)

I think the wand laying on the faded purple cushion outside Ollivander's is a Horcrux. Not entirely sure why, but on his thread, it was suggested that Ollivander might have been Grindelwald, the evil dark wizard. Just a thought....

Astragynia Winifred Posy Miranda Yseult Cawdor - Jul 18, 2005 9:09 pm (#31 of 2969)
Edited Jul 18, 2005 10:12 pm

Nate - I think we need to define what the phrase "use for a Horcrux" means. As I understand it, for a Horcrux you'd need 2 things: 1. a live person to murder (in order to tear your soul), and 2. Something to place the soul-piece in, which could be an inanimate object (like the ring) or something alive (like your pet snake).

Dumbledore seemed to think (quite logically) that Voldemort intended to make a Horcrux that night in Godric's Hollow, using Harry as "item 1" - the murder victim - meaning that Voldie must have brought some unknown object with him, intending to use it as "item 2."

As I see it, in order for Harry/his scar to BE a Horcrux (as in the "item 2" of the spell which actually contains the piece of soul), there are two ways this could have happened:

- Something went drastically wrong with the Horcrux spell when the Avada Kedavra spell didn't work as planned, and the piece of soul somehow attached itself to the object the wand was pointing at - Baby Harry. (The rip in Voldie's soul was already there from having killed Harry's parents).

- OR (this is the gruesome one) Voldemort intended to murder Harry - in other words, using him as "item 1" in the Horcrux spell - and then use Harry's lifeless corpse as "item 2," putting his soul into it, and presumably mummifying it somehow later. Then Voldemort would have walked out the door carrying an infant's body, to put it somewhere safe (like a cave or something). If this was the plan, then the Horcrux spell worked pretty much as it should have - the complication was that the AK rebounded, so the "object" in question stayed alive.

Possibility one is FAR more likely - the corpse thing is just too horrific an idea, even for dark magic. It would be a, um, creative way for Voldemort to have found "something of Gryffindor's," though.

I'm going to have nightmares tonight for sure, after thinking all this out.

Solitaire - Jul 18, 2005 10:41 pm (#32 of 2969)
Edited Jul 18, 2005 11:42 pm

I posted on the Chapter 23 thread, but I guess it could work here, too. If Voldemort could use Harry for a Horcrux, why not Lily's body? Could he have used her corpse after he killed her? Imagine the horror Harry would experience if one of the Horcruxes he had to destroy was the body of his mother.

Another option--a "trophy" of his kill, so to speak, which Dumbledore has said Voldemort likes to collect--could be Lily's wand. Do we know what happened to it? What if her wand was used as a Horcrux? This could certainly have been done before Voldemort turned his attention to Harry. Then again, I suppose his own wand could also be a Horcrux. This way, he would always have a piece of his own soul with him ... even if it is not in him.

I've also wondered if Lily's corpse might not be used as an Inferi against Harry at some point ... now that I know such a thing exists.

Solitaire

Diagon Nilly - Jul 18, 2005 11:01 pm (#33 of 2969)

I would be surprised if Voldemort intended to use Harry as a Horcrux. I feel like it happened by accident when the AK backfired. I doubt Voldy would have chosen to becomes less than a shadow at that moment.

Also, maybe Harry DID die when he was a baby. If a soul is just energy and doesn't really possess the personality of the owner, than perhaps Harry's soul left his body when he was a baby and was replaced by the piece of Voldy's soul. It's real ambiguous if the function one's soul is diminished when it's in pieces. However, Harry may have been living his life as an active vehicle for another person's soul, not just as a storage facility. Why isn't Harry evil then? Well, for one, souls don't carry a personality. Second, it's constantly emphasized in these books (specially CoS) that it's all about our choices in life. Harry strikes be as being the good kind of man Tom Riddle would have been if he'd made better choices for himself.

I'm not too sure I buy my own theory, but it's a thought.

Solitaire - Jul 18, 2005 11:32 pm (#34 of 2969)

OUCH! I just had a horrible thought ... Remember that, down in the Chamber of Secrets, Tom Riddle tells Harry that he began to pour a little bit of his soul back into Ginny. COULD GINNY BE THE MISSING HORCRUX?

In the new alchemy thread here in the spoilers folder, Hollywand said the following in post #6: I think perhaps Ginny's continued interest in Harry will blossom into something more malevolent in Book Seven.

Could the Harry-Ginny 'ship be leading to the destruction of both Harry and Ginny?

Solitaire

magicgirl - Jul 19, 2005 2:31 am (#35 of 2969)

I don't buy Harry as a Horcrux. I think Voldemort had an object to place his soul in but when AK backfired it was either destroyed or left at Godric’s Hollow. Maybe something at Godric’s Hollow when he goes to visit will give him a clue.

Elanor - Jul 19, 2005 2:38 am (#36 of 2969)

Solitaire, it is a ominous thought indeed! Actually, I am still very worried for Ginny and thus for Harry, mostly, as we said on the alchemy thread, because of the Ginevra/vinegar anagram (we talked a lot about the alcohol symbolism on the regular alchemy threads and this symbols come again very, very often in the HBP).

BTW, a silly thought occurred to me about the Horcruxes: what Harry needs now is a pet Dementor, able to suck the foul Voldemort's soul from the remaining Horcruxes. Ok, I'm joking about the "pet Dementor" but, on a second thought, we have parts of souls "stored" in objects and soul-sucking creatures, I wonder if they will meet somehow in book 7...

Spursgirl79 - Jul 19, 2005 8:02 am (#37 of 2969)

Elanor.. I also suspect that Dementors will feature strongly in book 7 in relation to the Horcruxes.. how, I'm not sure.

Is there any relevance in the fact that Voldemort decided to split his soul 7 ways.. apart from the fact that it's mentioned as a 'magic' number? Any tie-in with the number of books/school years, or simply coincidental? (not that I think anything JKR does is coincidental!)

Verbina - Jul 19, 2005 8:11 am (#38 of 2969)

I thin it is just because of the old magical preference for 7 but...who knows with JKR.

I was thinking about the Horcruxes and how they make them again. Trying to get my mind wrapped around the idea. I am trying to figure out what deaths are related to each of the Horcruxes I guess.

Does the person who makes the Horcrux have to commit the murder themselves? I only ask that because...well...the diary. Obviously made while still in Hogwarts, the diary, at first I thought was from the death of Moaning Myrtle. But...the basilisk killed her not Voldie. So, for what death did he gain that one?

I get the feeling that the ring came later on. So he got the ring for killing his father and grandparents. (I don't think you can kill someone and then years later make a Horcrux. I get the feeling it has to be fairly soon after the death.)

The locket and cup - if you can only gain one Horcrux from a death, then he got the Horcrux for killing the old woman and there is yet another death unaccounted for here.

Nagini - The death of Bertha Jorkins perhaps?

All that is left is the mystery one and then Voldie's little bit of soul he still retains. If you do have to make the Horcrux soon after the death and we are right in thinking he was going to make a Horcrux the night he killed Harry's parents, could it still be at Godric's Hollow?

Belladonna - Jul 19, 2005 9:19 am (#39 of 2969)

I agree with your theory that Voldemort was torn from the 7th piece of his soul and it unintentionally went into Harry through the scar when the curse rebounded.

I'm wondering if JKR has left clues to all of the other Horcruxes in the previous books: I'm convinced the Locket is the one they came across while cleaning Grimmauld place in book 5 (I also believe from what was said that Regulus Black did not have time to destroy it), we have the diary book 2, now I'm wracking my brains trying to remember any references to the Hufflepuff cup, and other Ravenclaw, and Gryffindor items in 1, 3, and 4.

Prongs Patronus - Jul 19, 2005 9:27 am (#40 of 2969)

Such interesting posts! All of you have given me much to think upon.

I don't think Nagini is a Horcrux--I think she is an Animagus.(unregistered, of course.) that would leave: the diary, the ring, the locket (Slytherin), the cup (Hufflepuff), ? (Ravenclaw), and Harry Potter, son of the Head Boy and Girl of their year, both Sorted into the House of Gryffindor, living in Godric's Hollow--he would be the "relic" of Gryffindor (or, at least that scar is, I believe), and lastly, the Dark Lord himself, with his seventh part of a soul.

Three objects "of" Lord Voldemort himself--the ring, the diary, and himself; four objects from the Founders of Hogwarts-- the locket, the cup, the Ravenclaw artifact, and Harry.

PP

Ant Hem - Jul 19, 2005 9:34 am (#41 of 2969)
Edited Jul 19, 2005 10:36 am

Couldn't the Sorting Hat be a Horcrux? It belonged to Godric Gryffindor but has elements of all 4 founders in it, which would really appeal to Voldemort's vanity. This would also cover the Gryffindor and Ravenclaw aspects in a single item. Plus the Hat has a little bit of potential influence on every student, especially those too weak-minded to make a choice as Harry did.

The best source to back up this theory comes from JKR's own words, albeit in a fairly old quote, which can be found in the Sorting Hat's entry on this very site: "The character you might be most surprised to see evolve is none other than the Sorting Hat. 'There is more to the Sorting Hat than what you have read about in the first three books,' Rowling says. 'Readers will find out what the Sorting Hat becomes as they get into future books.'"

It's the bit about what it "becomes" that intrigues me most - and Slytherin's spirit/essence in the Hat could have helped hide this part of the Hat's nature from Dumbledore.

Ant

The Sword and the Lion - Jul 19, 2005 9:35 am (#42 of 2969)
Edited Jul 19, 2005 11:21 am

This thought just occurred to me while I was posting on the Predictions for Book Seven thread.

Harry may not be able to find all of the Horcruxes and destroy them before he faces Lord-Voldemort. However, if Priori-Incantatem occurs again, Voldemort's wand may reverse his own Horcrux spells which could make Voldemort mortal for a brief moment. During this time frame, Harry or another individual, may be able to finish Voldemort off (Snape, Neville, Worm-Tail, Draco, etc.).

Ant-Hem, I like your theory, but the Sorting Hat has aided Harry in the past by providing Harry with Gryffindor’s sword. This has proven that the sorting-hat was an ally of Harry. However, if Voldemort does turn the sorting-hat into a Horcrux to replace a previously destroyed Horcrux (Tom Riddle's Diary), the sorting-hat might be able to take the form of a person. This person would have the founder's brains which could prove detrimental to Voldemort. Isn't Hogwarts' motto, "Never wake a sleeping Dragon?" =)

nu9p - Jul 19, 2005 10:15 am (#43 of 2969)

My predictions are...Harry will be at school, but will continually leave, just like Dumbledore in book six. Most of the time Ron and Hermione will go with him, because he seems strongest with them. The last Horcrux will bring him to face Voldemort, this will most likely be when he kills Nagini (spelling?). The Horcruxes will be Nagini, the diary, the Slytherin ring, the Hufflepuff cup, and the Ravenclaw(?) locket. Voldemort wanted six Horcruxes, so that his soul would be split into seven parts. I believe he was going to use, and is still planning to use Harry's murder to complete his sixth Horcrux. This is why Voldemort is so adamant that he kill Harry, and not a Death Eater. If my calculations are right then there are only three Horcruxes that the trio must discover and destroy. This will show equality three equals three. If this is true, than this would be a good reason for Snape to not kill or hurt Harry at the end of book six.

K Michaelis - Jul 19, 2005 10:30 am (#44 of 2969)

why is the number seven considered to be lucky? Have I missed something?

It's not that it's considered lucky, but that it's considered "complete." In medieval biblical numerology, theologians speculated that the number 7 is the "perfect" number, representing completion.

PensivePensieve - Jul 19, 2005 10:38 am (#45 of 2969)

I might be wrong, but wasn't it asserted in the book that Voldemort could have made any number of Horcruxes (at the price of his soul) but chose only 7 because of it being a mystical number. Just wanted to point that out.

Aurora Gubbins - Jul 19, 2005 10:49 am (#46 of 2969)

I think other important numbers are 1, 8, 9 and 12. Taken from things I've picked up over many years. In the books, the most important number, as many have pointed out, is 12.

dobbyiscool - Jul 19, 2005 10:50 am (#47 of 2969)

I was just thinking about LV's soul being split. Does the size of the soul matter at all? When the soul is described as splitting, I thought it splits in two halves, thus the first Horcrux LV made would have half his soul, the second would be 1/4, the third 1/8, the fourth 1/16 etc. Does that make sense? So the first Horcrux (probably the ring) had the most amount of soul, making it harder to destroy.

I doubt Harry is a Horcrux because LV wanted and still wants him dead. The object he had been planning on turning in to a Horcrux is probably still around the Potter's destroyed home.

Ant Hem - Jul 19, 2005 10:50 am (#48 of 2969)

Another fun interpretation of the Horcrux issue is that there are only three left for Harry to find, because one never materialised when Voldemort tried to kill Harry. Dumbledore briefly seems to suggest this, then goes off on trying to find six after all. Thus when Harry has destroyed 3 more and finally goes to confront Voldemort, he might have deduced that he's got all the Horcruxes he need (5 + 1 that never happened + 1 in Voldemort), but he can't be 100% sure he hasn't missed one, in which case Voldemort could not be killed. This theory heightens dramatic tension for the final face-off.

Personally, I hope the locket isn't a Horcrux, as that would mean two Slytherin items were used, though I can't see any good reason why it shouldn't be one of them.

Surtseystwin - Jul 19, 2005 11:10 am (#49 of 2969)

We now know that destroying a Horcrux is a dangerous business. For Dumbledore was and injured hand<

Dumbledore's hand was not injured in destroying the ring. When he and Harry visit Slughorn, we see the injured hand, and Dumbledore wearing the ring on the other hand. Perhaps he was injured in retrieving the ring, but for now that is a mystery.

I think it's possible that there are only 5 Horcruxes; the book, the ring, the locket, perhaps the cup, and Nagini (snakes can live a very long time) all imbued with a portion of Voldemort's soul prior to the episode in Godric’s Hollow. He no doubt killed many during that time period.

If he was planning to make the sixth and final Horcrux after killing the child of the prophecy (a powerful bit of magic), the spell may never have been completed when the killing curse rebounded. Perhaps the seventh portion of Voldemort's soul was destroyed at that time. If not, I think it's unlikely that he would have concerned himself with trying to further split his soul in his weakened spectral or slimy baby states.

If there is a sixth Horcrux, it seems possible that it may not have been created until after Voldemort's rebirth in GOF.

psipsina - Jul 19, 2005 11:16 am (#50 of 2969)
Edited Jul 19, 2005 12:16 pm

Hi guys

After reading the thread, a theory came to my mind...it might just be me rumbling but....

I think that the Horcruxes will eventually each correspond to each of the books. What do we know so far about them, or what do we think we know? For the moment, we know the 3, ring, diary and locket, and we believe that Nagini and the Hufflepuff cup will be the other 2 leaving 1 unknown (possibly related to Ravenclaw) and Voldemort (with the last part of his soul).

Now, I believe the Horcruxes relate to the books as follows:

- Book 1 - The Philosopher's Stone - Ring (with the black stone)
- Book 2 - Chamber of secrets - The diary (for obvious reasons)
- Book 3 - Prisoner - Nagini (since Buckbeak played an important part in the story
- Book 4 - Goblet - Hufflepuff cup
- Book 5 - OoTP - Locket (relation to 12 Grimmauld Place)
- Book 6 - HBP - Ravenclaw (?)(as yet unknown)
- Book 7 - ????? - Voldemort (again I think for obvious reasons)

Would this help at all in guessing the order in which the Horcruxes were created, or what they might be???

My two knuts......

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Wed Jul 20, 2011 6:37 pm

Nathan Zimmermann - Jul 19, 2005 11:21 am (#51 of 2969)

A question could Bella, Lucius, Severus, and Igor have been entrusted with a Horcrux. I am curious because, Bella made a commentary about Voldemort entrusted her with something and then stopped herself.

Detail Seeker - Jul 19, 2005 11:24 am (#52 of 2969)

One argument against Harry being the sixth Horcrux:

Tom started creating Horcruxes while still at school and continued fast after leaving, when in Borgin & Burkes¥ service (diary, locket, ring, cup). Why wait some 30 years to finish this ? Has it taken him that long to find something related to Gryffindor ? Speculating on a relationship between Harry and Gryffindor as a reason for using Harry is not a sound base, as we do not know, if this relation exists.

A bit of impatience is within LV's character, so he wouldn’t he have tried to finish his work as fast as possible ? He killed enough to find a situation for creating a sixth Horcrux earlier.

But, admittedly, Harry or Ginny as a Horcrux would be a nice complication of the plot.

I Am Used Vlad - Jul 19, 2005 11:37 am (#53 of 2969)

Dumbledore says that he thinks Voldemort was still at least one short when he killed Harry's parents. That is a long time from when he started making Horcruxes, I'll admit, but Dumbledore seems to have researched Voldemort's life quite thoroughly, so I'm inclined to believe him.

septentrion - Jul 19, 2005 11:40 am (#54 of 2969)
Edited Jul 19, 2005 12:40 pm

A random idea : what if Harry collects the Horcruxes and then cast them through the Veil in the Department of Mysteries ? Of course, it's still dangerous to just collect them but it would be easier if he can just do that to destroy them.

Nymphadora - Jul 19, 2005 11:43 am (#55 of 2969)

Nathan, I was just about to say this!! First of all, psipsina, great theory Smile

Kudos to Spursgirl79 (post 37) who I think mentioned it first.

So I think that the book/Horcrux connections are pretty much spot-on, with the possible exception of the Ravenclaw relic being moved on to the 7th book as we know that Ravenclaw will play a chunky part over there (ITV interview). I don't know where that leaves the Voldy part though so I'm being reserved in this.

I think therefore that Lucius had (as we all know) the Diary, that Bella had the Ring (as the stone is Black), that Severus possibly had the Cup as it could be related to Potions, and that Regulus was entrusted with the Locket before his deserting the DEs - he then tracked it down somehow and destroyed it all the same. I seriously doubt Igor had any of them, though.

It remains to be seen whether the Ravenclaw relic is with someone else (some Ravenclaw DE maybe?) and who Nagini was with while Voldy was in Albania.

Bluenote1313 - Jul 19, 2005 11:47 am (#56 of 2969)
Edited Jul 19, 2005 12:53 pm

Originally I think it was LV's plan to make Harry a Horcrux (and thus negating the prophecy because if Harry did kill LV part of him would still live on in Harry) I think that in the process it backfired, because of the protections Harry had and his mother's sacrifice and LV was killed. This still left him one short, so when he returned he made Nagini the living Horcrux thus completing his 6 (plus himself) Horcruxes.

I don't think Harry is a Horcrux, because DD doesn't seem to be all that concerned that LV was trying to make him one when he killed Harry's parents. He seems pretty sure that the only living one is Nagini. I do think that Ginny will be a big part because I think there is a part of the memories in her from CoS. I think she will be of assistance in knowing what is and isn't a Horcrux.

Also, I am sticking with the theory that DD was spot on in book 6 about listing the Horcruxes, without that list, Harry would have no place to start in destroying the existing ones. If he has to figure out for himself what they are, with no memories to help, he is in trouble. I expect that Norbert or Buckbeak will kill Nagini in a fight, Harry will destroy the cup, find the locket at the house all pretty early in the story. The remainder will consist of Harry figuring out what the 6th Horcrux is and then the final battle with LV.

Nathan Zimmermann - Jul 19, 2005 12:04 pm (#57 of 2969)
Edited Jul 19, 2005 1:16 pm

I doubt Ginny is a Horcrux because, of the quote J.K. Rowling made concerning Tom Riddle's Diary.

In 'Chamber of Secrets', what would have happened if Ginny had died and Tom Riddle had escaped the diary? I can’t answer that fully until all seven books are finished, but it would have strengthened the present-day Voldemort considerably

I wonder if Voldemort was intending to turn Ginny into a Horcrux but that Ginny's rescue and the destruction of the diary prevented Voldemort from transforming Ginny into a Horcrux

I believe that Igor was also entrusted with Horcrux. He and Regulus decided to break away from the Death Eaters. He, Regulus, and Kreacher stole the Locket. Igor was subsequently captured by the Aurors and so was saved. Regulus hid the locket at 12GP intending to destroy it but, he was killed before he could do so.

Toad - Jul 19, 2005 12:23 pm (#58 of 2969)
Edited Jul 19, 2005 1:29 pm

I think it is quite likely that Harry will turn out to be a Horcrux, as a lot of people have guessed. JKR has said that there is a huge clue to the series in CoS and I think that if this theory is true I can see what that clue might be. Dumbledore's exact words(from CoS p245 UK) are "Unless I am very much mistaken [Voldemort] transferred some of his own powers to you the night he gave you that scar. Not something he intended to do I'm sure..."

Let's say that the fact that Harry has a portion of Riddle's soul grants him certain powers (a diminished capacity to speak with snakes, for example) and also links him to Voldemort, so that they can read each other's mind etc. The thing to remember is that Voldemort did it by accident. He went there to kill Harry and it backfired considerably. We don't know how to make a Horcrux exactly but it's fair to say that this was a very unusual case. No one had ever tried to make seven before and clearly something unexpected happened, which is probably related to the fact that Voldemort only needed one more to have the full seven and because he had just murdered Lily moments earlier (we know that murder is part of the process).

This would explain everything that's happened to Harry so far and help us to understand the connection between Voldemort and Harry. Furthermore from Rowling's point of view it would be a way to redeem Tom Riddle's soul, which through Harry has now experienced love for the first time in its existence. The young Riddle that we saw in the pensieve had such a rough life it was almost inevitable that he would be affected by it. I'm not trying to justify his actions because it was still ultimately his choice although it does seem a little unfair. In a sense Riddle has been given a second chance.

Does anyone else think that this theory is extremely close to Redhen's 'Changeling Hypothesis'?

The Wandless Wizard - Jul 19, 2005 12:55 pm (#59 of 2969)
Edited by Jul 19, 2005 1:57 pm

The huge clue from CoS is the diary itself. JKR said that Harry discovered something that would become important in HBP. He discovered the diary. It turned out to be a Horcrux or 1/7 of Voldemort's soul. The diary alone, being a Horcrux, fits JKR’s description of something important. JKR said the most important question we could ask, pre-HBP, was why Voldemort didn't die. The clue was in CoS in the form of the diary.

Surtseystwin- DD did injure his hand while destroying the Ring Horcrux. He didn't actually destroy the ring. He took out/destroyed Voldemort's soul that was in the ring, and in doing so blackened his hand. That is why he was able to wear the ring afterwards. At that point it was just a ring. Well, not just a ring, but Slytherin's ring. It was a soul free ring though when he wore it to see Slughorn.

The parts of Voldemort's soul are hidden in 7 locations: Voldemort, Nagini, Slytherin's locket, Slytherin's Ring (the soul was destroyed), The Diary (destroyed), Hufflepuff's Cup, and a mystery artifact most likely belonging to Ravenclaw. Neither Harry nor Ginny is a Horcrux. DD's little silver instrument (in OotP) could tell that Nagini had two pieces of Voldemort's soul in him. I am sure it could have told if Harry did as well. I can see where the appeal, from a literary standpoint, of Harry as a Horcrux comes from. I just don't see the evidence to prove it.

-TWW

The Sword and the Lion - Jul 19, 2005 2:13 pm (#60 of 2969)
Edited Jul 19, 2005 3:45 pm

One problem I foresee in the next book is that Lord Voldemort knows that one of his Horcruxes had been destroyed (Tom Riddle's Diary). By the next book, I believe that Voldemort will have made a new Horcrux to replace the destroyed Diary. I also have serious doubts rather Harry, or his allies, will be able to track down and destroy all of the Horcruxes in the time span of one book. I am still skeptical that Harry will be able to avoid encountering Lord Voldemort before all of the Horcruxes have been destroyed. Now, here is why I think the Horcruxes are just a ruse and the downfall of Lord Voldemort will be a result of Priori-Incantatem:

In The Goblet of Fire, Priori-Incantatem was a highly significant event which took place because two brother wands were forced to do battle. When Priori-Incantatem occurred, Harry and Voldemort were forced to have a battle of willpower which Harry won. Following Voldemort's defeat in the battle of wills, his wand was forced to cast the reverse spell effect of every spell the wand had preformed, from the most recent spell, to spells cast long ago. During the process of Priori-Incantatem, Voldemort was described as being "frightened", an emotion I doubt Voldemort experiences often. When the victims of the A.K curse came out of Voldemort's wand, the reverse spell effect was a shadowy imprint of the dead, for "no spell can bring anyone back from the dead". However, the reverse spell effect of splitting a soul could be feasible.

In the next book, if Harry can instigate Priori-Incantatem once more, and maintain a hold on Voldemort long enough for the reverse spell effect of the Horcruxes to take effect, Voldemort's soul would be whole, making Voldemort mortal again. If this were to occur, Voldemort could be slain by anyone! Now, I understand that when Priori-Incantatem happened in the G.O.F, Voldemort and Harry were surrounded in a cage of phoenix light. I doubt any death-eater could pass through the cage, but perhaps a member of the Order of the Phoenix could pass through, just like the death-eaters could pass through the barrier at Hogwarts. If Snape is still a member of the Order, perhaps he will be the one who kills Voldemort and saves Harry, but I have my doubts.

Toad - Jul 19, 2005 2:41 pm (#61 of 2969)
Edited Jul 19, 2005 3:42 pm

TWW, you're probably right that the book alone is enough of a clue, knowing what we now know. But the clue, wasn't just about book 6 it was to the series as a whole (if I remember right). There are still the mysteries of why Harry and Voldemort both ended up with wands that had Fawkes' feathers in them, why Harry experiences pain in his scar when Voldemort is near, why they can read each other's mind etc. If Harry was a Horcrux it would explain all of these things and DD's words at the end of CoS would seem to support the theory, although I admit its not concrete evidence.

As for the silver instrument, I'd forgotten that. Now that you mention it, I'll bet that was what DD was checking for. Good catch! However, suppose that Nagini is not a Horcrux (DD wasn't sure) then the two pieces of Voldemort's soul would be the piece in Voldemort and the piece in Harry, since they were both inside the snake at the time. If that's so then that would explain why DD believed the Horcrux was in Nagini, because he mistook Harry's piece for Nagini's.

I could be wrong but one theory is as good as another at this point, and I really like this one.

P.O.P. - Jul 19, 2005 2:51 pm (#62 of 2969)

A whole new theory...liquid in the basin is a Horcrux

I haven't seen my theory on here yet, and I guess it may seem far-fetched, but I think the liquid that Dumbledore drank from the basin was actually a Horcrux. I think Snape helped LV with the potion while he was still in his service, and told DD about it when he went over to the good side. I think Snape and DD came up with plan for DD to drink it and for Snape to kill him in order to destroy the Horcrux, and at the same time it helped Snape seem allegiant to the Death Eaters so he could continue at a double agent until "THE END".

Snape didn't want to kill him when the time came, and that was what he and DD were arguing about (and what DD was pleading w/ him about). That Snape would share this with DD would help explain why DD trusted him, and why DD couldn't tell anyone why he really trusted Snape, without a doubt. DD knew where the Horcrux was, but had to wait until Draco finished the cabinet before the rest of the plan could be set in motion.

I'd like to hear someone else's reaction to this.

Trisha Dobel - Jul 19, 2005 2:59 pm (#63 of 2969)

I think that seems as plausible a theory as any other. It sounds great!

The Sword and the Lion - Jul 19, 2005 3:00 pm (#64 of 2969)

That could explain why Fawkes did not appear to help Dumbledore during any moment during the HBP. But what about the note and Tom Riddle's obsession for powerful artifacts?

Toad - Jul 19, 2005 3:05 pm (#65 of 2969)

P.O.P, it all fits, apart from the locket and the note. They make it look like someone has already beaten DD and Harry to it. Unless the whole thing was a set-up and DD knew perfectly well that the Horcrux was gone...

I definitely think that Harry is a Horcrux though. DD says on p473 of HBP (UK) "Voldemort was still at least one Horcrux short of his goal when he entered your parents' house with the intention of killing you...I am sure that he was intending to make his final Horcrux with your death"

What he hadn't counted on was Lily's death and that messed things up for him. Instead he made it with HER death and Harry became the final Horcrux. It's not my theory (I've no idea who suggested it first) but I think that it works extremely well.

Cassiopeia - Jul 19, 2005 3:16 pm (#66 of 2969)

Yes, and that's why Voldie wasn't going to kill her and told her to stand aside!

I had this thought while reading the Spinners End thread, but I thought it fit better here...we know (at least DD and Harry are reasonably sure) that Voldemort wanted a job at Hogwarts so he could steal a relic of Ravenclaw's and Gryffindor's. We also now know that Voldemort ordered Snape to take a teaching position. Yes, Voldie wanted Snape to spy on DD, certainly, but do you think he also wanted him to steal the relics? Could Snape know anything about the Horcruxes?

Deb Zawacki - Jul 19, 2005 3:33 pm (#67 of 2969)

The Scar could be a Horcrux--if so Harry would have to destroy himself to let Voldemort Live

Bluenote1313 - Jul 19, 2005 3:37 pm (#68 of 2969)

If the scar/Harry is a Horcrux, I wonder if he destroys the others and then LV it would be the end. We already know that LV cannot be inside of Harry because of the feelings Harry has. It would make sense that the part of LV left behind would die inside a person full of love.

P.O.P. - Jul 19, 2005 4:58 pm (#69 of 2969)

TOAD,(re: post 62 and DD drinking the Horcrux) As far as the locket, the only one who fits everything written in the note that was in the locket is DD himself. He would have known he was going to be dead before LV read the note "I know I will be dead long before you read this," if he drank the potion, he would have indeed stolen the Horcrux "I have stolen the Horcrux and intend on destroying it as soon as I can," he would have been facing death "(also in the note)and he knew about the Horcruxes, which would have meant that he knew if they were destroyed, LV would be mortal. But I have know clue what RAB is, a nickname LV would know? Something from LV's Hogwarts days?

Verity Weasley - Jul 19, 2005 5:01 pm (#70 of 2969)

Toad, I really like your idea. When someone else on this thread reminded me of DD using his silver instrument and referring to 'in essence divided', I could see why DD assumed that Nagini was the Horcrux. But your idea also makes sense.

On another matter, and I don't know where else to put this, but given what we now know about Horcruxes and such, what do people think about that triumphant glint in DD's eyes at the end of GOF when he realises LV has used Harry's blood in his re-birthing. What was that about? He mentions in the cave that Harry's blood is worth more than his. Any ideas?

P.O.P. - Jul 19, 2005 5:07 pm (#71 of 2969)

I wonder if maybe the triumph in his eyes was that maybe (if Harry was the Horcrux)the part of his soul was returned to LV when he used Harry's blood in his rebirth?

Surtseystwin - Jul 19, 2005 6:00 pm (#72 of 2969)

DD did injure his hand while destroying the Ring Horcrux. He didn't actually destroy the ring. He took out/destroyed Voldemort's soul that was in the ring, and in doing so blackened his hand. That is why he was able to wear the ring afterwards. At that point it was just a ring. Well, not just a ring, but Slytherin's ring. It was a soul free ring though when he wore it to see Slughorn.

Wandless Wizard, I don't read it that way. Dumbledore states that his hand was injured at the time he had "acquired" the ring. When transporting a ring, it is less likely to be lost on a finger than in a pocket, so it is reasonable for Dumbledore to wear it back to Hogwarts. During Harry's first private lesson in Dumbledore's office, he notices the ring sitting on a small table. Dumbledore is no longer wearing it. During this time, DD may have been trying to confirm his suspicions about the artifact.

At Harry's second lesson he notices that the ring is gone from the table. From that, I gathered that, since their previous lesson, Dumbledore had been able to confirm that the ring was a Horcrux, and had destroyed it.

The Wandless Wizard - Jul 19, 2005 6:42 pm (#73 of 2969)

"However a withered hand does not seem an unreasonable exchange for a seventh of Voldemort’s soul. The ring is no longer a Horcrux." (HBP Ch.23)

He doesn't say the ring is now destroyed. He just says it is no longer a Horcrux. This is in Harry's 4th lesson, the impromptu one when he discovers Slughorn's true memory, so it is after the ring has disappeared. If he destroyed the ring, he would have said "the ring is no more" or "the ring is gone now". Instead he said, the ring is no longer a Horcrux. His hand may have been hurt when he took the ring. I cannot confirm or deny that. However, he never destroyed the ring.

Finn BV - Jul 19, 2005 6:43 pm (#74 of 2969)

Still, TWW, how does an object un-become a Horcrux? One would think it would have to be destroyed to lose its Horcruxness.

The Wandless Wizard - Jul 19, 2005 6:51 pm (#75 of 2969)

That was the original debate, fbv. Can you take a Horcrux and destroy Voldemort's soul without destroying the object? I believe you can. I have no idea how, but I think Dumbledore did so with the ring. In fact, the diary wasn't completely destroyed either. It just had a big Basilisk fang stuck through it. The majority of the diary was still intact. There was still something left to give to Lucius.

Astragynia Winifred Posy Miranda Yseult Cawdor - Jul 19, 2005 7:22 pm (#76 of 2969)
Edited Jul 19, 2005 9:14 pm

"The Sword and the Lion," you bring up two very interesting theories - but I don't think I can agree with either of them.

1) Voldemort knows the diary is destroyed and so might make another Horcrux to replace it (my paraphrase, sorry) - I don't think Horcruxes work like that. The point of destroying a Horcrux is NOT that the piece-of-soul returns to its owner, but the piece-of-soul is now GONE. Two-sevenths of Voldemort's soul is now Behind the Veil, and he can't get them back.

2) Priori Incantatem might make Voldemort mortal again (my paraphrase again) - unfortunately, I don't think it can. Priori Incantatem doesn't actually undo the spells, it just shows a shadowy record of what they were. When we saw Cedric come out of the wand in the graveyard, it did not mean he was temporarily alive again; there's no reason to believe priori Incantatem can undo protections any more than it can undo deaths.

No dung-bomb intended. Smile

Oh, and somebody also mentioned that Nagini could be an Animagus instead of a Horcrux. Fun as it would be to figure out which DE she is, I don't think it's possible - Voldie uses Parseltongue to speak to her, meaning she's probably a real snake (Parseltongue is extremely rare, after all, and Voldie is the last descendant of Slytherin).

The Wandless Wizard - Jul 19, 2005 7:46 pm (#77 of 2969)

The other problem with priori Incantatem is that Voldemort did the first Horcrux around 50 years ago when he was still in Hogwarts. Can you imagine Harry having to sit through 50 years of all the spells Voldemort did coming out his wand? Harry could barely hold on for all the spells that were done when Voldemort didn't have a body. 50 years of all the people Voldemort has ever killed hopping out of his wand would take weeks.

-TWW

The Claw of a Raven - Jul 19, 2005 8:06 pm (#78 of 2969)

Speaking of Priori Incantatem... we can use that to be sure that since the Potters' deaths no new Horcruxes have been made. From pg 498 (US) HBP, Slughorn in his memory: "There is a spell..." Meaning that the creation of a Horcrux involves an incantation of some sort. Nothing like that showed during the Priori Incantatem. Dumbledore's theory of the Muggle caretaker's death being used for a Horcrux in Nagini is seemingly bunk. This would also follow along the thinking that The Dark Lord only uses "significant" deaths for Horcrux creation.

psipsina - Jul 20, 2005 1:09 am (#79 of 2969)

I have some objections as far as the Ginny/Harry being Horcruxes is concerned....

First of all, we could basically see that part of Voldie's soul in CoS, when it basically materialised and taunted Harry. That "image" then disappeared then the basilisk tooth went through the diary. So I think we can safely say that the diary/Ginny Horcrux is destroyed.

I do not believe that by possessing someone you leave a part of your soul behind...considering the fact that LV probably researched Horcruxes quite a bit, I do not think that he would actually want to be leaving parts of his soul whenever he possessed someone (if that happened, could we not say that Quirrell could be a Horcrux as well, since LV possessed him for a whole year?)

As far as Harry or his scar (or any other body part of his for that matter) being a Horcrux, I disagree in terms of the prophecy. More specifically, the prophecy stated that one could not live while the other one survived. In other words, if LV was to kill Harry in order to survive, assuming that Harry had already discovered the rest of the Horcruxes and destroyed them, and he was the last one, by killing Harry, LV would basically be killing himself!

Or the other way round, if Harry was to kill LV in order to survive, if Harry was the Horcrux, even if the killed the actual LV, a piece of his soul would still remain within Harry, which again would defeat the whole prophecy thing etc....

I do not know if I am making much sense, but I believe that the only living Horcrux is Nagini, firstly because the snake is usually close to LV and can be controlled by him, and secondly because I doubt that LV would bestow part of his soul to another person (human or not) and risk having that person being in control of LV's soul. In other words, DD said that LV never trusted anyone, and considering that a living PERSON (not animal) has his/her own will, LV would not put part of his soul inside them.

My two knuts....feel free to destroy my theory Smile

Edit: Sorry guys posted this in the wrong thread!!! Smile

The Sword and the Lion - Jul 20, 2005 3:00 am (#80 of 2969)
Edited Jul 20, 2005 4:14 am

"Astryagina Winifred", I believe that you are referring to the spell used in the OotP called "Priori-Incantatem" which causes a wand to reveal the last spell it cast. =) However, Priori-Incantatem is a totally different magical event which can only occur when "two brother wands are forced to do battle". Dumbledore describes all of this in the G.O.F, but I cannot find my ruddy book at the moment and any clarification from members who have the G.O.F handy would be appreciated.

Dumbledore also explains why the reverse spell effect of A.K could not bring Voldemort's victims back to life in a real and tangible way. Dumbledore clarifies that no spell can bring the dead back to life. Nevertheless, Voldemort's victims did appear as living imprints of their former selves for a brief period of time. Harry was able to converse with these "shadows", who in return, were able to recognized Harry and give him guidance (James, Lilly, Bertha, Cedric, etc.). The "living" shadows were also able to attack Lord Voldemort in some capacity which ensured Harry's escape from the graveyard.

"T.W.W", I'm not certain that too much time elapsed during the Priori-Incantatem in the G.O.F. It was a very dramatic scene which made for slow reading, but I believe the process was relatively quick. Perhaps a more powerful Harry, with an even stronger will than before, could accelerate the process of Priori Incantatem drastically. If Harry could hold on long enough for Voldemort to mend his soul (the reverse effect of the incantation that split it), Voldemort would be mortal and he could be killed by anyone so long as Harry held the connection.

I know that this theory is "way out there" and not that likely to occur given JKR's creativity, but Voldemort is not a fool. I am certain that L.V's death-eaters will explain the condition Dumbledore was in before he died, and L.V will be able to put two and two together. It just seems so unlikely that Harry and his allies will be able to find all of the remaining Horcruxes and destroy them in an almost video game like manner without Voldemort being aware of what is occurring, or splitting his soul into more fragments.

"The Claw of Raven", you have made an excellent observation about Nagini and the slain Muggle.

Professor Trelawney - Jul 20, 2005 4:05 am (#81 of 2969)

Would LV have been able to create a Horcrux after Harry 'killed him'? I had assumed that all the Horcrux were made before Godric’s Hollow. Would LV have been strong enough to cast the spell? Perhaps that is what went on when LV, Nagini and Wormtail were in the Riddle House? That was when he got a wand. Am I correct?

Toad - Jul 20, 2005 7:16 am (#82 of 2969)

Psipsina, is the prophecy as important as we assumed it to be? If I understood the book correctly, DD suggests that it just means Voldemort would mark his equal, give him certain powers and that it would be inevitable that the two of them would eventually confront each other. As to what would happen if Harry and Voldemort did battle (assuming I'm right to think that Harry is a Horcrux) perhaps that's why Harry is the only one who can beat him? We saw that when Voldemort tried to possess Harry it caused him pain, maybe Harry could attack him somehow through the link between them, which would not be possible otherwise? Just a thought anyway...

As to the remaining Horcruxes, does Voldemort know that they've been destroyed? Presumably it will depend on how much Snape knows about it (he helped DD recover from the ring, which suggests he knows something) and how much of that he shares with Voldemort. Which in turn depends on whose side he is on(!)

If he does know, then I agree with you, The Sword and the Lion, its going to be exceptionally difficult to find the others, although I don't think Voldemort can afford to make anymore Horcruxes with only a seventh (or a sixth?) of his soul left already. He's barely alive at all as it is.

Ant Hem - Jul 20, 2005 7:25 am (#83 of 2969)

I don't think Harry can be a Horcrux, though he may once have been. Maybe the drawing of Harry's blood in reincarnating Voldemort also resulted in the Harry Horcrux leaving his body. If he was still a Horcrux, Voldemort wouldn't want to kill him, surely, at least not until he'd extracted 1/7 of his soul from Harry?

Then again, if you believe Snape is working for Voldemort (which I don't) and Harry is a Horcrux, that's a very good reason for Snape not to kill Harry but to save him for the Dark Lord.

tamerlane - Jul 20, 2005 7:38 am (#84 of 2969)
Edited Jul 20, 2005 9:00 am

The number and make up of the seven Horcruxes don't add up. If Voldemort had split his soul six times, creating seven Horcruxes. Would not dying when he tried to kill harry cost him one. leaving six. Then he lost one in the diary. Five. DD destroyed one. Four. The locket was destroyed? Three. So there should be the one he is using and two more. Hard to apply too much logic to a made up event.

Ant Hem - Jul 20, 2005 7:42 am (#85 of 2969)

Perhaps that's why even Dumbledore contradicts himself when he's telling Harry about how many there are, tamerlane!

PensivePensieve - Jul 20, 2005 7:53 am (#86 of 2969)

I like Ant Hem's thought on this; it would explain a lot about the "glimmer of triumph" in Dumbledore's eye in GOF and it would also address the peculiarity of Harry's scar as has often been stated. I may be way off base, but no one really knows the effect of making a Horcrux in/on a human; Dumbledore wasn't even sure it could be done to a living creature and my guess would be that putting a Horcrux on Harry would be much more complex than Nagini.... I'm probably way off base, just food for thought

Cassiopeia - Jul 20, 2005 9:26 am (#87 of 2969)

Maybe the drawing of Harry's blood in reincarnating Voldemort also resulted in the Harry Horcrux leaving his body.

But then would LV and Harry had that connection in OotP if the Harry-Horcrux was gone?

vanessa cave - Jul 20, 2005 9:35 am (#88 of 2969)

I really can't see Harry being a Horcrux LV went to Godric’s Hollow to kill him not make him a Horcrux and I really don't think its something that could be done by accident, also I believe he would have had his 7 Horcruxes well in place before the Godric’s Hollow incident. I also took Dumbledores explanation of the prophecy (the neither can live bit) to mean Harry doesn't HAVE to kill LV but would never be able to move on with his life until he did, its something he would feel like he needed to do not something he had to do. I'm not really putting into words at the moment what I mean especially with my 5 year old at the side of me asking questions, I’m off for a butterbeer.

The Sword and the Lion - Jul 20, 2005 9:36 am (#89 of 2969)
Edited Jul 20, 2005 10:45 am

P.O.P, I have been thinking about your theory about the liquid crystals being the actual Horcrux that you posted on thread 62.

Your theory seems to make much more scene to me now. After re-reading the scene where Harry is force-feeding Dumbledore the crystal liquid (painful for me), Dumbledore says something along the lines of "Make it stop, Make it stop ... I want to die, I want to die, Kill me!" I remember when Voldemort possessed Harry in the OotP at the Ministry of Magic. While Voldemort was inside Harry (one piece of Voldemort's soul), Harry said nearly the same thing as he screamed in agony, "Make it stop, I want it to end, kill me, kill me, etc.". I think that is a really great idea you had. (I am paraphrasing the dialogue from the books.)

Your theory may also explain why Dumbledore let himself die (No Fawkes, or defensive spells). By killing Dumbledore, one Horcrux was destroyed.

P.O.P. - Jul 20, 2005 10:57 am (#90 of 2969)

The Sword and the Lion-

I've been re-reading the book, trying to disprove my theory, but haven't so far. I think the note in the fake locket was from DD. In fact, what is said in the note is what really makes me think it's DD. Considering what JKR did with the whole "Half-Blood Prince" not being something we could have guessed, since we didn't know about Eileen Prince, I think RAB has something to do with DD (nickname?)and maybe LV from his Hogwarts days that we can't know yet, because JKR hasn't given us what we need to figure it out, like "Prince".

haymoni - Jul 20, 2005 11:18 am (#91 of 2969)
Edited Jul 20, 2005 12:55 pm

I think the glimmer in Dumbledore's eye comes from Harry's blood making Voldy mortal again, just like the writer of the note hopes - that by the time the Horcruxes are found, Voldy will be mortal again and can be killed.

I think it is Regulus that wrote the note.

Has anyone been able to find anything about Horcruxes other than Harry Potter references? I did a quick search and all I got was a bunch of blogs of people who had already read HBP. Is there a reference to them outside of these books or is the Horcrux a JKR invention?

Edit: I wonder if one of Horcruxes is at the Riddle House? Tom was still young - he might have hidden it there somewhere after he killed his father and grandparents. I'll have to re-read the beginning of GOF now. Or maybe he TOOK something FROM the Riddle House to put a Horcrux in - a souvenir from his visit to Grandpa's.

Bluenote1313 - Jul 20, 2005 11:22 am (#92 of 2969)

I don't think that the note was from DD. JKR has mentioned plenty of times that DD has large loopy writing. The note in the lockets was not the same handwriting as the note Harry had to read to get in to 12 Grimmauld Place.

The other problem with the theory is this: if DD actually removed the original Horcrux, where is it? Not destroyed because if it was, why go back to the lake? I think logic shows that it was Regulus who retrieved the locket, perhaps with someone else's help. This leads to Harry finding the locket at the Black's house. My guess is that the Genealogy book we saw in OotP is going to come in to play again. Perhaps that is how Regulus found out that LV wasn't a pureblood.

May Crook - Jul 20, 2005 11:38 am (#93 of 2969)

I believe the locket is at #12 it is mentioned in ch. 6 OoTP. a large locket that nobody could open.

P.O.P. - Jul 20, 2005 12:28 pm (#94 of 2969)

Bluenote - Sword and the Lion was responding to what I had written in post62, which is my theory that Snape helped LV make the potion for the basin when Snape was a Death Eater. When Snape went to the good side, he told DD about the potion, DD (and maybe Snape, too) knew it was a Horcrux, and at some time formed the plan for DD to drink it and Snape (if no one else did first)to kill DD to destroy the Horcrux. When Hagrid heard Snape and DD arguing, it was b/c Snape did not want to kill DD, which is why DD had to plead with him to do it. Sword and the Lion noted this is probably why Fawkes did not turn up to help DD; it was part of the plan, therefore Fawkes couldn't come to the rescue. What you read was my explanation for the locket, in light of the "DD drank the Horcrux" theory.

Verbina - Jul 20, 2005 1:17 pm (#95 of 2969)

Harry being a Horcrux - I seriously doubt this. Voldemort would be in constant fear that Harry is injured or killed in the real world...Things like accidents do happen. Nagini is something he can control. Besides, if DD thought Harry was a Horcrux, why would he say he wasn't even sure that a living creature could be made into one?

Destroying a Horcrux - I think that it is very possible to destroy the Horcrux yet not destroy the thing. Harry was able to destroy the diary without dying or even sustaining a horrible injury. Of course, it was Voldemorts first one so may not have been as strong. Dumbledore has a blackened hand when Harry first meets him in book 6. Yet later on, when Harry goes to his office, the ring is sitting there. Basically, the piece of soul within the object is destroyed with powerful magic. With the diary, it was the poison of the Basilisk.

Prongs Patronus - Jul 20, 2005 1:17 pm (#96 of 2969)

I was thinking about the Dementor posts, and an idea came to me. If Harry's scar is indeed a sign he is a Horcrux, wouldn't the "scent" of Lord Voldemort's partial soul be enough to bring the Dementors to him? I seem to remember that the other one most affected was Ginny, who had also felt the touch of Lord Voldemort. What do you think?

re: Nagini being an Animagus: Legilimency would provide a way for controlling a willing Animagus, wouldn't it? (I suppose there is a darker possibility for the snake, but that belongs in another forum.)

So many possibilities!!

PP

wolfgrl - Jul 20, 2005 1:29 pm (#97 of 2969)
Edited Jul 20, 2005 2:32 pm

I do not know if this has been brought up as a possibility or not (I honestly have not read all of the posts) but maybe Voldemort kidnapped Ollivander so that he could then kill him and use his (Voldemort's) wand as a Horcruxes. What better person would there be for the Horcruxes death then the maker of the wand. So fittingly Harry would have to snap Voldemort's wand to destroy the Horcruxes.

Just a thought

Wolfgrl

Mattew Bates - Jul 20, 2005 2:07 pm (#98 of 2969)
Edited Jul 20, 2005 3:08 pm

Haymoni, I remember reading about a black magic spell in Dungeons & Dragons a long time ago - called "soul jar" or "magic jar," I think. I remembered it when I first read CoS. It was a way for an evil mage to store their soul externally from their body, so they could later possess a young wizard. It was typically done repeatedly over centuries as an attempt to live forever. There is a major difference between this and JKR's Horcrux, however. A D&D mage's whole soul goes into the object, and their body dies, so creating multiple simultaneous jars would be impossible, and it was only done when the mage was near death.

Verbina - Harry received a mortal wound from the Basilisk while attempting to destroy the diary. Fawkes is the only reason he walked out alive. However, you bring up a good point that the Horcrux nature can be removed from an object without destroying the object. If Harry or his scar is a Horcrux, then perhaps he could survive - but not unscathed.

first last - Jul 20, 2005 2:50 pm (#99 of 2969)

At the end of the book, Harry intends to go to Godric Hollow. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Gryffindor's first name Godric? Maybe Harry will stumble onto a clue when he gets there. Also, was he intending to visit the site of the tragedy or his parents' graves? R.A.B. Might end up being on a tombstone.

Saralinda Again - Jul 20, 2005 3:42 pm (#100 of 2969)
Edited Jul 20, 2005 4:44 pm

A problem with Harry-as-Horcrux: If after the attack, Voldie is pathetic, a mere shard of a being, with only 1/7 of his soul left, and Harry is alive, but with Voldie-nature inside of him, why has none of it ever shown on the surface? Conversely, how can Voldie -- or the 1/7 he currently has -- a man (sorta) who cannot endure "possessing" Harry at the MoM because of the love within him -- handle living in close contact with Harry for 16 years?

Or, if Harry is actually dead the entire series, he also has merely 1/7 of a soul -- Voldie's. Why then is Harry so vibrant and honorable with only 1/7 of a twisted soul to inform his conscience and elemental energy?

JKR has always said that the question is less Why did Harry live? than Why didn't Voldie die when the curse bounced of Harry? Her answer, of course, is the Horcruxes.

Dumbledore always said that Lily's sacrifice covered Harry with a special love magic which LV does not understand. He may be the remaining Horcrux, but I think it more likely that the last one is somewhere on the grounds of Hogwarts [and a jolly good reason to place part of Book Seven there, too]. I think Voldie started planting Horcruxes way before the Prophecy. The dude was always afraid of death. <-- I believe this is because he fears an afterlife, and having to take responsibility for his actions, but that's just personal prejudice.

I'm open to more thoughts, of course. And JKR is notorious for surprises that afterward leave us smacking our foreheads and howling, "Of course!"

ÙøÙ Saralinda

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Wed Jul 20, 2011 6:41 pm

Mrs Brisbee - Jul 20, 2005 5:00 pm (#101 of 2969)

One thing I'm wondering is if Voldemort was really intending to make a Horcrux when he killed Harry then did he bring whatever object he intended to the house in Godric's Hollow? And what happened to it afterwards?

mischa fan - Jul 20, 2005 5:26 pm (#102 of 2969)

Maybe Harry will find it when he goes back to Godric's Hollow. It may be a key to where the other Horcruxes are and help Harry find them.

Nathan Zimmermann - Jul 20, 2005 7:26 pm (#103 of 2969)

I wonder whether one of the three times that the Potters and the Longbottoms defied Voldemort was in some way tied into the Horcruxes?

Thisple Hammer - Jul 20, 2005 8:55 pm (#104 of 2969)
Edited Jul 20, 2005 9:56 pm

I just had an interesting thought... It has been mentioned several times that perhaps LV left a Horcrux at Hogwarts. I think this might actually be possible!

Here are few times and places how this could happen.

#1. Professor Quirinus Quirrell was at Hogwarts almost a full school year. Could have brought it with him (my personal opinion is no on this one...)

#2. When LV came to DD and asked for a teaching position (I don't know if he would have had time to do this though).

#3. Bartemius "Barty" Crouch, Jr. was also at Hogwarts for almost a full year. He could have dropped something off for LV. After all, LV gave Malfoy his diary, he could have entrusted other Horcruxes in the hands of other Death Eaters.

The more I think about it, the more likely I think there is a good chance that a Horcrux is at Hogwarts.

The Claw of a Raven - Jul 20, 2005 9:12 pm (#105 of 2969)

What would be the motivation for smuggling a Horcrux into Hogwarts? The Horcruxes, so far, have been under heavy guard. The exception is the diary, which was thought to be under some guard, but was planned to be eventually let loose in Hogwarts to continue Slytherin's "noble work." So it's definitely possible that there is another Horcrux in Hogwarts, but I keep asking myself... "Why?"

Wisey - Jul 20, 2005 10:59 pm (#106 of 2969)

Why did Riddle kill Moaning Myrtle? Maybe it was his first attempt at making a Horcrux after speaking to Prof Slughorn! And then had to hide it in the "Room of Requirement" in a hurry before framing Hagrid. Voldemort never wanted to be a teacher, he just wanted to get back into the school. Maybe the diary wasn't his first Horcrux.

Dragonesss - Jul 21, 2005 12:01 am (#107 of 2969)

Well, maybe Aragog was first one. Would be nice, isn't it? Actually JKR might write it that way - making Harry to hunt down all the Horcruxes just to find them all destroyed. All besides one, The One, most powerful, most horrible, most guarded. Slytherin locket, perhaps.

Kevin Corbett - Jul 21, 2005 12:43 am (#108 of 2969)

The question about Moaning Myrtle is indeed quite crucial: with which killing did Riddle create the diary-Horcrux? Hmmm...the dynamics were not entirely explained, but I think it was implied that the killing has to be done by the one wishing to create the Horcrux personally, not on the orders of the person, for it to work.

Kazius - Jul 21, 2005 1:09 am (#109 of 2969)

Dumbledore knows far more about the Horcruxes, and he makes it rather clear that Harry nor Ginny are Horcruxes. LV has 6 done, and made Nagini his 7th, which I believe JKR proves by the vision Harry has of LV using Nagini to seriously injure Arthur. As for Ginny, the Diary was destroyed, and Ginny was left with no remains of the Horcrux.

That being said, I agree strongly with Lizzy Dizzy's post earlier, and my post may show signs of that, but after a fresh reread and some new thoughts, this is what I believe happened as far as these Horcruxes.

Diary - Made by Tom Riddle, probably as an experiment not too long after he found out about Horcruxes. This object was destroyed by Harry in Chamber of Secrets.

Marvolo's Ring - LV's Grandfather's ring, which was probably used to make another Horcrux I'd estimate somewhere between the job interviews at 18(Dippet) and later 28(Dumbledore). This ring was cursed, and nearly killed Dumbledore if it weren't for his and Snape's quick actions to prevent his death. This was destroyed.

Salazar Slytherin's Gold Locket - A direct link to LV's descendant, and I believe a very important piece as a Horcrux for him. I believe this object will be found to either have been destroyed or is in #12GP.

Helga's Cup - A relic of Helga's, LV stole this object as he stole Slytherin's Locket, and I believe that he put another piece of his soul into this Horcrux.

A Ravenclaw relic: Despite the fact it could be either a Gryffindor or Ravenclaw object, I shall explain why I believe it's a Ravenclaw object. For one, I have already explained that Harry cannot be a Horcrux, because LV has already had 6 and Nagini is the last he made. Since Dumbledore assures Harry that Godric Gryffindor's sword has been kept safe, I trust his judgment. Also, given the hints that "Ravenclaw will have it's day" and suggestions that the Grey Lady will be helpful in Book 7, I believe some mixture of that ghost and Luna Lovegood will be what Harry needs to acquire this Horcrux.

Nagini - Between the suggestion in book 5, uttered by Dumbledore "in essence divided.." and later postulated by Dumbledore, there is little questioning that Nagini is more then likely a Horcrux, which would explain their extraordinary connection.

Lord Voldemort - Yes, he himself has to be a Horcrux or there would be no point in there being Horcruxes. Some people have notioned that Harry may have been transferred this Horcrux, but I doubt that. LV did not die, therefore his Horcrux was not destroyed.

I find this quite accurate and self-explanatory, admittedly it is theory, but based of Dumbledore's works and some logical reasoning, I would be greatly surprised if this was not at least close to what actually is found in Book 7.

psipsina - Jul 21, 2005 4:30 am (#110 of 2969)

Toad,

I sincerely believe that the prophecy is important enough to consider, especially with all the mayhem that took place in the MoM in Book 5.

I do think that one cannot live if the other survives, because basically this is what is required in order for the threat to the magical world to disappear.

Even DD seems to support the fact that only Harry can kill Voldie (cannot remember exact quotes, do not have my books with me) and especially his last actions before he died, seems to show that as well. In other words, he is preparing Harry for the fight with Voldemort.

So in my mind, the prophecy needs to be fulfilled, and coming back to the subject of the Horcruxes, for this reason alone, Harry cannot possibly be a Horcrux.

I will concede that his scar can lead to conclusions of him being a Horcrux, but I think that his scar mainly serves as a way for Harry and the rest of the "good guys" to have a glimpse into Voldemort's mind and intentions.

Finally, one last thought....regarding one of the Horcruxes that is believed to come from Ravenclaw...Ravenclaw is considered to be the "smart" house. Within the Room of Requirement, there seem to be quite a few old books....could the Ravenclaw Horcrux be in there? or in the Library??? The Restricted Section maybe? Voldie definitely had access to the Restricted Section while in school, considering his status as Head Boy, smartness etc at the time, so maybe he wanted to make sure that only someone with similar status/brains could have a chance of stumbling across it?

Just my two Knuts!! Smile

Betelgeuse Black - Jul 21, 2005 5:24 am (#111 of 2969)

Pardon me if someone else has presented my line of thinking...

The Horcrux can be made when a wizard or witch kills someone. It sounds to me like you lose a bit of your soul when you kill someone. If that is the case, the Horcrux would be an object where the piece of the soul is trapped after it has left the originator. If this is indeed the case, I think that the incantation would have to be done prior to the killing/soul splitting to capture that piece of the soul. Each time LV has killed, he has lost some of his soul until he is now not human.

That is why I think the scar is a Horcrux.

Betelgeuse

Saralinda Again - Jul 21, 2005 6:26 am (#112 of 2969)

Maybe I'm missing something here, and my book is across town in the arms of the sister-of-a-friend-of-my-son. <-- That would make a good Country/Western song!

The sense I got from the text was that if one wants to create a Horcrux, one must set out deliberately to murder someone. That's different from killing someone, which can happen by accident or impersonally, as in a war. A murder, as I think JKR is using the term, is one-on-one and intensely personal, whether you knew your victim previously or not.

It seems as if one has to know the magic, which is very obscure, in order to take advantage of the (temporary) splitting of one's soul.

I didn't get the impression that a Horcrux happens automatically or accidentally in the course of ending a life. Heaven knows it's traumatic enough (wars, auto accidents, for instance) without losing a chunk of one's soul to an inanimate object.

ÙøÙ S/K

tamerlane - Jul 21, 2005 6:55 am (#113 of 2969)

Riddle did not kill moaning myrtle. the creature did.

Deb Zawacki - Jul 21, 2005 7:14 am (#114 of 2969)

Couple of JKR clues to consider--the cemetery at Hogwarts whether it is related to DD death or not (recall after movie 3 JKR commenting to Curon that there was one on the grounds....and that movie 3 actually gave away some things...)

What if the Horcrux Is somehow actually a foundational piece of Hogwarts itself--his soul fraction contained there. To destroy Hogwarts completely would be the ultimate revenge....

Toad - Jul 21, 2005 7:54 am (#115 of 2969)

I might be completely wrong but I don't think there is enough proof either way to be sure. I've had time to think about everyone's ideas though and this is my current take on things.

DD suspected (and I'm going to put a lot of faith in this cause otherwise it wouldn't work) that Voldemort had not made all of his Horcruxes (I.e. he had at least one left) when he went to Godric's Hollow. DD felt, therefore, that Voldemort must have made his last one AFTER the curse rebounded, which is why he thought it was Nagini. But he didn't know for sure, and neither it seems did Voldemort. That's why the theory is still possible because there is at least one Horcrux (definitively) unaccounted for.

I think that Voldemort STILL doesn't know that Harry is a Horcrux (or he didn't up to OotP anyway) because, as has been pointed out, he has tried to kill Harry several times, which would be stupid. He may have found out since book 5 (because Snape says that the DEs are not to harm Harry) but that's neither here nor there.

The reason I like this is because it explains some of the biggest mysteries of the series, such as what happened the night Harry's parents died. And it doesn't take any of the emotional impact away because it was still Lily's sacrifice that saved Harry.

Verbina - Jul 21, 2005 8:33 am (#116 of 2969)

Okay...Horcrux questions....if it occurs from the splitting of a soul after killing someone...Voldemort could have many Horcruxes. So how is one made....

There are a couple possible ways 1) An item is selected, a spell is said over the item and when a murder is committed, the torn away piece of soul is pulled into the object.

2) An item is selected, part of a spell is put in place, the murder committed and then a final spell is said to place the soul in the object.

Or even 3) A murder is committed, the soul is torn and the person then gets an object and places the torn away soul piece in it.

Two of these require it be immediate. The third is a more leisurely (if it can be called that) pace.

The first can't be right as Voldemort, when he went to kill James and Lily, would have gotten his Horcrux when he killed James. Plus Voldemort marked it as important deaths.

The second is plausible but in the case of Godric's Hollow, it does not work. So we are left with the 3rd. Voldemort was able to kill then later place his bit of torn away soul into objects. This means he could have killed at any time to make his 7 but he wanted to only commemorate important things. The diary...it could not have been made from the death of Myrtle as he did not kill her, the Basilisk did. So there is a missing murder there done either while in school or before. The ring is from the murder of his father. The locket from ???? The cup from ???? Nagini from the murder of James and Lily perhaps? And the mystery Horcrux...it could have been made while in school or shortly after school. If it were made in school, it might be in Hogwarts!

Okay maybe I just rehashed everything everyone else has figured out but...for my own sanity, I had to write it down!

And...this may not be a Horcrux thing but...when DD went to see Tom Riddle in the orphanage, there were items like a yo-yo and such in his wardrobe...three to be exact. Trophies DD called them...but why were they moving? Or did I read that wrong?

Saralinda Again - Jul 21, 2005 8:41 am (#117 of 2969)
Edited Jul 21, 2005 9:41 am

Verbina: And...this may not be a Horcrux thing but...when DD went to see Tom Riddle in the orphanage, there were items like a yo-yo and such in his wardrobe...three to be exact. Trophies DD called them...but why were they moving? Or did I read that wrong?

DD cast a fire spell on the wardrobe where TMR was keeping them in order to demonstrate that he knew TMR was a thief. I presumed that everything that followed was related to the stuff needing to go back to its rightful owners.

Although to my knowledge Hogwarts has never given a course in forensic profiling (unless that's in NEWT level Muggle Studies) I was impressed that he would sense how serial killers often collect trophies.

ÙøÙ

TwinklingBlueEyes - Jul 21, 2005 9:28 am (#118 of 2969)

I posted this on the Future of Hogwarts thread, but I think it fits here also.

I believe Hogwarts absolutely HAS to continue, and remain in the hands of the "Good side".

I believe Dumbledore was on the right track, but not entirely correct.

From his own words, consider this...

"Hogwarts was where he had been happiest; the first and only place he had felt at home." DD HBP 431 Scholastic

Voldemort tried two times to come back to Hogwarts to teach. First Dippet told him he was to young at eighteen, the second time ten plus years later when DD was Headmaster. "Oh, you want to come back to Hogwarts, but you do not want to teach anymore than you wanted to when you were eighteen. What is it you're after, Tom? Why not try an open request for once?" DD, HBP 445

Lord Voldemort collects trophies of his victims, from his orphanage days on.

"Lord Voldemort liked to collect trophies, and he preferred objects with a powerful magic history. His pride and belief in his own superiority, his determination to carve for himself a startling place in magical history; these things suggest to me that Voldemort would have chosen his Horcruxes with some care, favoring objects worthy of the honor." DD, HBP 504

I think he originally intended to use the trinkets of the Founders, the ring, the locket, but then decided the greatest trophy of all would be Hogwarts itself!

"What intrigued and alarmed me the most was that that diary had been intended as a weapon as much as a safeguard." DD, HBP 500

What better weapon to use against the Wizarding World than its own children?

First, Dumbledore had to be removed from the picture, as had been tried before in previous books, then in HBP seemingly for good. We now have a MOM that most of us feel uneasy about, Umbridge is still around and you know looking for revenge. Remember, Voldemort operates best by stealth.

I do not believe the seventh Horcrux has been made, I believed Hogwarts is to become the vessel to hold the seventh part of Voldemorts soul, and that Harry's is the death intended to make it!

Hogwarts MUST stand! I hope Harry remembers something else Dumbledore said way back in SS/PS, "...it became clear to me that the place I should be was the one I had just left."

...toddles off to avoid incoming dungbombs...

Verbina - Jul 21, 2005 9:33 am (#119 of 2969)

I had a sudden thought while reading the RAB thread....the locket may not be the Horcrux!

The note from RAB was inside the locket. In order for LV to have found the note, he would have to open the locket to see it. But...if the entire locket is the Horcrux, why would he have need of opening it? What if the locket isn't the Horcrux but merely a safe way of protecting it and the Horcrux is something inside it?

Solitaire - Jul 21, 2005 9:46 am (#120 of 2969)

Up to the point at which he was vaporized, whom had Voldemort personally murdered? The three Riddles, Lily, and James make five. Weren't there two others (can't remember their names) who were mentioned by Mad-Eye as having been personally killed by Voldemort during his first rise to power? If so, that would account for the number seven.

Given what Dumbledore call's Voldemort's penchant for collecting "trophies," what if he used some things from the Potter house to create two Horcruxes--their wands, perhaps? Those missing wands--I am assuming they are missing, since we have never seen them again--have always troubled me. I can't help thinking that, if Dumbledore knew where they were, he'd have given them to Harry.

What if, having accomplished his seven Horcruxes--with no soul remaining in him--Voldemort then turned to kill Harry. When the AK rebounded, his body was destroyed ... and his soul had already been split into seven parts and placed outside his body. Could this be why he didn't die ... because, after creating his seventh Horcrux, he was not really alive?

This is as far as I have gotten, because--like the Time Turner--the Horcruxes make my head hurt!

Solitaire

Vaughn - Jul 21, 2005 10:07 am (#121 of 2969)

Verbina, I think you are right on with your 3rd option about Horcruxes. The killing takes place and splits the soul, then at a later time the portion of soul is placed into an object and that is the Horcrux.

How is the Horcrux used, or is it ever used? What I mean is when Voldemort was destroyed by the AK backfire, did that use up one of the seven parts of his soul?

Cassiopeia - Jul 21, 2005 10:08 am (#122 of 2969)

What if, having accomplished his seven Horcruxes--with no soul remaining in him--Voldemort then turned to kill Harry. When the AK rebounded, his body was destroyed ... and his soul had already been split into seven parts and placed outside his body. Could this be why he didn't die ... because, after creating his seventh Horcrux, he was not really alive?

Or could it be that he didn't die because he created the Horcruxes - when the Horcrux in his body was killed (by the rebounded AK), one of the other Horcruxes automatically somehow came to be inside his body? But then his body was destroyed...maybe because he split his soul into so many parts, it didn't work properly???

Does this make any sense to anyone?! This makes my head hurt, too!

Vaughn - Jul 21, 2005 10:26 am (#123 of 2969)
Edited Jul 21, 2005 11:29 am

Yeah, that is what I was kind of getting at, what happens when Voldemort's body is destroyed, if it still had a portion of his soul does that portion get destroyed and then he needs to use one of the Horcruxes to be "re-born".

If that is the case then there would be 3 that have been destroyed (if we assume RAB didn't destroy one).

So it would break down like this:

1. Inside Voldemort at Godric’s Hollow - destroyed.
2. The ring - destroyed.
3. The locket - maybe destroyed.
4. The cup from Hufflepuff - not destroyed.
5. The diary - destroyed.
6. Nagini - not destroyed.
7. The one in Voldemort now - not destroyed.

If on the other hand, whichever part of the soul is inside the body can only be destroyed when all of the others are gone, Voldemort did not lose his in Godric’s Hollow and the only remaining one is in an object belonging to Ravenclaw.

I just keep going back and forth on this. What fun. Smile

EDIT: When I was just reading all of the posts and had not joined the forum I couldn't understand all of the little errors in peoples posts...now that I have edited this one 3 times for spelling and whole letters just left off of words I understand a lot better. Smile

lurking-one - Jul 21, 2005 10:26 am (#124 of 2969)

I was thinking about Voldemort returning to Hogwarts, claiming that he wanted to teach. Most people agree that he actually intended to hide a Horcrux at the school at that time, from what I have read in the posts. Could he have made his award for 'Special Service to the School" one of them? Assuming, of course, that the Horcrux is not made immediately after killing someone, which is a LARGE assumption on my part.

Toad - Jul 21, 2005 10:33 am (#125 of 2969)
Edited Jul 21, 2005 11:41 am

Solitaire, I'm pretty sure that is what happened. Voldemort didn't die when the curse backfired because as he said in GoF, he had taken measures to protect himself from death, which we can now say with some certainty, means the Horcruxes he had made. I thought this had been confirmed in HBP, but now I can't remember where I read it. Does any one else know?

I would guess that the only thing destroyed by the rebounding curse was Voldemort's body. The other pieces of his soul (including the now disembodied piece which possessed Quirrell) survived unharmed. Indeed, if they were anything like the diary there could have been as many as seven Voldemort's running around at one point, although it would seem that most were kept in things that prevented them from taking independent action (like in the ring for example).

All the pieces of Voldemort's soul must ultimately be destroyed, before the last piece (the one which now has a body) can truly die. Actually, it is quite confusing isn't it?

Astragynia Winifred Posy Miranda Yseult Cawdor - Jul 21, 2005 4:00 pm (#126 of 2969)
Edited Jul 21, 2005 5:01 pm

I agree with Alias47 that it would make a lot of sense for an AK curse to send the portion of the soul currently in the body to - well, to wherever it is that evil wizards go when they die. However, from what's said in the book about Horcruxes, I don't think that's what happens; I think the portion of your soul stored in a Horcrux(es) acts as a binding link to keep the AK'd part of your soul in this world, even if the body is destroyed ("Vapormort," in the case of a certain arch villain we know). It's explicitly stated somewhere (sorry, should have made note of the page number) that the portion of the soul in use - I mean the part that's in the body - has to be the LAST soul-piece to be destroyed in order for the person to die. So unfortunately, that means that no piece of Voldemort's soul was destroyed when the Avada Kedavra famously rebounded.

Nymphadora Lupin - Jul 21, 2005 5:36 pm (#127 of 2969)
Edited Jul 21, 2005 6:37 pm

Quick thought here. I wonder if it's possible for someone else to utter the Horcrux incantation other than the murderer?

So, for instance, Voldemort bounds into the Potters', kills Lily, and a hidden (by way of invisibility cloak perhaps) third party nonverbally utters the incantation turning Harry into the Horcrux?

I wonder if this could be possible? Probably not, but it's a thought nonetheless, and would explain how Voldemort would be unaware of Harry's transformation into a Horcrux.

Also, didn't Jo say Lily's job in the wizarding world was important to the plot? I think I remember reading this somewhere. Perhaps she was an unspeakable assigned to studying the mysteries of Horcruxes. Maybe through her studies she learned a thing or two about them that even Voldemort did not know about?

Puck - Jul 21, 2005 5:48 pm (#128 of 2969)

I agree that the bit of soul still in LV's body was not destroyed, but held on this Earth and not allow to "pass" to the other realm, or whatever. I doubt Harry is a Horcrux. How could he destroy himself and then LV?

Other thought, why does he have to destroy the Horcruxes first? Can't he get rid of the bad guy, stop the war, and then hunt down the pieces of soul? Then, the last task would be to hunt down and destroy the "Vapormort".

Kazius - Jul 21, 2005 7:04 pm (#129 of 2969)

I'm wondering if people are confusing the fact that Voldemort was intending to use Harry's death to create a Horcrux with him actually turning Harry into a Horcrux.

I'm convinced, (and this is rare with JKR) that Harry is not a Horcrux, because LV would have had to kill Harry, and then cast the spell to turn him into a Horcrux separately. As far as we know, one person cannot cast two spells at the same time, and it would be pointless to do so regardless. Would LV expect a baby to be able to block AK? I seriously doubt that, but I do believe that Harry's Scar will provide him with a tool, that we don't know yet. It may be as I have posted elsewhere, a block against Voldemort using Legilimency against Harry.

I'm not quite sure about what his Scar will be useful for, but I am quite sure that Harry is not a Horcrux, it doesn't make any sense.

Verbina - Jul 21, 2005 8:05 pm (#130 of 2969)

LV didn't die from the rebound because his soul was not whole...he had already created Horcruxes so his soul was trapped here. Interesting concept actually. And the fact that a person who commits murder has a damaged soul. I know in the real world it is much more figurative but in the WW it is literal. Interesting. (Forgive me that is the writer in me thinking like that! LOL)

I am very curious though as to what the mystery Horcrux is. I do think it is a Ravenclaw item and I do think it is hidden in the school itself. But what could it be? Something they are known for? Books? I don't think so as a book Horcrux has already been done (the diary) What else are they known for and how could it be physically shown?

Nathan Zimmermann - Jul 21, 2005 8:33 pm (#131 of 2969)

There is an alternative I think to the Ravenclaw item and that is the Special Services Award Tom was given for his supposed discovery of who opened the CoS.

Miss M - Jul 21, 2005 8:47 pm (#132 of 2969)
Edited Jul 21, 2005 10:05 pm

I don't think that Harry is a Horcrux. If he was, wouldn't Voldemort have been able to come and possess Harry at some point? Even before he possessed Quirrell. If part of his soul was in Harry he would probably be able to control him as he controlled the snake.

I also strongly doubt that he would intentionally put part of his soul into a person he knew he was going to kill. And as we know he offered that Lily could live. He wouldn't want to make Harry a Horcrux and then let Lily live to know about it.

Oh, and do you really think that if in OOTP, Voldemort couldn't stand to possess Harry because Harry is so full of love, that Voldemort's soul would stand a chance in Harry?

schoff - Jul 21, 2005 10:25 pm (#133 of 2969)
Edited Jul 21, 2005 11:40 pm

Toad: DD felt, therefore, that Voldemort must have made his last one AFTER the curse rebounded, which is why he thought it was Nagini.

How could Voldy make a Horcrux after the rebound? He specifically said only one power was left to him: the ability to possess others (GoF33 653 US) He couldn't hold a wand and I doubt he'd do it while he possessed someone else, because that would split the possessed person as well. The only opportunity he would have had would be when he killed Frank Bryce, and we didn't see the Horcrux spell come out during the Priori Incantatem.

Verbina: The diary...it could not have been made from the death of Myrtle as he did not kill her, the Basilisk did. So there is a missing murder there done either while in school or before.

Why is the assumption that the Diary must have been made a Horcrux while Voldie was in school? Why couldn't he have made it later, after leaving school and while he was learning the extreme Dark Arts? He may have created the diary during school (which I'm not sure he did, as I'm not convinced he knew how to at that point) but that doesn't necessarily mean he made it a Horcrux at the same time.

Kazius: I'm convinced, (and this is rare with JKR) that Harry is not a Horcrux, because LV would have had to kill Harry, and then cast the spell to turn him into a Horcrux separately.

I don't think Voldie ever intended Harry to be either a Horcrux or to live. I'll repost some of what I said in the Ch. 23 Horcrux thread:

I don't think Voldemort intended Harry to be a Horcrux, I think it happened accidentally. Couple reasons:

Voldemort specified James had to die. I think Voldemort knew James was a descendent of Gryffindor. Perhaps this is part of the reason he picked Harry over Neville. Earlier theories did speculate this is the original reason Voldemort wanted James and Harry dead--to stamp out the line of Slytherin's foe. What if James had to die so that one of his items could be used as a Horcrux? Voldemort likes trophies, what better trophy of killing James than a Gryffindor artifact for which he could use to make a Gryffindor Horcrux? Especially if the Horcrux is created by killing Gryffindor's last descendent? Killing Harry would also make this possible (not to mention get rid of that pesky prophecy), and be extremely satisfying to him IMO.

But then: Lily steps in. She didn't have to die. Voldemort makes his fatal mistake (in more ways than one) and kills her, which leaves Harry her blood protection. Voldemort tries to kill Harry to commit the final murder that will allow him to make a Horcrux, but Harry survives. Again, I've always been suspicious of the sheer enormity of the backfire from the failed Avada Kedavra. Lily's charm alone just didn't seem to cut it IMO.

Harry lives, and so unintentionally becomes the Horcrux. The power of being one amplifies the backfire and leaves the scar on his forehead. Voldemort may not realize this, as it has never happened before. He probably just thinks the attempt failed.

Kevin Corbett - Jul 21, 2005 10:40 pm (#134 of 2969)
Edited by Jul 21, 2005 11:42 pm

I don't think its possible that, when Voldie went to kill Harry, he didn't have any soul left in him, or he would essentially be what Barty Crouch must be presently---an empty shell, one that can move and talk and eat, but otherwise unable to do much of anything. So, as well can see, he must have at least had part of his soul left.

Now, as to how the Horcruxes work, we have several things to consider:

Is the soul split in half after committing murder, or just into pieces? and how big are the pieces. Theoretically, LV could have sort of just snipped away smaller bits of himself until he had seven pieces---but non-necessarily seven EQUAL pieces. So the majority of his soul could have still been in his body at the time of the killing.

Perhaps then, by creating a Horcrux, you are not trying to leave some portion of yourself behind in case you die, but you are creating like an anchor, if you will, that literally ties the soul down because part of it is still connected to the physical world. So when LV died, the remainder of his soul remained disembodied, and yet tied to the world in the objects in which parts of his soul were still present, and thus he was able to posses various animals like snakes, and later Quirrell, though they seem to have had a sort of symbiotic relationship, which maybe explains why Quirrell died when LV left.

As to how one makes a Horcrux a Horcrux no more, we must look to the diary. Harry unmade it by gutting it with a basilisk fang, the venom whereof is obviously very powerful. So maybe, all you need to do to unmake a Horcrux is to expose it to some extreme potent force (like the fires of Mount Doom with the One Ring---and forgive me, but whether or no JK intended it, the parallels are pretty easy to draw).

As to whether Harry is a Horcrux (though I think, when you all say "Harry" you are implying "Harry's scar" not his whole person)...it's really quite up in the air. We don't know if its possible to inadvertently create a Horcrux or not, and until we know that, we really can't say. It certainly is possible, though, and it would explain how some of LV's power was transferred to Harry---as we can see from Ginny in CoS, who must have been about to speak in Parselmouth to open the chamber, having part of another Wizard's soul inside you can let you do things you could not do otherwise.

septentrion - Jul 22, 2005 1:58 am (#135 of 2969)

The diary was damaged but not the ring : has the recipient of the Horcrux to be destroyed or not ?

I like the idea of the Horcrux working as an anchor, it really makes sense and would explain why the Horcruxes must be destroyed before anyone tries to kill LV.

Ant Hem - Jul 22, 2005 4:06 am (#136 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2005 5:33 am

Just two thoughts to add to the debate. If Voldemort was trying to wipe out Harry as his nemesis from the prophecy, it would have been prudent of him to create all his Horcruxes before facing the child. Prudence may not be a particular trait of Voldemort, admittedly, and he would hardly expect a fight back from a child, but he may have made his sixth one before even facing Harry.

The second thought takes the idea that others were entrusted with Horcruxes a stage further. What if R.A.B. helped Voldemort to hide the locket Horcrux? It makes sense that six different Death Eaters knew about one Horcrux each. Voldemort would never trust anyone with all of them, but in case of his demise, someone would need access to one to start the whole think off again. Thus Lucius Malfoy was responsible for the diary, R.A.B. (probably Regulus Black) for the locket, and there are four others. Logically one might be Snape - either the ring (if Snape is really on the side of good) or one of the other items (if he is on Voldemort's side). Snape giving Dumbledore 1/7 of Voldemort's soul would be a very good reason for him to trust him completely.

So if R.A.B. helped hide the locket, he would know what potion was used in the basin and would be able to replace it with some more after he had drunk the original stuff, leaving an identical potion that was eventually drunk by Dumbledore. But Voldemort did not trust R.A.B. completely, so he added the Inferi as a defence without R.A.B.'s knowledge. They got R.A.B. on his return trip, and the Horcrux was taken to the bottom of the lake. When Harry Accio Horcruxed, it was R.A.B.'s body that moved, with a Horcrux attached (thanks to mischa fan for that last bit of the puzzle).

Nagini, incidentally, is Voldemort's back-up Horcrux in case none of his Death Eaters can be trusted.

I can see a few problems with the above theory (not least timelines around the ring element), but I thought I'd post it anyway, as there are hopefully enough ideas in it to generate some discussion.

EDIT: I see Hollywand and The Wandless Wizard have already had some similar ideas about Death Eaters as guardians of the Horcruxes over on the R.A.B. thread - apologies for posting before I'd caught up with all the threads (one day off and so much appears...)

Puck - Jul 22, 2005 5:18 am (#137 of 2969)

It seems you would have to make a real effort for magic as Dark as creating a Horcrux, thus Harry accidently becoming one doesn't seem likely. Plus "Neither can live while the other survives" seems that it is possible for Harry to kill LV without dying himself.

I believe that most Horcruxes would have been hidden by LV himself, not entrusted to others. The diary is an exception, because it had a dual purpose. No access to them is necessary to bring LV back. He just needed to create a new body, as he still had the piece of soul that was in his body when the AK hit.

I think Harry will have to look at murders which LV committed personally - such as Dorcas Meadowes, pointed out in Moody's photo. DD said LV used significant murders to make them. Anyone he went to murder personally is a possibility. Start at the scene, right. Thus the mansion on the hill is another important sight to search.

The ring was destroyed -the stone was cracked. And Tom had the ring during his meeting with Slughorn, suggesting he had already made a Horcrux before he asked about them. He wanted mostly to know whether he could have more than one. The diary was made during teen years, as it created a teenaged Riddle.

Betelgeuse Black - Jul 22, 2005 5:20 am (#138 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2005 6:23 am

Hello all,

First, I apologize for not being specific with my wording in my last post. I meant murder, not killing, in my last post. I thought that would be obvious. Dumbledore said that you lose part of your soul when you murder someone and that's why LV is not very human (I hope I paraphrased correctly).

I submit that when you murder, the soul splitting must take place as the murder is committed. If the piece of your soul that is lost in the murder is not acquired and "attached" to an object, then that piece of your soul is lost. When someone murders someone else, it has an immediate psychological effect on the murderer. Once the act is committed, the murderer cannot go back. He is a murderer forevermore.

Whichever way the Horcrux incantation works, I submit that it needs to be done immediately before or after the murder. I would think that it should be done prior to the murder to make sure the fractured soul gets attached before it can escape.

I think that if the incantation must be done prior to the AK that murders someone, then it is likely that the scar is a Horcrux. This would explain why Harry can read LV's mind, since part of LV is attached to Harry's forehead. The connection is there between foe and adversary because they are bonded by the piece of LV's soul. I think that Dumbledore knew this but he didn't tell Harry. Harry needs to discover this for himself.

I'd better send this on. Betelgeuse

Mrs Brisbee - Jul 22, 2005 5:54 am (#139 of 2969)

I think Harry is an accidental "Horcrux", too.

"I guessed, fifteen years ago," said Dumbledore, "when I saw the scar upon your forehead, what it might mean. I guessed that it might be the sign of a connection forged between you and Voldemort."(OotP, Ch37, "The Lost Prophecy")

Dumbledore doesn't explain in OotP why he would think such a thing. The situation of Harry causing the AK to rebound is unique. But the description of Horcruxes Dumbledore gives in HBP would explain why he suspected something like that.

We also have:

"You can speak Parseltongue, Harry," said Dumbledore calmly, "because Lord Voldemort-- who is the last remaining descendant of Salazar Slytherin-- can speak Parseltongue. Unless I'm very much mistaken, he transferred some of his own powers to you the night he gave you that scar. Not something he intended to do, I'm sure...."

"Voldemort put a bit of himself in me?" Harry said, stunned.

"It certainly seems so." (CoS, Ch18, "Dobby's Reward")

We have also seen the connection at work since in GoF and OotP. I don't think there is much doubt that some bit of Voldemort's soul is attached to Harry via the scar, even if Harry isn't a proper, intended Horcrux.

Toad - Jul 22, 2005 7:29 am (#140 of 2969)

Mrs Brisbee, I'm glad someone agrees with me!

The most important part of the theory is that Voldemort did it by accident. No one expected it to happen and it remains to be seen if any of the characters have even yet managed to figure it out.

Schoff, I don't think Voldemort made the curse after the rebound either but that was something DD considered (my book is now being passed around the rest of my family so I can't find the quote, unfortunately). He could have done it with his new, temporary body since he was able to do at least some magic in that form, but personally, I don't think he made Nagini into a Horcrux at all. Unless he has made eight pieces without realising it. Remember he probably doesn't know that Harry is a Horcrux yet and certainly didn't know in GoF.

Voldemort can kill Harry any time he wants because he still has his other Horcruxes and whatever remains of his original soul. Plus, like I say, he might not even know that Harry is a Horcrux. It's Harry who's in trouble, although for all we know he may be able to get rid of the Horcrux without killing himself.

Nathan Zimmermann - Jul 22, 2005 8:25 am (#141 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2005 10:27 am

If Voldemort did in fact transfer some of himself into Harry. Then this would raise an interesting conundrum for Voldemort because, having only heard half of Trelawney's prophecy. Voldemort is operating under the assumption that he can kill Harry Potter without harming himself. By the time of the final confrontation I suspect that Harry will have destroyed all but, one of the Horcruxes. If in fact Harry is the final Horcrux. If Voldemort kills Harry then Voldemort himself will either become mortal and can be destroyed or will be destroyed once Harry is killed much like a parasite dies once its host dies.

There is another possibility. Is it possible that Harry is not the final Horcrux per se But, that his scar is the final Horcrux.

There are several points that could support this idea. First, the scar burns and hurts when Voldemort is feeling particularly murderous we know this from GoF. Second, when Voldemort attempted to possess Harry at the end of OotP Harry was able to force him out. Third, and this is a minor point the Ring of Slytherin's that was Horcrux looked like it had a broken lightning bolt. I wonder whether the spell that is used to create Horcruxes leaves a mark in the shape of a lightning bolt.

This distinction between Harry's scar as the Horcrux and Harry himself as the Horcrux, is an important one because, while Harry's scar may be tainted with Voldemort's evil, Harry's heart and soul are not tainted by Voldemort's evil therefore, he is capable of great love in contrast to Voldemort who is incapable of love giving Harry the advantage he needs to defeat Voldemort, Having said that I doubt very much that Voldemort intended to use Harry as Horcrux this I think can be borne out by the prophecy.

Potterhead - Jul 22, 2005 8:49 am (#142 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2005 9:53 am

I was reading the Horcrux chapter thread and had this thought. If someone has posted it here already, I apologize. I'll go back and read the other ninety posts I have not yet read in a minute. It occurs to me (without my book handy) that DD says there are powerful curses on Horcruxes, and I think we are all assuming that anyone who destroys a Horcrux will most likely suffer some sort of injury (like DD's hand, and the effects of the potion). We know that the diary was a Horcrux. Isn't it odd that Harry did not suffer an injury in destroying it? He suffered injury at the mouth of the basilisk, yes, and Ginny was nearly wiped out from the growing strength of the Horcrux, but Harry, the wizard who destroyed it, did not suffer injury from that act of destruction. I just find that a bit jarring. Will have to go back and read that portion of CoS and also DD's statements to Harry in his office afterward one more time . . .

Not to be too circular, but in just re-reading what I posted so far, it occurs to me that maybe the basilisk is akin to the potion -- the protections surrounding the Horcrux is where the danger is. Ok, sorry guys, think I answered my own question. But it is interesting to imagine, not just what the Horcruxes will be, but, almost more importantly, what the protections and curses surrounding each of them will turn out to be.

Edit: another thought. The diary did not have the protection of the basilisk when it was out and about in the Gryffindor dormitory or the girls' bathroom. Would the basilisk have been its protection then? Would it have had any other defensive protections if Harry, say, took a poisoned kitchen knife to it well away from the Chamber and the dirty great snake? (my mind hurts . . .)

Fawksey girl - Jul 22, 2005 9:15 am (#143 of 2969)

I have a Horcrux related question. If LV was desperate to return to Hogwarts, why didn't, or maybe he did, he use Quirrell to find a Hogwarts Horcrux.

haymoni - Jul 22, 2005 9:21 am (#144 of 2969)

Oh! That's good! If a part of his soul was already at Hogwarts, why would Voldy waste Quirrell's time getting the Stone?

Mmmm...No Horcrux at Hogwarts then?

I think Voldy wanted the job so he could continue Salazar Slytherin's noble work.

Fawksey girl - Jul 22, 2005 9:29 am (#145 of 2969)

Well I think that Dumbledore and LV have made it clear that LV fears death above all else and would take any and all precautions to render himself immortal . a sorcerer's stone couldn't hurt, practical or not.

Nathan Zimmermann - Jul 22, 2005 9:29 am (#146 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2005 11:29 am

Haymoni, I doubt very much that Voldemort intended to use Harry as Horcrux this I think can be borne out by the prophecy. I think Voldemort only began to realize what had happened that night at Godric's Hollow at the end of OotP. I believe Voldemort heard only the first half of the prophecy. I also believe that Severus either did not hear or intentionally held back the second half of the prophecy and that Voldemort having knowledge of only the first half of the prophecy decided to attack Godric's Hollow

haymoni - Jul 22, 2005 9:39 am (#147 of 2969)

Nathan - I don't think Harry is a Horcrux.

I thought maybe Voldy had hidden a Horcrux at Hogwarts. If he had, he would have sent Quirrell to retrieve THAT - why bother with the Stone?

Yes, the Stone would be a handy item to have, but if you know Dumbledore is spending time securing the Stone, why not just tell Quirrell how to go to the Room of Requirement or the Chamber or to a loose piece of flagstone or the Trophy Room or wherever the Horcrux was hidden - "Accio Horcrux" and there's Voldy, born again!

Is it enough to get a piece of your soul, or do you still need a body???

Kevin Corbett - Jul 22, 2005 11:08 am (#148 of 2969)

I refer you back to the anchor theory.

Also, I was thinking, the Horcruxes give us a little insight into why LV is able, apparently at least, to ally himself with the Dementors: he himself would be a paltry meal for a hungry Dementor, as would his DE's, they having ripped their souls to pieces.

Doris Crockford - Jul 22, 2005 11:19 am (#149 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2005 12:20 pm

Didn't he already have a piece of his soul, Haymoni? I thought that was all he was left with after the AK backfired, and so he needed the body to be able to do anything (cast spells, create his final Horcrux, kill all the Muggle-borns, etc.).

Nathan Zimmermann - Jul 22, 2005 11:21 am (#150 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2005 12:43 pm

There is a fourth point which I forgot to mentioned that lends itself to the idea that Harry's scar maybe the final Horcrux. In his speech in the graveyard to the Death Eaters, Voldemort makes this statement. " I miscalculated my friends, I admit it. My curse was deflected by the woman's foolish sacrifice and it rebounded upon myself. Aaah...pain beyond pain, my friends; nothing could have prepared me for it. I was ripped from my body I was less than spirit, I was less than the meanest ghost...but, still I was alive. GoF page 832 of the Large Print edition published by Thorndike press.

This tends to make think that there occurred an interaction between the force of Voldemort's failed AK and the force of Lily sacrifice and the protection that it provided Harry, the end result being the unintentional transfer of some of Voldemort spirit and powers into Harry's scar. The end result being that the scar was however, unintentionally transformed into a Horcrux.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Wed Jul 20, 2011 6:43 pm

septentrion - Jul 22, 2005 11:23 am (#151 of 2969)

What harmed DD when he destroyed the Horcrux wasn't the Horcrux itself but the curses and enchantments which protected it. The diary wasn't so heavily warded, so it was easier to destroy.

If the lightning-bolt shape is a telltale of a Horcrux, I'd say LV is very slow on the uptake : everyone knows about that scar. How could he miss that clue ?

Nathan Zimmermann - Jul 22, 2005 11:29 am (#152 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2005 12:44 pm

I think Voldemort is so obsessed with how Harry able is to defeat him that does not notice the outward physical signs and has thus far fail to make the connection. Voldemort does tend to overlook things. In CoS he forgot about the healing properties that Phoenix tears possess. In the speech in the graveyard he says "His mother left upon him traces of her sacrifice .... This is old magic, I should have remembered it, I was foolish to overlook it. Page 832 of the large print edition of GoF published by Thorndike Press.

Solitaire - Jul 22, 2005 1:52 pm (#153 of 2969)

It sounds to me like a Horcrux must be deliberately--not accidentally--created. I tend to agree that Voldemort would not have been in any shape to create a Horcrux after he was vaporized. Additionally, I do not see how Voldemort's soul could survive in Harry. Harry is too full of the force of love. If Voldemort's soul had been put into Harry, surely it would have been destroyed by now.

Someone back several posts mentioned that perhaps another Wizard created the Horcrux. I can't see this happening, either. First of all, I doubt Voldemort would willingly give another wizard the kind of knowledge about him that could bring him down. Second, it just seems that creating a Horcrux is something one must do for oneself--since it deals with one's soul.

Solitaire

Bluenote1313 - Jul 22, 2005 1:59 pm (#154 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2005 3:01 pm

Although I do not think either are Horcruxes, I think Ginny is more likely due to the effects of the Diary. Of course I think that when the Diary was destroyed the part of LV soul that was stored there was destroyed, and not left in Ginny.

Here is a random thought: Maybe Petunia has one of the Horcruxes and doesn't know it yet. What if Lily and James found one and gave it Petunia as a gift so that it was always safe in a Muggle house - the last place LV would look?

Nathan Zimmermann - Jul 22, 2005 2:09 pm (#155 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2005 3:28 pm

Solitaire, my argument is that Voldemort's soul is not actually within Harry. The portion of Voldemort's soul is within the scar but that it did not penetrate into Harry's heart or soul and that it is ensconced within scar and that it feeds off of Harry like a leech.

As to Voldemort's intent he intended to kill both James and Harry. I would argue that while under normal circumstances the creation of a Horcrux is an intentional act. There exist situations it which the creation of Horcruxes can occur spontaneously given the right circumstances regardless of specific intent. The description of Voldemort's soul being ripped from its body seems similar to me the splitting that occurs in the process creating a Horcrux.

Circe - Jul 22, 2005 2:22 pm (#156 of 2969)

Did anyone catch what happened to the ring in the end, after DD got possession of it? He did wear it to get Slughorn. I wonder what he did with it after that.

Belladonna - Jul 22, 2005 3:21 pm (#157 of 2969)

Or to defeat him. Let's say that all of Voldemort's soul is divided and into the objects. Without the external Horcruxes he might perish. Harry might have to destroy himself to destroy Voldemort.

Toad - Jul 22, 2005 3:24 pm (#158 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2005 4:24 pm

Good point about the Dementors, Kevin. Since Voldemort is practically soulless they really are his 'natural allies'. They may even look to him as something of a leader. Creepy.

Cassiopeia - Jul 22, 2005 3:27 pm (#159 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2005 4:28 pm

Harry saw the ring on a table in DD's office.

We don’t' know exactly how one creates a Horcrux. You have to say an incantation and you have to murder someone, but in what order? Suppose you say the incantation for the Horcrux then do the murder. Then when the murder happens, the Horcrux is created. If LV killed James, then said the incantation for the Horcrux, then tried to kill Harry but Lily jumped in front and died for him. So when he tried to kill Harry after Lily was already dead, it created a Horcrux instead of killing Harry. Does that make any sense at all? I'm grasping at straws here...

Nathan Zimmermann - Jul 22, 2005 4:25 pm (#160 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2005 5:38 pm

Cassiopeia, given how little the readers actually know regarding the creation of Horcruxes I would say that could be possible. Although, I seem to recall there being a passage in which was said to be inadvisable to transform a body into a Horcrux. What I suggest is that if Harry's scar is in fact a Horcrux then, it is an external one in that it is outside of Harry heart and soul. If this is so Harry maybe able to sever or destroy the Horcrux while, inflicting minimal harm to himself.

Nymphadora Lupin - Jul 22, 2005 4:32 pm (#161 of 2969)

If this is so, Harry maybe able to sever or destroy the Horcrux while, inflicting minimal harm to himself.

Perhaps this is where Snape might come in? He has to figure out a way to "sever" (sever - us) the Horcrux from Harry in order to defeat Voldy and save Harry's life??

Paulus Maximus - Jul 22, 2005 4:55 pm (#162 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2005 6:27 pm

Forgive me if the points I am about to make have already been brought up...

It may be significant that Voldemort never achieved his ambition of splitting his soul into seven pieces... By the time he made a Horcrux out of Nagini, the diary had already been destroyed.

I suspect that something dreadful might have happened if Voldemort HAD succeeded in splitting his soul into seven pieces, and now that he knows that the diary is destroyed, he might want to create a seventh Horcrux...

Not that this will help him, really, now that the ring is destroyed too...

By the way, I suspect that the word "Horcrux" is derived from the Latin words "horrere" meaning "to dread" and "crux" meaning "cross"...

Nathan Zimmermann - Jul 22, 2005 4:56 pm (#163 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2005 6:18 pm

Nymphadora Lupin, that would provide new levels of complexity to Snape's character well done.

Wisey - Jul 22, 2005 5:13 pm (#164 of 2969)

I think that the assumption it takes only one death to create a Horcrux is wrong. The multiple deaths prior to Bk1 was LV trying to split his soul 7 times. Does LV have to do the killing or merely order the death to get his required effect?

Paulus Maximus - Jul 22, 2005 5:18 pm (#165 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2005 6:25 pm

Creating a Horcrux requires one to split one's soul. Only an act of murder is foul enough to do that...

As far as I know, the assumption that it takes one death to create a Horcrux is based on the fact that Voldemort wanted to create his final Horcrux with Harry's death. Although, it might be possible to create just one Horcrux by committing mass murder.

However, it isn't clear whether commanding a murder is as bad as committing a murder. (In my opinion it is, but my opinion doesn't mean much... I do know that some schools of thought [or whatever you call them] consider the man who hires a murderer to be as guilty as the murderer... As a matter of fact, I don't know any that don't...)

Again, forgive my gibberish...

Puck - Jul 22, 2005 6:03 pm (#166 of 2969)

Pretty sure you have to actually commit the murder to get a Horcrux. And I agree with Solitaire that such powerful dark magic would not happen accidently. Plus, there's Lily's protection. It saved Harry's life, I doubt it would allow him to become something so twisted and evil, even in part.

The diary had to have less protection in order to fulfill its second purpose.

I doubt Voldy will continue to split what is left of his soul. He said himself that 7 was a powerful magic number, he would not want to reduce that power with number 8. Plus, if he believes only the diary to be destroyed, and most of the others well protected, he feels confident.

But why, though, if he has several souls anchoring him to this life would he say in GOF that he has been reborn to a mortal body, and will think of immortality later?

TwinklingBlueEyes - Jul 22, 2005 7:01 pm (#167 of 2969)

I do not believe Harry's scar is a Horcrux. I think it, as has been explained by Dumbledore in previous books, a mark, as Voldie believes the prophecy says.

I posted back in post 118 I think, my ideas about Horcruxes, and got absolutely no response from anyone. No yes, is possible, ... no, you are nuts, nothing... I am used to being shot down, laughed at, but not ignored. So I will post my ideas once more and hope you posting people will at least tell me I'm crazy.

From his own words, consider this... Dumbledore says about Tom Riddle...

"Hogwarts was where he had been happiest; the first and only place he had felt at home." DD HBP 431 Scholastic

Voldemort tried two times to come back to Hogwarts to teach. First Dippet told him he was to young at eighteen, the second time ten plus years later when DD was Headmaster. "Oh, you want to come back to Hogwarts, but you do not want to teach anymore than you wanted to when you were eighteen. What is it you're after, Tom? Why not try an open request for once?" DD, HBP 445

Lord Voldemort collects trophies of his victims, from his orphanage days on.

"Lord Voldemort liked to collect trophies, and he preferred objects with a powerful magic history. His pride and belief in his own superiority, his determination to carve for himself a startling place in magical history; these things suggest to me that Voldemort would have chosen his Horcruxes with some care, favoring objects worthy of the honor." DD, HBP 504

I think he originally intended to use the trinkets of the Founders, the ring, the locket, but then decided the greatest trophy of all would be Hogwarts itself!

"What intrigued and alarmed me the most was that that diary had been intended as a weapon as much as a safeguard." DD, HBP 500

What better weapon to use against the Wizarding World than its own children?

First, Dumbledore had to be removed from the picture, as had been tried before in previous books, then in HBP seemingly for good. We now have a MOM that most of us feel uneasy about, Umbridge is still around and you know looking for revenge. Remember, Voldemort operates best by stealth.

I do not believe the seventh Horcrux has been made, I believed Hogwarts is to become the vessel to hold the seventh part of Voldemorts soul, and that Harry's is the death intended to make it!

Hogwarts MUST stand! I hope Harry remembers something else Dumbledore said way back in SS/PS, "...it became clear to me that the place I should be was the one I had just left."

"Paulus Maximus[/b] - Jul 22, 2005 5:55 pm (#162 of 165) Edited Jul 22, 2005 6:27 pm Forgive me if the points I am about to make have already been brought up...

It may be significant that Voldemort never achieved his ambition of splitting his soul into seven pieces... By the time he made a Horcrux out of Nagini, the diary had already been destroyed."

Paulus, I totally agree. Another point, and correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the ring and locket both belong to Slytherin?

I think Voldie wants to make Hogwarts his crown jewel, and Harry is the death he sees making it. Plus it will be a trophy he has as evidence of his defeat of Dumbledore, "the only one he ever feared."

...toddles off elsewhere for a while...

Nathan Zimmermann - Jul 22, 2005 8:41 pm (#168 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2005 9:58 pm

The only two items known to have belonged to Godric Gryffindor are the Sorting Hat and his sword.

"...I cannot answer for whether he ever managed to find anything of Ravenclaw's. I am confident however, that the only known relic of Gryffindor remains safe." Dumbledore pointed his blackened fingers to the wall behind him, where a ruby-encrusted sword reposed within a glass case. page 305 of the American Edition of HBP published by Scholastic Books.

This quote however does not account for the Sorting Hat although, since it is secured within the headmaster’s office and only used for the sorting ceremony. I doubt it was used as a Horcrux because, Tom Riddle's access to it like his access to the sword would have been restricted.

Although, there are three questions this passage raises: First, why did Dumbledore state that the only known relic of Gryffindor was his sword. Second, why did Dumbledore not make mention of the Sorting belonging to Godric Gryffindor? Third, was the omission an accidental or intentional one?

Astragynia Winifred Posy Miranda Yseult Cawdor - Jul 22, 2005 9:07 pm (#169 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2005 10:13 pm

TBE, you're right that both ring and locket did belong to Slytherin; I think, though, that Voldemort sees the locket as representing his family/his past/his personal connection (as heir) to Slytherin, whereas the ring is a trophy of Slytherin-the-Hogwarts founder, one of (ideally) four trophy-Horcruxes - one from each founder. ("Collect All 4!" ... Imagine how different the Wizarding World would be if Tom Riddle had decided to collect something else... Chocolate Frog cards, for example, or Chudley Cannons memorabilia, or beanie-babies...).

A couple of people have pointed to Voldemort's possession of Harry at the end of OotP to argue that Harry cannot be a Horcrux. We know that possession is a completely separate thing, though, because Dumbledore says that Voldemort was possessing Nagini when she attacked Arthur, and he also thinks that she is a Horcrux. So clearly, something that already contains a piece of a soul can still be further possessed - let's say, by the full consciousness of the person, instead of their soul. This could mean that it is Voldemort's full consciousness that cannot be in the same body as Harry's love; a piece of his maimed soul could fit in there without a problem. (JKR's view seems to be that hatred, evil and murder twist and split the soul - they do not emanate from it).

Oh, and TBE: your idea that Voldemort might want a BUILDING as a Horcrux is interesting, but I just have a lot of difficulty imagining it. It seems too far out of character - buildings are just so... BIG. Voldemort seems to like small, secretive things that can be directly controlled and hidden (and I'm not just referring to Horcruxes). The idea of hiding something in plain sight - a Horcrux castle - well, it's a very good idea, just not one that I think could ever appeal to Voldie. Yes, I know Hogwarts is Unplottable, but STILL.

TwinklingBlueEyes - Jul 22, 2005 9:51 pm (#170 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2005 10:54 pm

"Oh, and TBE: your idea that Voldemort might want a BUILDING as a Horcrux is interesting, but I just have a lot of difficulty imagining it. It seems too far out of character - buildings are just so... BIG."

Hogwarts itself is a combination of all of the Founders. It is over 1000 years old, the largest wizarding school in Europe. The domain of Dumbledore, "the only one he ever feared." The only place the Dark Lord ever felt as home. If you do a search you will also find evidence that the castle itself has its own personality and it's own magic. I propose it is more than just a BIG inanimate building.

Voldemort would see it as his crowning glory, his greatest trophy.
Edited for more thoughts. I think Hogwarts is the final Horcrux that Voldemort wants to make, one he does not yet have, one that Harry is the murder that is the one he wants to make it with.

Circe - Jul 22, 2005 10:20 pm (#171 of 2969)

Interview Part 3 JKR: Well, I'm prepared to bet you now, that at least before the week is out, at least one of the Horcruxes will have been correctly identified by careful re-readers of the books.

I am tempted to go back to the locket found in 12GP as the Horcrux. But a little voice is suggesting to me.. what if it is some personal belonging of Dumbledore's? After all, a close personal belonging of DD would be significant because it would belong to LV's greatest nemesis.

Solitaire - Jul 22, 2005 11:07 pm (#172 of 2969)

a close personal belonging of DD would be significant because it would belong to LV's greatest nemesis.

I think this makes a lot of sense, Circe. The question is ... what would he have used?

Nathan, you could be correct about Harry's scar. I guess we will not know until the next book--or until Jo decides to answer a question on the issue--the exact procedure for creating a Horcrux. I think it is significant if we are going to figure out who or what is the actual Horcrux.

I tend to think all of the Horcruxes were made before Voldemort was vaporized, since I think there may be a problem with him attempting to create a Horcrux in his current state. Of course, that blows my "Ginny as Horcrux" theory out of the water, too ... although I still find Riddle's words--that he began pouring a little bit of his SOUL into her--very troubling.

Solitaire

Wendelin the Weird - Jul 23, 2005 12:22 am (#173 of 2969)

DOH!! I almost feel dumb for not catching this sooner. Has anyone else posted this yet? Its 3am-- too late to read 173 posts back.

We know one of the Horcruxes already! THE GOBLET OF FIRE! It was no coincidence that Crouch Jr. was able to hoodwink the cup, and certainly no coincidence that Voldemort was waiting to be reborn when Harry & Cedric turned up with the portkey cup. It was a Horcrux and that is probably how he was able to return to his full strength!

slaps forehead* I cant believe I didn’t see it before!

So, is this the Ravenclaw Cup? It had a blue flame didn’t it, and I think Jo gave a friendship cup to Emerson of Mugglenet after the interview. In part 3 she said that she expected someone would figure out what the other Horcrux is that we know of. I would bet that’s it. We know LV and DEs have been in contact with it!

I bet the rebirth was because Tom Riddle had the cup (stolen from the woman no doubt) and used it to make his 2nd(?) Horcrux when he murdered his father-- hence why he had to use his father’s corpse to be reborn anew.

1 down and 3 to go! Very Happy

Hand Of Glory - Jul 23, 2005 12:36 am (#174 of 2969)

Hmmm Wendelin the Weird, very interesting and entirely possible...

JKR: "Well, I'm prepared to bet you now, that at least before the week is out, at least one of the Horcruxes will have been correctly identified by careful re-readers of the books."

Note she said re-readers of the books... not just book 6. I think this might give a little weight to the theory that Slytherin's locket is, in fact, the same one mentioned in book 5 found while they were clearing out the Black house... They are both described as heavy...

(This is a popular theory in the RAB discussion forum)

What do you all think?

Wendelin the Weird - Jul 23, 2005 12:46 am (#175 of 2969)
Edited Jul 23, 2005 2:05 am

She also mentioned that Harry would draw upon things he had already encountered throughout his years at Hogwarts-- the Goblet makes perfect sense! Smile

*happy dances all around living room*

As L.V’s 'most loyal servant' I would think it entirely plausible to think that LV would entrust Crouch Jr. with a Horcrux. Smile

Not only entrusted him with it but he had him steal it from Hogwarts and deliver it to the graveyard where his father was buried. It wasn't just Harry LV was after that day-- and he certainly had words to say about the measures he had taken to prevent his own death. When the spell rebounded he was without a body and weak. Then he creates a sick sort of a body -- probably soulless from its description, and has his servant steal one of his Horcruxes back from DD and Hogwarts. The Horcrux is delivered straight to him where he is awaiting to use it and the victim's body (along other things) to bring him back. Off course it would be best to use Harry's blood since he is the one who caused the rebound in the first place. And I think this also has to do with DD's 'look of triumph'.

And I do like the locket theory, but I tend to think that the Horcrux is on the body of RAB in the water surrounding the pedestal where it was kept. I’m of the "Accio Horcrux" school of thought in regards to its location. But anything is possible!

Now, we know 2 of them, what of the other two? Those are going to be tricky...

I really should sleep but I’m so excited. Somehow this book is just putting my thoughts all in place. I was baffled after book 5 -- I didn’t feel I got the answers I was looking for, but now it feels like I’ve been on the right track and didn’t know it. Hope I’m right!

I suspect the Sorting Hat will become important before this is all through also. For what LV is doing collecting these Hogwarts items, the Sorting Hat would be the tops! It houses the brains of the four founders, and sounds like a Horcrux in its own right, although I certainly hope they wouldn’t have killed anyone to make it. Maybe it’s more like a portrait. However, it did come to the rescue with Gryffindors sword, and I’m sure there is good reason for that or Fawkes would have just brought the sword alone.

haymoni - Jul 23, 2005 4:56 am (#176 of 2969)

I like the idea of the Goblet being the same cup, but isn't the Goblet of Fire locked up in that wooden case? I'm guessing somebody knows where it is all the time.

Given the mistrust from the other schools, I think they might have a problem with Rowena Ravenclaw's cup being used to pick the Tournament Champions.

But I'm open to just about anything now!!!

Her-melanie - Jul 23, 2005 6:29 am (#177 of 2969)

Guys, I don't have the book with me, but I don't think the Triwizard Cup and the Goblet of Fire are the same thing. The Goblet is what chose the contestants; the cup is the trophy inside the maze. I think they are two different things.

Puck - Jul 23, 2005 6:39 am (#178 of 2969)

I think that the object likely needs to be present at the time of the murder, as I assume the Horcrux spell needs to be performed immediately thereafter. SO, I doubt it could be the Sorting Hat or the Goblet of fire, as someone would have noticed either being missing.

What about the cursed necklace that almost killed Katie? That certainly is protected by a powerful enchantment.

I was thinking that there is perhaps something at St. Mungo's. Remember, JKR said in the interview that book 5 was so long because there were places Harry needs to visit. The MoM was the scene of the murder. The possibility of the locket at Grimmauld place has been discussed. Why did he have to go to St. Mungo's? Perhaps there is something hidden there.

The Wandless Wizard - Jul 23, 2005 7:04 am (#179 of 2969)
Edited by Jul 23, 2005 8:08 am

JKR has said some things in part 3 of her Mugglenet/Leaky Cauldron interview that we should keep in mind when discussing Horcruxes. They have been mentioned in passing the last few posts, but I thought I'd put them down here verbatim:

"Dumbledore's guesses are never very far wide of the mark. I don't want to give too much away here, but Dumbledore says, ‘There are four out there, you've got to get rid of four, and then you go for Voldemort.’ So that's where he is, and that's what he's got to do."

"But Dumbledore has given him some pretty valuable clues and Harry, also, in the course of previous six books has amassed more knowledge than he realizes. That's all I am going to say."

"Well, I'm prepared to bet you now, that at least before the week is out, at least one of the Horcruxes will have been correctly identified by careful re-readers of the books."

"Harry definitely destroyed that piece of soul [Riddle's diary], you saw it take shape, you saw it destroyed, it’s gone. And Ginny is definitely in no way possessed by Voldemort" (JKR interview with Mugglenet/Leaky Cauldron, part 3)

So what does this tell us. Most importantly that DD is not that far from the truth when he says there are 4 Horcruxes and guesses what they are. While it doesn't kill it, I think this puts a serious damper on the Harry is a Horcrux theory. DD didn't say that Harry was a Horcrux. He said Voldemort was 1 Horcrux short when he went to kill Harry and that he later made Nagini his last Horcrux. There are only 4 Horcruxes left. If three were made before Voldemort went for Harry and Nagini was made one afterwards, then there is no room for Harry as a Horcrux.

Second, she outright kills the Ginny is a Horcrux theory. When she said Ginny was not possessed, she was answering a question about Ginny possibly being a Horcrux. Third, the clues to find the Horcruxes are in the previous books as Harry has obtained more knowledge than he now knows. Finally, we should have already identified a Horcrux. This is probably the locket in OotP which would mean Regulus is most likely R.A.B.

Nagini is always with Voldemort, so he should be easy to find when the time comes. The locket is in 12GP which Harry owns (or more likely it was stolen by Mundungus or Kreacher). That leaves Harry to find the Hufflepuff cup and the 4th artifact. I think there are clues to where those are in the earlier books as well, but I have not had the time to think about it. I just wanted to get these quotes out there for discussion.

-TWW

Reble Sheep Go Moo - Jul 23, 2005 8:05 am (#180 of 2969)

If Harry and his friends miss one of the Horcruxes of mis-identify one and Harry goes along to destroy L.V. then what would happen? Would the bit of soul from the remaining Horcrux just be sucked out of where ever it is by Voldie and then used by him or would he go into a 'vegetable state' while someone needed to find it and let it out to bring Voldie back from where ever he went.

If that happened then couldn't Harry and Co. just reputedly stab/AK Voldie until he ran out of Horcruxes and (for want of a better word) died.

Verbina - Jul 23, 2005 8:19 am (#181 of 2969)

Gone a day and wow!

schoff - You said "Why is the assumption that the Diary must have been made a Horcrux while Voldie was in school? Why couldn't he have made it later, after leaving school and while he was learning the extreme Dark Arts? He may have created the diary during school (which I'm not sure he did, as I'm not convinced he knew how to at that point) but that doesn't necessarily mean he made it a Horcrux at the same time."

I am thinking that Horcruxes are tricky things. 1st of all, how would you hang on to the part of your soul that split off? How could you hold on to it for years? I simply do not think that it works that way. I feel that you would have a short time period in which to make Horcrux lest the split off piece of soul leaves. After all, not all wizards make a Horcrux after committing a murder otherwise there would be many from DEs alone. I do believe that you have to plan ahead to do it and then do it fairly soon after the murder. Also, the piece of soul in the diary was young, Tom Riddle before he became Voldemort. That leads me to think that Tom was young when he committed the murder from which he made the Horcrux. If he had been older, the soul within it would have been older. Just my odd way of thinking I guess.

I was thinking about the liquid in the basin with the locket. Why would it effect DD as it did? Yet why would LV want it there as a protection if he would have to drink it himself? He does not strike me as a guy that would willingly put himself through pain or discomfort for any reason. Then it hit me...what if the liquid in the basin was actually a type of potion that forced the drinker to relive things in the past that they feel guilt or remorse for? DD's physical reactions were to collapse and to not want to drink more along with begging to not have to drink more. His emotional reactions seemed to almost be stronger. As we all know, DD has lived a long eventful life in which he has been held responsible for many things and people. And some of the things he had to do for the good of all he may feel remorse and guilt for. If the feeling of guilt and despair is strong enough in a person, it could lead to collapse and physically feeling drained. Now if you look at it from the point of view of Voldemort, do we honestly think he would feel remorse or guilt for the things he has done? The man is cold hearted and cares for nothing. So the liquid would have no effect on him or very little.

Nope, I don't think it was a poison in that basin but an emotional based potion.

The Wandless Wizard - Jul 23, 2005 8:27 am (#182 of 2969)
Edited by Jul 23, 2005 9:33 am

I don't think Horcruxes work like that Reble Sheep. I like the anchor theory that has been brought up. Normally when you die, your soul goes "beyond the veil" (to heaven or the underworld or wherever). However, if you have a Horcrux, something binds your soul to the mortal coil. Despite being split, your soul is still connected to all the other pieces. If a piece is still connected to a Horcrux, the piece of soul you were using is connected to it and hence can't move on. So when Voldemort died, the piece of his soul that was in his body just kind of floated around for years looking for a body. So Harry could keep stabbing Voldemort's body as much as he wants. He is not destroying the Horcruxes. He would just keep expelling that one piece of soul. Once Harry destroys the Horcruxes, he can kill Voldemort and nothing will anchor his soul to this world. Then he will be forced to go beyond the veil.

I have thought of an interesting (at least to me) side-note. When Voldemort was "killed" the first time, the piece of his soul wandered the earth and was able to have conscious thought. It was able to possess and interact with people (Quirrell). So when a Horcrux is destroyed, can that piece of soul interact with the world like the piece that sprang from Voldemort's body? We know the diary was able to interact in some small way upon the world while it was a Horcrux. It had a consciousness of sorts. Was that special? Can it still act upon the world? If so, diary Riddle could be out there possessing people. My guess is that Horcruxes act as anchors; however, when they are destroyed, nothing anchors them. Still there is a lot we don't know about Horcruxes, A LOT.

-TWW

Edit: Interesting theory Verbina about the potion causing an emotional reaction. I am not sure I believe it, but it is an interesting possibility. Why did the water (or at least whatever DD drank from the lake) cause DD to stop feeling the emotional burden, at least so heavily?

Wendelin the Weird - Jul 23, 2005 8:39 am (#183 of 2969)
Edited Jul 23, 2005 10:26 am

The Horcrux diary houses Riddle's 16-year-old self, so yes, it points to him still being at Hogwarts when he first created it in my opinion. But did he create it over the summer you mean? That is highly possible since the only death we know of was Myrtle. However, is it possible that having ordered the Basilisk to kill Myrtle would have worked? We did hear his voice in the bathroom speaking Parseltongue to open the entrance and release the snake...

As for the Triwizard cup being a different object from the Goblet of Fire, I don't know for sure but my point is that cup that was carried to the rebirthing is the Horcrux. Be it the GoF or the Triwizard cup, it’s very likely to have been the Horcrux. Oh and by the way, on a reread it is Helga Hufflepuffs cup, not Ravenclaws. It’s the same one that Hepzibah Smith had in a leather box. We know it has some very magical qualities that she hadn't at that time uncovered. If compared to what Emerson received as a gift from Jo I would say that it was a friendship cup.

In GoF the goblet was indeed housed in a box too, but a wooden jewel-encrusted one and it was made of wood, so I guess you're right that the GoF isn't the same as the Triwizard Cup which was gold I think. "The Triwizard Cup was gleaming on a plinth a hundred yards away..."(GoF p631 US)

I'd say we are right in saying that this cup is it! We know Tom stole the Hufflepuff cup from Hepzibah, and we can suspect he used it as a Horcrux because he is set on using Founders objects. There it is!

Other quotes about the Triwizard Cup:

"Cedric was standing ten feet from the Triwizard Cup which was gleaming behind him."

"But Cedric didn't move. He merely stood there, looking at Harry. Then he turned to stare at the cup. Harry saw the longing expression on his face in its golden light."

Note, its Hufflepuffs friendship Cup and Cedric is the Hufflepuff Champion. Through friendship they both decided to take the cup together rather than only one of them. It is 'gleaming' and casting 'golden light'. Hepzibah’s is described as a "small golden cup with two finely wrought handles". Coincidentally Hepzibah was distantly related to Helga Hufflepuff and it was her cup, and it had all sorts of powers that she hadn't tested yet. It also had a badger engraved on its side.

"When they had reached it, both held out a hand over one of the cup's gleaming handles."

The Triwizard Cup is gold and has two handles. It matches the description although Voldemort doesn't seem to actually ever use the cup physically, but perhaps its presence is enough. It is possible that Voldemort was planning on using the cup to create a new Horcrux when he killed Harry. It says that he is one Horcrux short of seven.

"I am sure that he was planning to make his final Horcrux with your death." (HBP p507 US)

The Cup was present when he planned to kill Harry. Although DD agrees that the cup, locket, and snake are intact, so this suggests that the cup is already probably a Horcrux-- this goes back to the suggestion that its presence at the rebirthing was of importance to the effectiveness of the potion he brewed. He had a spectral maimed soul prior to rebirth-- the part that lived out a spectral existence during exile. That is the seventh piece which was regenerated. The magic used to return L.V’s soul is in his own words "very dark magic."

The cups placement in Hogwarts before the tournament is also important-- Voldemort had Lucius smuggle the diary back into Hogwarts' which may mean that the magic of the school itself (of which Tom Riddle learned more than most anyone) could have magnified their power. It also explains why DD is set on staying at Hogwarts instead of being Minister of Magic. He doesn't want to let Riddle get his Horcruxes back.

"Lord Voldemort liked to collect trophies, and he preferred objects with a powerful magical history. His pride, his belief in his own superiority, his determination to carve for himself a startling place in magical history; these things suggest to me that Voldemort would have chosen his Horcruxes with some care, favoring objects worthy of the honor." (HBP p 504 US)

Well, this all doesn't necessarily prove that the cup is Helga's but it certainly hints at it, doesn't it? Especially considering what Jo says about Harry having more information to find it that he thinks.

Toad - Jul 23, 2005 8:43 am (#184 of 2969)

TWW, about Nagini. DD wasn't sure, but there is evidence that he has had his eye on Nagini for some time, such as the silver instrument in OotP.

However, assuming that the instrument told DD there were two pieces of Voldemort's soul in Nagini, this would be an excellent way to drop a clue about Harry being the Horcrux without proving it one way or the other. Since Harry was also in the snake at the time, one of the two pieces could be the one inside Harry. DD didn't realise this though and consequently he assumed the other Horcrux must be Nagini. That is a near perfect example of JKR's ambiguous clue dropping. When she says DD was close, she was right. He was 'never very wide of the mark' and this explains why he suspects Nagini. In book 7 Harry might remember this instrument and realise DD's error, so that it will still be DD's idea which pointed them in the right direction.

From her perspective, assuming I'm right, this would be an excellent way of giving us a clue, without confirming it so that it keeps us guessing.

Also, I don't think Ginny can be a Horcrux because Voldemort has never met her (that we know of). Tom Riddle doesn't count, unless a Horcrux could make a Horcrux of itself, which seems a little too confusing.

The Wandless Wizard - Jul 23, 2005 9:12 am (#185 of 2969)

Toad, it is possible that your interpretation that Harry, not Nagini, is the final Horcrux could be correct. I did say that JKR did not completely squash the Harry is a Horcrux theory. It all comes down to what she means by DD's guesses not being very far wide of the mark. I would say Harry being a Horcrux instead of Nagini is far wide of the mark. When you are telling someone he has to destroy certain objects, there is a huge difference between a snake and the person you are talking to ("You have to kill a snake" versus "You're going to have to kill yourself"). However, you may be right. I can understand the appeal of the Harry is a Horcrux theory. It really explains the transfer of powers nicely and is somewhat a poetic ending. I just get this feeling the power transfer and the Horcruxes are two separate phenomena. I don't think that is where JKR is going with this. Granted, I have been wrong before. Many, many times before.

-TWW

Toad - Jul 23, 2005 10:13 am (#186 of 2969)

You make a good point, TWW. Perhaps there's another way of explaining the power transfer that we've overlooked and the Horcruxes are a different thing altogether.

I'm certain this has been discussed before elsewhere but it is related to what we're discussing (sort of). Do we know for sure why Harry didn't die when Voldemort tried to kill him? We know that Lily's sacrifice enabled DD to use Harry's blood to protect him afterwards, but what exactly was it that it saved him on the night itself? Or was that the blood protection too? (If so then Lily must have been a powerful witch indeed).

I only ask because it might explain how Harry could have been made a Horcrux by accident or how he came to have some of Voldemort's power (through other means).

TGF - Jul 23, 2005 10:36 am (#187 of 2969)

What saved Harry in Goblet of Fire were the matching wand cores in his and Voldemort's wands, which caused a reaction. Nothing seemed to happen in his fight with Voldemort that had anything to do with blood (he wasn't hit by a fatal curse, resisted Imperius with his own will and Crucio hurt as much as it usually does).

I really don't think you can accidently make a Horcrux. There's nothing in the books that says that that's remotely possible, but rather it seems that making a Horcrux takes a fair amount of sophisticated dark magic (and therefore not something one is going to create by accident).

The fat lady - Jul 23, 2005 11:09 am (#188 of 2969)

Hello, my first time to post - I like all the theories around here. I don’t know whether this has been posted before: I think, if the 1/7 part of LV soul was destroyed when he tried to kill Harry, one of the Horcruxes must (in my opinion)somehow have been involved in his "rebirth" in order to get a soul into his new body. Well, he used Harries blood, but that would mean, that a) Harry is a Horcrux and b) LV knows this.

Another point: one possibility to destroy Horcruxes might be using Dementors. They are sucking souls after all.

Mrs. D. - Jul 23, 2005 11:12 am (#189 of 2969)

Thanks Fat Lady now I have an image of Dementors running around sucking on books and jewelry! LOL!! I've been giggling rather loudly at that!

The fat lady - Jul 23, 2005 11:26 am (#190 of 2969)

well, that will keep them busy....

Paulus Maximus - Jul 23, 2005 11:33 am (#191 of 2969)

One could probably destroy a Horcrux by throwing it into the veil in the Death Chamber...

Kazius - Jul 23, 2005 12:00 pm (#192 of 2969)

If the Tri-wizard Champions cup was Helga's cup, don't you think Harry and Dumbledore would have recognized it immediately?

Although I think the idea of it being Ravenclaw's object is far off also, I believe that one is more plausible, simply because we don't know if the Goblet of Fire or Tri-wizard Champions cup come from.

As for the Harry is a Horcrux idea, frankly, every thing I read again points more and more away from Harry being a Horcrux. I just don't think it's possible for someone to "Accidentally" turn someone into a Horcrux. They're separate incantations.

Now, what did happen? Well, I believe Voldemort transferred some of his power into Harry, along with several of his abilities. However, there is a large difference between transferring power into someone and transferring a piece of your soul. Besides, even if Voldemort was planning to make a Horcrux out of Harry's death, we don't know the timeframe it takes to make a Horcrux. I have series doubts whether every single Horcrux took place immediately after a major death, as I believe we're meant to believe that the Diary or Marvolo's Ring (At least one or the other, if not both) were made off LV's Father (Tom Riddle) and Grandparents deaths. Also, Nagini could have been made the 7th Horcrux when he killed the old man in Book 4, when we was very weak, but had been brought up by Wormtail somewhat.

Ultimately, Dumbledore is not far from the truth. We probably have enough hints to figure out what the Locket and "5th" Horcrux are, but we would be calling Dumbledore plain wrong to assume much else. I'm not saying Dumbledore is infallible, but it's rare he makes a mistake, and the few he makes are generally not reasoning mistakes.

Puck - Jul 23, 2005 12:06 pm (#193 of 2969)

Okay, DD said -and he speaks for JKR- that tiny portion of LV's soul that he had retained DID survive the AK. In fact, it was the only part that did. SO, to be reborn he needs only a body, not another piece of his soul. A Horcrux is only an anchor, not necessary to the rebirthing process.

So, LV could have put poison in the basin, as he never expected to drink it himself. So long as it was safely tucked away, he need never touch the Horcrux. (If he did discover someone such as DD was hunting them down and therefore he needed to move them to a new hiding place, we would bring a house elf or underage wizard along to drink the potion.)

Also, DD suspects that Hufflepuff's cup is a Horcrux. He would had noticed/remembered if it had been used as the Triwizard Cup, and, as Harry had brought it back from the graveyard, would likely know it's current whereabouts and would have had it destroyed.

Kevin Corbett - Jul 23, 2005 12:56 pm (#194 of 2969)

I've since trademarked "The Anchor Theory". Now you must refer to it as "The Anchor Theory TM". And I get a nickel every time.

Puck - Jul 23, 2005 5:07 pm (#195 of 2969)

Kevin, I think I may have used your term twice. Will send you 10 cents.

Puck

David Olson - Jul 23, 2005 5:40 pm (#196 of 2969)

I'm gradually working out a theory here...

Voldy can't possess Harry, and the soulbits in the Horcruxes want to possess somebody. That means Harry is uniquely qualified to handle them.

On that point, the setup in the cave is pure evil: only a great wizard could make it through the defenses, and the potion is designed to disable the wizard, not kill. Now right next to the disabled wizard is a Horcrux with a soulbit looking to take possession, so there's no need to wait for Voldy. He's there already --- or would be, if the locket weren't missing.

Nicholas Schouten - Jul 23, 2005 5:53 pm (#197 of 2969)
Edited Jul 23, 2005 6:55 pm

I think the etymology of Horcrux may be related to the Egyptian god(s) *Horus* (think also eye of Horus):

the following is from Wikipedia:

"As Horus was the son of Ra, and god of the sky, he became closely associated with the Pharaoh of Upper Egypt (where Horus was worshipped), and became their patron. The association with the Pharaoh brought with it the idea that he was married to Isis, in her original form, who was regarded as a deification of the Queen. Due to Egyptian beliefs about the soul, the bodies of the deceased royalty were mummified, and four internal organs were transferred to canopic jars, and so Horus, embodying the Pharaoh, was said to be the father of these four children, deifications of the jars, known as the Four sons of Horus, with Isis, his wife, as their mother."

In another aspect of the Horus mythology, Horus' father (Osiris) was tricked into a sarcophagus by his brother (Set/Seth) who then proceeded to try and drown Osiris by sinking the sarcophagus into a body of water. Horus' mother (Isis) finds out and releases Osiris before he drowns. Set/Seth then eventually chops Osiris into 13 parts and hides the parts in various places. Horus' mother (Isis) and aunt find the parts, put him together and eventually Horus is resurrected and then Isis and Osiris finally conceive Horus. Too bad for Osiris, the magic of his resurrection was too weak and he had to return to the underworld. Horus then gets even with his uncle in a long couple of battles.

As to "crux" the following is from Merriam Webster:

Etymology: Latin cruc-, crux cross, torture Date: 1718 1 : a puzzling or difficult problem : an unsolved question 2 : an essential point requiring resolution or resolving an outcome 3 : a main or central feature (as of an argument)

All in all, a very nice play on words and concepts.

Verity Weasley - Jul 23, 2005 7:17 pm (#198 of 2969)

I agree with Kazius. If Hufflepuff's cup were the Triwizard Cup then Dumbledore and Harry would both have recognised it and commented on it, so I don't believe that can be one of the Horcruxes. I think the Horcrux JKR referred to in the interview is the locket at 12 Grimmauld Place, but here's another idea - the bust that Harry places on the cabinet where he hides his potions book in the ROR - maybe that was a bust of Ravenclaw!

Kevin Corbett - Jul 23, 2005 9:39 pm (#199 of 2969)

I'll post my etymology here, copied from the thread on the chapter "Horcruxes" where, I was told, it didn't belong.

Using my breathtaking skills as a Latin minor, lets see what I can do with this.

hor- This is, obviously, the hard syllable. Hor- is not a specific prefix, and there are all sorts of words it could be related to.

Hor- could have something to do with time, because it is the base of the word "Hora" (literally, "an hour"), which is from the Roman goddesses of the seasons, the "Horae"

It could have something to do with "hortor" a verb meaning "to urge strongly, drive, etc." most in the sense of telling someone to do something. Thus the hor- could be the urging of the part of the soul into the object.

It also could be from the word "horror" which is a state of being straight, bristled, and ready to be attacked.

-crux

This is a bit easier...the "crux" can either mean a literal cross used for execution, but it is can mean torture, pain, misery, etc. So the "crux" could either be the object into which the soul is forced, or maybe it just relates to the torture of ripping the soul into pieces.

---

Also, I'm beginning to question my own "Anchor Theory"...because R.A.B. (I'm tempted to just come right out and say "Regulus"...but I really shouldn't take that for granted, even if it is quite obvious that R.A.B. is him) left the note in the fake Horcrux for LV, assuming, apparently, that LV would be back to fetch it one day. But if the Anchor Theory is correct, why would LV ever need to go back for it? Hmmm...perhaps R.A.B. thought that when LV had met him "match", he would want to keep the Horcruxes under his personal protection. And also, if all LV had to do to get his body back was find one of his Horcruxes, all he'd have to do is go to the cave and reincarnate.

Circe - Jul 23, 2005 9:43 pm (#200 of 2969)

Has anyone speculated that LV used his wand as a Horcrux?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Wed Jul 20, 2011 6:46 pm

Kevin Corbett - Jul 23, 2005 10:21 pm (#201 of 2969)

I have just had quite a brilliant stroke about R.A.B., the Horcrux, the D.E.'s and more.

Recall the spell that was on the entranceway to the Astronomy Tower that Snape and Malfoy passed through while Neville and Lupin were repelled? Snape and Malfoy were able to walk right through the "force field" so to speak because they had the Dark Mark.

Now, remember the pensieve looking thing in the cave, how Harry and DD couldn't touch it? Making any connections?

It seems like it could hardly be a coincidence. The same spell was guarding the entranceway and the font (so we'll call it). Only someone bearing the Dark Mark could penetrate it, without drinking the poison like DD did. So, we know pretty much for certain now that it was a Death Eater who stole the true Horcrux.

So, what does this tell us? Apparently, LV trusted his DE's to handle the Horcruxes, possibly to know their location as well---how else would R.A.B. know where to find the Horcrux. This leads me to another conclusion: could not another DE have told Dumbledore the location of that particular Horcrux? It did seem odd to me that DD would just know the location of that particular one...

My first thought was that it might have been Snape...but if this were true (and this assumes Snape was and is on the good side), Snape would have told him about the Horcruxes long ago...I mean, the fact that the Horcruxes existed, not necessarily where they were. So Snape, good or evil, was either ignorant or mute (and Occlumensed) as to the Horcruxes.

Then I thought of Lucius Malfoy. I think is possible that he either spilled some of his guts to DD or had the information Legilimens out of him. What we can see is that DD had some contact with Lucius, because he apparently found out between then and now about the reaction LV had upon discovering Lucius allow the diary-Horcrux to be destroyed. I mean, how else would DD know this? Perhaps some of those day trips were to Azkaban. I also think its possible that Lucius up and confessed, because, as we can see from Narcissa's behavior in the second chapter, LV is pretty ticked off at him (he renounced LV after his downfall, he got a Horcrux destroyed, and he managed to let the Prophesy and Harry elude him), and maybe he preferred DD's protection to LV's "mercy".

septentrion - Jul 24, 2005 12:46 am (#202 of 2969)

About etymology, "hor" is pronounced the same as the French "hors" which means "outside, out". Like in you put your soul out of yourself.

LV told the DE about his steps towards immortality but he didn't tell them everything. For instance, Lucius didn't know the diary contained more than a memory. That doesn't prevent intelligent people to make connections, like RAB did. And I think Snape knows about the Horcruxes (Riddle's diary, DD's injuries and ring at least must have rung some bells in his head). Well he knows they exist, but perhaps doesn't know what objects they are, or how many there are. Perhaps his task is to watch Nagini and LV to guess about the other Horcruxes and help Harry.

Kevin Corbett - Jul 24, 2005 1:54 am (#203 of 2969)
Edited by Jul 24, 2005 3:06 am

In GoF, LV say's in Ch. 33, p. 648 of the American edition:

"And then I ask myself, but how could they have believed I would not rise again? They, who knew the steps I took, long ago, to guard myself against mortal death?"

Notice that he says, "who knew the steps I took", which implies that the DE's indeed knew that he specifically had used Horcruxes. If they simply knew that he had taken some nondescript steps, it would have been, "They, who knew that I had taken steps, long ago, to guard myself against mortal death."

Also, the fact that the font seems to have been protected by a spell that allowed DE's access to it (assuming I'm right---which I think I am) suggests that they knew.

And again, what makes me think that either DD and Lucius have been talking or DD has been Lucius' plumbing brain is the fact that DD seems to know about LV reaction to Lucius' foul-up with the diary. Then again...maybe Snape told him...

That Snape might have figured out about DD's suspicions about Horcruxes is neither here nor there---he may have figured it out, he may not have: the important thing is whether he knew about them in the first place.

As for the "hor" being like the French "hors" as in hors d'oeurvres---I suppose its possible, but I'd need to see the Latin root for "hors" in French, which I am currently unable to locate.

Mia Hughes - Jul 24, 2005 2:20 am (#204 of 2969)

Hor- is also the base word for the Latin 'horribile', meaning horrible, fearful or dreadful, obviously.

And crux- also means (in Latin) a puzzle or a perplexing problem.

So, timecross, horrible puzzle, etc.

Ooh! And also... and this may be getting way off the track, but remember in chap. 18, when Ron is opening his presents and he gets a "heavy gold watch with odd symbols around the edge and tiny moving stars instead of hands"? Well, 'hor'ologium is Latin for timepiece.

And the odd symbols reminded me of the pensieve that also has symbols around it and can mentally transport you to other places and times.

So, since all the time turners in the MoM were destroyed, perhaps the watch works in a similar way and will help in the search for the other Horcruxes???

septentrion - Jul 24, 2005 2:27 am (#205 of 2969)

Kevin, I know LV told this to his DE but DD in the cave told Harry LV believes he's the only one to know about the Horcruxes. That's why I think LV didn't tell everything about them to the DE. Perhaps he's told about the splitting of his soul but not more.

Cassiopeia - Jul 24, 2005 5:11 am (#206 of 2969)

OK, I know most of you do not agree that Harry's scar could be a Horcrux, or that one could be created accidentally, but I still stand by my idea in post #159 (sorry, I don't know how to create a link). And I also think that Ginny will be the one to remove it. I was thinking this morning about that scene on Christmas morning where Harry opens his gift from Kreacher...then he goes downstairs for breakfast. "Harry, you've got a maggot in your hair," said Ginny cheerfully, leaning across the table to pick it out..." Did that strike anyone else as just weird? I mean, most people would be rather disgusted. and wouldn't it be more like, "You have something in your hair...it's a maggot!!" So this has been kind of bothering me since I first read it. It hit me this morning - maybe this is foreshadowing that Ginny will be the one to remove the Horcrux (something disgusting) from Harry's head.

OK, be gentle... Smile

Toad - Jul 24, 2005 6:44 am (#207 of 2969)
Edited Jul 24, 2005 7:45 am

I think we've exhausted the 'Harry is a Horcrux' theory, but personally, I still like this one, so I'm sticking with it.

Mia, I can't believe I missed that bit about Ron getting a watch! Doesn't DD use something similar at the start of PS/SS? Do you have a quote, because my family still has my book? It seems significant, although I can't think how it relates to Horcruxes...

And Kevin, I thought it sounded like Voldemort was speaking to the DEs in GoF as if they knew about the Horcruxes too but in HBP DD addresses that point and he doesn't seem to think that the DEs knew what he was referring to. Either DD is wrong or Voldemort was being very careless in letting that slip.

Do you think the DEs know about the Horcruxes?

Kevin Corbett - Jul 24, 2005 7:23 am (#208 of 2969)

Maybe DD wasn't lying, just speaking on a lack of information. And I don't think Voldemort was being careless back in GoF, because he didn't think anyone beside's the DE's (I.e., Harry) would live to tell about it.

Also, one would think that, based on our newfound knowledge from the EM/MA interview about the failsafe reliability of the Pensieve, that DD would have taught Harry how to siphon his memories as well so they could re-examine that night themselves. Maybe he figured it would be to traumatic for Harry, though, knowing DD, I don't think that is a likely explanation. Perhaps he just thought Harry had told him everything there was to know.

Her-melanie - Jul 24, 2005 7:39 am (#209 of 2969)

I still don't believe that the Triwizard Cup can be a Horcrux because A) I agree that one probably cannot create a Horcrux accidentally, and B) if it is a Horcrux, why would Voldemort allow it to get back to Hogwarts? Wouldn't he take a sec to hide it somewhere since it is clearly precious to him? I always thought it was idiotic of Voldy to leave it lying around as a portkey and getaway tool for Harry, but it would be triply idiotic if it were also a Horcrux! Whoever suggested that the other Horcrux is the bust in the Room of Requirement, I was thinking something similar while rereading yesterday, except I was thinking of the tarnished tiara that Harry put on top of the bust. After all, Ravenclaw was a woman. The big problem with that idea is whether Voldemort would risk hiding a Horcrux within the school at which Dumbledore is in charge. I can't wait to skim through the other books looking for possibilities!

mom molly - Jul 24, 2005 9:23 am (#210 of 2969)

I haven't posted for years but I think that LV gave the Hufflepuff cup to Bellatrix since we know he gave another Horcrux (the diary) to another Death Eater for safekeeping. I also think she hid it at 12 Grimmauld place. In HBP Ron pick up a goblet that Mundungus stole from 12 Grimmauld place, although the description is different from the Hufflepuff cup if could have been disguised to conceal the badger.

Madame Pomfrey - Jul 24, 2005 10:03 am (#211 of 2969)

I thought Bellatrix may know about the Horcruxes, or at least, a certain one, by a statement she made in Spinners End. "The Dark Lord has, in the past, entrusted me with his most precious--if Lucius Hadn't--"

Mrs Brisbee - Jul 24, 2005 10:03 am (#212 of 2969)

If Voldemort did in fact transfer some of himself into Harry. Then this would raise an interesting conundrum for Voldemort because, having only heard half of Trelawney's prophecy. Voldemort is operating under the assumption that he can kill Harry Potter without harming himself. --Nathan Zimmerman

I wonder if that would explain the part of the Prophecy that says "either must die at the hand of the other." I always thought it interesting that the Prophecy said "must", not "will". Suppose that if someone else destroys a Horcrux the piece of soul in it is destroyed, but there is a way for the maker of the Horcrux to recover his piece of soul if he destroys the Horcrux himself. That would explain Voldemort's edict that only he is allowed to kill Harry Potter.

Hogs Head - Jul 24, 2005 10:05 am (#213 of 2969)

Just a thought -- what about the cup (or other trophy -- I can't recall its dimensions) awarded to Riddle for "service" in helping to "catch" Hagrid long ago? I'm not implying that this was the cup of one of the founders, but it might be something Voldemort might infect with a Horcrux. (Not my favorite theory, either, but one item to consider and check off the list if appropriate.)

septentrion - Jul 24, 2005 10:27 am (#214 of 2969)

Mrs Brisbee, could you elaborate your theory about why LV edicts he's the only one to kill Harry ? I'm intrigued by it.

Solitaire - Jul 24, 2005 10:46 am (#215 of 2969)

Toad, I agree, after reading the interview, that Ginny isn't a Horcrux. Riddle's comment that he had begun to pour a bit of his soul back into her is what made me think she might be. This fact, coupled with a remark of Hollywand's on the alchemy thread, seemed to point in that direction. However, I no longer feel this is the case.

Solitaire

timrew - Jul 24, 2005 3:22 pm (#216 of 2969)

Why would LV make a Horcrux out of a living person? It just doesn't make sense. He wants to be immortal......they are going to die.

Astragynia Winifred Posy Miranda Yseult Cawdor - Jul 24, 2005 5:20 pm (#217 of 2969)

Septentrion, I always thought that Voldemort's edict to the DEs not to touch Harry had nothing to do with Horcruxes or the prophecy, but was instead a PR thing on his part; if you look at what he says in the graveyard in GoF, he's afraid that his DEs see his failure to kill Harry as a serious sign of weakness and he wants to prove that he's the one in control. If another dark wizard - Snape, for example - killed Harry, he'd be indirectly proving himself more powerful than the "Dark Lord" - an excellent way to start a mutiny against Voldemort.

Blast - Jul 24, 2005 5:33 pm (#218 of 2969)

Just a thought here, the Longbottoms and the Potters might have been both after the Horcruxes. This maybe why the Longbottoms were tortured by the DEs. The Potters were not around to get information from, so the Longbottoms were. It is never stated what info Bella and co. ever got from the Longbottoms. Were both couples working together to find out about the Horcruxes? D.D. must have gotten his information from somewhere?

Cassiopeia - Jul 24, 2005 6:00 pm (#219 of 2969)
Edited Jul 24, 2005 7:02 pm

Why would LV make a Horcrux out of a living person? It just doesn't make sense. He wants to be immortal......they are going to die.

That is why I think he did it inadvertently. We don't know exactly how a Horcrux is created...I think it is possible that somehow the Horcrux ended up in Harry's scar rather than in the intended object. I read somewhere that JKR said something to the effect that there is something significant about his scar, and the shape of it is not the most significant part of it.

Paulus Maximus - Jul 24, 2005 6:17 pm (#220 of 2969)
Edited Jul 24, 2005 7:17 pm

The problem with Harry or his scar being a Horcrux is that Harry has too much love in him to allow Voldemort's soul to live in him...

I hope I make myself clear...

Cassiopeia - Jul 24, 2005 6:20 pm (#221 of 2969)

Yes, but if it is in his scar, and therefore technically outside of his being...I'm thinking it's more attached to him than inside of him.

Cassiopeia - Jul 24, 2005 6:42 pm (#222 of 2969)

I found the quote I was thinking of...it is from the World Book Day Chat, March 4, 2004:

Cathedral: Don't want to rune the ending, but will we be finding out more about the significance of the shape of Harry's scar in future books? JK Rowling replies -> The shape is not the most significant aspect of that scar, and that's all I'm going to say!

So if the most significant part of the scar is not a Horcrux, then what is it?

Puck - Jul 24, 2005 7:00 pm (#223 of 2969)

When was that question asked about the scar? Was it before book five, when we found the connection to LV? I'm of the thought we do have more to learn about it, but do not believe it to be a Horcrux.

I question Nagini, too. Some mentioned Priori Incantatem and I looked it up in GoF. In the graveyard scene there is no evidence of a spell which could account for the making of a Horcrux, either before/after Bryce's death, nor Harry's.

The Sword and the Lion - Jul 24, 2005 7:47 pm (#224 of 2969)
Edited Jul 24, 2005 9:26 pm

J.K.R quote from a Boston Globe Interview, October 18, 1999: "There is more to the Sorting Hat than what you have read about in the first three books. Readers will find out what the Sorting Hat becomes as they get into future books."

I believe that if a Horcrux exists within Hogwarts, it is the Sorting-Hat. The Sorting-Hat would be an ideal artifact for Voldemort to store his soul in for obvious reasons; namely, it belonged to Gryffindor, and has the brains of the founders in it (a powerful artifact with a connection to all of the houses).

Additional clues from chapter 20, Lord Voldemort's Request (HBP):

When Tom-Riddle visits Hogwarts to apply for a teaching position from the newly installed Headmaster, Dumbledore politely offers Tom Riddle a drink which he accepts:

Dumbledore stood and swept over to the cabinet where he now kept the Pensive, but which then was full of bottles. Having handed Voldemort a goblet of wine and poured one for himself, he returned to the seat behind his desk. (HBP, 442)

During this period, Tom could have used a silent incantation to apply a Horcrux spell to the Sorting-Hat.

Voldemort sneered. "If you do not want to give me a job--" "Of course I don't," said Dumbledore. "And I don't think for a moment you expected me to. Nevertheless, you came here, you asked, you must have had a purpose." (HBP, 445)

For a second, Harry was on the verge of shouting a pointless warning: He was sure that Voldemort's hand had twitched toward his pocket and his wand; but then the moment had passed. (HBP, 446)

Voldemort may have cast a silent Horcrux spell here as well.

"Oh, he definitely wanted the Defense Against the Dark Arts job, said Dumbledore. The aftermath of our little meeting proved that. You see, we have never been able to keep a Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher for longer than a year since I refused the post to Lord Voldemort."

There are reasons to discredit this theory as well. After-all, the Sorting-Hat helped Harry in the Chamber of Secrets by providing Harry with Godric's sword; thus, allowing Harry to defeat Slytherin's basilisk and destroy Tom Riddle's Diary -- a Horcrux. However, the Sorting-Hat may be an object in which a piece of Lord-Voldemort's soul resides dormant, for the time being at least. With Dumbledore presumably dead, perhaps the sorting-hat will become more sinister in the next book.

I am not entirely convinced that the sorting-hat is a Horcrux, but I thought I would throw this theory out there anyway. I secretly hope that the Sorting-Hat takes a human form in book 7, and this entity becomes the new Defence against the Dark Arts teacher, defender of Hogwarts and an asset to Harry and his friends. If I remember correctly, Hogwarts' motto is Never Wake A Sleeping Dragon. Could this be an obscure reference about re-awakening the founders who may still preside within the Sorting-Hat in some form?

Solitaire - Jul 24, 2005 9:51 pm (#225 of 2969)

I am not entirely convinced that the sorting-hat is a Horcrux

I agree. I posted the following on the Chapter 23 thread.

Regarding the Sorting Hat as Horcrux ... the memory Riddle in CoS didn't seem to have much interest in or use for the Sorting Hat when Fawkes delivered it to Harry down in the Chamber.

"This is what Dumbledore sends his defender! A songbird and an old hat! Do you feel brave, Harry Potter? Do you feel safe now?"

I don't think the Sorting Hat is one of Voldemort's Horcruxes. JM2K, of course ...

Solitaire

Mia Hughes - Jul 24, 2005 11:15 pm (#226 of 2969)

Toad-- Quote regarding watch:

"Seriously good haul this year!" he announced, holding up a heavy gold watch with odd symbols around the edge and tiny moving stars instead of hands. "See what Mum and Dad got me? Blimey, I think I'll come of age next year too...." HBP, Chap. 18, pg. 390(hardback ed.)

Can't remember a watch in SS, but shall try to locate.

As for relating to Horcruxes, I thought perhaps the watch (working similar to a time turner) may help them go back in time to see what things or people, etc. Voldemort made into Horcruxes.

The Sword and the Lion - Jul 25, 2005 12:07 am (#227 of 2969)
Edited Jul 25, 2005 1:11 am

I fail to see what will prevent Voldemort from creating new Horcruxes to replace the old ones that have been destroyed (I.e., The Diary). If Voldemort does not create seven Horcruxes to assimilate the power of ancient artifacts, how can Dumbledore's statement from the OotP be justified, "I doubt even my strongest defensive spells would be able to stop Lord-Voldemort's attacks if he were ever to return to full-power." (Paraphrased)

Mia Hughes - Jul 25, 2005 1:37 am (#228 of 2969)
Edited Jul 25, 2005 2:40 am

Toad--

Found DD's watch in SS. Quote:

"Dumbledore gave a great sniff as he took a golden watch from his pocket and examined it. It was a very odd watch. It had twelve hands but no numbers; instead, little planets were moving around the edge." SS, Ch. 1, pg. 12.

Brella W - Jul 25, 2005 2:03 am (#229 of 2969)
Edited Jul 25, 2005 3:04 am

I have never posted before but love this thread because I have no one to discuss these things with. So here are my thoughts first with Harry being a Horcrux...I don't think that is possible I mean, if LV couldn't be in Harry at the end of OoP than why would a portion of him intentionally or accidentally be able to exist anywhere near him? Also if a portion of LV soul was inhabited in Harry's scar wouldn't have burned long before he even arrived at Hogwarts his first year...because if my memory is correct (which it is quite likely not) LV couldn't even touch Harry before the GoF. Another thing that I thought about was why LV would not make any more Horcruxes...I think that even LV realizes he is running low on soul to divide. He has so little left. I don't think he has enough soul left in him. Also I did have a question...do you think the LV succeeded in making all the Horcruxes? I mean didn't DD say he believed he died before he could create the 6th one? Another thing was LV after 6 Horcruxes with his 7th sliver of soul left in his body or 7 Horcruxes with the 8th sliver left in his body. I also agree that Bella was entrusted with on of the Horcruxes.

Mrs Brisbee - Jul 25, 2005 4:46 am (#230 of 2969)
Edited Jul 25, 2005 5:49 am

Mrs Brisbee, could you elaborate your theory about why LV edicts he's the only one to kill Harry ? I'm intrigued by it. --Septentrion

Sure. First off we need to assume for that the sake of argument that Harry is a Horcrux-- or rather a "Horcrux", a highly unsuitable vessel to which a bit of Voldemort's soul has accidently been stuck. If so I would think Voldemort would want his soul bit back so he could put it into a proper Horcrux, if it is at all possible to recover bits of detached soul.

Dumbledore explains how Prophecies work in the same chapter that Horcruxes are explained. Not all prophecies are fulfilled, therefore a prophecy isn't some message from a future which is written in stone. But a prophecy does outline a potential future, which means the facts stated within a prophecy must be true to a certain extent.

So the Prophecy "either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives" is not predicting some one-on-one confrontation because it has already happened in an unalterable future. Before HBP some people believed that the Prophecy meant just that, and that if, say, someone other than Voldemort tried to AK Harry, then they would automatically miss because they were not fated to kill him. Rowling has laid those arguments to rest.

So why must it be a mano-a-mano fight between Voldemort in the end? If the Prophecy isn't telling us about what will (potentially) happen in the future, but what must happen, then why must it happen that way?

I think we need to ask ourselves what would happen if all the Horcruxes are destroyed, but then someone other than Harry kills Voldemort? Why would it matter who does it, as long as Voldy is dead? If Harry is a "Horcrux" then Voldemort won't be dead.

What would happen if someone besides Voldemort killed Harry? We know that destroying an object containing the soul bit destroys the soul bit. We know that Voldemort was angry that the diary was destroyed. We know he has commanded that only he is allowed to kill Harry. We know he is unaware of the ring's destruction, that he made the Nagini Horcrux before he was aware of the connection between himself and Harry, so if he counts Harry than he thinks he currently has seven pieces of soul in existence.

I think that part of the Prophecy means that the only way to resolve the connection between Voldemort and Harry is for one to personally kill the other.

septentrion - Jul 25, 2005 5:06 am (#231 of 2969)

Thanks Mrs Brisbee !

Verbina - Jul 25, 2005 7:01 am (#232 of 2969)
Edited by Jul 25, 2005 8:07 am

I recently re-read GoF and came upon the comment by LV about the DEs knowing the steps he took to become immortal. But...it doesn't mean that they knew about all the Horcruxes. It could be a few things actually. 1) They knew LV had made a Horcrux but did not know what it was. (According to DD no one has tried to make more than one before.) 2) Each knew of a Horcrux but did not know it was not the only one. So say, Lucius knew about the locket. Crabbe could have known of the diary but not the locket. Each thinking the one they knew of was the only one.

Oh and about the Longbottoms, they were tortured after LV disappeared because the DEs thought that they knew where LV was. Hmmmmm. Could it be that they knew where the Horcruxes were? Possible that the previous Order of the Phoenix set out to find the Horcruxes?

Spursgirl79 - Jul 25, 2005 8:00 am (#233 of 2969)

I apologize if this has been discussed already, but I couldn't find it.. I mentioned last week that I believe there is a connection between the number of parts of V's soul, and the number of books. Is it possible that we get an introduction to each Horcrux in each book? My friend and I spent most of Saturday afternoon trying to work it out (when her fiancé caught us writing out charts and diagrams relating to this he was quite appalled!) Book 1: Harry (because I am sure he or his scar is a Horcrux: created accidentally, and I believe he is the Heir of Gryffindor) Book 2: The Diary Book 3: not sure, perhaps the Hufflepuff cup or a Ravenclaw object(my friend is rereading POA for any clues as I write!) Book 4: could be Nagini (but I'm not convinced that Nagini is a Horcrux).. or the Hufflepuff/Ravenclaw object Book 5: The Slytherin Locket Book 6: The ring Book 7: Voldemort (as obviously he has the final piece within him).

There are gaping holes in this theory, mainly because we can't imagine what is mentioned in POA that could be a Horcrux, and if Nagini IS one then it means that Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff don't get a look in.. but it's fun to speculate!

David Breeze - Jul 25, 2005 10:22 am (#234 of 2969)

Presuming Harry is indeed a Horcrux (As I firmly believe) it raises questions as to how he is going to remove the part of Voldemort's sole without having to commit suicide.

This is where I feel the Dementors play a huge role. Would it be possible for a Dementor to suck Voldemort's sole out whilst leaving Harry's own sole intact and unaffected?

I can think of no other Explanation for JK inventing the Dementors unless this is their purpose in the storyline. Everything that they had done in previous books could easily have been worked around by a writer as skillful as Rowling.

The only problem, of course, is that the Dementors have joined forces with Voldemort; And considering the fact the Dementors scare Harry the most, it raises a lot of interesting possibilities.

What do you all think?

Cassiopeia - Jul 25, 2005 10:55 am (#235 of 2969)

That is interesting...I'll have to think about that more...

If the Horcrux is in Harry's scar, it could possibly be removed without him dying. He would be injured, yes, but not necessarily dead. I can hope anyway!!

Paulus Maximus - Jul 25, 2005 2:22 pm (#236 of 2969)

I really don't like the idea of Harry (or any part of him) being a Horcrux, because it means he has no chance of killing Voldemort...

Besides, could Voldemort's soul reside in someone who loves so much?

timrew - Jul 25, 2005 3:58 pm (#237 of 2969)

After the last book, suddenly everyone was a Metamorphmagus, like Tonks. Now everything is a Horcrux..............

So it goes............

Kazius - Jul 25, 2005 4:02 pm (#238 of 2969)

JKR said that Dumbledore was mostly right about his theories involving Horcruxes.

Harry being a Horcrux would be way off what DD was thinking.

I firmly believe that Harry is not a Horcrux, he is not going to have to sacrifice himself to kill Voldemort, he will kill Voldemort, the real question is how.

Solitaire - Jul 25, 2005 4:19 pm (#239 of 2969)

I'm afraid I have to agree with you here, timrew. The minute we learned there was such a thing as a life-debt, people began analyzing every little action and deciding who owed whom a life debt. As soon as we knew Animagi and Metamorphmagi existed, we began speculating as to who might be a Metamorphmagus and what X, Y or Z's Animagus form was. Then we all began speculating about whether or not this one or that one was an Occlumens or a Legilimens ... Oh, well, we only have two more years of having to try and figure out who or what is or isn't a Horcrux! LOL

Solitaire

Verbina - Jul 25, 2005 5:02 pm (#240 of 2969)
Edited by Jul 25, 2005 6:33 pm

Have to agree that Harry can't be a Horcrux. Why? DD thought that Nagini was because LV was able to possess the snake without much trouble. LV has never possessed Harry. And if it were an accidental Horcrux, then there would be a total of 8 that he made (the initial 7 he wanted and the accidental one)

This however does not mean that Ginny is a Horcrux either, even though she was possessed by LV. She was possessed by a much younger LV, not the present day one. She was essentially possessed by the Horcrux soul.

One question...how does one destroy a Horcrux? The diary was pierced by a basilisk tooth though. The ring...what did DD do to destroy it? It obviously had something to do with his wand as it was his wand hand that was injured. So...it becomes clear that each Horcrux may need a different way to destroy it.

Solitaire - Jul 25, 2005 8:19 pm (#241 of 2969)

Verbina, I believe I was the first (or one of the first) on the forum to suggest that Ginny might be a Horcrux. Alas, earwax! I think Jo's comments during the interview pretty well blew that idea out of the water. Bummer ... my first theory shot down by the author.

Solitaire

It's Tonks - Jul 25, 2005 9:11 pm (#242 of 2969)

I just thought of something but I'm not sure if it's been mentioned before. 7 Horcruxes ... 7 books. Could each Horcrux have been introduced in one book? PS/SS would be LV himself. CoS is the diary. GoF not sure yet? PoA not sure yet? OotP would be the locket. HPB would be the ring. That leaves book 7 for the 7th Horcrux? Which would put an end to the theory that Harry is actually one. Guess I should start rereading the series once again and see what items I've missed....

David Breeze - Jul 26, 2005 12:02 am (#243 of 2969)

LV has never possessed Harry.

Not true! Lord V possessed Harry briefly at the in the Department of Mysteries at the end of OoTP.

Spursgirl79 - Jul 26, 2005 1:22 am (#244 of 2969)

It's Tonks: I see you are also following my line of thought (post 233 above).. glad to see someone else thinking like me!

But I think the 7 books/7 Horcrux theory does hold up... I see Harry (or his scar) being the Horcrux we are introduced to in Book 1.. and the final part of the Voldemort's soul (which is still inside Voldemort) being destroyed in Book 7.

The only flaw to my theory is that if you include all the objects that Dumbledore and Harry discuss as possible Horcruxes, you end up with too many: Harry, Diary, Hufflepuff Cup, Slytherin Ring, Slytherin Locket, Nagini, Ravenclaw object, and Voldemort's final piece of soul still within him: so that's 8.

I'm still not sure about Nagini being a Horcrux... could it be that this was shown as a possibility simply to confirm the idea that living objects could become Horcruxes?

Steve Newton - Jul 26, 2005 4:55 am (#245 of 2969)

If Voldemort separated his soul into 7 parts then there would only be 6 Horcruxes. (The part with his body would not need a Horcrux.) Doesn't really affect your idea since it just means that they end up back with Voldemort.

Mrs. T - Jul 26, 2005 6:17 am (#246 of 2969)

I have been re-reading HBP and was thinking (but I definitely could be wrong) DD mentions several times that Tom Riddle was interested in ancient magic and in ch. 20 DD mentions that LV had 3 reasons for wanting to teach at Hogwarts 1) Hogwarts = home=happiness (since LV was never attached to a person) 2) Hogwarts is a stronghold for ancient magic 3) Obviously, to gain followers and who else but impressionable young minds. My point is could Hogwarts castle be one of the Horcruxes? This is just a thought, so please give me feed back.

JustaMuggle - Jul 26, 2005 6:23 am (#247 of 2969)
Edited Jul 26, 2005 7:27 am

"Not true! Lord V possessed Harry briefly at the in the Department of Mysteries at the end of OoTP."

Yes, indeed. LV possessed Harry on the Ministry of Magic in OotP, but he could not bear posses Harry or else he would be destroyed as Dumbledore explained to us. Therefore, if a piece of his soul was in Harry it would already be destroyed.

Kerstin - Jul 26, 2005 6:59 am (#248 of 2969)

Sorry if that has been mentioned but I've not read the whole thread: Could it be that Tom Riddle Sr.'s bone was a Horcrux? So this Horcrux has been used already in the rebirthing party and Harry only has to find and destroy three more.

Mrs Brisbee - Jul 26, 2005 6:59 am (#249 of 2969)
Edited Jul 26, 2005 8:50 am

Therefore, if a piece of his soul was in Harry it would already be destroyed.

And yet, there is that strange connection....

But, what is it, if it has nothing to do with Voldemort's soul?

David Breeze - Jul 26, 2005 7:32 am (#250 of 2969)

The cup that belonged to Hufflepuff is the interesting Horcrux in my opinion.

If we go with the theory that each Horcrux has been introduced to us in one of the seven books, the only cup that stands out is the Goblet of fire.

Could I be that the Triwizard Tournament did not happen for such a long time because the Goblet was stolen? When Voldemort was destroyed, the cup may have been found, meaning that the tournament could go ahead once again.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Wed Jul 20, 2011 6:53 pm

Snuffles - Jul 26, 2005 7:33 am (#251 of 2969)

I don't know if it has been mentioned, but the cup that Tom Riddle received for services to the school, maybe he turned that into one of the Horcruxes.

Dani - Jul 26, 2005 8:29 am (#252 of 2969)
Edited Jul 26, 2005 9:29 am

Snuffles - that sounds like a very good possibility. I have yet to hear anything on that.

I would still like to hear some peoples input on a previous post by Mrs. T. as to Hogwarts possibly being a Horcrux.

Solitaire - Jul 26, 2005 8:41 am (#253 of 2969)

I would suspect there are "anti" spells and enchantments that would prevent that from being possible, Dani. JM2K, of course ...

K Stahl - Jul 26, 2005 9:06 am (#254 of 2969)
Edited Jul 26, 2005 10:10 am

There is no indication that the Horcruxes were created when the vessel was collected. Tom was still young when he spoke to Slughorn about the Horcruxes. He was at the beginning of his quest and probably did not know how to create a Horcrux. We know that he collected the diary, the ring, the Hufflepuff teapot and the locket when he was young (I.e. at Hogwarts or shortly after). He was a collector long before he ever thought of splitting his soul. He then disappeared for a long time and no one recognized him as Tom Riddle when he returned. I believe that it was during this period that he sought out and learned how to make the Horcruxes. He may have been ready to make the sixth by killing Harry when something went wrong and he was forced to spend his time vacationing in Albania with the forest mists. If Nagini is a Horcrux, then Voldemort would have done it after his resurrection. Voldemort probably killed many times before he first attempted to create a Horcrux, which may be a very difficult process. He probably did not create a Horcrux when he killed his father, grandfather and grandmother.

Nagini was introduced in Goblet of Fire. Both the ring and the Hufflepuff teapot were introduced in the Half-Blood Prince. One vessel is yet to be introduced.

paracelsus - Jul 26, 2005 9:12 am (#255 of 2969)

It seems to me that either the Ravenclaw/Gryffindor Horcrux (or possibly the Hufflepuff cup) may be somewhere on the Hogwarts grounds, after all isn't Hogwarts supposed to be one of the safest places. I have read a few posts that suggest that the Horcrux may be currently in the room of requirement (ROR), I am not so sure it will be their. While the ROR may be a convenient hiding spot for students to stash items, I do not think LV would put such an important object in a place with a bunch of other junk. Just think of the elaborate (and grand) repository for the locket.

I think it is possible that the Horcrux is in a prominent location somewhere at Hogwarts but no one knows what it is (we may have actually seen it at some point in the previous books). This is based on three suppositions. 1. Having something at Hogwarts in a prominent place is what LV would think he deserves, because of his self-seen greatness. 2. Having an item on prominent display would help ensure the object is not damaged or mistreated, something that would be difficult to ensure in the ROR especially if someone like Filch found all the junk in the ROR and decided to do some spring-cleaning. 3. Where better to hide something than in plain sight, if people see it all the time, they won't really think about what the object is.

Nathan Zimmermann - Jul 26, 2005 9:30 am (#256 of 2969)

Another point that may tend to indicate that Harry's Scar is a Horcrux is the found in the discussion Harry and Dumbledore have at the end of CoS. Dumbledore told Harry that he possessed traits that Salazar Slytherin prized in his students including his own rare gift for speaking Parseltongue.

"...Unless, I'm much mistaken, he transferred some of his powers to you the night he gave you that scar. Not something he intended to do I'm sure..." "Voldemort put a bit of himself in me?" "It certainly seems so. Page 452 large print edition published by Thorndike Press.

wolfgrl - Jul 26, 2005 9:34 am (#257 of 2969)
Edited Jul 26, 2005 10:37 am

This is a very random thought, but we are told early in the books not to trust anything that can think for itself. We have lots of examples to discredit that notion, the Sorting Hat, paintings, the goblet of fire. But what if when creating a Horcrux that object does retain somewhat of a mind. The diary is our only concrete example of this. But I would not put it past Voldy to put an enchantment on the locket to kill anyone not worthy to ware it. The same goes for the ring. But the locket or ring would have to decide worthiness. Maybe we need to look for things that can think for themselves? I think it would be very like JKR to give us that kind of clue so early on.

I know completely random thought.

Puck - Jul 26, 2005 10:10 am (#258 of 2969)

Okay, I don't think Harry himself is a Horcrux. I believe that it was some of his powers LV transferred, not his soul. DD says himself that weakening his soul will not effect LV's talents/brain power. So, I would take it that having some of LV's powers would not be connected to having a piece of his soul.

As to how old LV was when he made his first Horcrux, I'm betting it was when he killed his Dad and stole the ring. He had the ring before he talked to Slughorn, and I believe he had already made his first Horcrux. DD said the real purpose to his questioning Slughorn was to find out whether or not it was possible to make multiple Horcruxes. He perhaps was working on the diary and wanted to know what would happen if he split his soul again. The diary contains a Riddle at the age of 16, not an adult version. In the memory when he came into DD's office looking for a job he was already, in Harry's description, looking less human. And his eyes glowed red briefly in the memory of the locket and cup. This says to me that he likely had already made the first 2 Horcruxes before he stole the objects, as he had already lost some of his humanity.

David Olson - Jul 26, 2005 10:15 am (#259 of 2969)

Just a comment for the 7 books/Horcruxes theory: note that Harry got 7 owls. Some poster in some thread (forgot --- my apologies) suggested that Harry would have to use each owl in some fashion. For example, Nagini and Care of Magical creatures go together. That could provide another helpful clue.

Also, as Voldy makes Horcruxes from significant events, it might be helpful to categorize his 7 key killings.

Mrs Brisbee - Jul 26, 2005 10:45 am (#260 of 2969)

Okay, I don't think Harry himself is a Horcrux. I believe that it was some of his powers LV transferred, not his soul. DD says himself that weakening his soul will not effect LV's talents/brain power. So, I would take it that having some of LV's powers would not be connected to having a piece of his soul. --Puck

However, Harry is able to tell what Voldemort is feeling in OotP. He even has visions from inside Voldemort. His scar burns when Voldemort is experiencing intense emotions. This really sounds to me like there is a connection to Voldemort's soul. I'm not sure what a connection to Voldemort's powers would feel like. Would Harry be able to experience Voldemort's jubilation when the DEs escaped Azkaban in OotP? What then is the nature of the soul, as opposed to "powers"?

Verbina - Jul 26, 2005 10:58 am (#261 of 2969)

The question of Horcruxes...seems never ending really.

Personally, I believe that the Horcrux doesn't have to be made at the time of the murder but it can't be made years later. How can one hold on to a torn off piece of soul? It has to be put somewhere safe with in a certain amount of time. Another reason for me thinking this is that the bit of soul within the diary was the young Voldemort, when he was still Tom Riddle. If the soul had not been placed in the Horcrux until much later, the soul would not be so young in my opinion.

Also, Voldemort made the Horcruxes to add to his collection, not just to house his souls. He made them to represent a major point in his life. The killing of his father, the first Horcrux he was able to make...major things in his life, things he wanted to have a trophy to remember it by.

Can we learn anything from the Horcruxes he made? The diary we can assume (according to DD) was his first one. Made when he was in school, he placed his soul in a book to represent the learning in school and perhaps the learning and study that he had to do to accomplish it.

The ring - let us assume it was made after the killing of his father...the ring of his grandfather, his family heritage, representing the death of his father, who had rejected his mother for what she was.

Nagini - if we take DD's word that Nagini is a Horcrux, then we look at what Nagini is...a snake which for centuries has been regarded a symbol of immortality due to the shedding of it's skin. Nagini to Voldemort would represent his rebirth and strength returning.

So could the others represent something as well as to what death occurred or what time of his life? Curious at the very least I must say.

Surtseystwin - Jul 26, 2005 11:41 am (#262 of 2969)

Paracelsus wrote:

It seems to me that either the Ravenclaw/Gryffindor Horcrux (or possibly the Hufflepuff cup) may be somewhere on the Hogwarts grounds

I don't think the Hufflepuff cup is on Hogwarts grounds, but it may be more easily found than we might first assume.

If the spell to create a Horcrux is complicated, it would make sense for LV to have taken the locket & cup from Hepzibah's house, so that he could complete his work in privacy and safety. But after the hooplah over the murder (& theft) died down, LV may have decided that the cup would be safest back with Hepzibah's family. Perhaps he arranged for them to "find" it again.

Hepzibah had said that the cup had been in the family for a long while and that it was a prized treasure. She also said that many of the family members would love to get their hands on it, and would be loathe to learn that she had even shown it to Tom. Where else, but back with the family, would the cup/Horcrux be safer or more closely guarded - especially after they thought it had been lost once already?

I think we might find the cup at the home of the only Hufflepuff we know who shares Hepzibah's last name... Zacharias Smith.

TGF - Jul 26, 2005 12:22 pm (#263 of 2969)
Edited Jul 26, 2005 1:27 pm

Why would Voldemort keep a Horcrux in Hogwarts grounds? If he could get close enough to create one then you can be sure that he's going to be taking it away, and it makes absolutely no sense for Voldemort to leave a Horcrux right underneath Dumbledore's nose. He wants these things to stay intact and hidden you know. Voldemort hiding his Horcruxes in Hogwarts would be like the Allies in World War 2 hiding their nuclear weaponry in Berlin.

TwinklingBlueEyes - Jul 26, 2005 12:26 pm (#264 of 2969)

Mrs T (post #246) and Dani (post #252), if you will look back on this thread you can read my thoughts as to Hogwarts being the final Horcrux. Post #118. You can also use the search function and search this thread, maybe using Hogwarts as a keyword. :-)

septentrion - Jul 26, 2005 12:44 pm (#265 of 2969)

Surtseystwin, it makes sense Voldie would hide his Horcruxes, or one of them, on the place of one of his crimes. After all, that's what he did with the locket. I can't remember right now : was the ring hidden in the ruins of the Gaunt house ? Do we even know where it was hidden ? (need to get along with rereading). Anyway, Jo seems to tell Harry has the knowledge he needs, so I suppose we could deduce the location of the Horcruxes from the memories DD showed Harry and from Harry's past (Godric's Hollow).

Starry Night - Jul 26, 2005 12:49 pm (#266 of 2969)
Edited Jul 26, 2005 1:58 pm

Nearly Legless Mick (post 6), I hope I can answer your question, not sure though if maybe someone else has already tried to..

I think the whole Horcrux-dividing-your-soul-thing isn't that simple to understand either, but after some thinking, this is how I think it works (and why the part you think was already destroyed should be destroyed again): I think what's most important is that one can only truly DIE when his soul- the WHOLE thing- goes "beyond the veil". Normally wizards don't use Horcruxes and when they die, think of it like a balloon: the balloon breaks and all of the air(=soul) escapes from it. I think only the soul AS A WHOLE can pass the veil. Meaning that if someone has divided his soul and one of the things containing his soul (whether it is a Horcrux or his body) gets broken, this part has to linger the earth until ALL parts are freed (and possibly have joined the other parts?).

Dumbledore said Voldemort is most probably not aware when the Horcruxes are being destroyed (thus setting free the parts of soul contained within them, as I think). He will only notice when his body is broken and this part of his soul escapes - his intelligence and magical ability will probably be connected to this last piece of soul- and this happened the night when Harry’s parents were killed. He then - gradually, first the ugly reddish snake-ish baby, then the ugly white snake-ish adult - formed a new body around this weak little piece of soul.

And that's why this particular piece of soul has to be destroyed again.

Prongs Patronus - Jul 26, 2005 2:45 pm (#267 of 2969)
Edited Jul 26, 2005 3:46 pm

Grin-- I think Harry should just collect all the Horcruxes he finds and chuck them through the Veil in the Ministry. Be done with the lot of them, all at once. I am thinking that would liberate whatever "soul" was in them.

Either that, or get Professor Binns to deactify them. After all, he is a ghost wizard--what could the Horcruxes do to him that hasn't already been done?

*wink* PP

Mrs Brisbee - Jul 26, 2005 2:51 pm (#268 of 2969)

Grin-- I think Harry should just collect all the Horcruxes he finds and chuck them through the Veil in the Ministry. Be done with the lot of them, all at once. I am thinking that would liberate whatever "soul" was in them.

Good idea. Or chuck the lot into the Love Room. Bet Voldy would love that

Puck - Jul 26, 2005 5:29 pm (#269 of 2969)

Mrs. Brisbee, I guess I was thinking that the whole thing about feeling his feelings/seeing through his eyes thing was an Occlumency/Legilimency type connection -more psychic than soulful. The stickiest point I have with Harry being a Horcrux is I just don't see one being made accidently, it is such powerful dark magic.

If you murder someone but don't make a Horcrux (and I agree it must happen soon thereafter) the soul much heal, but leave a scar. Otherwise DE's like Bella who have murdered many would also been to take on that inhuman appearance of LV.

Now, how much soul does LV have left? The first bit tore from a whole soul. The second from a diminished one, etc... until the last bit had to tear from an already significantly reduced portion. The part remaining in LV is likely less than 1/7th, as I can't see the pieces being divided equally. So really, how could Harry and LV have a strong soul-connection, as there isn't much left to connect to?

TangledWeb - Jul 26, 2005 5:56 pm (#270 of 2969)

Hi all - If someone could help me clarify...I am a bit torn about the Hogwarts being a Horcrux idea. Would Harry and his army have to destroy the whole school? And on that note...how does one know that a Horcrux is destroyed? Does it automatically disappear? From what I remember, Dumbledore still had that ring, but Voldemort’s soul was no longer there. How did Dumbledore know that?

On another note...what does everyone think about a Horcrux residing in the Chamber of Secrets? If Voldemort was able to control the snake because he speaks Parseltongue, then perhaps he considered it a good place to hide something, like a Horcrux ?

Mrs Brisbee - Jul 26, 2005 6:34 pm (#271 of 2969)

On another note...what does everyone think about a Horcrux residing in the Chamber of Secrets? If Voldemort was able to control the snake because he speaks Parseltongue, then perhaps he considered it a good place to hide something, like a Horcrux ? --TangledWeb

I think you are right and it would be a great place to hide something-- it worked for Salazar Slytherin's secret serpent for a thousand years. But when Harry went down there Rowling didn't describe any objects down there (except for rat bones). The place seemed to be pretty empty.

Mrs. Brisbee, I guess I was thinking that the whole thing about feeling his feelings/seeing through his eyes thing was an Occlumency/Legilimency type connection -more psychic than soulful. The stickiest point I have with Harry being a Horcrux is I just don't see one being made accidently, it is such powerful dark magic. --Puck

The problem I have with it being psychic and not soulful (darn it all, I just got an image of Voldy and Harry doing a heartfelt duet!) is that we have just hit book 6 of a seven book series, and some hint of explanation about the nature of Harry and Voldemort's connection really needs to have been put forth by now. We need to wonder how a backfiring AK could create this unique connection. Rowling tells us that murder tears the soul, and that bits of soul can be removed from their owner and stuck in objects, or even other creatures. I think it makes sense to use this information to explain the connection at this late date.

Now, how much soul does LV have left? The first bit tore from a whole soul. The second from a diminished one, etc... until the last bit had to tear from an already significantly reduced portion. The part remaining in LV is likely less than 1/7th, as I can't see the pieces being divided equally. So really, how could Harry and LV have a strong soul-connection, as there isn't much left to connect to? --Puck

I don't think Rowling indicated how big the torn pieces were. Certainly Voldemort has less of a soul than is humanly necessary, I agree with you there. He still can think, act egomaniacal, and feel intense emotion though. I guess we are back to what is the nature of a soul?

TwinklingBlueEyes - Jul 26, 2005 6:38 pm (#272 of 2969)
Edited Jul 26, 2005 8:03 pm

"Dumbledore still had that ring, but Voldemort’s soul was no longer there. How did Dumbledore know that?"

I think the cracked stone in the rings answers that. The piece of soul was released from the stone causing the crack. The question is was it the magic of releasing, or destroying that piece of soul that caused the damage to Dumbledore's hand as well as the damage to the ring caused by releasing the piece of soul, or the evil of the soul itself? Either the piece of soul just went poof, or, has been suggested by some, that may haps was "absorbed" by Dumbledore, through his hand.

I am thinking that the piece of soul was just released. If there was the danger of Harry "absorbing" the soul pieces as he finds and destroys the other Horcruxes, he would have warned Harry.

...toddles off to ponder some more...

I do think the final Horcrux is Hogwarts. "what does everyone think about a Horcrux residing in the Chamber of Secrets? If Voldemort was able to control the snake because he speaks Parseltongue, then perhaps he considered it a good place to hide something, like a Horcrux ? --TangledWeb" The COS is a part of Hogwarts. It has been discussed that there may be more ways to enter the COS. Voldemort has always demonstrated he wanted to be back at Hogwarts, why? Many reasons, but the thing I think is the biggest is collecting his biggest trophy. His obstacle has always been Dumbledore. He tried hoodwinking Dumbledore, having him removed from the school via the MOM, and Umbridge, and finally his apparent death. Like I have said before, I don't think that Voldemort has made all his Horcruxes. Remember, after his first encounter with Harry, he had to assume a "mortal" body once more. I think his triumphant victory over death will be making his final Horcrux, with Harry's death as the catalyst. Then again, I may be wrong, have been many times before.

...toddles off again...

paracelsus - Jul 26, 2005 7:27 pm (#273 of 2969)
Edited Jul 26, 2005 8:41 pm

I think septentrion has a good point that LV would hide his Horcruxes, or some of them, at the place of one of his crimes. That what he did with the locket and the ring.

One thing I think we need to remember is that LV believe that he is the only one who knows about the multiple Horcruxes, even the DE don't realize that he has more than one, even though some of the DE may assume that he has made one Horcrux. (to paraphrase what DD told Harry in HBP Ch. 23) Thus LV has really been securing/stashing his Horcruxes rather than hiding them, since hiding something sort of infers that someone might actually be looking for them. But, for some to be looking for them, they would have to know about their existence, and since LV assumes that no one knows about the Horcruxes (DE excluded), in his mind no one will really be looking for the Horcruxes. (I was rambling slightly but I hope you get the point )

With this line of reasoning, LV could stash a Horcrux anywhere (Hogwarts, St. Mungo’s, the MoM, etc.) and put a charm around it to keep it from being disturbed (or something similar possibly) and no one is going to "find" the Horcrux because no one is going to be looking for it. Although someone might find it accidentally, they will not know that it is a Horcrux, and it would theoretically be safe. So, one of the Horcruxes could be at Hogwarts, not saying it has to be, but it is a possibility.

TwinklingBlueEyes - Jul 26, 2005 8:36 pm (#274 of 2969)
Edited Jul 26, 2005 9:37 pm

"and put a charm around it to keep it from being disturbed (or something similar possibly) and no one is going to "find" the Horcrux because no one is going to be looking for it."

Ah!, but we know two people that have been looking, Dumbledore and Harry, and remember, Dumbledore did show Harry that magic can be detected. Think cave. So once again Voldemort has made a mistake... Harry has vowed to find now, unbeknownst to Voldemort.

paracelsus - Jul 26, 2005 9:20 pm (#275 of 2969)
Edited Jul 26, 2005 10:22 pm

Exactly! LV (wrongly) assumes that no one is going to be looking for the Horcruxes, thus he could put them anywhere.

This will be the downfall of LV since Harry, Ron, and Hermione (and DD) know about the Horcruxes, but LV does not know they know about them. They will have the element of surprise in defeating LV as long as they don't tip off LV they are looking for the Horcruxes.

Solitaire - Jul 26, 2005 10:58 pm (#276 of 2969)
Edited Jul 27, 2005 12:01 am

I keep thinking about what Dumbledore told Harry--that Voldemort liked to "collect trophies" ... souvenirs, if you will, of particularly unpleasant bits of magic. Bear in mind this magpie-like tendency, for this, particularly, will be important later. I can't help wondering if one of the Potters' wands was used as a Horcrux. Lily's, in particular, might be considered such a trophy.

Now, on to my next idea ... What if Voldemort had already made the six Horcruxes when he attempted to AK Harry. Remember that Jo said, in one of her interviews, that we needed to ask ourselves why Voldemort didn't die that night. Do we have our answer? If there had been no Horcruxes and his entire soul had been within him, would he have died? Was the part of his soul that remained within him AK'd with his body? If so, then the only reason he didn't truly die were the six (or seven?) Horcruxes anchoring him to earth.

IF this were so, wouldn't it seem that all Harry must do is destroy the Horcruxes? If Voldemort is "living" through the existence of those Horcruxes, then wouldn't destroying them leave Voldemort merely a soul-less body? If so, would he be dead, or would he become a Dementor??? The good thing is that Harry would not have to become a murderer. He could destroy Voldemort without killing him. Okay, it was just some idle musing. No dungbombs, please ...

Solitaire

Edit: Could this be what is worse than death? If he has no soul, there is nothing to go on to "the next great adventure." Alas ...

The Sword and the Lion - Jul 27, 2005 1:02 am (#277 of 2969)
Edited Jul 27, 2005 2:05 am

If the whole of Hogwarts can be made into a Horcrux, why doesn't LV make the entire planet Earth a Horcrux? I can see a powerful artifact being stowed at Hogwarts, but to suggest that the entire castle is a Horcrux is ridiculous. Now, placing a Horcrux in the Statue of Slytherin in the CoS, or in the Sorting-Hat, would be interesting.

Additional thoughts: LV is aware that one of his precious Horcruxes has been destroyed (Tom's Diary). I honestly believe that L.V will try and create more Horcruxes in the next book. If Voldemort does not have six Horcruxes, or seven fragments of soul, how can Dumbledore's statement in the OotP be justified: "I fear if Voldemort were ever to return to full-power, my most powerful defensive spells would be useless." (Paraphrased) I also have a gut-intuition that L.V places his soul in powerful artifacts in order to assimilate their powers. Surely, there must be a reason behind L.V's artifact cravings other than his sociopathic tendencies.

I have another random question. What would happen if Voldemort placed a piece of his soul in a ghost -- oh, let's say the Bloody-Barron for instance? If Nagini or Harry can be a Horcrux, can a ghost become one as well?

TwinklingBlueEyes - Jul 27, 2005 1:42 am (#278 of 2969)
Edited Jul 27, 2005 2:44 am

"but to suggest that the entire castle is a Horcrux is ridiculous."

Excuse me, but I do not find the notion ridiculous at all! If you would do some reading, and searching through the forum, you might find the theory that Hogwarts is an entity in it's own right. Hmm, think moving staircases, trick steps...

Our ideas are never ridiculous, funny, weird, strange, out of this world, maybe... but never "ridiculous"

That we reserve for Boggarts!

...toddles off muttering, think not stone building, think history, purpose, think...

Toady Hoady - Jul 27, 2005 2:26 am (#279 of 2969)

Hi all, I am new here so please be gentle with me!

After reading JKR’s interview on Mugglenet she says with careful re-reading of the all the books people might be able to find out at least one of the Horcruxes?! So after a careful re-read of the GOF I believe that Frank Bryce’s walking stick was made into a Horcrux after lord Voldemort killed him. Harry will know about this as he dreamed it at the same time, it will just be a case of remembering it.

What do peeps think?

Blast - Jul 27, 2005 2:51 am (#280 of 2969)

The collapsed tunnel that Fred and George used to get out of Hogwarts has been mentioned a few times. Is this a hiding spot for one of the Horcruxes?

The Sword and the Lion - Jul 27, 2005 3:08 am (#281 of 2969)
Edited Jul 27, 2005 4:25 am

TwinklingBlueEyes, in post 274 you state that: " ... and remember, Dumbledore did show Harry that magic can be detected ..."

If Lord Voldemort's soul resides in the whole castle as you suggest, Dumbledore and his staff would have detected its' presence ages ago. When Sirius Black was at large, breaking into Hogwarts and such, don't you find it likely that Dumbledore and his staff preformed spells to detect Dark-Magic?

If L.V's soul resides within the castle itself, what was the point of having Lucius wait for the command to sneak the Diary into Hogwarts to reopen the Chamber of Secrets. Wouldn't L.V's soul in the castle be able to open the chamber or possess a student to do the job? Furthermore, Hogwarts isn't exactly a sinister entity. In the recent past, Hogwarts has proven itself to be most helpful to Harry and Dumbledore. In the OotP, the castle did not permit Umbridge to enter and claim the post of Headmistress -- an act I am certain a piece of Lord Voldemort's soul would have allowed.

J.K.R has also indicated that one student amongst Harry's peers will end up teaching at Hogwarts when the series is over. I presume that means that the castle will not be destroyed. Perhaps I am wrong. No-Dung bombs intended -- I just find it unlikely that the entire castle is a Horcrux.

I am still interested in your feedback from post 277. =)

Spursgirl79 - Jul 27, 2005 5:36 am (#282 of 2969)

Blast: I think it is very possible that those collapsed tunnels will come up again in book 7. I did wonder if the statue of the one-eyed witch was perhaps a Horcrux? No evidence for this except to try and back up my 7 books for 7 Horcruxes theory (and I can't find a Horcrux in the Prisoner of Azkaban!).

Toady Hoady - Jul 27, 2005 6:25 am (#283 of 2969)
Edited Jul 27, 2005 8:16 am

The Sword and the Lion: I do not think the castle is a Horcrux either, and I am not sure that Nagini is a Horcrux (it seems to easy) it could be a ghost but ghost's move around a lot and are unpredictable(peeves) so how could Voldemort or Harry get to it or destroy it (how do you destroy a ghost when even the basilisk could not kill headless nick). so we have:

1, Diary (destroyed)
2, Voldemort himself (last to be destroyed when all others have been)
3, Locket (might have been destroyed by RAB)
4, The Hufflepuff Cup (do not know where it is possibly Malfoys hidden chamber?)
5, The Ring (destroyed by Dumbledore)
6, Nagini (possibly) or something of Ravenclaws?
7, I believe it could be Frank Bryce's walking stick as we know Dumbledore said he believed Voldemort was to make his final Horcrux after killing Harry, but when the spell backfired and reduced him to nearly nothing he had to wait, Dumbledore says in the chapter Horcruxes that he thought Voldemort killed Frank Bryce using Nagini, but after reading it back (GOF chapter 1) Voldemort himself killed Bryce and all that was left was a walking stick??!!

So what do you all think?

Catherine - Jul 27, 2005 6:46 am (#284 of 2969)

If the whole of Hogwarts can be made into a Horcrux, why doesn't LV make the entire planet Earth a Horcrux? I can see a powerful artifact being stowed at Hogwarts, but to suggest that the entire castle is a Horcrux is ridiculous. --The Sword and the Lion

It's fine to respectfully disagree on the Forum, but please do not call a member's theory "ridiculous."

Verbina - Jul 27, 2005 7:28 am (#285 of 2969)

Hogwarts is an entity on its own. That is true but...it is a helpful entity. In CoS, Dumbledore says something to the effect of all one needs to do is ask for help. Also in CoS, Ron asks for help in the dark forest and the car returns. Also the feeling of the place is comforting to most of the students. If it were the Horcrux of LV, wouldn't you think it would have a more ominous feel to it?

I was thinking about the Horcruxes and why LV never went to find them before, like when he first was floating around after the backfire in Godric's Hollow. Could it be that the Horcrux has to be in a place of power to be accessed without a dangerous consequence? And by power, I mean a place of significance to Voldemort since he would need to be the one to access the Horcrux?

My theory is that the diary was not going to be able to be used until it was back in Hogwarts. It was tied to the Chamber and the basilisk. When Harry destroyed it in the Chamber, he did not have any dire effect from the destruction. (He had been poisoned by the basilisk tooth but that was before he destroyed the diary)

According to this theory then, the ring caused damage to DD because of the fact that it was not in a place of power to LV when he did it.

Okay the theory is a bit weak but something to ponder.

JustaMuggle - Jul 27, 2005 8:23 am (#286 of 2969)
Edited Jul 27, 2005 9:29 am

I would like to share some impressions that I had about the Horcruxes and death in the HP universe.

We learned from Dumbledore that when one kills his soul is torn, and that he can, through a very complicated magic, bind this torn piece of his soul to an object or even an animal (in DD opinion and LV case - Nagini). I am not sure, tough, if the spell has to be made at the moment of the killing, or could be done after. I need to re-read HBP to try to find an answer, it would be important to identify other Horcruxes.

Horcruxes works, in my opinion, binding the major part of the soul, the piece that remains in the body, to earth (or our dimension) even when the body dies (the person who made the Horcrux would be turned into in a ‘ghost like’ -sorry, could not find a better word- being -more or less like Voldy is pictured in PS/SS) . To support this idea I call for the passage in DD funeral when Harry believes he saw a phoenix-like image leaving DD body, in my opinion, it was DD soul going to his next adventure. Based on this idea, I don’t think LV lost part of his soul when he tried to kill Harry, or that the soul he has now is a piece that was in one Horcrux, but the major part of his soul that was in his body when he tried to kill Harry.

One last point, we have seen that Voldy has set many nasty protective spells to his Horcruxes, and we have no reason to believe that he would leave the other ones less protected, these spells would leave recognizable traces, so if a Horcrux was in Hogwarts DD surely would detect.

What do you think?

Surtseystwin - Jul 27, 2005 9:52 am (#287 of 2969)

If there is a Horcrux in Hogwarts, wouldn't the "I need to hide something" version of the Room of Requirement be the ideal place? The room itself is undetectable. What about the tiara that Harry puts on the ugly bust? LV has used a ring and a locket, both valuable jewelry heirlooms, so the tiara, if it has a similar significant history, would be a strong possibility.

LV could have stashed a Horcrux at Hogwarts when he showed up to ask Dumbledore for a job.

Other possibilities (but they don't seem as likely) are the House Cup, and Tom Riddle's award for Special Services to the School.

TwinklingBlueEyes - Jul 27, 2005 10:20 am (#288 of 2969)

"If Lord Voldemort's soul resides in the whole castle as you suggest, Dumbledore and his staff would have detected its' presence ages ago." If that were the case, it seems to me the Chamber would not have been secrete for so long.

"If L.V's soul resides within the castle itself, what was the point of having Lucius wait for the command to sneak the Diary into Hogwarts to reopen the Chamber of Secrets. Wouldn't L.V's soul in the castle be able to open the chamber or possess a student to do the job?" Might I suggest that you read my thoughts on the matter a little more carefully? What I said was; "Like I have said before, I don't think that Voldemort has made all his Horcruxes." LV intended to use Harry's death for his final Horcrux since he tried to kill Harry as a baby. In his view it would be his greatest triumph in the history of magic, Hogwarts would be his "trophy" for defeating his great nemesis Dumbledore, assure him of what he thinks is his immortality, and solve the problem of that pesky prophecy. But, as Harry responded so well to Draco’s remark, "Your dead, Potter." at the end of OoP, "Funny," he said, "you'd think I'd have stopped walking around."

"the castle will not be destroyed." If the castle is indeed a Horcrux, I do not see it's needing to be destroyed to release the piece of soul. Remember, the ring itself was not destroyed, was still wearable in fact. It's stone was merely cracked.

In JKR's world many things are possible, even the improbable. It is after all her fictitious world.

Post #118 pretty much sums up my thoughts on this matter.

Jon Parker - Jul 27, 2005 10:28 am (#289 of 2969)

Nate, in #29 you asked why would LV put a piece of his soul in Harry if he knew from the prophecy he had to kill Harry. Correct me if I'm wrong, but according to DD, LV did not get the entire prophecy from Snape.

Weeny Owl - Jul 27, 2005 11:25 am (#290 of 2969)

What about the tiara that Harry puts on the ugly bust?

I like that idea mainly because a tiara is something worn by royalty, and while the Half-Blood Prince isn't female, perhaps if it's a tiara worn by Rowena Ravenclaw it could be a Horcrux. Not that I think she would see herself as royalty, but it could have been some type of family heirloom handed down through the female branch of the family.

Bluenote1313 - Jul 27, 2005 11:57 am (#291 of 2969)

Here is a theory on the Horcrux:

perhaps when a Horcrux is destroyed the part of the soul of the person who created it returns to that person, and once the entire soul is returned he is mortal again. Since a soul is not like a body part, you would now know when it was returned. The reason LV cannot create a new one to replace the diary is because he was 'dead' at the time and it was not returned to his body. When the ring was destroyed by DD, no one told LV so he could not create a new one.

I think in book 7 Harry will be fighting LV and LV will make a comment about how Harry cannot kill him because he is immortal. Harry will ask if he is talking about the Horcruxes. LV will be surprised that Harry knows about them and Harry will tell he destroyed them all except Nagini. LV will start to be frightened and Nagini will be killed by Snape (to protect Harry) It will be at this point LV will realize he is mortal and CAN be killed and eventually Harry will kill him...

siliconsmiley - Jul 27, 2005 12:46 pm (#292 of 2969)

Whew. Lots of posts. Read all 291 today. Very interesting points brought up by all. Kudos folks.

Dumbledore left some wiggle room in his explanation to Harry. There seems to be little room to doubt the locket at #12 GP or Hufflepuff's cup. But the fifth and sixth are questionable.

I do like the theory of Riddle's Award for Special Services. I find it very odd that Hogwarts would keep that award on display, knowing that Tom Riddle is perhaps the most evil wizard of all times. I just don't see how he could have made this object a Horcrux.

And I can't shake the feeling that Harry's scar is some kind of Horcrux itself. The only thing that bothers me is that Dumbledore didn't mention it at all. Hopefully, it is not.

Whatever the fifth (?Ravenclaw object?) and sixth (?Nagini?) Horcruxes turn out to be, Harry is going to need some help to find them and liberate Voldemort's soul.

K Stahl - Jul 27, 2005 12:51 pm (#293 of 2969)

Interlude:

Harry, Hermione, Ginny and Ron arrive at the grave of Tom Riddle on their hunt for Voldemort. They have destroyed all the remaining Horcruxes but one, Nagini. Without warning, they are set upon by a gaggle of Dementors and Dementrixes. Harry, Hermione and Ginny quickly produce patroni, corralling the Dementors and Dementrixes. Ron stumbles over a tree root and falls into a neatly arranged pile of road apples. He fires his patronus into the trees above with the serendipitous result that Nagini is knocked into the ever contracting sphere of Dementors and Dementrixes who realizing that they have no place to go decide to go for one last feast and suck out one seventh of Voldemort’s soul from the last Horcrux. Voldemort, who has been hiding concealed as a tree root, immediately appears writhing on the ground.

"Of course," exclaims Hermione. "Seven is a very magical number. Its inverse, that is one seventh, is the contra positive of magical power. It is Muggle non-power. How could I have missed this?’

Harry turns to Voldemort. "Well, it looks like you have discovered how to make a squib. I guess Professor Dumbledore was right. Death is not the worst thing."

Ginny immobilizes Squib Voldemort and everyone congratulates Ron for saving the day as he attempts to brush the dung from his robe.

Solitaire - Jul 27, 2005 1:44 pm (#294 of 2969)
Edited Jul 27, 2005 2:44 pm

I still think we need to consider what Dumbledore told Harry in Chapter 13, The Secret Riddle:

"And lastly--I hope you are not too sleepy to pay attention to this, Harry--the young Tom Riddle liked to collect trophies. You saw the box of stolen articles he had hidden in his room. These were taken from victims of his bullying behavior, souvenirs, if you will, of particularly unpleasant bits of magic. Bear in mind this magpie-like tendency, for this, particularly, will be important later."

Dumbledore took pains to make sure Harry understood the importance of this tendency of Voldemort's. For this reason, I suspect the Horcruxes are "trophies" of particularly unpleasant magic he has committed against others. Given the fact that Voldemort killed the Potters personally, I suspect that one of the Horcruxes is a "trophy" from Godric's Hollow, such as the wand of either Lily or James. And if James was the heir to GG, as some have said, perhaps the "trophy" was some other object of GG's that had been passed down.

Solitaire

Vaughn - Jul 27, 2005 1:44 pm (#295 of 2969)
Edited Jul 27, 2005 2:46 pm

Hi, I just wanted to say that I don't think Harry (or his scar) is a Horcrux.

I also think that Horcruxes are not meant to be used once they are created, they simply house portions of a soul so that the person cannot die. I think we (Harry) still has to figure out what the Ravenclaw Horcrux is, where the locket is (12 GP in my opinion) and where the Hufflepuff cup is.

I think Nagini is a Horcrux like Dumbledore says.

I like the idea that the Horcruxes are hidden in places that LV committed some serious crime and that will be how Harry finds them all. That being said I believe the Hufflepuff cup will be found in the Smith's home and that the murder of Hepzibah (SP?) Smith is one of the ones that LV used to create the Horcrux.

EDIT. Cross-posted with Solitaire. I can see the last Horcrux being made from James murder and the Horcrux being in Godric's Hollow.

Nearly Legless Mick - Jul 27, 2005 1:48 pm (#296 of 2969)
Edited Jul 27, 2005 2:51 pm

I don't think it's likely, but a snitch might make an interesting Horcrux. Imagine Harry and LV as rival seekers playing for the highest stakes of all.

It makes sense to use jewelry and other metal objects for Horcruxes because they are tough and long-lasting naturally. The Diary seems a rather poor choice - what if it was just thrown on a fire? As DD says LV's rather blasé attitude about the Diary was a clue that he had made several Horcruxes, I think choosing something made from paper reinforces that idea. Of course the Diary may have had protective spells on it too. Fortunately the Basilisk venom did the trick anyway.

I agree that the "hide something" version of the Room of Requirement is well worth checking. It also may contain books with info about Horcruxes which were contraband items under Dumbledore.

I also agree that Harry should investigate the Chamber of Secrets again for clues and possible Horcruxes. LV certainly never expected anyone to get past the basilisk.

Riddle's award is definitely a candidate, but I don't think the Sorting Hat is. I think that hat can look after itself, with the brains of all four founders and a thousand or so years of experience.

Not sure about Frank Bryce's walking stick either, but maybe Tom Riddle Sr.'s gravestone?

Wormtail's silver hand crossed my mind, but I think that's a bit problematic. Other places to investigate include the Slytherin section of Hogwarts and the Crouch residence where LV stayed for quite a while.

Edit. Also agree that Godric's Hollow and the Smith residence are possible locations.

Kazius - Jul 27, 2005 3:38 pm (#297 of 2969)

Solitaire, only one problem I see with the Lily's/James' wand as a Horcrux theory. LV killed hundreds of people, why would he pick their wands specially to make a Horcrux out of? There is no reason to, he wanted to kill Harry, and he wanted to make a Horcrux after his killing.

It doesn't make any sense to me that LV would be like, *kill James, Kill Lily* Oh wait, *Turns Lily's wand into a Horcrux*, and then turns to kill Harry, and it of course, fails. I find the idea of Bryce's walking stick instead of Nagini being a much better possibility of being a Horcrux then this idea, no offense.

As for making more Horcruxes, every Horcrux LV makes damages his soul, and we're not exactly sure what type of effect that would have. There is an implication, I believe, that there is a limit to how many Horcruxes one can make, seeing as most wizards have only made *1* Horcrux, other then themselves. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised of Grindelwald made a Horcrux, which is why Dumbledore seemed to know so much about this theory based on the little evidence he had. I'm thinking this way, that if you split your soul too many times, that you can no longer be human, and that would probably limit LV from making 2 Horcruxes to replace Marvolo's Ring(Which he doesn't know about), the Locket(R.A.B. supposedly destroyed) and the Diary(Which he does know about).

irish flutterby - Jul 27, 2005 3:46 pm (#298 of 2969)
Edited Jul 27, 2005 4:46 pm

I am posting this here instead of on the Magical Animals Snakes, thread. If a moderator want to copy it over there, or let me know when I can post it over there without the risk of spilling, that'd be great. As it stands this is the only place I have found to place it that is in a spoilers included folder. Thanks

I think LV really identifies with snakes in a MAJOR way. After all, he is constantly described as looking more like a snake than human. Could this be because of choice (e.g. he sees snakes as admirable creatures b/c of Slytherin or whatever.), because snakes are inherently evil characters therefore as he splits his soul his true self is being revealed as evil ( I don't necessarily agree), or that because he has split his soul into a snake, he has taken on some of her appearances.

Mrs. D. - Jul 27, 2005 3:48 pm (#299 of 2969)

I really like the idea of the tiara being the missing Horcrux and it having once belonged Rowena Ravenclaw and it being hidden under DD's nose at Hogwarts. I can see Tom finding that deliciously funny. It may not be of course, but I really like the idea.

Soul Search - Jul 27, 2005 6:50 pm (#300 of 2969)

I am not sure that "destroy" is the right term for a Horcrux. The example we have is Harry using the Basilisk's fang on the diary.

The diary and the Tom Riddle "memory" were destroyed, but Harry was not particularly harmed; just a lot of ink everywhere. There was no specific clue about a soul escaping, either.

Dumbledore was hurt from the protective spells Voldemort put on the ring, not necessarily from his releasing the soul.

The potion and/or cave pond water hurt Dumbledore, even though he had not yet attempted to "destroy" the locket Horcrux (which was a fake, anyway.)

Thus, given that Harry's scar is a Horcrux, Harry will not be hurt when Voldemort's 1/7th soul is released from it.

A better term might be "releasing" or "freeing" a soul from the Horcrux, rather than "destroying" the Horcrux.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Wed Jul 20, 2011 6:57 pm

The Sword and the Lion - Jul 27, 2005 7:05 pm (#301 of 2969)

Harry was still protected by his mother's "lingering protection" when the Diary was destroyed in the Chamber of Secrets.

Puck - Jul 27, 2005 7:26 pm (#302 of 2969)

DD never explained about how to destroy a Horcrux, only took Harry along to find one. I'm guess, too, that the protective spells are likely more dangerous than the releasing process, other wise why bother with the heavy-duty protection in the first place?

I wonder if DD checked the Riddle House? I seems an obvious place, and I can't see him overlooking it, but perhaps he concentrated on the places Harry would have a harder time finding?

Hogwarts is a great hiding place. I mean, DD found one in the shack by looking for concealed magic. How long would it take to search all of Hogwarts for such a spell? I'm guess perhaps in the chamber, or even concealed in the Slytherin common room. The Smith House or Borgin and Burkes, and St. Mungo’s seem deserving of being checked out as well.

Solitaire - Jul 27, 2005 8:41 pm (#303 of 2969)

Kazius, Voldemort killed hundreds of people? Do we know this for a fact? He is certainly responsible for many deaths, but hundreds? Also, I am talking about the people he killed before he attempted to AK Harry. I feel that those are the important deaths.

I realize Lily did not need to die, but Voldemort was intending to kill James anyway. Jo discussed this in her recent interview. I still think--until Jo tells us otherwise--that one of the Horcruxes is connected somehow to Godric's Hollow and their deaths. JM2K, of course ... but it fits into the "trophy" business that Dumbledore was so insistent Harry understand.

Solitaire

Kazius - Jul 28, 2005 12:26 am (#304 of 2969)

Well, perhaps Voldemort did not kill Hundreds (Although I wouldn't put it past him), but I believe we can both agree he killed at least 7 people. His Father, Grandparents, Bertha, Frank Bryce and Diggory add up to 6 already, that would be enough to make all the Horcruxes.

My point is, there was no reason to specially single out Lily, maybe after all this happened he might have used her wand as a Horcrux, but he never had that chance.

ajin7 - Jul 28, 2005 1:21 am (#305 of 2969)

I think we can assume he killed hundreds. Doesn't DD say to Harry in HBP, that LV killed enough people to create an army of Inferi?

irish flutterby - Jul 28, 2005 3:23 am (#306 of 2969)

I categorically change my mind. I definitely think, after hearing the bit about the drawing room at #12 Grimmauld, that the locket none of the m could open was the Horcrux. Also.....here's a thought. Since, each time you create a Horcrux you split you soul in half, does that mean the largest part of LV's soul is ACTUALLY in the first Horcrux he created?....Hmmmm

Vaughn - Jul 28, 2005 4:24 am (#307 of 2969)

I was thinking about that too, so the first Horcrux (the diary) had 1/2 of the original soul.

- The second had 1/4.
- The third had 1/8.
- The fourth had 1/16.
- The fifth had 1/32.
- and the sixth had 1/64 of Voldemorts original soul...not that it really would make any difference because the whole point is that the soul is not whole and still in the original body. But fun to think about anyway.

What are some of the most "particularly nasty bits of magic" that we know of Voldemort doing and where did they take place?

The Sword and the Lion - Jul 28, 2005 4:35 am (#308 of 2969)
Edited Jul 28, 2005 6:15 am

There has been a great deal of speculation about Harry's scar being a Horcrux. After reading the Mugglenet interview with J.K.R, this theory makes much more sense to me than it did previously. According to J.K.R, the last word of book seven is currently "scar", but she has claimed that she may change it in the future. That is the nail in the coffin for me -- I am convinced that Harry's scar is a Horcrux.

After some reflection, I keep returning to the brother-wands that Harry and Voldemort own, and the peculiar recognition of Tom Riddle's name on the Diary Horcrux in the Chamber of Secrets. During the CoS, Harry seemed drawn toward Tom's Diary: The only other time that I recall Harry being lured by an object was during the Veil scene at the Department of Mysteries in the OotP. I believe that it is probable that the Veil is the mysterious sixth Horcrux. I will explain below:

Anyway, here is the description of Harry's first encounter with Riddle's Diary -- a known Horcrux:

"Harry couldn't explain, even to himself, why he didn't just throw Riddle's diary away. The fact was that even though he knew the diary was blank, he kept absentmindedly picking it up and turning the pages, as though it were a story he wanted to finish. And while Harry was sure he had never heard the name T.M Riddle before, it still seemed to mean something to him, almost as though Riddle was a friend he'd had when he was very small, and had half-forgotten."

Dumbledore's take on LV's Horcruxes: "You are forgetting what I have showed you. Lord Voldemort liked to collect Trophies, and he preferred objects with a powerful magical history. His pride, his belief in his own superiority, has determination to carve for himself a startling place in magical history; these things suggest to me that Voldemort would have chosen his Horcruxes with some care, favoring objects worthy of Honor."

If Voldemort believes that he can conquer death, the Veil would be the ultimate object to place, or hide, a piece of his soul in. By placing a Horcrux in the Veil, that fragment of soul may not be capable of being destroyed by the living. Conceivably, the Horcrux would be on both sides of the veil. Perhaps Dumbledore knew this and more-or-less planed his death in the H.B.P in order to destroy this Horcrux from beyond the veil (a chapter title in the OotP). It would be gratifying to see Sirius and Dumbledore destroy a Horcrux while they are "dead".

Here is a condensed version of the scene at the Department of Mysteries in the OotP where Harry is lulled by the veil:

"Harry scrambled down the benches one by one until he reached the stone bottom of the sunken pit. His footsteps echoed loudly as he walked slowly toward the dais. The pointed archway looked much taller from where he stood now than when he had been looking down on it from above. Still the veil swayed gently, as though somebody had just passed through it. [Harry] had the strangest feeling that there was someone standing right behind the veil on the other side of the archway. Gripping his wand very tightly , he edged around the dais, but there was nobody there. All that could be seen was the other seen was the other side of the tattered black veil. "Let's go," called Hermione from halfway up the stone steps. "This isn't right, Harry, come on, let's go ..." She sounded scared, much more scared than she had in the room where the brains swam, yet Harry thought the archway had a kind of beauty about it, old though it was. The gently rippling veil intrigued him; he felt a very strong inclination to climb up on the dais and walk through it." "Harry, let's go, okay?" said Hermione more forcefully. Okay, he said, but he did not move. He had just heard some thing. There were faint whispering, murmuring noises coming from the other side of the veil. "Someone's whispering behind there", he said, moving out of her reach and continuing to frown at the veil. "Is that you, Ron?" "I'm here, mate", said Ron appearing around the side of the archway. "Can’t anyone else hear it?" Harry demanded, for the whispering and murmuring was becoming louder; without really meaning to put it there, he found that his foot was upon the dais."

(A few lines down)

"Harry, we are supposed to be here for Sirius!" [Hermione] said in a high-pitched, strained voice. "Sirius", Harry repeated, still gazing mesmerized at the continuously swaying veil. "Yeah ..." And then something slid back into place in his brain. Sirius captured ...

"What do you reckon that arch was?" Harry asked Hermione as they regained the dark circular room. "I don't know, but whatever it was, it was dangerous."

Another interesting piece of text from OotP., chapter 23 -- Christmas on the closed Ward:

Was this why Dumbledore would no longer meet Harry's eyes? Did he expect to see Voldemort staring out of them, with catlike slits for pupils? Harry remembered how the snakelike face of Voldemort had once forced itself out of the back of professor Quirrell’s head, and he ran his hand over the back of his own, wondering what it would feel like if Voldemort burst out of his skull .... He felt dirty, contaminated, as though he were carrying some deadly germ, unworthy to sit on the underground train back from the hospital with innocent, clean people whose minds and bodies were free of the taint of Voldemort ... he had not merely seen the snake, he had been the snake, he knew it now. And then a truly terrible thought occurred to him, a memory bobbing to the surface of his mind, one that made his insides write and squirm like serpents ....

"What's he after apart from followers?"

"Stuff he can only get by stealth ... like a weapon. Something he didn't have last time.

Recall Dumbledore's reference to the Diary Horcrux as a weapon -- the prophecy could not have been a weapon. The Veil? Surprised

Let me know what you think.

(Side note about Tom's Diary: When Harry turned to the back cover, the name of a variety store where the diary came from was listed as Vauxhall Road, London.)

Steve Newton - Jul 28, 2005 9:57 am (#309 of 2969)

I think that a Horcrux would fit nicely under a squeaky stair.

Puck - Jul 28, 2005 10:04 am (#310 of 2969)

Vauxhall Road sound like a possible searching point.

Not sure about the Arch. Harry was not the only one of the group who was drawn to it, and Luna also heard the whispering. It seemed as those who had lost someone close to them were pulled to it. If Harry was drawn to it because of he and it both being a Horcrux then he would have been the only one.

What we really need here is some information about how to create a Horcrux. Then we would know if a) it can be created accidently, like many seem to think about Harry's scar and b) if it's possible for a building such as Hogwarts could be used. We also need to know how soon after the murder the spell must be preformed.

Not sure a soul is split in exactly half with a murder. JKR just said it split, not necessarily evenly.

Verbina - Jul 28, 2005 10:20 am (#311 of 2969)
Edited by Jul 28, 2005 11:23 am

Okay I have been messing with this in my mind and I am finally to the point I have to post it. It is still in progress so please bear with me.

The Horcruxes are much more than a place to keep his soul bit. It is something to represent the murder and the circumstances. In real life, serial killers have trophies to remember and revel in the attention and "glory" of what they did. Voldemort is doing the same thing. When e was young, the items that he had that he took from the kids he bullied, were items that represented those children to him.

So in this way of thinking, each Horcrux means something to Voldemort in connection to the murder he committed and the circumstances.

Diary - it is a book, representing that he was in school. Perhaps the person killed (I just don't think it can be Myrtle) was a student or someone who taught him things. Not necessarily a proper teacher but someone who taught him something. The diary being a book could also represent the study he had to do to accomplish his first Horcrux.

Ring - a family heirloom from his mother's family, this is logically the Horcrux made from his father's murder. His father rejected his mother for what she was so it would follow that the pride of the family, the ring, would be the Horcrux of the death.

The locket - a Slytherin heirloom, this could represent the death of a member of Slytherin house or it could represent the death of a mother like figure.

The Hufflepuff cup - a Hufflepuff heirloom, this could represent the death of Smith, the woman who had the cup and was descended from Hufflepuff.

The unknown one - this could be the Ravenclaw artifact.

Nagini - made after the backfire at Godric's Hollow and at the beginning of Voldemort's rise again. Snakes were often thought of in ancient times as symbols of rebirth and immortality due to the shedding of the skin. Nagini, being a snake, would represent the rebirth of Voldemort's power and his rise to power again.

and of course, Voldie is the last one.

Also, in reference to the harm caused by destroying a Horcrux... there is a clue in Chapter 2. Snape says that DD sustained an injury because his reactions are slower. Reaction to what?

Marcos Stefanakopolus - Jul 28, 2005 10:30 am (#312 of 2969)

Gah! You beat me to it. I was going to read the whole thread to see if anyone else had suggested that the Goblet of Fire is a Horcrux, and after 173 posts, was starting to get excited to think that it might be an original idea. Fooey. Smile

But yes, I think it'll turn out to be either the Ravenclaw or Gryffindor relic.

Also, because Voldemort has shown precedent for creating Horcruxes that can also be used by him as tools (witness the diary), that the cup falls into that same category. I don't have GoF on me at the moment to look it up, but my recollection was that it was a supposition that someone had slipped Harry's name into the cup under a fake house name in order to get him into the competition, but that the supposition was never proved. If the cup is a Horcrux, then there's no need for Voldemort to have an accomplice do that; the cup could just have spat out Harry's name all on its own because V. wanted it to.

Verbina - Jul 28, 2005 10:31 am (#313 of 2969)

Didn't Barty Junior admit to putting Harry's name in the Goblet?

Nathan Zimmermann - Jul 28, 2005 10:43 am (#314 of 2969)

Verbina, Barty Crouch Jr. admitted under Veritaserum to altering the restrictions on the Goblet and placing Harry's name inside.

Kazius - Jul 28, 2005 10:56 am (#315 of 2969)

Yes, Barty Crouch Jr. (Fake Mad-Eye, if you wish) did hoodwink the Goblet of Fire into putting Harry's name in with a fake school.

That, I believe, is the most convincing evidence that the Goblet of Fire is not a Horcrux, because if it was a Horcrux, why bother to go to all the trouble to plant Barty Crouch Jr. at the school and have him hoodwink the cup. Along with this, the 5th Horcrux is supposed to be an object of Ravenclaw's, and we (Haven't reread GoF, currently on PoA and reread CoS already) don't get any hint that this is Rowena's cup.

Back to the Harry/Harry's Scar is a Horcrux notion, sorry if I'm being cruel about trying to disprove every point you make, but it's my nature. The most recent point is that JKR says the scar will be important, but we have no idea in what way. It could be important just so far as to give Harry a taste of Voldemort's powers without infecting him because he was protected by love. For a woman who gives tons of hints, I find very few (even fewer in the actual canon) that suggest his scar is a Horcrux.

As for the notion that the last word of book 7 is "Scar", we don't know the reference. All we know is that this is an epilogue chapter, how do we know the last sentence isn't something like, 'Harry still had times when he would lay in bed pondering while touching his scar.' We don't know, but I would definitely argue it as being "proof" of it. There are far too many instances where it could not be true.

Solitaire - Jul 28, 2005 1:04 pm (#316 of 2969)

after all this happened he might have used her wand as a Horcrux, but he never had that chance.

Actually, we can't really say that he didn't have the chance. He could have easily created a Horcrux out of either Lily's or James's wand--or any other item at Godric's Hollow--after killing Lily and before attempting to AK Harry. I'm not saying it is so ... but given Dumbledore's comments about trophies, I don't think it can be discounted until either Jo tells us "No way!" or we learn for certain in the next book.

Solitaire

David Olson - Jul 28, 2005 1:57 pm (#317 of 2969)

I don't think LV deliberately created a Horcrux on the night he killed Harry. The wand speculation doesn't seem to be based on anything in the books.

But until someone gives me a convincing argument otherwise, I'll continue to believe that Harry's scar is an inadvertent Horcrux. That fits the textual clues ("transferred a bit of himself to you") and the other connections to LV. And it also explains why LV won't let anyone else kill Harry: that would destroy part of his soul. I'm sure he would like to harvest his soulbit before he kills Harry.

Kazius - Jul 28, 2005 2:05 pm (#318 of 2969)

Uh, on the contrary, LV cast AK at Harry in the Ministry of Magic in OOTP, but Harry was saved by DD.

If Harry's scar is a Horcrux (which I definitely do not think), then it has to be inadvertent.

We need to accept that not everything is a Horcrux, nor is everything an Animagus, and not everyone can do Legilimency. I'm not saying it's impossible for Lily, James, or any other thing to be a Horcrux, just extremely unlikely.

I believe Dumbledore was 90% right, the only thing he wasn't right about was not knowing exactly what the 5th Horcrux is, meaning a Ravenclaw or Gryffindor item.

The Sword and the Lion - Jul 28, 2005 3:28 pm (#319 of 2969)
Edited Jul 28, 2005 4:56 pm

Kazius, I concede that the scar may not be a Horcrux, but there is no denying that Lord Voldemort and Harry share some sort of spiritual connection with one-another via the scar. This underscores the brother-wand theme and Priori Incantatem (a battle of wills, or souls arguably).

Whenever Harry is feeling a strong emotion from Voldemort, Harry's scar always burns and hurts. The focal point of pain emanates from the scar on every occasion while Harry is experiencing Voldemort's emotions, or while Harry is gazing through Voldemort's eyes or his soul (the mirror scene where Harry sees himself through the eyes of L.V, the snake attack at the ministry, Voldemort's possession of Harry at the end of OotP).

page 474 OotP.:

"Harry looked up at [Dumbledore] -- they were very close together -- and Dumbledore's clear blue gaze moved from the Portkey to Harry's face. At once, Harry's scar burned white-hot, as though the wound had burst open again -- and unbidden, unwanted, but terrifyingly strong, there rose within Harry a hatred so powerful he felt, for that instant, that he would like nothing better than to strike -- to bite -- to sink his fangs into the man before him --"

On another note, I believe that the snake-attack on Arthur Weasley at the Department of Mysteries in the OotP was Voldemort himself and not Nagini. In the H.B.P, Dumbledore makes it clear that L.V prefers to work alone for anything of great importance. If Voldemort was truly after the prophecy, why did he send his goonish Death Eaters to retrieve an item he could have removed himself? The prophecy was second priority, a job left to the servants of Voldemort to retrieve. I am still convinced that L.V was after something else in the Department of Mysteries -- an object to be used as a Horcrux. The weapon that is alluded to multiple times in the OotP (The Veil IMO). Remember, LV's greatest desire is to become immortal. I doubt Harry Potter was on LV’s mind that often during the H.B.P; thus, L.V made no appearances in his present form.

I am going to back away from the scar being a Horcrux for the time being. However, it seems very apparent that L.V and Harry are bound to each other's soul through Harry's scar; in fact, L.V and Harry share some of the same blood now.

(To clarify: I believe that Harry and Voldemort share separate and unique souls. However, there is a connection between the two souls that was forged on the night that L.V failed to kill Harry.)

Michael Harrell - Jul 28, 2005 4:19 pm (#320 of 2969)

Following a line of thought (more likely several lines of thought) that caught my attention from another post(s) (apologies for not remembering which one(s) or by whom), if we follow the logic that Dumbledore uses and the ways that we see the 3 known Horcruxes, it becomes fairly clear to my addled brain that Voldemort follows the "souvenir" and meaningful place philosophy. Meaning that the object made into a Horcrux is of import as well as the place where he leaves the Horcrux - three known examples:

1. Diary...although not actually left in the Chamber of Secrets, the diary was Voldemort's way of "proving" that he is the heir of Slytherin and also showed off his considerable magical abilities at the same time - remember that the Voldemort in the Diary is the 16 (or 17) year old Voldemort/Tom Riddle. This indicates to me that at the age of 16 or 17 he had already killed and used that venture to create the Diary Horcrux preserving himself at the time of Horcrux creation - so I would venture to hypothesize that the Diary was Horcrux #1 (if my logic holds). I'm not sure how the Diary is exactly a souvenir yet, but it seemed to be a relatively expensive book and it has already been supposed that Tom Riddle/Voldemort was not a person of means. Perhaps the souvenir theme comes into play if I suppose that he bought the book/Diary from ill-gotten gains. I am not sure whose significant death he would have used to capture his torn soul to create it - maybe Moaning Myrtle (but I really think she was killed by looking directly at the Basilisk - but Voldemort/Tom Riddle was there to open the Chamber when Myrtle died). As far as placement, it would be very interesting to learn when and under what circumstances Voldemort entrusted it to Lucius Malfoy.

2. The Ring - this one is more obvious. Voldemort/Riddle took the ring from Morfin before/after Voldemort killed Tom Riddle Sr. and company. And the ring was found by Dumbledore at the Gaunt House - ancestral home.

3. Locket - even though the locket is still at large, Voldemort followed the souvenir and placement line of thought. The locket was lifted from Hepzibah Smith and Voldemort "hid" it in the cave where he took the 2 kids from the orphanage years before - where Harry and Dumbledore went to endeavor to retrieve the real Horcrux.

So with this line of thought, I believe that if we peer back through what we know history wise of Voldemort, we'll be able to figure out some of the others. For places, perhaps something at the orphanage, perhaps at the Riddle House (or maybe that's why Voldemort went there at the beginning of GOF), perhaps Room of Requirements (but I don't yet see the logic here following my thoughts laid out) or other places. As far as objects, I like: 1. diary 2. ring 3. the locket (was his mother's) 4. the cup taken from Hepzibah Smith 5. maybe Nagini just because Dumbledore though of that one but we don't know the history of Nagini and Voldemort 6. Voldemort himself and 7. not sure - I don't think it something of Gryffindor's and Dumbledore sort of poo-poo'd the idea of anything of Ravenclaw's surviving, but then again no one knew about Gryffindor's sword until the Sorting Hat presented it to Harry.....the Sorting Hat could be a key (but not a likely Horcrux). But what about the using of the Horcrux idea - do they get used as needed - I think of this because Voldemort uses the bones of his father to regenerate....maybe his father's bones were a Horcrux?

What about if the Horcruxes get used and Voldemort knows of two used or destroyed from his 7 (Diary and whatever was used to regenerate (father's bones??) would he create 2 more to replenish his magical seven.

I'm starting to ramble. Thoughts?

TangledWeb - Jul 28, 2005 4:33 pm (#321 of 2969)

Writing to the point about the Goblet of Fire...do we have any back-story on the history of it? Kazius, as you mentioned before, there are not that many clues that point the Goblet to be an object of Ravenclaw. Perhaps there are some other clues that point to the fact that it could be, or could not be, a Horcrux.

Sometimes I also wonder why go through all that trouble to get Barty Crouch Jr. over to Hogwarts, rig the Goblet of Fire, then turn it into a Portkey to send Harry over to Voldemort? Especially if the Goblet is actually a Horcrux?

I think that it is good to imagine if everything went to plan for Voldemort, and he had actually killed Harry that night. What would he do then? Perhaps he could reclaim the Goblet as one of his Horcruxes, or even...take the portkey back to Hogwarts. Imagine...a ticket into Hogwarts where Voldemort and his Death Eaters can either send a message or begin to do some damage to the otherwise unknowing young witches, young wizards, and staff at Hogwarts.

But I digress...as the Goblet is a symbol of a Hogwarts Champion, a leader of the school...I can see how Voldemort could be tempted to turn this item into a Horcrux.

TwinklingBlueEyes - Jul 28, 2005 5:29 pm (#322 of 2969)
Edited Jul 28, 2005 6:32 pm

Nagini - I wonder if Dumbledore is mistaken about the snake, or did JKR get confused? The snake did not kill Frank Bryce, LV did.

"After an interval of some years, however, he used Nagini to kill an old Muggle man, and it might then have occurred to him to turn her into his last Horcrux." DD-HBP

"Slowly, with his face screwed up, as though he would rather have done anything than approach his master and the hearth rug where the snake lay, the small man walked forward and began to turn the chair. The snake lifted its ugly triangular head and hissed slightly as the legs of the chair snagged on its rug. And then the chair was facing Frank, and he saw what was sitting in it. His walking stick fell to the floor with a clatter. He opened his mouth and let out a scream. He was screaming so loudly that he never heard the words the thing in the chair spoke as it raised a wand. There was a flash of green light, a rushing sound, and Frank Bryce crumpled. He was dead before he hit the floor." GOF

Steve Newton - Jul 28, 2005 6:22 pm (#323 of 2969)

If the scar is a Horcrux (and I'm going to take a lot of convincing) it is possible that it could lead to the defeat of Voldemort. This part of his soul will know love and perhaps turn from evil. I know it sounds trite but I'm not a world-class writer.

Solitaire - Jul 28, 2005 7:53 pm (#324 of 2969)

I don't think LV deliberately created a Horcrux on the night he killed Harry

It seems like a Horcrux must be deliberately created. I do not think it can just "happen."

wombat witch - Jul 28, 2005 7:54 pm (#325 of 2969)

Brandi - I think you are spot on! As soon as I read about the RAB person taking the real locket my thoughts went to two things - 1 RAB is Regulus Black & 2 Mundungus somehow got hold of the locket and that is why we see him in Hogsmeade... otherwise why is that scene in the book, it doesn't go anywhere!

The heavy gold locket which none of them could open in the OotP is thrown into a sack to be 'thrown out’, but this is then followed by several references to Kreacher trying to sneak items out under his loincloth...

We know Mundungus coveted lots of things which Sirius didn't hold valuable so it stands to reason...

P.S. - this is my first ever post!!

Solitaire - Jul 28, 2005 9:21 pm (#326 of 2969)

I agree that it will turn out to be important that Mundungus has been pilfering things from 12GP.

Luanee - Jul 28, 2005 10:00 pm (#327 of 2969)

I don't think LV will use Nagini, a living thing, as a Horcrux because she will die sooner or later, won't she? Unless by being a Horcrux you gain eternal life? If that is so, won't Harry has eternal life too if he was indeed a Horcrux?

Oh, I am getting confused....

Solitaire - Jul 28, 2005 10:27 pm (#328 of 2969)
Edited Jul 28, 2005 11:27 pm

The trouble with Nagini being a Horcrux is that Harry is a Parselmouth. Can he communicate with her? Probably, although he has never tried. After all, he could hear and understand the basilisk, and he was able to talk to the boa constrictor at the zoo.

The Question: Would Nagini obey Harry if he attempted to get her to do something? Who knows? If she does turn out to be a Horcrux, it would make sense that she was made a Horcrux before Voldemort learned of Harry's ability as a Parselmouth ... wouldn't it? After all, why would he create a Horcrux that could potentially be controlled by someone else?

BTW, Luanee, the Horcruxes affect my brain just about the same way as the time-turner. They make my head hurt!

Solitaire

The Sword and the Lion - Jul 29, 2005 1:20 am (#329 of 2969)
Edited Jul 29, 2005 3:13 am

Nagini seems to be a very powerful snake. I imagine she is very similar to Fawkes in supernatural abilities. There must be more to Nagini than we currently know if L.V used her as a Horcrux. Didn't Worm-Tail "milk" her for some potion in GOF? I have my doubts rather all of the objects that were shown in the Pensieve will actually turn out to be Horcruxes. There are bound to be some plot twists in the next book. For instance, Dumbledore's shriveled black hand could end up being a piece of LV’s soul that spread from the ring without Dumbledore's knowledge -- perhaps this is why the "jam question" will be pertinent in the future. (A wild theory ... don't hold me to it)

I wonder if L.V can extract his soul from a Horcrux and place it in a new object. If he can, it might be plausible to bring Nagini with him. I mean, wasn't the Diary doing that very thing -- moving LV’s soul from the Diary to Ginny?

---

Luanne, I believe that Harry's scar is considered to be the Horcrux, not Harry himself. I no longer believe that the scar is a Horcrux, but I still believe that Voldemort and Harry are linked to each other's soul as a result of the backfiring A.K curse.

Although Voldemort essentially created a self-fulfilling prophecy, consider the one line that is more relevant now that we know about Horcruxes and the value of an intact and untainted soul:

... neither can live while the other survives ...

wombat witch - Jul 29, 2005 2:21 am (#330 of 2969)

Hmmm I've also given the Sorting Hat a lot of thought... the trouble is that the brains of the founders of Hogwarts which are preserved within the hat could surely tell someone that there is a bit of LV's soul inside - after all it did interact with Harry when he tried it on in DD's office in CoS. If DD had any doubt about whether LV had succeeded in making it or the sword of Gryffindor a Horcrux then he could pop it on & ask it! Couldn't he?

On the other hand, the fact that DD doesn't conclusively rule out anything of Gryffindor's having become a Horcrux and the fact that Harry still contemplates the possibility of it when he 'recites' the potential Horcruxes he must track down at the end of HBP (sorry can't give details - my Mum has borrowed my copy!) makes me think it's possible that the Sorting Hat could be a Horcrux... and yeah, my head is hurting!

kezz brady - Jul 29, 2005 3:20 am (#331 of 2969)

Just a few thoughts to add. I think the first Horcrux was made using the basilisk to murder Myrtle. It's the only death at the time that V could be responsible for. Interestingly, that one was destroyed using the basilisk tooth, so is the destruction of a Horcrux linked to the initial murder weapon? As V in the diary knew of the consequences of Myrtle's death, it implies that there is a period of time between the murder and the making of the Horcrux. I think that a potion is involved in the making. V questioned Slughorn as his potions teacher, and also DD went looking for him when he wanted to know what information V would have found about Horcruxes. We know that potions always take as long as they do and cannot be rushed so I think that it would not be possible to make an accidental Horcrux. Also, V began making them 40 years before he heard about the prophecy. It would be unlikely that he would not have finished before he killed the Potters. Perhaps Harry's scar has a different function. We are told that it doesn't hurt any more because V is using Occlumency against him. I always thought that was more of a defensive thing. Perhaps it could be used for some kind of attack on V.

Mrs Brisbee - Jul 29, 2005 5:05 am (#332 of 2969)

I wonder if L.V can extract his soul from a Horcrux and place it in a new object. If he can, it might be plausible to bring Nagini with him. I mean, wasn't the Diary doing that very thing -- moving LV’s soul from the Diary to Ginny? --The Sword and the Lion

Good catch! The diary soulbit ("stays crunchy in milk!") wasn't stagnate. If Ginny's life-force had been drained completely, would the new Tom body have housed the soulbit from then on, with no need for the diary anymore? If so, then that would mean the soulbits can be moved from a Horcrux.

wombat witch - Jul 29, 2005 5:16 am (#333 of 2969)

Kezz Brady! - I had consistently discredited the whole Moaning Myrtle's murder leading to the creation of a Horcrux theory, until you came up with the idea that the murder weapon must somehow be used to destroy the Horcrux. My reason for dismissing it was a) Myrtle was actually murdered by Slytherin's Basilisk and b) We know that Riddle had already killed his father when he was researching the Horcruxes - as noted in Slughorn’s memory (Harry noticed that Riddle was wearing Slytherin's ring). But I think there is merit in your theory ...although ...

If most of Vs murders were committed with his wand, how did DD manage to destroy the one in the ring?? Also isn't it possible that he asked Slughorn - not as a potions master, but as the head of Slytherin House and therefore the teacher most likely (and most vulnerable to flattery) to tell him about them?

Still - it's the best argument I have seen for the Moaning Myrtle/Horcrux case! :-)

Nicholas Schouten - Jul 29, 2005 9:43 am (#334 of 2969)

Tom Riddle may have made his first Horcrux *before* ever talking to Prof. Slughorn!

DD emphasizes what Tom Riddle was really seeking from Slughorn (U.S. Schol. ed. at p. 500): "What he particularly wanted from Horace was an opinion on what would happen to the wizard who created more than one Horcrux..."

At the point of the Tom Riddle-Horace Slughorn discussion, Tom already knew something about Horcruxes and knew their purpose and probably already knew that they required a death (perhaps the CoS held some material on the subject). There is no reason that Tom could not have already done his first Horcrux creation and afterwards was wondering if there was any information available that would deter him from making more. I think that at the time of the conversation he had already determined that he would split himself 6 times to make 7 parts, but wanted to be sure that the second split (or subsequent ones) wouldn't absolutely cause him to die. If Slughorn didn't say it definitely would result in the death of Horcrux maker, then Tom Riddle had already resolved to attempt it.

Kazius - Jul 29, 2005 9:44 am (#335 of 2969)

I think a lot of people are missing a minute detail.

Tom Riddle was wearing Marvolo's ring while at Hogwarts, and he killed his father and grandparents on the same night that he acquired the ring. Coincidence? I believe not. This is supposed to suggest that Tom Riddle killed his father and grandparents while he was at Hogwarts.

siliconsmiley - Jul 29, 2005 9:51 am (#336 of 2969)

I've been a bit on the fence about Harry's scar as a Horcrux. Last night while listening to OotP on audio, I heard something that caused new doubt.

I don't have the book or the exact quote but after Hermione described the DA's coins, Harry was reminded of the Death Eater's Dark Marks. He described them as scars. Voldemort touches one of their scars and the others burn. Harry's scar is frequently described as burning. Perhaps Harry's scar (and the connection to Voldemort) is more along those lines.

Nicholas Schouten - Jul 29, 2005 9:57 am (#337 of 2969)
Edited Jul 29, 2005 10:58 am

And the ring may have been his first Horcrux, with the diary becoming a Horcrux after this conversation with Slughorn. (This would also tie in with his willingness to "risk" the second Horcrux being destroyed when it was eventually passed on to a future student.)

Also it should be noted that the gathering of any item to become a Horcrux need not necessarily be connected to the death that makes that item a Horcrux.

At p. 504 (U.S. Schol. ed) DD states: LV "liked to collect trophies, and he preferred objects with a powerful magical history. His pride, his belief in his own superiority, his determination to carve for himself a startling place in magical history; these things suggest to me that Voldemort would have chosen his Horcruxes with some care, favoring objects worthy of the honor."

But it's not until a few pages later, at p. 506 that DD says: LV "seems to have reserved the process of making Horcruxes for particularly significant deaths."

Surtseystwin - Jul 29, 2005 10:06 am (#338 of 2969)

Weeny Owl wrote:

I like that idea mainly because a tiara is something worn by royalty, and while the Half-Blood Prince isn't female, perhaps if it's a tiara worn by Rowena Ravenclaw it could be a Horcrux. Not that I think she would see herself as royalty, but it could have been some type of family heirloom handed down through the female branch of the family.

Perhaps the tiara is the one belonging to Auntie Muriel, and Molly was never informed that it had been lost/stolen. There is certainly a rich Gryffindor history in the Weasley family. It could have been made into a Horcrux when Gideon and Fabian Prewett were killed. (Although we know it took five Death Eaters to defeat them, we don't know that LV specifically was not there.)

The owner of the tiara may not have been royalty, but LV certainly thinks of himself in those terms. I can see how he would not only be drawn to souvenirs of his murder victims, but specifically to items that reinforce his self-perceived status.

Ann - Jul 29, 2005 11:22 am (#339 of 2969)
Edited Jul 29, 2005 12:32 pm

Whew! It was not a great idea to put off reading this thread. A few reactions:

It seems clear that a Horcrux is a terribly evil thing, containing as it does the part of a soul that is torn away when its owner does the ultimate evil act, the intentional and premeditated killing of another human being. The idea of Harry or Ginny or even a part of Harry "being" a Horcrux doesn't seem to work with that. Harry has, as Dumbledore stresses, a whole, loving soul. He has not been tainted with the evil that a Horcrux would entail. And Dumbledore stresses how dangerous it is to make a Horcrux of an animal, rather than an inanimate object. But then he says Nagini is particularly close to LV. Harry, to put it mildly, is not.

There are some weird chronological inconsistencies (mistakes? or something I'm missing?) in the Horcrux sequence. The Diary seems to date from Riddle's Sixth year, and the ring from the following summer. Riddle is wearing the ring when he asks Slughorn about Horcruxes, which means that it is not yet a Horcrux. Dumbledore says he stops wearing it after he makes it one; and in any case, Riddle's excitement about the possibility of making Horcruxes, revealed in Slughorn's memory, seems fresh and intense. This would tend to imply that the bits of soul severed during murders can somehow be recovered long after the fact, since Myrtle is the only known sixth year murder of Riddle, and Dumbledore stresses that he doesn't think Riddle murdered anyone between his father and grandparents and the murder of Hepzibah Smith.

So what Horcruxes have we got if Dumbledore was right (and JKR says he largely was).

1. The Diary, probably created with the murder of Myrtle, which I think was planned and intentional, though some time afterwards. It is probably significant that we don't know Myrtle's last name--I'd suspect Prince (she's quite unattractive)...or perhaps Potter? (She does have dark messy hair and wear glasses, doesn't she? Or is she ever specifically said to be a non-pureblood witch?) Dumbledore finds it alarming because it has a function (releasing the basilisk--the murder weapon--again), and thereby implies that there are multiple Horcruxes. Destroyed by the basilisk itself.

2. The Ring, which is never said to have belonged to Slytherin, though it is an heirloom of his descendants. It's inscribed with the crest of the Peverells (no previous reference in the books, according to the Lexicon), and the stone seems to have been fractured when Dumbledore released the soul-sliver and it ceased to be a Horcrux. (His injury sounds like it came from the protective spells rather than the sliver removal itself.) Presumably it was made using Riddle's murder of his father, long after the fact.

3. The Locket of Slytherin, which I'm fairly sure was taken from the cave by Regulus and hidden at 12 GP, though where it is now is a question (which perhaps Kreacher can answer). Perhaps made, long after the fact, by the murders of Voldemort's grandparents. It seems likely that Harry will be able to release the soul-sliver by opening the locket, probably using Parseltongue. (Why else would there be a snake on it?)

4. The Hufflepuff cup, made with the murder of Hepzibah Smith. Location, unknown. It's tiny and gold--Riddle dangles it on a single finger, I think--and therefore it is neither the Goblet of Fire (which is large and wooden) nor the Triwizard Cup (which is large and jewel studded, as I remember, and can be grasped by both Harry and Cedric). In any case, if the Hufflepuff badger appeared on either, there would have been some reference to Helga's role in creating the Tournament. I rather like the idea that Bella has this, or the next if it belonged to Ravenclaw. If so, she has no idea what it really is.

5. Something of Gryffindor's or Ravenclaw's. The vaguest of all, since we don't know its form, or the murder that was used to create it, nor its location, though I also like the idea that it's at Hogwarts. It will almost certainly turn out to be something we've already seen or heard about, and the murder will be likewise familiar.

6. The Snake Nagini, confirmed by Dumbledore's smoky intertwined snakes in the OotP scene after she bites Arthur Weasley. Dumbledore thinks she was made into a Horcrux by Riddle's murder of Frank Bryce, the Muggle caretaker of the Riddle House. Not what I'd call an "important murder," but that's what Dumbledore says. She'll almost certainly be the last to be killed before Harry goes after Voldemort himself.

I suspect that #s 3 and 4 will be fairly easily solved, but #5 is going to require some work.

One other thing: it's very clear that Dumbledore doesn't want Lord Voldemort to find out that Harry and his friends know about the Horcruxes. This is absolutely crucial (to use a related word). LV believes that the Diary was destroyed by Malfoy's carelessness, though Dumbledore makes it clear that Malfoy didn't (and probably still doesn't) know what it really was. I think LV's speech in the graveyard about the steps he took refers to some other kinds of insurance against death, unless the entire speech is a lie and a distraction. I don't think Dumbledore has even told Snape. The Horcruxes are safest if no one knows that they exist; and likewise, since Voldemort can't detect their destruction, it is extremely important that Harry and his friends keep the fact that they know about them and are destroying them highly secret. In fact, I think this secrecy is so important that it explains why Dumbledore wanted Snape to murder him: if he hadn't, Dumbledore would have died from whatever withered his hand eventually, and the manner of his death would have tipped LV off to the destruction of the ring.

Long winded tonight, aren't I? (Sorry!)

David Breeze - Jul 29, 2005 1:28 pm (#340 of 2969)

On page 81 of PoA, Ron uncertainly sees the following symbols in Harry's tealeaves:

"Right, you've got a wonky sort of cross..." he said, consulting unfogging the future. "That means you're going to have trials and suffering - sorry about that - but there's a thing that could be the sun. Hang on... that means great happiness... so you're going to suffer but be very happy."

Based upon JKR’s style of making details that we would otherwise of disregarded critical to the plots of future books, I am wondering weather this shaky prediction may actually come true.

This ties in with the 'Harry is a Horcrux' theory very well indeed. If Harry is indeed a Horcrux he may have to kill himself to rid his body of Voldie's sole. This will be fulfilling the 'suffering' part of Ron's prediction.

However, Harry will not be worried about dying in the slightest, for he knows that by suffering it will bring about the final defeat of Voldemort. This fulfills the 'happy about suffering' part.

Wisey - Jul 29, 2005 1:53 pm (#341 of 2969)

Theory. This is assuming that LV had already created 5 Horcruxes.

Voldemort didn't die when AK spell to kill Harry rebounded because he had prepared 1/7 of his soul for a Horcrux by killing James. Being the egomaniac of the century he wanted to use the death of "the enemy with the power to defeat LV" as his final Horcrux making him all-powerful. The AK rebounded killing his remaining body/soul but setting the prepared 1/7 of his soul free to linger in the world.

The killing of Frank Bryce would be significant because LV wanted to have 7 Horcruxes believing in the magical/powerful number, but at that point he would have had to half 1/7 making two 1/14's using Nagini, then made his rebirth in which he was significantly "snake like" and very much less human.

JKR has always said if we knew why LV didn't die in the Bk1 she wouldn't have needed to write the series.

Saralinda Again - Jul 29, 2005 2:40 pm (#342 of 2969)

[Note: moved from the wrong Horcruxes thread, which is where I originally posted it]

Theory (part of it already mentioned, part of it not): When Harry returns to Godric's Hollow in Book Seven (Harry Potter and the Thrilling Conclusion?) he will find evidence of some artifact of the Gryffindor line that had been in the Potter family's possession for one reason or another.

Maybe Voldie selected Harry rather than Neville because of some Potter family direct bloodline to one of the Founders. Maybe he had two goals that night: to wipe out the Potter line, and to snag that artifact for his last Horcrux.

(Maybe LV was prepared to spare Lily only because he could use her as a prize to reward some conscientious but unlucky-in-love young Death Eater. [like Snapey?])

Maybe discovering that will convince Harry that the remaining Horcrux must be in a Ravenclaw artifact. That would also explain why we're going to be seeing more of the Ravenclaw ghost, the Grey Lady, in Book Seven.

What the heck, in the end she's going to surprise us all anyway ...

ÙøÙ

The Sword and the Lion - Jul 29, 2005 2:59 pm (#343 of 2969)
Edited Jul 29, 2005 3:59 pm

This is from the Mugglenet interview with J.K.R: (page 3)

"MA: What about Harry's family - his grandparents - were they killed?

JKR: No. This takes us into more mundane territory. As a writer, it was more interesting, plot-wise, if Harry was completely alone. So I rather ruthlessly disposed of his entire family apart from Aunt Petunia. I mean, James and Lily are massively important to the plot, of course, but the grandparents? No. And, because I do like my back-story: Petunia and Lily's parents, normal Muggle death. James's parents were elderly, were getting on a little when he was born, which explains the only child, very pampered, had-him-late-in-life-so-he's-an-extra-treasure, as often happens, I think. They were old in wizarding terms, and they died. They succumbed to a wizarding illness. That's as far as it goes. There's nothing serious or sinister about those deaths. I just needed them out of the way so I killed them.

MA: That sort of shuts down Heir of Gryffindor [theories], as well.

JKR: [Pause.] Yeah. Well - yeah.

---

Passage from the H.B.P, pg 277 U.S version:

"I trust that you also noticed that Tom Riddle was already highly self-sufficient, secretive, and, apparently, friendless? He did not want help or companionship on his trip to Diagon Alley. He preferred to operate alone. The adult Voldemort is the same. You will hear many of his Death Eaters claiming that they are in his confidence, that they alone are close to him, even understand him. They are deluded. Lord Voldemort has never had a friend, nor do I believe that he has ever wanted one."

Toad - Jul 29, 2005 3:05 pm (#344 of 2969)
Edited Jul 29, 2005 4:08 pm

Whoa, I've not been near a computer for a few days and I'm now a hundred posts behind! Apologies if any of this has been addressed in my absence.

Ok, the most persuasive arguments against Harry being a Horcrux (which is a theory I still believe) that I've heard so far are:

1. The Horcruxes are all accounted for.

2. Voldemort wouldn't intentionally put his soul into Harry because this would be unsafe to him.

3. It is unlikely that a Horcrux can be created by accident.

4. People are getting carried with the new concept of a Horcrux (as has happened in the past with other devices, such as time-turners etc) and suspecting anything and everything of being a Horcrux.

I'll try to address these as best as I can.

1 - Relies on guesswork and supposition (some of it Dumbledore's, granted) and there are bound to be some surprises in the next book.

2 and 3 - Of course for the theory to work Voldemort had to have made Harry into a Horcrux by accident. As to how likely this is, well in normal circumstances, I admit, the probability is low. However, these were far from normal circumstances. Voldemort was trying to make SEVEN Horcruxes (and remember seven is a powerful magical number, which may cause unforeseen effects if introduced into a spell, for all we know) and no one has ever done this before. His soul was already a mere fraction of its former size, and no doubt thoroughly shattered by Voldemort's repeated acts of murder. Is it that unlikely that something could have gone awry, when Voldemort tried to perform three additional murders, with Horcruxes on his mind? Could the powerful magic involved have not been triggered inadvertently? We know that spells can be performed wordlessly after all, and Voldemort was certainly planning his seventh Horcrux.

4 - This is possible, I'm sure. But then again the Horcrux has to be something and someone is sure to guess it right eventually, so what's the harm? To be fair I don't think this theory is that random anyway because it has been around since before HBP. It's basically an updated version of Red Hen's Changeling Hypothesis. Check, [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] if you haven't come across this yet, it's quite spooky in retrospect.

Sorry for the long post.

Paulus Maximus - Jul 29, 2005 3:19 pm (#345 of 2969)
Edited Jul 29, 2005 4:21 pm

This ties in with the 'Harry is a Horcrux' theory very well indeed. If Harry is indeed a Horcrux he may have to kill himself to rid his body of Voldie's sole. This will be fulfilling the 'suffering' part of Ron's prediction.

However, Harry will not be worried about dying in the slightest, for he knows that by suffering it will bring about the final defeat of Voldemort. This fulfills the 'happy about suffering' part.

Given the prophecy, there are only two possible outcomes: Harry will kill Voldemort, or Voldemort will kill Harry.

So, I very much doubt that Harry will kill himself. Certainly not until after he has killed Voldemort, or after Voldemort has killed him...

Solitaire - Jul 29, 2005 3:49 pm (#346 of 2969)

Very nice post, Ann.

TwinklingBlueEyes - Jul 29, 2005 4:07 pm (#347 of 2969)
Edited Jul 29, 2005 5:23 pm

Thank you for the headache Toad! That does inspire some very interesting questions.

...toddles off to ponder with yet another headache...
Edited because of continuing headache; "Professor?" he said finally. "Do you think the Horcrux is here?" "Oh yes," said Dumbledore. "Yes, I'm sure it is. The question is, how do we get to it?"

Why is Dumbledore so sure that Horcrux is there? In light of what we later find out, is that one of his biggest mistakes? Thoughts?

Saralinda Again - Jul 29, 2005 4:56 pm (#348 of 2969)

TBE: In light of what we later find out, is that one of his biggest mistakes?

Good question. Unless, of course, that a fake Horcrux will "read" just like a real one, since what Dumbledore was measuring was the magical protections (?)

Or it could be, like with Felix Felicis, that good luck just flows from it. Maybe if they can pin the switch on Regulus, it might just be the shock they need to pry Mom off the wall of 12GP.

(sigh)

Hope springs eternal.

The Sword and the Lion - Jul 29, 2005 6:53 pm (#349 of 2969)
Edited Jul 29, 2005 7:53 pm

That is pretty insightful, TBE -- someone in the past suggested that the Crystal Potion may have been the Horcrux. Dumbledore's reaction to the potion is very similar to Harry's reaction when L.V possessed him in the OotP.

TwinklingBlueEyes - Jul 29, 2005 8:45 pm (#350 of 2969)

"Or it could be, like with Felix Felicis, that good luck just flows from it. Maybe if they can pin the switch on Regulus, it might just be the shock they need to pry Mom off the wall of 12GP."

Care to explain? I seem to be a little slow witted tonight...

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Wed Jul 20, 2011 7:02 pm

hpalias - Jul 29, 2005 10:19 pm (#351 of 2969)

We've talked about the locket from #12 Grimmauld Place being a Horcrux. On page 245 HBP American vers. Harry recognized the bar man, Aberforth (sp?) Dumbledore's brother I believe). "As Harry, Ron, and Hermione drew closer, the barman drew his cloak more tightly around his neck and walked away," The barman had been talking to Mundungus who had a load of Sirius' old things with him. Did he just sell a Horcrux to Aberforth? Maybe he bought it on Dumbledores orders? thoughts anyone?

TwinklingBlueEyes - Jul 29, 2005 10:34 pm (#352 of 2969)

"Did he just sell a Horcrux to Aberforth? Maybe he bought it on Dumbledores orders?"

Seems if Dung was fencing Sirius's possessions, and if bought on DD' orders, then it seems it would be the locket. If so, why should DD and Harry need go to the cave?

If not the locket, what other artifact would the Black house have?

Socks and Sphinxes - Jul 29, 2005 11:40 pm (#353 of 2969)

I think one of the Horcruxes is carefully hidden in the orphanage where Tom Riddle grew up. It was not a place of happy memories, but it is the place where Voldemort discovered that he was a wizard. I’m especially reminded of the rabbit that little Tom hung from the rafters. Those rafters are difficult to reach: the matron said she had no idea how Tom could have gotten the rabbit up there, so I’m guessing that a ladder is not high enough. Voldemort would only have to apply a Muggle-Repelling Charm to keep the Muggles away from it, and possibly some advanced Dark Magic spells to stop a wizard. Also, very few wizards know that Voldemort was once Tom Riddle. Why would they look for a trophy of the greatest Dark wizard of all times in a simple Muggle orphanage?

irish flutterby - Jul 30, 2005 6:47 am (#354 of 2969)

My goodness, One day away, and I've been reading for an hour.

As far as Moaning Myrtle, I think the Basilisk killed on Tom Riddle's orders. Could have been coincidence, but what if it wasn't. Also, I think it is mentioned that she was Muggle-born.

The barman - In OoP, when they all go into the Hog's Head the FIRST time JKR wrote "He was a grumpy looking old man with a great deal of long gray hair and beard. He was tall and thin and looked vaguely familiar to Harry." Is this what we are using as a proof for him being Aberforth...I.e. because he looks so much like DD? If he's not Aberforth, why does he look familiar to Harry. Could this lead to a conclusion as to what he was purchasing from Dung?

Nathan Zimmermann - Jul 30, 2005 9:04 am (#355 of 2969)

Brandi, that was one of the clues used to identify the Barman as Aberforth. Among the other clues was that the barman smells of goats.

Liz Mann - Jul 30, 2005 11:35 am (#356 of 2969)
Edited Jul 30, 2005 12:35 pm

I don't know if this has been suggested before, but I think the unknown Horcrux is in the Room of Requirement. There's loads of stuff in there when Harry went in to hide the book.

‘Thousands and thousands of books, no doubt banned or graffitied or stolen. There were winged catapults and Fanged Frisbees, some still with enough life in them to hover half-heartedly over the mountains of other forbidden items; there were chipped bottles of congealed potions, hats, jewels, cloaks; there were what looked like dragon-egg shells, corked bottles whose contents still shimmered evilly, several rusting swords and a heavy, blood-stained axe. He turned right past an enormous stuffed troll. took a left past the vanishing cabinet. finally pausing beside a large cupboard which seemed to have acid thrown at its blistered surface. it had already been used as a hiding place for something in a cage that had long-since died; its skeleton had five legs. Seizing the chipped bust of an ugly old warlock from on top of a nearby crate, he stood it on the cupboard. perched a dusty old wig and a tarnished tiara on the statue’s head.’

I think it might be the tiara. Somehow it stands out more than anything else. And it seems like a more special object. Besides, Hogwarts surely can't have any part to play in this last book.

Toad - Jul 30, 2005 2:40 pm (#357 of 2969)

It does seem likely that Harry will have to return to Hogwarts for some reason (even if its not to resume classes) so a Horcrux being hidden in Hogwarts seems probable.

I'm not sure about the Room of Requirement though, as everyone seems to have hidden something in there at some point and Voldemort would want something special and uniquely his. It would threaten his ego to leave something so precious to him (essentially a part of him) amongst the trivial collections of other students, where any one could get at it.

Isn't the Half-Blood Prince's book still in there? Maybe that will become important later on.

irish flutterby - Jul 30, 2005 5:29 pm (#358 of 2969)

We know that no one knew that there was a "Chamber of Secrets" per say, let alone how to find it. Couldn't it be that, since Hogwarts is a castle with innumerable passages that could be hidden or secret, there could be another secret room possibly created by LV or Slytherin where the Horcrux is hidden.

irish flutterby - Jul 30, 2005 5:47 pm (#359 of 2969)

Another question. Could DD's injury have resulted from a duel with the soul-bit of LV. Harry had to duel with Diary Tom.

Here's my theory. Maybe there's a spell specifically designed to destroy the Horcrux soul. (maybe the answer to the spell DD was trying to cast at the MoM in OoP.) I don't know if it's fact, but every time anyone uses AK, they aim for the heart. Maybe the Ring soul aimed, but as DD's reflexes were too slow, he dodged only fast enough for it to hit him in the hand. This caused, in essence for his HAND to die, rather than his whole self. So DD released the soul, They both cast spells/curses, DD dodges the AK, but only barely, but hits the Ring soul with his "special spell" that "kills", in effect, the Horcrux soul. Just an idea...Sorry it's so long.

Ydnam96 - Jul 30, 2005 9:03 pm (#360 of 2969)

Don't worry Brandi a lot of the theories on this forum are long. But just so you know, you can go back and edit your post for up to a half an hour so you don't have to post back to back and waste another post if you are a free member.

That said...I'm not sure all the Horcruxes have a "Tom" to duel with. The diary was special in that he designed it to have some sort of physical manifestation of his old self within the Horcrux. I don't think all of them are like that. I think the ring had a part of his soul in it, but that it wouldn't be able to fight back like the diary Tom did. My guess is that DD's hand was damaged in whatever process he had to go through to destroy the soul within the Horcrux...maybe he dipped it in a potion or had someone curse it or maybe Fawkes breathed fire on him?

I'm sure there will be tons of theories flying around about this until book 7 comes out.

Solitaire - Jul 30, 2005 10:42 pm (#361 of 2969)

I'm betting that destroying a Horcrux is no picnic. There are probably many spells and enchantments protecting both the hiding place and the Horcrux itself. I suspect that Dumbledore took Harry along less for the assistance--there are probably other Order members who would have helped him--and more for the "education." Dumbledore knew that Harry needed to know what to expect. He needed to understand that figuring out, finding, and destroying those Horcruxes is a dangerous game, and he and those who help him may pay the ultimate price.

Solitaire

Mrs. Sirius - Jul 30, 2005 10:55 pm (#362 of 2969)

I have been running this in my mind and just need to write it down. JKR said on her website that the question we should ask is not "why did Harry live" but "why didn't Voldemort die".

At the time LV attacks the Potters, he has already made his Horcruxes', 7 presumably. Only one seven of his soul is in the body that attacked the Potters.

We've seen the Avada Kedavra used a few times. When the spider and fox are AK'd I don't think very much happens they just freeze and die. Snape AK's Dumbledore. When he does, Dumbledore's body was blasted and hangs suspended before dropping.

The AK we were today by Moody needs to be performed by someone with enough magic in them/intention to harm to be used properly. DD re-enforced the idea of "enough" magic in the cave when Harry inquires before boarding the boat.

It is safe to assume at this point, that LV didn't "die" because of the other six parts of his soul are intact elsewhere. Is it possible that the AK cannot be properly produced by a nearly soulless person? But what caused the spell to back fire?

Was it: 1) LV's soullessness or 2) something about Harry, or 3) the journey from a soulless being to one protected by love.

RoseMorninStar - Jul 31, 2005 12:05 am (#363 of 2969)

Mrs. Sirius, If you read carefully you will see that the reason the Avada Kedavra curse did not work on Harry is because his mother (Lily) knowingly and willingly sacrificed herself for her son, Harry. Voldemort specifically told her to 'step aside' and he would have spared her life if she would have just moved out of the way... but she CHOSE to die trying to save her son. That gave Harry a special protection that is in his very skin. I also believe that it has something to do with why he lives with the Dursleys.. he must live with a 'blood' relative for that special protection to continues.. until he comes of age, which for a wizard, is 17. I am not sure exactly where, but Dumbledore tells Harry of this 'blood/mother's sacrifice protection in one of his chat's with Harry. Because of that protection, Voldemort's curse just bounced off of baby Harry and rebounded right back to Voldemort. He should have died, but he did not because of the Horcruxes he created.

I also think Voldemort began to realize this special protection was in Harry's blood and that is why he insisted on using it in his rebirthing ceremony... and why Dumbledore got that 'gleam in his eye' at the end of GoF. He realized how he might be able to continue giving Harry a protection/power 'that the dark lord knows not.' And that is why I think Dumbledore willingly & Knowingly sacrificed himself for Harry's sake. That is why Snape had to be the one to perform the killing curse on Dumbledore, because Draco & the other Death eaters wouldn't have known that Dumbledore was willingly dying for Harry.

Susurro Notities - Jul 31, 2005 1:39 am (#364 of 2969)

From Latin:

Hora - an hour, the twelfth part of a day or night

Crux - a cross; hence torment, trouble; as a term of abuse, gallows bird

Interesting. The number 12 - again.

(I have read about half of the Horcrux posts so forgive me if this has been mentioned.)

The Sword and the Lion - Jul 31, 2005 5:06 am (#365 of 2969)
Edited Jul 31, 2005 6:25 am

L.V was essentially reduced to a gimp when his A.K rebounded though ("I was less than the meanest ghost" etc. etc.). We know that the original piece of L.V's soul survived at Godric's Hollow that night, but his body was completely destroyed (seems much more powerful than A.K curse which leaves the body as a corpse).

So, L.V eventually returned to a body using Harry's blood and the dark-magic at his father's grave. My question is this: Why was L.V's body completely destroyed at Godric's Hollow? I presume that is why L.V could not return to power despite his multiple Horcruxes --he had no body but his original fragment of soul survived. Thoughts?

TwinklingBlueEyes - Jul 31, 2005 5:23 am (#366 of 2969)

Maybe because of a purely evil curse hitting something as pure and innocent as a baby?

The Sword and the Lion - Jul 31, 2005 5:27 am (#367 of 2969)
Edited Jul 31, 2005 6:28 am

I fail to see what that has to do with anything.

TwinklingBlueEyes - Jul 31, 2005 5:28 am (#368 of 2969)

Then you are quite welcome to come up with a better idea. Best I could do on short notice. :-)

The Sword and the Lion - Jul 31, 2005 5:30 am (#369 of 2969)

=)

Seriously, they never found a corpse of L.V at the Potter's house did they? His body was gone, right?

Deb Zawacki - Jul 31, 2005 5:35 am (#370 of 2969)

How convenient that the locket just happened to have fallen from Dumbledore's pocket, right next to his body when HARRY came up to him-- no one else found it or noticed it. I think Dumbledore wanted Harry to find RAB or RAB's grave or something as a clue---- he intended for Harry to get the folded piece of paper and to read that note--- in fact he could most likely have known it all along....

TwinklingBlueEyes - Jul 31, 2005 5:39 am (#371 of 2969)

Tis an interesting thought Deb, seems too convenient not to amount to something.

And yes S&L, LV's body was destroyed, poof, apparently with no trace that we have been told of. :-)

Deb Zawacki - Jul 31, 2005 6:12 am (#372 of 2969)
Edited Jul 31, 2005 7:16 am

Stepping into reality for a second--what would one actually see in a body that had been blasted from a building and fallen several stories--?? a tiny little trickle of blood-- no I believe such force leaves massive bruising, the pressure rips the aorta to shreds and--the whites of the eyes are blood filled, the skull or body might be split from the pressure of impact--the person is usually not spread eagle but the limbs are twisted--not a pretty or peaceful sight.....

Our school custodian fell from a cherry picker lift changing a light bulb in a street lamp outside the school-- it was fairly gruesome. Yes he died at 27

Ann - Jul 31, 2005 6:15 am (#373 of 2969)
Edited Jul 31, 2005 7:19 am

I agree that Voldemort's body must have been destroyed (or hidden?), since if a dead body had been found, people would have been much more confident that he was really gone than they seemed to be (though the doubters were, of course, correct). On the other hand, the house was destroyed, and perhaps the body was blown up into unrecognizable bits, too.

That was a weird spell, when you think about it: abnormal in so many ways: First it was supposed to kill Harry, and not leave a mark on him (a characteristic of AK spells that has been much stressed), but instead it did the opposite. And then when it bounced onto Voldemort (as JKR implies that it must have, or she wouldn't have said "he should have died"), it is supposed again to take his soul and leave his body untouched, but instead his soul survives and his body is destroyed (possibly as a by-product of the destruction of the house). Was this because of the Horcruxes? Or was the spell already so weird that it wasn't working properly. (After all, AKs aren't supposed to ricochet!)

I do wonder if the whole Horcrux thing isn't a bit of a red herring: Harry has to take care of them, but the protection of his mother's love (and the glint-of-satisfaction-inspiring attempt to get around it by Voldemort at his resurrection) may not prove even more important in the end. Just a thought--though I expect to be pelted with rotten fruit by suggesting such a thing on a thread where everyone (me included) has been obsessing about Horcruxes for two weeks!

PS to Deb: McG was hit by red Stunning Spells (Stupefy). And after someone dies and their heart stops (and this apparently happens instantly with an AK), there should be no bleeding at all, shouldn't there? I was actually more surprised by the fact that there was any blood than the lack of it. (Not that I have any medical expertise; I'm just an avid reader of murder mysteries....)

Susurro Notities - Jul 31, 2005 7:34 am (#374 of 2969)

There is surprisingly little medical research regarding the type of injury sustained in a free-fall related to the landing position. The research that exists is at times contradictory. The research does indicate that the height of a fall is a poor predictor of injury.

Generally a person who falls and lands on their back would likely suffer from lower spine and pelvic fractures and head injury. They might also have limb fractures and chest and abdominal injuries. Undoubtedly they would have some abrasions and bruising but those might be hidden under clothing. Additionally most bruising would be on the surface that hit the ground - thus not visible unless the body was turned.

Bleeding from the mouth would be consistent with a head, chest, or possibly with an abdominal injury. Bleeding would occur if the heart did not stop immediately upon impact but it could also occur if it did.

At any given moment there is blood at all areas of the body - a significant amount of it in the chest (lungs & heart) a chest injury might cause rupture of vessels releasing the blood within. Depending on the amount of blood released it might travel up from the chest to the mouth.

Impact head injuries typically cause bleeding in the skull. In a severely injured head this bleeding might leak from the ears or from the sinus's to the mouth.

JKR's description of Dumbledore's body is consistent with a free-fall.

azi - Jul 31, 2005 7:54 am (#375 of 2969)

We should also remember that as Dumbledore is a wizard, any fall is less likely to have as serious effects as it would on us Muggles.

Blood trickle from the mouth is often used in books and TV to symbolise that a person has died. Perhaps it was just to confirm Dumbledore's death?

I am personally not surprised that nobody noticed the fake Horcrux before Harry. It was night time so the only lights were from peoples' wands, plus the shock of seeing Dumbledore dead would mean most people would be staring at the body rather than looking around it for something they didn't know was there.

Puck - Jul 31, 2005 9:18 am (#376 of 2969)

Remember DD was dead before he fell, I expect that would factor in.

I think a clue to a Horcrux was planted by Mad-Eye. He shows Harry a photo of the Order, and tells him Dorcas Meadowes was killed by LV personally. This may be one of those significant deaths, and Harry should look into it.

JKR also says that Harry needs to visit in OotP, I believes these are places she wants the reader to know about as well. So, St. Mungo's might work into the Horcrux theory as well.

Never thought of LV's body not being found. Hmmmm. Somehow body disintegrated as soul bit is left in tact?

Liz Mann - Jul 31, 2005 10:49 am (#377 of 2969)

I'm not sure if anyone's suggested this, but I was thinking about the locket. If the locket they found in Grimmauld Place is the same one, and Mundungus has sold it to someone like the family china, then is it possible that whoever owns it now could bring the piece of soul out like Ginny with the diary?

Isn't the Half-Blood Prince's book still in there? Maybe that will become important later on.

Maybe it will be! Maybe Harry will figure out what the last Horcrux is, but not know where to look for it. Then he'll go back to the Room of Requirement to get that book for some reason, and while he's in there, he'll see it.

Madame Librarian - Jul 31, 2005 11:31 am (#378 of 2969)

Sorry to shift the discussion here, but I just happened upon an interesting tidbit.

I have this old book (no, that kind of old book) titled "Standard Dictionary of Folklore, Mythology and Legend" (c1949). It's really densely packed with all sorts of stuff, a lot of which JKR uses in her books (Boggarts, Centaurs, Seers, Mermen, Veelas, Naginis, etc.) Out of curiosity about the concept of a Horcrux I looked that up, but there was nothing. I'm a persistent librarian so I looked under the word "soul," and found a ton of interesting stuff that doesn't really relate to HP except in the most general sense. However, this bit from the section on Chinese belief was one thing that made me sit up:

In Kueicho a young man committed horrible crimes. He was frequently executed but three days later, even when parts of his dismembered body were buried at different places, he returned and five days later recommenced his wickedness. One day he beat his mother. The old lady then came to the mandarin with a small box. She said that when he was about to commit his crimes he put his superior soul [note: earlier the book explains that the ancient Chinese believed a person had two souls, one superior--the spiritual, one lesser--grounded in the body alone] in the box. Consequently after the execution the superior soul could find the parts of the body and bring them together again.

Not exactly how a Horcrux works, but has a ring of similarity.

Anyway, just something curious I tripped upon.

Ciao. Barb

M A Grimmett - Jul 31, 2005 11:38 am (#379 of 2969)

Very cool. Did the book say what was done with the superior soul?

Madame Librarian - Jul 31, 2005 11:47 am (#380 of 2969)

If you mean, what the mandarin did with the box the mom gave him, no, it didn't continue the story. I assume (I know, a dangerous thing...to assume) that good use was made of the soul in the box to keep the criminal dead after the next execution. It's also a curious story in that it's the mother who basically turns him in. Maybe because that's the way the deeply evil nature of the young man was shown--only the worst sort would beat his own mother. All kinds of Freudian echoes here to my narrow Western mind.

If Tom's mother had lived, but still gave him up to the orphanage because she was impoverished and had no place to go, would he have "punished" her if he found her later? Given what he did to his dad and grandparents, the answer is a resounding maybe. He didn't kill his Uncle Morfin, and the guy survived long enough to provide DD with that memory. Did Tom allow him to live because he was from the magical side of his family, or just because it was more convenient to let him take the blame for the murders?

Uh, oh, drifting Off Topic here. Sorry, just wanted to tell that Chinese soul story.

Ciao. Barb

RoseMorninStar - Jul 31, 2005 11:56 am (#381 of 2969)

Madame Librarian... wow... that is very interesting and it sounds as if the 'Chinese soul' story might be the 'seed' of the idea of the Horcrux. I will have to look up that 'Standard Dictionary of Folklore, Mythology & Legend. (Who is it by?)

TheSword & the Lion, I don't think it is safe to assume that Voldemort's soul survived that day he tried to kill Harry in Godric's Hollow. I think it is very possible that the bit of soul inside of him was destroyed and that one of his Horcruxes 'kicked in' to use in Voldemort (which, I would think, would mean that there may be an object out there that was once a Horcrux but is now inert or 'used up'. That would leave us with the possibility that Harry will, unknowingly, have less Horcruxes to destroy.. but which one would be 'used up'?

M A Grimmett - Jul 31, 2005 11:56 am (#382 of 2969)

I think Uncle Morfin survived because LV needed a patsy. If he'd killed his uncle, the officials might have looked further. I bet Mom would have been punished most severely if not killed.

Puck - Jul 31, 2005 7:36 pm (#383 of 2969)

Rose, Actually, we DO know that LV's soul-bit survived the AK. Dumbledore tells us this. The soul bit could not leave this realm because the other pieces held it here. It's not like having "seven lives", using up a piece after each death. Horcruxes don't get used up, they remain as is unless destroyed. They work by holding the body's soul to the earth, not by replenishment.

RoseMorninStar - Jul 31, 2005 9:52 pm (#384 of 2969)
Edited Jul 31, 2005 10:54 pm

Puck, That is interesting.. I would like to understand this a bit better.. do you know where Dumbledore talks about this? And why wouldn't the rebounded AK curse have 'destroyed' Voldemort (or at least the bit of soul)...it nearly did... he was 'less than the meanest ghost'. Are you saying that the 'bit of soul' cannot be destroyed in Voldemort until all of the others have been destroyed, so that, no matter what, that which is in him will always remain the last 'bit of soul'? If Voldemort's 'bit of soul' cannot be destroyed by the AK curse, then how can any of the other bits be destroyed? And if Horcruxes don't get 'used up' when one is destroyed, that means he would still have a 'full' soul... What if Voldemort was technically 'destroyed' as he surely seemed about as close as one could come to it the night he tried to kill Harry, that could not have, under any circumstances destroyed the bit of soul in him? Are the bits of soul in the Horcrux items different from the soul bit that is within Voldemort? I guess what I am getting at is... doesn't some of his soul need to remain *within* his body to have some 'grounding' to this earth? And if he were hit by the AK curse and his body/soul is destroyed, how could he remain unless one of the other Horcruxes transferred it's 'soul bit' back into his body. If it DOESN'T work like this, then it seems he wouldn't have had to put the soul bits into other objects, he could have just broken up his soul and left them within himself. This is a complicated! I would appreciate any thoughts/explanations on the subject!

Liz Mann - Aug 1, 2005 7:12 am (#385 of 2969)

This has probably already been mentioned, but do you think Voldemort knows that the diary was destroyed? Surely if Lucius didn't tell him then Wormtail has. In which case, he may replace it. Or he might already have replaced it.

Madame Librarian - Aug 1, 2005 7:44 am (#386 of 2969)

RoseMorninStar, sorry I didn't answer you right away--had company for dinner.

The "Standard Dictionary of Folklore, Mythology and Legend" was published in 1949, so I don't know if it's still in print. Since it's a dictionary there is no single author, but many contributing authors, experts in their field. The editor was Maria Leach. The publisher was Funk & Wagnall, New York. I was able to by it from a withdrawn book sale at the library where I work. It was a reference volume. Some libraries may still have it, or something very much like it. Used book stores, too.

Ciao. Barb

Bluenote1313 - Aug 1, 2005 8:00 am (#387 of 2969)

Liz,

I have a theory about that...I think that once he separated his soul in to the other 6 parts, if one was destroyed he could no longer separate. His soul was so diluted that the risk of separating is that if something happens to a Horcrux, you lose that part of your soul.

constant vigilance - Aug 1, 2005 9:04 am (#388 of 2969)

With the magical eye, would Moody be able to see if Horcruxes were stored in objects? If so, I hope that Harry teams up with the great Auror Alastor.

Jon Parker - Aug 1, 2005 9:51 am (#389 of 2969)

OK... here goes a LONG-SHOT. It has been proposed that James Potter is a direct descendant of Gryffindor. Therefore, James might possess some item that had once belonged to Gryffindor. We've never been told why James left his invisibility cloak with Dumbledore. And we've never been given the details of how James and Lily thwarted LV three times. Could LV have created a Horcrux from the cloak but then lost the cloak back to James in some way? James then gives the cloak to DD for some reason not knowing what it has been turned into. DD, not having the suspicions of the Horcrux theory until many many years later returns the cloak to Harry.

Puck - Aug 1, 2005 10:00 am (#390 of 2969)

I agree, he would not make any more Horcruxes, as he feels 7 is the magically powerful number, and he would potentially loose strength if split into more pieces.

Not sure what happens to the soul bit once a Horcrux is destroyed. Perhaps it waits around for the other pieces, so they can pass through the veil together? I don't think they rejoin the bit in the body.

From what DD says in the Horcrux chapter, LV's body was destroyed, but an incomplete soul cannot pass to the other realm, so that bit was stuck here. He was less than a ghost, because a ghost has a full soul. Think of it this way, you don't revive a body with a new piece of soul, but regain a body for the bit of soul. Make any more sense?

If LV had separated his soul but kept all the pieces within his body instead of in objects, they all would have been released at once, and there would have been nothing to anchor them to this realm. (Now who do I owe that nickel to again for use of the word "anchor"?)

Oh, yes, DD does say (I think also in the Horcrux chapter) that LV was very angry when he discovered that the diary had been destroyed.

Interesting idea about the magical eye. Mad Eye does come in handy!

Sparrowhawk - Aug 1, 2005 11:29 am (#391 of 2969)
Edited Aug 1, 2005 1:05 pm

Hi everybody,

Concerning the Horcruxes that have already been destroyed, and those that Harry will have to take care of in the course of book 7, I have a few suggestions to make. If we scrutinize the first 6 books, I think that there are some patterns that need to be considered before making any predictions...

Assuming that Dumbledore was right, six Horcruxes were made, each of them connected to something very significant in the eyes of Voldemort.

Two have been destroyed: Marvolo's ring, and Tom's diary.

Out of the four Horcruxes remaining, one is inside Nagini - it makes a lot of sense, as it emphasizes Voldemort's connection with snakes and Slytherin... and explains to us readers why JKR took pains to describe the circumstances surrounding the death of Frank in the opening chapter of GoF.

The other three are objects related to three of Hogwarts houses: Slytherin's locket, Hufflepuff's cup and Ravenclaw's ??? (IMO, Luna Lovegood will play a major part, when it comes to finding this one) The whole Harry Potter story being centered on the fight between the houses of Gryffindor and Slytherin, I don't believe that Voldemort has been able to lay his hands on anything that once belonged to Godric Gryffindor, but I'll come back to this point later.

There is another pattern at work: places. We know that Voldemort let one Horcrux, Marvolo's ring, in Little Hangleton where his ancestors once lived. He left another one in the cave where he had terrorised two children, during his orphanage years.

It is also possible that he put a third one somewhere in Hogwarts, or at least in the immediate vicinity (the chamber of secrets, the forest or anywhere else?) We also know that he spent some time working for Borgin and Burkes, so IMO there is a possibility that one more Horcrux could be there (it is also possible that the Horcrux that was once in the cave will end up for sale there, thanks to Mundungus Fletcher).

And there is another place that I find highly attractive, as a hiding spot for a Horcrux: Durmstrang. IMO, this is likely to be the place where Voldemort learnt how to make Horcruxes, and he would have wanted to commemorate that: he's very unlikely to have found the secret while he was still a teenager at Hogwarts, or at Borgin and Burkes for that matter. We also know that he disappeared during several years, and that when he came back he had lost his handsome features, and looked far less human. This would also explain how he met Karkaroff... and why JKR has said that Viktor Krum would reappear in book 7.

Last observation: it has been suggested by a few readers that the last Horcrux could be the sword of Gryffindor, the sorting or even Harry’s' scar. I don't believe that they ever could be, Voldemort never having had the opportunity to perform the very complex bit of dark magic that undoubtedly would have been necessary in order to turn them into Horcruxes. Yet at the same time these discussions gave me an idea that may be worth pondering on.

From what Dumbledore has said, it is very likely that Voldemort knows that Tom's diary has been destroyed (this being one of the reasons why he is so angry against Lucius Malfoy). Knowing the magical importance that he attaches to number 7, it is also likely that he'll want to make himself a new Horcrux. To do that, he'll need to kill someone, so as to split his soul once again, and put the new fragment in a powerful object, preferably belonging to Gryffindor.

If I try to put myself in Voldemort's shoes (not a nice sensation by any means!) or JKR's (much better, although she's a woman and I'm a man...), it looks obvious to me that the victim should be Harry, and the magical object Godric Gryffindor's sword (IMO the Sorting Hat wouldn't attract Voldemort at all: it doesn't look too good and it is a symbol of unity between the four houses, while the victory of Voldemort would mean Slytherin's domination for ever).

I would tend to believe this to be Voldemort's intention, and a reason why he wouldn't want Harry to get killed immediately (although at the same time, I still believe that Snape will ultimately prove on Harry's side).

Your thoughts? No unforgivable curse, please! ;o)

Good Evans - Aug 1, 2005 11:35 am (#392 of 2969)
Edited Aug 1, 2005 12:38 pm

I will predict that we have already seen six of the Horcruxes, one introduced innocently and subtly in each book - seven Horcruxes, seven books. I have no idea what they all are - but lets consider.....

the ring - introduced in HP6; the locket - introduced in HP5; the snake - introduced in HP4; the diary - introduced in HP2

so we are looking for seemingly innocuous objects introduced in books one, three and one to be introduced in book seven (and if DD is right objects belonging to the three remaining house founders). If we are sure that the Hufflepuff goblet is one, what is this cup? the house cup the Quidditch cup? I don’t think so but they cannot be discounted out of hand and were introduced in book 1.

There is a possibility that Harry is one and he of course was introduced in book 1 - that however opens up a whole further discussion.......

I have posted this in book seven predictions - but felt it belonged here too. many earlier posts repeat the ones we know but I hope this adds a bit to the discussion.

sparrowhawk - you have some well thought out points!

Paulus Maximus - Aug 1, 2005 11:48 am (#393 of 2969)

There is a possibility that Harry is one and he of course was introduced in book 1 - that however opens up a whole further discussion.......

I disagree. The only Horcrux that we don't know about belonged to Gryffindor or Ravenclaw (probably Ravenclaw, if Dumbledore is right about Godric's sword being the only Gryffindor relic.)

Harry was many centuries after Ravenclaw's and Gryffindor's time, and thus could not have belonged to either of them...

Sparrowhawk - Aug 1, 2005 11:54 am (#394 of 2969)
Edited Aug 1, 2005 12:58 pm

Hi Good Evans, thanks for your comment! Surprised

)

I find your idea that we have already met one Horcrux in each book very attractive... and I have some suggestions that you may like!

- Book 1: Voldemort himself (no Horcrux then)
- Book 2: Tom Riddle's diary
- Book 3: something from Ravenclaw, at Hogwarts
- Book 4: Nagini
- Book 5: Slytherin's locket, 12 Grimmauld place (maybe moved since - to Borgin and - Burkes?)
- Book 6: Marvolo's ring
- Book 7: the Hufflepuff cup, at Durmstrang

Good Evans - Aug 1, 2005 12:06 pm (#395 of 2969)

On a different thread Steve Newton reminded me that LV has part of his soul and is therefore number 7 - of course!!!!

and yes he would fit in to book 1 - therefore blowing the harry theory as Paulus points out(but I assure you others are making this suggestion, I am quite pleased because if harry is not a Horcrux - then he doesn’t have to kill himself!).

I agree Sparrowhawk that the missing one in book 3 is either the Ravenclaw /Hufflepuff or Gryffindor relic. I am not sold on the Gryffindor sword, the Hufflepuff goblet was referred to in book six - so I would be looking for a passing reference to that in book 3 for my theory to hold up. I can't think of anything.... leaving the Ravenclaw or Gryffindor relic to turn up in book seven. if anyone can see a link in book three - that would be great, if not well maybe not such a good idea after all.....

Paulus Maximus - Aug 1, 2005 12:33 pm (#396 of 2969)
Edited Aug 1, 2005 1:33 pm

I like your idea, Sparrowhawk.

Pardon me while I go off to dissect book 3 for a Ravenclaw relic...

Nathan Zimmermann - Aug 1, 2005 3:09 pm (#397 of 2969)

Paulus, I would like to suggest a possible item what about the cup that Snape uses to bring Remus the Wolfsbane potion?

LAMjester313 - Aug 1, 2005 3:53 pm (#398 of 2969)

Harry is a Horcrux

For those of you who have not read the new book a Horcrux is a piece of someone's soul put into either an animate or inanimate object so if his body dies his soul will live on. I believe that Harry Potter is either a Horcrux of Voldemort or Dumbledore. I'm not sure how but it says in the book that Voldemort (even though it's a bad idea) would probably like to put a Horcrux of himself in an animate object. It's just an idea and therefore I have no proof. Sincerely, LAM

Puck - Aug 1, 2005 5:00 pm (#399 of 2969)

I'm not sure we've seen the cup. I imagine it is well protected, as the locket was. I'm guessing only the diary and the snake are exceptions to the rule of extreme protections, as they have other purposes aside from being a Horcrux.

DD would know if the House or Quidditch cup at his school was Hufflepuffs cup. I think, therefore, we can rule out any official trophies, goblets, etc...

I like the Durmstrang idea. It would be fun to see another wizard school! Ron would not be pleased, as Krum would likely have a role in helping them find the object.

pottermom34 - Aug 1, 2005 5:06 pm (#400 of 2969)

Does it have to be a human killed to make a Horcrux? I'm wondering because of the unicorn he killed if he could make one out of that if maybe there is one in the dark forest.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Wed Jul 20, 2011 7:12 pm

Nathan Zimmermann - Aug 1, 2005 6:18 pm (#401 of 2969)
Edited Aug 1, 2005 7:18 pm

Could one of the Bludgers used for Quidditch be a Horcrux? They have been described as being made of iron and being heavy?

Ydnam96 - Aug 1, 2005 7:23 pm (#402 of 2969)
Edited Aug 1, 2005 8:33 pm

Some one above, sorry I don't remember who, said exactly why I came on the thread! I think that the invisibility cloak may be one of the Horcruxes! ??? Just a possibility.

And another thought (Sorry I haven't read both of the threads that talk about the Horcruxes it may have been mentioned on one of them. I did a search and couldn't find anything)...anyway could VM's wand be a Horcrux?? I think there is a pretty good chance that he would make his wand one, it's something he keeps with him (okay, not during the Vapormort stage but...), no one else would dare use it, and it seems that it would be quite powerful with the Phoenix feather in it.

Verbina - Aug 1, 2005 10:22 pm (#403 of 2969)

Okay I am back after being gone a few days and yes, I am still obsessing about the deaths and such. I know, pitiful me. Anyway this is what I have put together...a sort of timeline if you will. Oh and another member Soul Search has pointed out some of these points in another thread as well.

At age 11, DD visits Tom Riddle and invites him to Hogwarts. (From DD memories and what we know of Hogwarts students)

Tom worked 5 years before he found the Chamber of Secrets and he was a prefect by the time he discovered it. (Probably was unable to really search for it until he was a prefect) So I (and Soul Search) figure that he did it in his 5th year. Age - 15 or 16. It was at this time that he preserved his first Horcrux. For what death, unknown as I don't think it was for Myrtle's since her death did not strike me as planned.

Dumbledore states that in the summer of Riddle's 16th year, he went looking for the Gaunt family. That was when he killed his father and got the ring. I think he did make another Horcrux at this time.

In his 6th year, he asked Slughorn about Horcruxes and I have to agree that he seemed to already know about them and wanted to know about multiple ones. I don't think he wanted to know it was possible because I feel he already made a second in the ring. I think he wanted to know if any other wizard had ever done it. Riddle was always looking to be special in everything and so he wanted to know if he had gone where no other wizard had gone.

Now assuming that he finished his 7th year at Hogwarts, he would be 17 almost 18 by the time left and started to work for Borgin and Burkes. During this time, he gained access to two more items he wanted. Very likely the death of the old witch was the Horcrux for the Hufflepuff cup but the locket...who is to say?

Then Tom Riddle totally disappeared and Lord Voldemort arrived on the scene. By this time, he has a possible of four Horcruxes. Unless he somehow got hold of the other founder relic...Gryffindor or Ravenclaw.

Now one thing bugs me about the Horcruxes. Voldemort seems fond of the relics of the founders...Slytherin Locket, Hufflepuff Cup and so it would make sense for him to seek out other items to complete his set and to prove his dominion over the founders of Hogwarts (at least in his mind) But we are all talking about the Ravenclaw items and some think Harry could be the Gryffindor item. Personally I think he had plans for both. He did get the Ravenclaw item but the Gryffindor item he wanted most, he was unable to claim because of the backfire. I am thinking that perhaps the sword was in James possession.

Of course I could be way off base with all of this and I am starting to ramble....

Snuffles - Aug 2, 2005 2:03 am (#404 of 2969)

I'm still sticking with my earlier thought that the cup Tom Riddle received for services to the school is a Horcrux.

I don't know why, just a hunch!!

Soul Search - Aug 2, 2005 6:11 am (#405 of 2969)
Edited Aug 2, 2005 7:29 am

I, too, like the introduction of one, and just one, Horcrux in each book. Very good idea. Fits well with JKR's giving subtle clues that make something fit a few books later. (For example, Hagrid mentions Sirius Black when delivering Harry, and we don't find out about him until book three.)

The idea not only allows us to narrow guesses for Horcruxes, but also allows us to eliminate objects that were introduced in a book where we are sure what the Horcrux is. So ...

The Horcrux for CoS is the diary. Thus, the sword can't be a Horcrux. Dumbledore enforces this with his comment to Harry about it in HBP.

The ring was introduced in HBP, so the cup can't be! (unless it has actually been mentioned in an earlier book, and we haven't recognized it as such.)

My read on each book would be:

• PS/SS Harry's scar. Gets quite a lot of attention early in the book. Dumbledore's comments when placing Harry on the doorstep and the narration first describing the almost-11-years-old Harry. If not, there are a lot of choices, since a lot of objects are first mentioned in PS/SS.
• CoS -- the diary.
• PoA -- Can't think of anything introduced, let alone a candidate for Horcrux.
• GoF -- Nagini. Maybe even made a Horcrux in the first chapter.
• OotP -- The locket
• HBP -- the ring
• Book 7 - ???

Any ideas for the Horcrux for PoA? Was any kind of "cup" first mentioned in PoA?

(I won't even guess for book 7.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Verbina - I like your refinement that Tom Riddle wasn't asking Slughorn about Horcruxes to learn about them, he had already made one, maybe two, but that he wanted to know if any other wizard had made more than one, and that he was the only one to think of it and do it. Really fits with his character.

I'll further suggest that he learned about Horcruxes from books among the thousands Harry observed in the Room of Requirement storeroom. Harry will too, when he needs to learn how to release the soul from a Horcrux.

constant vigilance - Aug 2, 2005 6:27 am (#406 of 2969)

Perhaps in PoA the clue was not what the Horcrux was stored in, but where it was hidden. We are introduced to a great deal of nooks in Hogwarts, such as the caved in tunnel the Weasleys couldn't use, Hogsmeade, Azkaban and the Shrieking Shack.

I'm curious about what places are symbolic enough for Voldemort to hide his Horcruxes in.

The cave - a place he tormented children, and was able to exert power over others.

But I haven't been able to think of any other significant locations.

Soul Search - Aug 2, 2005 6:45 am (#407 of 2969)
Edited Aug 2, 2005 7:53 am

Horcruxes AND (new) places for each book. I like it. New list ...

• PS/SS -- Harry's Scar / Godric’s Hollow, where the final confrontation will happen?
• CoS -- Diary / Chamber of Secrets (doesn't matter, done deal).
• PoA - Still no good ideas.
• GoF -- Nagini / Graveyard, Riddle House?
• OotP -- locket / 12 Grimmauld Place, Room of Requirement?
• HBP -- ring / Gaunts' cabin.
• Book 7 -- ??? / Does this mean we will be introduced to a new location in book 7?

As an aside, I don't think the Shrieking Shack was around in Tom Riddle's day; and not when he came to visit Dumbledore. (Was all made for Lupin.)

I wonder how far Godric’s Hollow is from Little Hangleton?

Eponine - Aug 2, 2005 8:08 am (#408 of 2969)

To change the subject just a bit, I was looking at some old threads, and the quote that's been debated ad nauseum about 'the heart of it all' was mentioned.

JEREMY PAXMAN: So there will be some pairing up will there in this book?

JK ROWLING: Well in the fullness of time.

JEREMY PAXMAN: Unlikely pairings? Not Hermione and Draco Malfoy or anything like that?

JK ROWLING: I don't really want to say as it will ruin all the fan sites. They have such fun with their theories ... and it is fun, it is fun. And some of them even get quite close. No-one has ever - I have gone and looked at some of it and no-one's ever ... There is one thing that if anyone guessed I would be really annoyed as it is kind of the heart of it all. And it kind of explains everything and no-one's quite got there but a couple of people have skirted it. So you know, I would be pretty miffed after thirteen or fourteen years of writing the books if someone just came along and said I think this will happen in book seven. Because it is too late, I couldn't divert now, everything has been building up to it, and I've laid all my clues.

I'm beginning to think she was talking about the concept of Horcruxes. The theory had been skirted around prior to HBP, but no one had quite gotten there. I think that it does explain quite a lot of the story, and that it's been building up to it.

Any thoughts?

Shannon aka Brammwell - Aug 2, 2005 9:38 am (#409 of 2969)

Central characters of sorts in PoA was the Whomping Willow and the marauder's map although both came into existence during Siruis', Lupin's, and James' time there and thus I don't believe would have had a significant relationship to Voldemort.

Voldemort chose items which he prized; his lineage to Slytherin, Hogwarts, himself. What better item to represent Hogwarts and all four members then the Sorting Hat? Is it just me or size a significant factor in creating a Horcrux? If Nagini is in fact a Horcrux then he would be the largest.

Paulus Maximus - Aug 2, 2005 9:46 am (#410 of 2969)
Edited Aug 2, 2005 10:47 am

The Sorting Hat might be a Horcrux, since it once belonged to Gryffindor.

Although, Dumbledore mentioned that it is dangerous to make Horcruxes out of creatures that can think for themselves, and the Sorting Hat has been able to think for itself since long before Voldemort's time...

Still, Voldemort doesn't know everything that Dumbledore knew...

Shannon aka Brammwell - Aug 2, 2005 9:54 am (#411 of 2969)
Edited Aug 2, 2005 11:00 am

Central characters of sorts in PoA was the Whomping Willow and the marauder's map although both came into existence during Siruis', Lupin's, and James' time there and thus I don't believe would have had a significant relationship to Voldemort.

Voldemort chose items which he prized; his lineage to Slytherin, Hogwarts, himself. What better item to represent Hogwarts and all four members then the Sorting Hat? Is it just me or size a significant factor in creating a Horcrux? If Nagini is in fact a Horcrux then he would be the largest.

Eponine - Don't you love JKR's cryptic answers to things...what fun to try and decipher. As for the Horcrux being at the heart of it all that is a definite possibility as she wrote seven books and there are seven Horcruxes. Theories above have stated that a Horcrux could have been placed into each of the seven books which could reiterate your theory. This would lead one to believe that the seventh Horcrux may very well lie in the seventh book; could the 7th book hold the clue to the Ravenclaw Horcrux?

Puck - Aug 2, 2005 10:03 am (#412 of 2969)

Interesting about a Bludger, but I doubt it, as it wouldn't be "special enough". Hogsmeade is an interesting thought. If LV was unable to get into Hogwarts to hide a Horcrux, perhaps the next best thing?

Aqualu Nifey - Aug 2, 2005 10:24 am (#413 of 2969)

Shannon, I thought the seventh book would be all about the LAST Horcrux, the one inside Voldy. He'll have to get the other ones too, but I don't think they will be such major plot points in the book. Though, they'll probably at least have a chapter devoted to each of them.

I dunno what I'm saying, I'm sorta out of it.

Soul Search - Aug 2, 2005 11:50 am (#414 of 2969)

Paulus Maximus,

I, too, dismiss the Sorting Hat as a Horcrux. Your reasons are good.

Let me add that the Sorting Hat is kept in Dumbledore's office. While I am sure that Voldemort could have snuck into Hogwarts, maybe using one of the six secret passages from Hogsmeade (the seventh was created for Lupin), I don't think he could have reached Dumbledore's office. Even if he did, the portraits would have known.

Maybe we should only be looking for Horcruxes for 1-6, since JKR has stated that books 6-7 are a "pair."

(Has anyone else figured out that the Hogwarts portraits are a spy network? How else, in PoA, did McGonagall know to come to the Gryffindor common room when Ron saw Sirius with the knife.)

The secret passages are the only "places" first mentioned in PoA that I can come up with for possible Horcrux hiding places. Voldemort could have accessed them from Hogsmeade, without passing any protections placed on the Hogwarts grounds. Weak, but the one that was caved in was specifically mentioned in OotP.

Sirius establishes that the passage was clear when he was at school and Harry confirms that it was caved in by the time the twins got the map. Suspicious, but no cannon suggests anything but background support.

I Am Used Vlad - Aug 2, 2005 12:16 pm (#415 of 2969)

I think Pettigrew should be considered a potential PoA Horcrux. If he went to Godric's Hollow with Voldemort, he may have been rewarded with part of Voldemort's soul.

Good Evans - Aug 2, 2005 1:01 pm (#416 of 2969)

Pettigrew is entirely a possibility and yes he was introduced in POA - I do quite like that... but then I am keen to find something in POA so maybe I am a bit biased!

Steve Newton - Aug 2, 2005 1:07 pm (#417 of 2969)

I don't see that Peter has any special meaning to Voldemort. I can't see him as a Horcrux. Actually, I’d be surprised is any person was.

Shannon aka Brammwell - Aug 2, 2005 1:30 pm (#418 of 2969)

What about Pettigrew's new hand? It was created by Voldemort?

M A Grimmett - Aug 2, 2005 1:36 pm (#419 of 2969)

LV created the new hand as a replacement for Peter because Wormtail helped him. I think that a Horcrux wouldn't be part of a person, it would be the whole person or not.

Finn BV - Aug 2, 2005 1:36 pm (#420 of 2969)

Yes, it was created by Voldemort, but not until GoF.

I think that Voldy as the Horcrux will not be introduced until Book 7. Then, Ravenclaw's Horcrux is somewhere in PoA - I will search the Insignificant magical items......? thread closely as well as a careful reread of the book.

Steve Newton - Aug 2, 2005 2:44 pm (#421 of 2969)

I don't think that Voldemort can be a Horcrux. At least not his own. It is his soul in him, or at least the remainder. There is nothing that he must do to put it in there.

Puck - Aug 2, 2005 4:59 pm (#422 of 2969)

I think the tunnels are a good possibility. Riddle must have been familiar with them. He spent years searching the school for the Chamber, he likely found the passageways during this time. Possible he hid a Horcrux there after Sirius and James left school, but before his down fall. The blocked passage is mentioned in PoA, as Fred and George tell Harry it's unusable.

I was wondering why the bit of soul in LV has to be destroyed last. I mean, if you killed the bad guy and stopped the war, couldn't you then destroy the Horcruxes? Wouldn't "Vapormort" then be forced to the other realm, as he would no longer have anything holding him here?

Plus, if DD suspected multiple Horcruxes since Cos, why is he just now finding them? Did it take him all those years to track down memories and fit the pieces together?

Shannon aka Brammwell - Aug 2, 2005 5:06 pm (#423 of 2969)

What about hiding a Horcrux in the room of requirement? It appeared that when Harry had gone in there to hide the potions book he'd found many things that had been placed there by others for safekeeping. It's seems a little more than coincidence that a room exists in which to hide things and that's exactly what Voldemort tried to do with his Horcruxes.

Puck - Aug 2, 2005 5:15 pm (#424 of 2969)

I'm just not sure that's LV's style. I mean, he doesn’t want to be like anyone else, "common". I'm not sure he'd want his precious Horcrux in a room with everyone else’s stuff.

Finn BV - Aug 2, 2005 6:02 pm (#425 of 2969)

Sorry Steve, meant soul, said something else!

Steve Newton - Aug 2, 2005 6:18 pm (#426 of 2969)

It happens to me all of the time.

Shannon aka Brammwell - Aug 2, 2005 8:55 pm (#427 of 2969)

I'm thinking that his slipping into the school through the secret passage ways would be a simple enough way to get in, but what if he'd done it when he'd come in for the interview with DD to acquire the Dark Arts position. Now his presence then would not have been surprising at all.

I'm guessing that one of the Horcruxes lies in the school, and that although book seven will lead us away from Hogwarts, we will be lead back there in the end for Harry to destroy the final two Horcruxes; the one in the school and the final piece of soul within Voldemort.

Mattew Bates - Aug 2, 2005 8:59 pm (#428 of 2969)

OK, I'm going to eat my words (way back in post 4). I just re-read chapter 23 (Horcruxes), and it dissuaded me from any continued belief that either Harry or his scar are a Horcrux. (Just for the record, I highly recommend that everybody re-read that chapter - it clears up many of the questions raised here).

It became clear that a Horcrux is evil by design, and corrosive and destructive upon extended contact. Harry has been in contact with his scar since he was 15 months old, and he is still pure of heart. His scar, I am now sure, is closer to a Death Eater's dark mark, but more intense. I do predict, however, that Harry will wonder whether or not his scar is a Horcrux, and it will make a wonderful red herring in book seven.

Now, I am sure that Voldie intended to make his Gryffindor Horcrux with Harry's death. Even if he is completely unrelated to Godric, he is the child of the Head Boy & Head Girl from the same house, and that probably doesn't happen often. Gryffindor to the core, you might say. He also had a mole (or should I say a Rat?) in the house. Certainly, a family crest from a very Gryffindor family living in Godric's Hollow would count, symbolically, as something of the Four Founders. A proper relic would be better, but Big V's access to Hogwarts was still blocked. So, Pettigrew, as the secret keeper, could have easily snuck out (or even borrowed!) such an object for his Dark Lord's uses. Voldemort may still plan to use this item to create a Horcrux from Harry's murder - to replace the diary that Harry destroyed. I think we may get some hint of this when Harry visits Godric's Hollow.

So we're still in the dark about the Ravenclaw relic, which may or may not have been first spotted in PoA...

Verbina - Aug 3, 2005 12:01 am (#429 of 2969)
Edited by Aug 3, 2005 1:03 am

In PoA we first learn of:
• astronomical models (for sale in Diagon Alley)
• Lunascopes - astronomical model or instrument which shows the phases of the moon
• a couple types of brooms
• Crystal Balls for divination
• Monster Book of Monsters
• Marauders map
• Sneakoscope (Ron gave Harry one in PoA)

These are all very mundane items nothing special about them save the Map. I will keep looking and possibly re-read PoA.

I am thinking you are all on to something.... as for places....there is another place we did not mention for OotP and that is St. Mungo’s...though how there is a connection there I can't really say.

Soul Search - Aug 3, 2005 6:00 am (#430 of 2969)
Edited Aug 3, 2005 7:15 am

Verbina,

We also have the North Tower, Trelawney's room, all the junk in the room, Sir Cadogan, and Buckbeak. Since Trelawney came to Hogwarts around the time Harry was born, her room must have been something else in Tom Riddle's time.

Was the ice cream parlor mentioned before? I know Hagrid bought ice cream in PS/SS, but I don't recall any other reference. I bring it up only because Florian seems to have been taken off in HBP (and I am the suspicious sort when JKR casually mentions something).

None of this seems to help. PoA has me stumped.

As much as I like the one Horcrux/hiding place per book idea, I am going to have to give it up if we can't come up with something for PoA.

What we really need is some PoA reference that can be interpreted as Hufflepuff's cup. It seems to be a good candidate for a Horcrux, but we already have the ring for HBP.

Vaughn - Aug 3, 2005 6:38 am (#431 of 2969)

This is totally a shot in the dark in an attempt to find a Horcrux in POA because I like the idea of one being introduced in each book. In Professor Trelawney’s class don't they all use tea cups for reading the tea leaves? Maybe the Hufflepuff cup is in there.

I can't think of any reason for LV putting it there, without protection. Maybe Trelawney is a descendent of Hufflepuff's and she now has the cup from Mrs. Smith.

Jon Parker - Aug 3, 2005 8:30 am (#432 of 2969)

When a wizard commits murder, his soul splits. Are we all going on the line of thought that LV has only killed in conjunction with making a Horcrux to preserve that part of his soul that was split from the original? Or does he just take a part of his already splintered soul when he decides to make a new Horcrux? According to the Priori Incantatem spell that took place after his re-birth in the graveyard we know he killed Cedric, Frank Bryce, Bertha Jorkins, Lily and James. Lily and James were killed back to back. Does this mean that LV's soul had split twice before he tried to kill Harry? Also, when LV described what happened he said something to the effect "I was ripped from my body...". Does this mean that the spirit "Vapormort" was actually the 3 last splinters of his soul? Or could each of the splintered pieces been separated? One left as LV. POSSIBLY one residing in Harry's scar. And the third.....? Food for thought, I hope.

Finn BV - Aug 3, 2005 8:38 am (#433 of 2969)

When a wizard commits murder, his soul splits. --Jon Parker

Oh. I thought he had the option to split his soul; he could only create a Horcrux if and only if he committed murder. It is not an automatic effect. Am I right or is this just how I took the words?

Paulus Maximus - Aug 3, 2005 12:59 pm (#434 of 2969)
Edited Aug 3, 2005 2:02 pm

The "splitting" of the soul is an automatic effect of murder. Binding a piece of the soul to an item and creating a Horcrux is not.

After all, a single wizard creating multiple Horcruxes was unheard of before Voldemort's time, but surely a single wizard committing multiple murders wasn't...

Finn BV - Aug 3, 2005 1:53 pm (#435 of 2969)

Ah. I was combining making Horcruxes and splitting one's soul as one action. Thanks.

Puck - Aug 3, 2005 5:14 pm (#436 of 2969)

My guess is when a wizard kills but does not make a Horcrux, the splintered pieces remains in his body and eventually heals, but leaves a "scar" so to speak.

The Sword and the Lion - Aug 3, 2005 7:31 pm (#437 of 2969)

If there is indeed a Horcrux at Hogwarts, it would probably be in the dungeons -- a new unexplored area for Harry and his friends.

Phelim Mcintyre - Aug 4, 2005 10:12 am (#438 of 2969)

I've noticed something about the Horcruxes which may be significant.

The family ring came into Voldemort's possession at the time of him killing his father and step-family. My guess is that this ring became a Horcrux then. The link is family, the owning of the Slytherin side and destruction of the Riddle side.

The diary became a Horcrux at the time of Moaning Myrtle’s death. Dumbledore suggested this was to do with Voldemort as their heir of Slytherin.

Helga Hufflepuff's cup was stolen in circumstances similar to the ring. The witch who owned it was a descendant of Helga Hufflepuff. Could the cup have become a Horcrux then?

The locket was stolen in similar circumstances. My guess is the murder had something to do with Slytherin. Did Voldemort have a relation that he killed to become the last heir?

Then there is Nagini. Mike Millar suggests that the murder of Frank Brice was involved. While I agree there is the problem of Voldemort not being fully human at the time. This suggests that Nagini could be a red herring.

This leaves at least one Horcrux. Something to do with Rowena Ravenclaw? If my thinking is correct then the person killed, a member of the Order of the Phoenix, would have been a descendant of Ravenclaw. Could this support the suggestion that one of Harry is descended from Gryffindor on his father's side?

David Breeze - Aug 4, 2005 10:24 am (#439 of 2969)

ABOUT THE RAVENCLAW HORCRUX...

Luna Lovegood is the only Ravenclaw that we know a great deal about. It would seem strange that she is in Ravenclaw, as she doesn’t seem that brainy, and sounds rather like Hufflepuff material.

So why is she in Ravenclaw?

Maybe its because her mother (who incidentally we know nothing about) was a descendant of Rowena Ravenclaw and that Luna was sorted into that house as a result of her direct blood line to the founder.

Perhaps the Lovegoods are in possession of the Ravenclaw Horcrux. Maybe that would explain why JKR introduced a character as important as Luna so late in the series.

haymoni - Aug 4, 2005 10:40 am (#440 of 2969)

Tom Riddle worked at Borgin & Burkes - that was where Merope turned in the necklace. Is it possible he killed Burkes to make the locket a Horcrux?

Do we know how Burkes died?

mike miller - Aug 4, 2005 11:20 am (#441 of 2969)
Edited Aug 4, 2005 12:21 pm

Here's my take on the Horcrux question (Thanks for the insight Phelim, it has helped but I must disagree on a minor point, see below).

This has been covered on the "Harry's Lessons from Dumbledore" thread; Riddle/Voldemort chooses significant/symbolic items and "People" to create his Horcruxes. Here how I see the timetable laying out:

1) Tom Riddle Sr. and the Diary - Tom's first and most significant Horcrux was created by murdering his own father. I think it was the diary and not the ring because we know that Diary Tom was 16 years old, so he must have been 16 when he created the Horcrux. The Diary has been Destroyed.

2) Hepzibah Smith and the Hufflepuff Cup - Ms. Smith has provided young Tom with 2 very significant relics that link back to the Hogwarts founders. At this point, Voldemort is holding the Slytherin relics for very special people so he uses the Cup. I'm guessing the Cup is sitting in the Hogwarts Trophy case, hiding in plain sight ever since Tom left it there during his visit to see Dumbledore about DADA teaching post.

3) Dorcas Meadows and the Slytherin Locket - Ms. Meadows was called out by Moody when showing Harry the photograph of the original Order during OotP as being killed by Voldemort "personally". Now that we know about Horcruxes we can guess what that means. I've heard it speculated that Dorcas and Albus may have been related or married making this more special than just a very powerful witch. The leading bet on the Locket is Regulus took it from the cave and it is now under the boiler in the kitchen of #12 GP where Kreacher hid it after recovering it from the trash during the "cleaning" of #12. Harry will probably figure this out during the summer after he visits the Dursleys, attends Bill and Flour’s wedding and visits Godric's Hollow. This might even be the reason he returns to Hogwarts to look for the Cup.

4 & 5) We still have the Ring and another Hogwarts relic, either Ravenclaw or Gryffindor. The murder victims unknown at this point. These are the important questions Harry will have to answer in book 7 once he figures out that R.A.B. is Regulus and that he has already seen the Locket.

6) Frank Brice and Nagini - Harry was supposed to be the 6th part of Voldemort's 7 part soul, but the curse backfired. Voldemort, in his desire to complete the 6th Horcrux, he used Frank and Nagini as an opportunistic way to finish his plan before returning to his old body. This will be the easiest Horcrux to destroy because of Voldemort's condition at the time he created it and the fact that he used a less stable "living creature" as the Horcrux.

Well, there's a lot of speculation here so take it for what it's worth. One thing I've learned from HBP is that even the most logical scenario could be completely "off base". This is JKR's story and she's going to write it the way she wants.

Mattew Bates - Aug 4, 2005 11:22 am (#442 of 2969)
Edited Aug 4, 2005 12:22 pm

That's an excellent idea, Haymoni! The low pawn value Merope got for the necklace contributed to her despair. Burkes' death (was it a murder?) could have been Riddle's revenge for Burkes' contribution to the death of Tom's mother.

dobby379 - Aug 4, 2005 6:09 pm (#443 of 2969)
Edited Aug 4, 2005 7:26 pm

A Horcrux in every book is a very good notion. On that idea, I think that the first book's Horcrux may be the Mirror of Erised. This would fit with Voldemort's pattern of picking items that have an innate magical power or a link to the four founders. Perhaps the mirror was created by Ravenclaw or young Riddle once glimpsed his "future greatness" in the mirror and decided to use it as a Horcrux.

Also, I totally forgot that Luna was a Ravenclaw. We also know that her mother died trying a "complex spell" that backfired. Could Luna's mother have died trying to destroy one of Voldemorts Horcruxes?

The Sword and the Lion - Aug 4, 2005 6:46 pm (#444 of 2969)
Edited Aug 4, 2005 7:49 pm

That is an excellent point about Luna's mother, dobby379. Imagine if Voldemort placed a bit of his soul in the mirror just as Dumbledore did with the PS/SS. Harry may not be able to retrieve it if he had the intention of destroying it. In the first book, Dumbledore also explains how the mirror works -- perhaps this could be foreshadowing for book 7 (although the mirror did appear in the climax of book 1). Nice post.

Nathan Zimmermann - Aug 4, 2005 7:08 pm (#445 of 2969)

If Luna's mother died attempting to destroy a Horcrux. Then that would imply that would imply that a second Horcrux was discovered prior too Harry's advent at Hogwarts.

Puck - Aug 4, 2005 7:50 pm (#446 of 2969)

As LV had his soul bit intact, he could have well made Nagini into a Horcrux without having a body. However, the fact that such a spell doesn't appear in the "Priori Incantatem" in GoF makes me suspect that DD was mistaken on this point.

It was mentioned a few posts back about Harry being related to Gryffindor -JKR has said in her recent interview that this is NOT the case.

I believe Tom made the ring Horcrux with his father's death. He would not have made the diary first, as it was too easily destroyed. Until he was sure it was possible to have more than one, he'd want his first to be more solid and secure.

Verbina - Aug 4, 2005 8:57 pm (#447 of 2969)
Edited by Aug 4, 2005 10:01 pm

In my re-read, I realized something...at least two of the Horcruxes have special magic in themselves! When Tom visits Smith and she shows him the cup and the locket, she says that both have special magic "abilities" that she has tested, though not all of them. Could this be a clue as to how he treated them? I mean, the Diary was given to Malfoy yet the locket was guarded with highly complicated magic. Why the difference? Could it be that the locket, already having magic attributes, plus the importance of it as a Horcrux to Voldemort, lead to it's protections? The diary being the first was not as important as the later ones?

I do agree that the item that became a Horcrux must have something to do with the murder committed. Let's look at what death created it, what the item was, it's meaning to Voldie and where it was hidden.

Diary = Myrtle (still not convinced of this) done in school, thus the book, given to Malfoy to keep

Ring = Father, representative of his mother's family, whom Tom Sr. had rejected, hidden in family home

Hufflepuff Cup = Smith, she was a descendent of Hufflepuff, ????

Locket = ???? I suspect that it was in relation to his mother somehow. A locket being a more female type item, hidden in cave from his childhood (could he have killed the woman in charge of the orphanage, the only mother type figure he knew?)

?????? = suspected Ravenclaw object so it would need to be a connection to Ravenclaw

Nagini = Bryce perhaps, with him at all times Nagini would represent his upcoming rebirth to the land of the living.

Also, we know that Voldie had two Horcrux items by the time he left Hogwarts, the ring and the diary. In HBP, DD says to Harry that he did not believe that Voldemort had killed anyone since the Riddles when he killed Smith for the cup and locket. So...if you need to make a Horcrux in a set amount of time after the murder is committed, he had to have killed twice to make those two Horcruxes. I am still not so sure that the death of Myrtle would count because he did not kill her, just ordered her death. If he could make a Horcrux from ordering a death, he could have made his seven without too much trouble since he sent DEs to kill. This also means that he had to kill four more times to create his ideal 7 part soul. So Smith would be one for the Hufflepuff cup with three more left. If Bryce is for Nagini, then that still leaves 2 deaths and I get the feeling he didn't choose random people for the deaths...they had to be significant for him to create a Horcrux from it.

Guess I just shot my own theory that he killed once more before leaving Hogwarts.

Verbina - Aug 4, 2005 9:34 pm (#448 of 2969)
Edited by Aug 4, 2005 10:42 pm

First of all, yes I know I could edit my previous post but...I set about working out a timeline and when I finished, it would not let me edit so either the time had passed or something went wonky. Also, editing would have made my previous post very long indeed so I think a separate post would be better.

Anyway, I set down to create a timeline using what we found out in HBP along with the Lexicon's timeline...perhaps we can use it to better figure out the Horcruxes.

• 1927 LV born (Dec 31)
• 1938 turned 11 (Dec 31)
• 1939 Invited to Hogwarts ( I assume here that turning 11 during a school year, he would have to wait until the following school year to start attending)
• 1943 - June CoS opened (June according to the Lexicon Timeline)
- Myrtle Killed
- Killed the Riddles (Summer of his 16th year)
- Gained the ring
- created the Diary (Voldemort says he put part of his 16 year old self into the pages)
• 1944 - Asked Slughorn about multiple Horcruxes This could have happened in the early part of the school year so it could have been in 1943 though judging from the casual way the students were acting in the Slughorn memory, I would suggest that it took place in the later half, in 1944)
• 1945 - wanted DADA post, turned down
- worked for Borgin and Burkes
- met Smith
- killed Smith (Could have happened in 1946)
- gained Hufflepuff Cup and Locket
- disappeared
• 1955 or 56 - arrived at Hogwarts to ask for position.
• 1981 - October 31 Killed the Potters attempted to Kill Harry (possibly to create his 6th Horcrux)
• 1991 - attempts to get Stone while possessing Quirrell
• 1994 - Pettigrew sets out to find Voldemort
• 1995 - Kills Cedric Diggory
- recalls DEs to him regains body
- attempts to kill Harry
• 1996 - attempts to steal the prophecy
- attempts to kill harry
- orders Draco to kill Dumbledore

So we see that in a very short time period, he had two items which did make into Horcruxes. Plus the fact that he asked about Multiple Horcruxes...puzzling to say the least. He may have studied up on them somehow and made one previous to talking to Slughorn or he may have even made two without realizing that was unusual.

Phelim Mcintyre - Aug 4, 2005 11:59 pm (#449 of 2969)

Mike Miller - Dumbledore appears to link the diary as a Horcrux with the killing of Myrtle (I will find the quote and post). The ring was his Slytherin family line and vanished at the time of the killing of the Riddle's. This is why I put them round that way. The ring was not in Voldemort's possession at the time of killing Myrtle so if Myrtle's murder was one to create a Horcrux then it must have been something in his possession - like the diary.

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 5, 2005 1:12 am (#450 of 2969)

Phelim Mcintyre wrote on Aug 5, 2005 12:59 am in message #449

Mike Miller - Dumbledore appears to link the diary as a Horcrux with the killing of Myrtle (I will find the quote and post).

I'd be very grateful if you could, because I have to agree with Mike that it would seem impossible short of a direct quotation.

The diary was created after Riddle had framed Hagrid, which happened after Myrtle died. The indication is that Riddle created the diary some time after, having found that Dumbledore kept a too close watch on him to allow him to get back into the Chamber of Secrets:

'Well, he certainly kept an annoyingly close watch on me after Hagrid was expelled,' said Riddle carelessly. 'I knew it wouldn't be safe to open the Chamber again while I was still at school. But I wasn't going to waste those long years I'd spent searching for it. I decided to leave behind a diary, preserving my sixteen-year-old self in its pages, so that one day, with luck, I would be able to lead another in my footsteps, and finish Salazar Slytherin's noble work.'

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets Chapter 17, The Heir of Slytherin

I wouldn't quib about a few days - regardless of what happens to the torn fragment of the soul (healing & scarring or withering) when it is not locked in a Horcrux, it is bound to take a bit of time, but the implication here is, IMO, that it took some time. The 'capture' of Hagrid was on 13 June, so we are possibly looking at the next school year before Riddle realised that Dumbledore wouldn't give him peace to get into the Chamber, and he began his magic experiments with the diary.

I haven't been re-reading all of it, but it would seem to me possible that any sequentially implied between the Diary and the Ring is actually tied to their destruction rather than their creation, and that the Ring might well have become a Horcrux before the Diary was ever enchanted to prove that Tom Marvolo Riddle was indeed the Heir of Slytherin.

Regards,

Troels

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Wed Jul 20, 2011 7:16 pm

septentrion - Aug 5, 2005 1:47 am (#451 of 2969)

Interesting ideas round here ! You may be on something Troels with the idea that the diary may not have been the 1st Horcrux. And I like the idea the woman who ran the orphanage may have been killed to make a Horcrux. She was an important figure in LV's childhood, and we have seen her in the memory, which in my mind is a clue from Jo.

I want to point this out : the Horcrux spell LV would have used to make Nagini a Horcrux didn't come out of LV's wand, but it wasn't the only one : the failed AK against Harry neither came out (and that still bothers me).

mike miller - Aug 5, 2005 5:49 am (#452 of 2969)

Good points made by all. However, I'm sticking with my current layout of murders and Horcrux creations. I'm not sure that Tom could have used Myrtle's death even if the timeline worked, he didn't kill her - the basilisk did.

Tom's own words tell us that he was 16 when he created the diary. The only murders we know he committed at that time where his father and grandparents. I don't think he would have used the Ring, the only relic he possessed at the time, to create a Horcrux. It was too valuable and represented more to him at the time. I think it was later that the idea of multiple Horcruxes, powerful symbolic relics and powerful symbolic murders came into play.

My theory still leaves much for Harry to find out in book 7 along with a few easier things that he should be able to put together quickly to get book 7 off to a good start.

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 5, 2005 6:25 am (#453 of 2969)

septentrion wrote on Aug 5, 2005 2:47 am in message #451

I want to point this out : the Horcrux spell LV would have used to make Nagini a Horcrux didn't come out of LV's wand, but it wasn't the only one : the failed AK against Harry neither came out (and that still bothers me).

There were other spells that didn't show up - only a few of the spells he used in the Graveyard actually showed up in the Priori Incantatem effect. Hmm . . . I once wrote something about this where I went through it quite thoroughly; it might be time to find that again

Mike Miller wrote:

I'm not sure that Tom could have used Myrtle's death even if the timeline worked, he didn't kill her - the basilisk did.

Good point! I thought of that as well, but I think a good case can be made for Riddle using the Basilisk as a weapon, so I'm not completely sure.

Mike Miller:

Tom's own words tell us that he was 16 when he created the diary. The only murders we know he committed at that time where his father and grandparents.

You're assuming that the Diary was created as a Horcrux initially. I don't think that is the case. Dumbledore, when talking to Harry about it, said,

'The diary, as you have said yourself, was proof that he was the Heir of Slytherin. I am sure that Voldemort considered it of stupendous importance.'

To me that suggests that the importance of the Diary to Voldemort, and the reason why he would use it to create a Horcrux, lay in the fact that it was already proof of his Slytherin descent. The proof whereof Dumbledore speaks is naturally the memories showing Riddle opening the Chamber of Secrets, that which could only be done by 'The Heir of Slytherin'.

Essentially I think that the Diary was made and prepared before Riddle's seventeenth birthday, containing the memories of Riddle opening the Chamber, and having the ability to guide someone else to complete the 'great work' () of Slytherin. But I do not think that it was made a Horcrux at that time - that did not, IMO, come until later (don't know how much later, though).

I suppose that this two-step process could still be done rather quickly: that Tom could have begun with the Diary perhaps even before the summer holiday started, and having the Diary, including the memories etc. prepared long before going to Little Hangleton, but I don't really see why he should be carrying the book with him at that point, nor do I recall any suggestion that he might have been doing that (though I guess he could have made it a Horcrux when he came home, even if that doesn't feel 'right' in the same way for me).

In order for Voldemort to create a Horcrux, we need to have three things in place.

Knowledge of the spell.

We know that Tom was seeking knowledge of Horcruxes from Slughorn after he had secured Marvolo's ring (the ring is on Tom's finger when we see the untampered-with memory in ch. 23 Horcruxes), so it seems unlikely that he would have known the spell when he sought the Gaunts and the Riddles.

A significant murder.

I would certainly agree that any killing of his own family would loom very large here.

An object of sufficient importance and power to be turned into a Horcrux for the 'mighty Lord Voldemort' ().

The diary would not be suitable before it had been magically prepared, and Tom's memories of his glory stored within it.

All in all I feel that the Horcruxes must have been created later - after Tom left school, in fact.

Regards,

Troels

mike miller - Aug 5, 2005 7:45 am (#454 of 2969)
Edited Aug 5, 2005 8:46 am

Troels - I like your thinking here. I'll add only one point of clarity, Tom is not asking Slughorn about Horcruxes, he's asking about multiple Horcruxes.

"What I don't understand, though -- just out of curiosity -- I mean, would one Horcrux be much use? Can you only split your soul once? Wouldn't it be better, make you stronger, to have your soul in more pieces, I mean, for instance, isn't seven the most powerfully magical number, wouldn't seven --?" (Scholastic; Horcruxes pg. 498)

It's at this point that Slughorn cuts off Tom's line of inquiry. I think Tom had already created the Diary as a Horcrux to show his power as the heir of Slytherin, using the murder of his own father as the event that created the first tear in his soul.

Tom's delusions of grandeur have had a chance to expand with the success of his first Horcrux; and, he's starting to devise a plan to go further than any wizard in history down the path toward immortality.

Hogs Head - Aug 5, 2005 8:34 am (#455 of 2969)

It is possible, though, that the diary was constituted as a Horcrux when Myrtle was killed and that Tom modified the content and programming of the diary after Hagrid was expelled.

Also, as to whether Tom actually murdered Myrtle, can we actually confirm that it was the basilisk that killed Myrtle? I know that has been assumed, but what can we know as fact? Myrtle said she saw two eyes and then she died. Even if it was the basilisk, does the instrumentality of a murder really make a difference? All this in the "things we don't know" category.

Paulus Maximus - Aug 5, 2005 8:35 am (#456 of 2969)
Edited Aug 5, 2005 9:43 am

I'm not sure that Tom could have used Myrtle's death even if the timeline worked, he didn't kill her - the basilisk did.

The basilisk killed Myrtle on Tom's orders, and I'm sure we can agree that someone who commands murder is just as bad as someone who commits murder. (For example, Hitler commanded far more murders than he committed, but he is as guilty as those who did the actual killing...)

That might hold true for creating Horcruxes as well.

mike miller - Aug 5, 2005 9:10 am (#457 of 2969)

Hogs Head and Paulus - You are both correct in your observations and ideas about Myrtle's death and it's possible role in creating a Horcrux.

For me, I get the impression Tom created the Diary after Myrtle's death, after Hagrid's expulsion because he realized that he would not be able to continue his original plan. The creation of the Diary was the genesis of a new idea. Cleansing Hogwarts as Salazar Slytherin would have wanted became less of an objective for Tom than chasing immortality.

Verbina - Aug 5, 2005 11:58 am (#458 of 2969)

Meanwhile I am of the mind that the diary was at first, just that. It was a diary in a sense that Tom used it to record what he learned in his searching for the chamber. Of course, it appears empty when Ginny has it but within it are the secrets to the chamber, in essence everything Tom learned in 5 years about Slytherin and the whereabouts of the Chamber. And we all know from the Marauders Map that it is possible to make paper that is written upon look as if it is blank.

This would explain why he would make a Horcrux of it in my mind. I am of the opinion that he did make it first though I am still unsure about it being from the death of Myrtle. I at first thought it seemed that the death of Myrtle was an accident but the more I think about it, I think it was a calculated murder with Tom wanting to see if he could get the Basilisk to kill a person on his orders. Under those circumstances, the coldness of it all, the death with no logical reasoning whatsoever except to see if he could do it...then I could see a Horcrux coming of it.

One thing I did notice though. The diary seemed to be different in many ways from the ring, at least from what we know of the ring. The diary was a Muggle item (not bought at Diagon Alley at any rate) and had nothing magical attributed to it before hand, as far as we can tell. And there were no protections about it. As if it were an imperfectly done Horcrux and was not as big of a concern to Voldemort as the ring or locket.

Paulus Maximus - Aug 5, 2005 12:10 pm (#459 of 2969)
Edited Aug 5, 2005 1:12 pm

The first attempt at making anything will be more... shoddy... than any subsequent attempts.

More evidence that the diary was the first Horcrux, perhaps...

Or at least that he made the diary a Horcrux before he made the ring one...

Maybe the diary wasn't as big a concern to Voldemort as the ring or the locket, but it was big enough of a concern that he was angry at Lucius for his bid for power in book 2...

Puck - Aug 5, 2005 12:15 pm (#460 of 2969)

I don't believe Tom would have made the diary -something so fragile and meant to he placed in the hands of students- his first Horcrux. He needed to know if would be safe to make a second one before turning the diary into one. I think the ring was a Horcrux as he wore it questioning Slughorn. It was later he thought to hide it. At first, he wore it as a trophy.

The diary, I agree, could have been made first to open the chamber, then become a Horcrux much later. It may have been just before LV gave it to Lucius, for all we know.

dobby379 - Aug 5, 2005 12:45 pm (#461 of 2969)
Edited Aug 5, 2005 1:49 pm

I don't think that it was an accident that Tom let out the basilisk while Myrtle was in the bathroom. He murdered her to create his first Horcrux. I believe that it was his first murder as he didn't have the nerve yet to kill her in person. The basilisk was convenient weapon as was the ability to frame Hagrid. Myrtle's death was the beginning of Voldemorts pattern of committing murder and framing someone else for it. The diary not only gave him immortality but gave him a trophy of his deed.

Also notice that Dumbledore was trying to show harry that Voldemort is like many serial killers. He has a pattern to his deed(s) and likes to keep trophies. That is why the memory of DD first meeting with Tom is so important it shows his emerging detachment from others and habit of "Trophy Collecting"

Verbina - Aug 5, 2005 12:48 pm (#462 of 2969)

But, wouldn't the soul inside the diary have been an older one then? Not a 16 year old soul?

Liz Mann - Aug 5, 2005 2:57 pm (#463 of 2969)

I'm still sticking with my earlier thought that the cup Tom Riddle received for services to the school is a Horcrux.

DARN IT! I was just thinking that and was going to post it when I read your comment.

I have to agree that it might be, though. It goes against the 'one in each book' theory, which I also like, but it just makes sense - after all, it's a souvenir of his very first murder - Myrtle.

Nathan Zimmermann - Aug 5, 2005 5:11 pm (#464 of 2969)

Verbina, to your timeline outlining Voldemort's movements> I would add one thing. In the 1970's Voldemort personally killed Dorcas Meadowes.

Verbina - Aug 5, 2005 7:43 pm (#465 of 2969)

Noted and added...do we know of anyone else that he personally killed?

Paulus Maximus - Aug 5, 2005 8:23 pm (#466 of 2969)

I think that perhaps there were two functions of the Diary... First, it contained a piece of Voldemort's soul when he made it a Horcrux. However, this may or may not be the same thing as the artificial intelligence that communicated with Ginny and Harry (commonly known in this forum as Diary Tom). I always thought that it seemed a bit too much like the Marauder's Map, and we KNOW that the Marauder's Map isn't a Horcrux. (Not only are two of the Marauders dead, but Horcruxes are Dark Magic, and James hated any form of Dark Magic more severe than Levicorpus...)

So, because a fragment of soul is not necessarily an artificial intelligence, and an artificial intelligence is not necessarily a fragment of soul, Tom might have made his diary a Horcrux several years AFTER he created Diary Tom... He undoubtedly made Diary Tom when he was 16, but he might have made the Horcrux later...

Nathan Zimmermann - Aug 5, 2005 8:29 pm (#467 of 2969)
Edited Aug 5, 2005 9:29 pm

Verbina, there is according to Fudge a suspicion that Voldemort killed Amelia Bones personally but, whether creation of Horcrux motivated that killing no one can be sure.

Phelim Mcintyre - Aug 6, 2005 4:56 am (#468 of 2969)

The importance of the diary, to Dumbledore at least, is that it proved that Voldemort is the heir of Slytherin. The basilisk is, I guess, the beast that Slytherin put into the Chamber. As the heir only Voldemort could control the basilisk. Why turn the ring into a Horcrux to do with Myrtle's death if there is something more trophyish, more significant to use - like the diary? Or the special award. The ring as the Horcrux associated with Myrtle's death does not tie in with Voldemorts collection of trophies.

The significance of the ring is that it belonged to his mother's family. It is a trophy of his regal bloodline as opposed to his Muggle bloodline, and would make sense trophy of the destruction of the Muggle bloodline.

I may be wrong, but having the Horcruxes this way round seems more logical.

Soul Search - Aug 6, 2005 5:55 am (#469 of 2969)
Edited Aug 6, 2005 7:41 am

Good discussion in recent posts. I think there are some flaws with some of my previously posted ideas.

Tom Riddle wearing the ring in Slughorn's memory doesn't show that he has already made it a Horcrux. Probably the opposite; after he made the ring a Horcrux, he then secured it in the Gaunt cabin. (I think Dumbledore suggests this.)

He had probably opened the chamber and created the diary, but had not made the diary a Horcrux.

Thus, he hadn't made any Horcruxes yet, but he had committed the murders. He also had at least two trophies for Horcruxes.

I do have some doubt that Myrtle was "important" enough to use her murder for a Horcrux, even though she might have been his first murder. I still can't decide between "accident" and "willful murder." His father would have been "important," but maybe not his grandparents. If so, this leaves us a murder shy.

I would suggest that he was still gathering information on Horcruxes and that there is no time limit on using the part of a soul split when committing a murder. So, he committed the murders and split his soul before the Slughorn memory, but created the Horcruxes after it.

Harry's description of Voldemort from Dumbledore's memory of Voldemort's visit to Hogwarts suggests that making Horcruxes, removing parts of one's soul, changes one's appearance.

No appearance changes are noted in Slughorn's memory, nor in Hokey's memory. This suggests that Voldemort made the Horcruxes sometime between his leaving Borgin and Burkes and visiting Dumbledore. Dumbledore had no information on this time period.

My (current) vision is that he collected the trophies and split his soul by committing murders, maybe even creating hiding places for some Horcruxes, then spent time creating the Horcruxes. Maybe they can only be made at a full moon, or something, but it takes time to do it.

Still looking for a PoA Horcrux. No luck. The one Horcrux/hiding place per book idea is slipping.

Just a thought: The ring, locket, and cup are all described as having strong (undescribed) magical properties. The magical properties must have been instilled by the original owners. Might be something to this, but I haven't come up with anything.

Well, maybe I have. As Harry finds a Horcrux and releases the soul, he acquires it, and any magical properties it has. This might help him make up for his less-than-adequate magical abilities to confront Voldemort. Even if "love" is the key to defeating Voldemort, Voldemort isn't going to sit still when Harry confronts him. Harry will need all the help he can get.

Phelim Mcintyre - Aug 6, 2005 7:34 am (#470 of 2969)

The murder of Myrtle (who must have been Muggle born, or have one parent at least) may not have been important. The significance is the Chamber of Secrets. That Voldemort is Slytherin’s heir. This is what makes the murder of Myrtle significant. Not the importance of the victim, but the surrounding circumstances.

Finn BV - Aug 6, 2005 10:15 am (#471 of 2969)

Verbina, in your post #448, with the timeline, I would amend that Voldemort did not kill Cedric Diggory. His wand performed the spell, but Wormtail actually killed him. This will obviously affect if Voldy created a Horcrux with this murder, which he could not have, because he did not kill Cedric.

mike miller - Aug 6, 2005 10:48 am (#472 of 2969)

Soul Search - I would question the idea that one could commit murder, causing a tear in their soul and then wait to create the Horcrux. Time and distance matters in magic as someone once said. I think the Horcrux must be created within a fixed and relatively short time after the murder is committed, JM2KW.

It is also speculation as to the effect on ones appearance of actually splitting one soul. I'm guessing, but 1 split may be hardly noticeable whereas 2 or 3 would start to show.

Paulus Maximus - Aug 6, 2005 11:13 am (#473 of 2969)

This will obviously affect if Voldy created a Horcrux with this murder, which he could not have, because he did not kill Cedric.

Voldemort was as guilty of killing Cedric as of killing Myrtle; he commanded both murders. I have stated my views on this matter, and they have not changed...

Finn BV - Aug 6, 2005 11:27 am (#474 of 2969)

Paulus, he commanded both murders, but the former was committed by a beast (non-human creature, that is), while the latter was actually committed by another person. I find these two to be very different.

I'm sorry if you said this before; I joined this thread late.

I Am Used Vlad - Aug 6, 2005 12:15 pm (#475 of 2969)

I agree with you, Finn. Voldemort may be guilty of Cedric's murder in the legal sense, but if anyone's soul was ripped apart, it would have been Wormtail's. He has free will, and chose to kill.

M A Grimmett - Aug 6, 2005 1:04 pm (#476 of 2969)

I would think that if you want to use a murder to create a Horcrux, you should have to actually commit the act.

Puck - Aug 6, 2005 6:46 pm (#477 of 2969)

I agree, sending the order is not enough. I also wonder if it has to be face to face. Would Draco's soul had torn in the same way if Katie or Ron had died, since he wasn't present when the "deed" occurred? Just wondering, as I was thinking earlier that he seemed capable of this kind of "distant" murder, but not of looking one in the eye and committing the deed.

Do we know that Tom opened the Chamber before murdering his father? I thought Diary Tom had a Head Boy badge, which would make him a seventh year student. Could he have killed his family over the summer, made the ring into a Horcrux, and later opened the chamber?

Verbina - Aug 6, 2005 7:58 pm (#478 of 2969)

About the appearance of Voldemort, I am not so sure that you can say that he hadn't created a single Horcrux until after he left Borgin and Burkes. We know from Slughorn that no one had ever tried to make more than one Horcrux of themselves. He may have made one by the time he left Borgin and Burkes. One may not effect the appearance of a person. Two would cause a slight effect. Three would be more and so on.

Paulus Maximus - Aug 6, 2005 8:36 pm (#479 of 2969)

I thought Diary Tom had a Head Boy badge, which would make him a seventh year student.

A badge, surely, but I thought it was a Prefect badge... Let me check...

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 7, 2005 5:38 am (#480 of 2969)
Edited Aug 7, 2005 6:39 am

Soul Search wrote in message #469

Good discussion in recent posts.

Yes, this is looking promising.

Tom Riddle wearing the ring in Slughorn's memory doesn't show that he has already made it a Horcrux. Probably the opposite; after he made the ring a Horcrux, he then secured it in the Gaunt cabin. (I think Dumbledore suggests this.)

Indeed. Especially since he is, at that time, asking questions about Horcruxes.

It is quite possible - even in character for Tom as I see him - if he knew quite a bit more about Horcruxes already before he turned to Slughorn, but it can't have been all that much since Slughorn's explanations helped him (if he had known more about them, in particular if he had know how to create them, he would also have realised that Slughorn's explanations wouldn't help at all).

He had probably opened the chamber and created the diary, but had not made the diary a Horcrux.

Obviously I have to agree with that

Thus, he hadn't made any Horcruxes yet, but he had committed the murders. He also had at least two trophies for Horcruxes.

This is where it gets puzzling, I agree. As I see it, Tom cannot have used the deaths of Myrtle or the Riddles to create Horcruxes because he didn't know how to do that yet, and though I wouldn't quibble over a few days, I think the Horcrux must be created shortly after the killing.

I do have some doubt that Myrtle was "important" enough to use her murder for a Horcrux, even though she might have been his first murder.

And even that is, I believe, put in doubt by the fact that it was actually the Basilisk that killed her (on top of the time issue)

I still can't decide between "accident" and "willful murder." His father would have been "important," but maybe not his grandparents. If so, this leaves us a murder shy.

I suggest that we are actually still all the murders shy.

If we look for a moment at what must happen when the soul is torn, then we are left with this soul fragment that is separated from the main part (souls are infinite etc. so looking at halves or sevenths is, I strongly believe, a mistake - they are merely 'parts'). I guess there are a number of things that can happen to this soul fragment if it is left 'to its own devices' so to speak. It could,

A) Heal the rip, leaving a scar, but a whole soul

B) Wither in some way and be lost or

C) Remain healthy.

As I see it, C) would make the necessity for Horcruxes void, so that can't be. A) and B) could both be possible, depending on the manner of the killing (killings with evil intend could result in B) and accidents or killing in self-defence in A) - possibly there might even be a scale between those where the amount of 'healthy soul' and of scarring varies with the manner of the killing). The point is that there, IMO, must be a time limit on how long you can wait before making the Horcrux, either because the soul-fragment will grow back an no longer be separate or because it will wither and become non-functional. My feeling about this (and this is not based on anything in the canon) is that this period should be measured in days rather than weeks or months.

I would suggest that he was still gathering information on Horcruxes and that there is no time limit on using the part of a soul split when committing a murder. So, he committed the murders and split his soul before the Slughorn memory, but created the Horcruxes after it.

I'll agree with that, with the addition that I think Voldemort had to commit new murders when he learned how to create a Horcrux.

Harry's description of Voldemort from Dumbledore's memory of Voldemort's visit to Hogwarts suggests that making Horcruxes, removing parts of one's soul, changes one's appearance.

That's a very good point.

No appearance changes are noted in Slughorn's memory, nor in Hokey's memory. This suggests that Voldemort made the Horcruxes sometime between his leaving Borgin and Burkes and visiting Dumbledore. Dumbledore had no information on this time period.

Which ties is all to nicely with Dumbledore's words in CoS that "He disappeared after leaving the school ... travelled far and wide ... sank so deeply into the Dark Arts, consorted with the very worst of our kind, underwent so many dangerous, magical transformations, that when he resurfaced as Lord Voldemort, he was barely recognisable." (CoS-18 Dobby's Reward)

My (current) vision is that he collected the trophies and split his soul by committing murders, maybe even creating hiding places for some Horcruxes, then spent time creating the Horcruxes. Maybe they can only be made at a full moon, or something, but it takes time to do it.

Hmm - I've already stated part of my problem with waiting, but we also have Slughorn's answer to Tom's question of how to encase the soul-fragment, "There is a spell, do not ask me, I don't know!" Slughorn, though not an expert, knows that there is spell, but says nothing about a slow, painstaking process (like brewing the Polyjuice Potion or the Felix Felicis).

Still looking for a PoA Horcrux. No luck. The one Horcrux/hiding place per book idea is slipping.

I'll be frank and say I've found it dubious all the way, though not quite dubious enough to seriously try to debunk it

Just a thought: The ring, locket, and cup are all described as having strong (undescribed) magical properties. The magical properties must have been instilled by the original owners. Might be something to this, but I haven't come up with anything.

I'll be delighted to hear about it.

Well, maybe I have. As Harry finds a Horcrux and releases the soul, he acquires it, and any magical properties it has.

The Diary was completely destroyed and all magical powers gone. We don't know about the Ring, of course, but I think the implication is that it is gone, destroyed and its magical powers vanished.

This might help him make up for his less-than-adequate magical abilities to confront Voldemort. Even if "love" is the key to defeating Voldemort, Voldemort isn't going to sit still when Harry confronts him. Harry will need all the help he can get.

I am rather dubious about Harry's need for help. I think all he needs is his capability for love, that the ultimate message of the series is going to be "love conquers all!"

Regards,

Troels

Soul Search - Aug 7, 2005 5:50 am (#481 of 2969)

mike miller - I can go either way on the murder - create-Horcrux timeframe; there is no direct cannon. The events we see in the memories don't fully support that Tom Riddle made the Horcruxes exactly when he committed the early murders.

The strongest suggestion is that Tom Riddle was wearing the ring in Slughorn's memory. He had murdered the Riddles, but had not made the ring Horcrux. What was he waiting for?

I use the long time from Tom Riddle leaving Borgin and Burkes and Voldemort's visiting Dumbledore to support the idea that making multiple Horcruxes takes time. Tom Riddle seems to have disappeared during this time: Dumbledore could find no evidence of his activities nor anyone that had any memories of him during this, rather long, time period. Tom Riddle was in seclusion, completing his transition from Tom Riddle to the Voldemort we know. When he visited Dumbledore he had just begun building his following.

In PS/SS, when Hagrid is explaining Voldemort to Harry, he starts "About twenty years ago ... gathering followers" This would be about the right timeframe, that is, when Voldemort visited Dumbledore.

I may be hung up a bit on the "importance" of the person Voldemort murdered. Any murder causes the soul split. I think it was Dumbledore's suggestion that Voldemort intended to use Harry's murder to create the sixth Horcrux that got me on that track. Why not James, or any other of the numerous murders he must have committed by that time?

mike miller/Verbina - HBP first points out changes to Voldemort's appearance when he visits Dumbledore. I am assuming that the changes are significant, and, perhaps weakly, that, since no changes were pointed out, there were none before that event. There is, actually, no support that the changes in Voldemort's appearance were because he had split his soul into Horcruxes. Makes sense, though, since Voldemort's Horcruxes are a major theme of HBP.

Harry compared the Dumbledore visit Voldemort with the Graveyard Voldemort, and noted that the eyes weren't yet slits. Seems Voldemort's appearance was progressing towards a snake. Maybe snakes have no soul, or without a soul, humans would be just like snakes?

My vision of the process is that a horrible act, like murder, damages the soul, "splitting" it, but that the pieces stay with the person. Creating a Horcrux removes a part of the soul, so it is not part of the person.

The less soul a person has, the less human they become, and this is reflected in their appearance.

Dumbledore must have known what Tom Riddle's changed appearance meant, multiple Horcruxes, although he could not have known how many.

This may have been the trigger for his research into Tom Riddle's nature and history.

Mrs Brisbee - Aug 7, 2005 5:55 am (#482 of 2969)

If Voldemort's change in appearance is connected to his having made Horcruxes-- which seems likely-- then there is one change that did definitely begin while he still worked for Borgin and Burkes: in Hokey's memory Tom's eyes turn noticeably red. In CoS Diary Tom's eyes begin to glint red. I think Diary Tom represents Voldemort with one Horcrux, and Hokey Tom with the stronger redeye has two Horcruxes.

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 7, 2005 6:02 am (#483 of 2969)
Edited Aug 7, 2005 7:06 am

Heh! I never realised that there was a size-limit to this, so here comes the rest of what I wanted to say

I've done a bit of research on the folk-lore precursors for the Horcruxes, which might interest some. I wanted to ask the Alchemy crew if there's anything in their areas that resonates with the soul receptacles, but I don't know if they read this thread (I think I'll point them this way ). Anyway, here is what I've found so far.

Sir James George Frazer, The Golden Bough, 1922 [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] In particular chapter 66, 'The External Soul in Folk-Tales', and chapter 67, 'The External Soul in Folk-Custom'. The following is from chapter 66:

In the first place, the story of the external soul is told, in various forms, by all Aryan peoples from Hindustan to the Hebrides. A very common form of it is this: A warlock, giant, or other fairyland being is invulnerable and immortal because he keeps his soul hidden far away in some secret place; but a fair princess, whom he holds enthralled in his enchanted castle, wiles his secret from him and reveals it to the hero, who seeks out the warlock’s soul, heart, life, or death (as it is variously called), and by destroying it, simultaneously kills the warlock.

(Please, the text is from 1922 and 'Aryan' simply means the same as what would today be called 'Indo-European').

The Golden Boughby Sir James George Frazer, [1922] (parts relevant in connection with Horcruxes)

Full index: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Chapter 18 The Perils of the Soul - Section 1. The Soul as a Mannikin. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Chapter 18 The Perils of the Soul - Section 2. Absence and Recall of the Soul. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Chapter 18 The Perils of the Soul - Section 3. The Soul as a Shadow and a Reflection. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Chapter 66 The External Soul in Folk-Tales [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Chapter 67 The External Soul in Folk-Custom - Section 1. The External Soul in Inanimate Things. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Chapter 67 The External Soul in Folk-Custom - Section 2. The External Soul in Plants. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Chapter 67 The External Soul in Folk-Custom - Section 3. The External Soul in Animals. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Chapter 67 The External Soul in Folk-Custom - Section 4. The Ritual of Death and Resurrection. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I'd be very interested if anyone knows of other sources describing soul-receptacles, or "The External Soul" in general. I am particularly interested in anything describing the splitting of the soul. Not particularly the multiple-souls descriptions (similar to the Freudian picture of the self with Id, Ego and Super-ego), but actually splitting something that had been one whole.

Regards,

Troels

Madame Librarian - Aug 7, 2005 7:42 am (#484 of 2969)
Edited Aug 7, 2005 8:45 am

I have a question about Diary Tom's plans for how his diary was to work. As I understand things, he was sucking out Ginny's soul little by little as a way to replace his own and become alive again. Ginny would die (or become soulless?) and Diary Tom would become his old 16-yr. old self...alive, well and quite normal for a wizard, I suppose. Yes, there might be two Voldemorts--one who's a 16-yr. old and one who's a non-corporeal mist lurking in forests, barely alive. I'm guessing that Diary Tom would be able to absorb or subsume the mist version and carry on with his world domination plans as his old self. He might have a bit of an issue convincing his old crew of DEs that it was truly a real Voldemort back and in apparently excellent shape ("No, you idiots, I did not get Botox or dermabrasion. I used magic!")

As I read it Ginny's soul was just a single one replacing the sliver that was in the diary. Does this imply that at that time (1944-ish) Tom had only needed one replacement soul for one sliver of his own, therefore, the diary is the only Horcrux he's made by then? If he'd made others (the ring, cup??) wouldn't he need to collect all of them and somehow activate the slivers before the magic of rebirth could kick in?

I'll assume that's how it was, and the murder of Myrtle = the first Horcrux = the diary (possibly prepared fairly close to the time just after the murder).

It's always tricky talking about something that tampers with the past such as this. Gets very muddled in my head.

Ciao. Barb

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 7, 2005 8:05 am (#485 of 2969)

I think Tom actually made his purpose quite clear already in CoS:

'I bet Dumbledore saw right through you,' said Harry, his teeth gritted. 'Well, he certainly kept an annoyingly close watch on me after Hagrid was expelled,' said Riddle carelessly. 'I knew it wouldn't be safe to open the Chamber again while I was still at school. But I wasn't going to waste those long years I'd spent searching for it. I decided to leave behind a diary, preserving my sixteen-year-old self in its pages, so that one day, with luck, I would be able to lead another in my footsteps, and finish Salazar Slytherin's noble work.'

CoS Ch. 17 The Heir of Slytherin

To lead another was the original purpose. The whole business about possessing another and coming out of the diary wasn't, IMO, part of the original purpose.

Regards,

Troels

HungarianHorntail11 - Aug 7, 2005 8:24 am (#486 of 2969)
Edited Aug 7, 2005 9:24 am

Soul Search, I like the idea you suggested about Harry learning how to destroy Horcruxes via one of the books in the Room of Requirement. I still feel as though he will end up back at Hogwarts, whether or not he is there to attend classes.

Soul Search, with regard to LV's split souls not being used until he's ready - it makes more sense to me that he would have to have an incantation in place, commit the murder and have the receptacle in which to place the Horcrux somewhere close by. As someone pointed out that Snape says "time and space matter in magic, Potter", or something to that extent.

Also, are we SURE all time-turners were destroyed by the MoM? That sticks out to me in PoA. It's just an idea, I'm not saying it's a good one, but I haven't been back to reread PoA yet and am thinking off the top of my head.

Verbina, I like that idea regarding T. Riddle's questioning Slughorn, also. That sure does fit his persona.

constant vigilance, I think Riddle was "practicing" on those children in the cave and then tried memory modifications. What do you think about that?

One last comment regarding the fact that I think Harry is inadvertent Horcrux. I emailed Round Pink Spider with my thoughts and in her reply, I thought she brought up a great quote supporting this from SS:

Yes, we think that Harry is an involuntary Horcrux as well. Do you remember when Dumbledore told Harry that, when Voldemort attacked him, he accidentally transferred some of his own powers to Harry? Do you remember what Harry said?

‘Voldemort put a bit of himself in me?’ Harry said, thunderstruck.

‘It certainly seems so.’

Hint, hint! I think Harry is the ‘something belonging to Godric Gryffindor.’ It probably wasn’t what Voldemort intended, but I think that’s just how it worked out.

Remember, Harry is sorted into Gryffindor.

Verbina - Aug 7, 2005 8:41 am (#487 of 2969)
Edited by Aug 7, 2005 9:48 am

Mrs. Brisbee - I was about to post about the appearance of Tom in the Hokey memory myself! We can fairly assume that there is a link between the Horcruxes and the appearance of Voldemort. It would make sense that he would appear less and less human as he had less and less soul within his body. And I searched out references to his appearance. This is what I found in the Hokey memory Chapter 20, pg 434 American version - "He was plainly dressed in a black suit; his hair was a little longer than it had been in school and his cheeks were Hollowed..."

Chapter 20, pg 436 - "Harry thought he saw a red gleam in his dark eyes."

Chapter 20, pg 437 - "There was no mistaking it this time: Voldemort's eyes flashed scarlet at the words and Harry saw his knuckles whiten on the locket's chain."

Now I don't know about anyone else, but the only place I have ever seen red eyes on a person was in a photo. This is not a normal human trait so I would suggest that he had made at least two Horcruxes at this time.

Also in Chapter 23, in Slughorn's memory, Slughorn says that to split your soul even once was horrible. "But of course, existence in such a form...few would want it Tom, very few. Death would be preferable" So it seems that the creation of just one Horcrux mars the maker in some way.

If the diary were the first, then the only noticeable difference in appearance would be the eyes going red.

As to the diary, it was created when Voldemort was 16. He killed his father at the age of 16. When he was 16 or 17, he asked Slughorn about the creating of Horcruxes, specifically creating multiple ones. At this time, he was wearing the ring from Morfin. Looking at the memory, it almost seems as if Voldemort already knows how to create one. Slughorn certainly didn't tell him how to do it specifically. I suggest that Tom knew how to create one and was trying to ascertain if it were possible to create another.

Also DD says that the way in which the diary was made...it was made to be used by another, to be within the possession of another to be able to open the chamber. There were no protections about it and it was given to another to hold. DD said that this seemed to suggest that when it was made, it was made with the knowledge that it was not the only Horcrux. "It suggested that he had made - or been planning to make - more Horcruxes, so that the loss of the first would not be so detrimental." said by DD, Chap 23 page 501

I propose from this information that Tom killed Myrtle through the basilisk. He created the diary to be a weapon, suspecting that it was possible to create yet another Horcrux. Then he killed the Riddles and upon his return to Hogwarts asked about the creation of multiple ones so that he could use the ring.

It is also possible he asked Slughorn about the creation of multiple Horcruxes to find out how many were possible, not if it were possible. He asked specifically about the number 7 as if wondering if it could be done that many times.

And one thing about the death of Myrtle, is it possible that Voldemort was able to partially possess the basilisk, making her death at murder essentially he committed?

Elanor - Aug 7, 2005 10:38 am (#488 of 2969)
Edited Aug 7, 2005 11:44 am

Troels: "I wanted to ask the Alchemy crew if there's anything in their areas that resonates with the soul receptacles, but I don't know if they read this thread (I think I'll point them this way )." Well done!

The concept of the soul in alchemy is very interesting. It is also rather complex but may help us understand the principle of the Horcruxes. As often, in alchemy, the concept refers to different types of reality:

- First, the soul refers to the end of the red process, to the achievement of the journey for the alchemist through the achievement of the Philosopher's Stone. The soul is then the ferment that "animate" the Stone and what is needed to make the Elixir of Life ("animate", from the Latin word "anima", "soul", from which the French word for "soul", "‚me", comes too.)

- Alchemists had a very Platonic idea of the soul (something like "The soul is in the body, and the Spirit is in the soul"). The soul is attached to men but is also independent, that is to say the soul doesn't depend on the man but the man depend on it so to continue to live. Hence "to animate" from "anima"/soul: the soul animates the body. Hence too the fact that the soul can leave the body.

So, the aim of the alchemists was to celebrate "the wedding of the soul and the body and then the wedding with the Spirit". In other words, to do the exact opposite of a Horcrux: not to split a soul but to unite the body and the soul.

- Jung, who worked a lot on alchemical symbolism, was seeing the soul as a couple of opposites (an alchemical concept): these opposites were the body and the spirit/the mind and the soul was the "mediator" of these opposites. Here again, it is the idea of union ("conjunction", to use an alchemical term) that is important. So, if it is those conceptions of the soul that JKR uses, then we understand better why it is such an ignominious act to split one's soul, don't you think so?

- In alchemy, the human soul undergoing spiritual development is symbolised by birds flying. The symbol is different depending on what bird is used but the phoenix image here is very interesting since it symbolises "the freeing of the spirit from the bounds of the physical" (Adam McLean alchemy site). How not to think of the "white smoke" phoenix appearing during DD's funeral?

This is all that I have found for the moment but I have not searched all my books yet. But for now, I have found nothing about "splitting souls", only about unity which is logical after all since the alchemists' main aim was the ennoblement of the soul, achieved through the ennoblement of the matter and that the Horcruxes, as I understand them, are the exact opposite of that.

Which is interesting BTW since, on one hand, we have symbols of the elevation of the soul (the white phoenix), white/albedo symbols, unity (the harmony concept again) -light in a word- and, on the other hand, on the side of darkness, the Horcruxes, the soul split and all the nigredo symbolism attached to the Cave chapter. This is the couple of opposites concept again...

Does it help? Oh, a last detail! I've been wondering about the "Horcrux" etymology and I was thinking that it could be read as "hor(s) crux", "hors" means "outside" in French (you don't pronounce the "s") and "crux" in alchemy is the crucible (a container used by the alchemist during the Work). So, "Horcrux" could mean "the outside crucible", which is exactly what Voldemort is searching for: an outside container for parts of his soul!

septentrion - Aug 7, 2005 10:40 am (#489 of 2969)
Edited Aug 7, 2005 11:41 am

I'm not sure about that last part : Myrtle distinctly heard a male voice just before she went out of her cubicle. If Riddle was possessing the basilisk, she wouldn't have heard it, would she ?

Just an idea : do you think it possible to make a Horcrux, to put it in a temporary vessel and then to put it in the object you really intended to use for your Horcrux ? For instance, could Riddle commit a murder, put a split part of his soul in any object, then retrieve his Horcrux and put it in say Hufflepuff's cup ?

edit : cross-post with Elanor ***waves frantically***

Soul Search - Aug 7, 2005 3:24 pm (#490 of 2969)
Edited Aug 7, 2005 4:28 pm

Hey, I think we are getting somewhere!

We are making the assumption that Voldemort's moving parts of his soul into Horcruxes caused his appearance to change, become more "snakelike."

Mrs Brisbee's pickup on the red eyes for Diary Tom Riddle says he had made at least one Horcrux when he created the diary. I think it was a package, diary and Horcrux; that is, the concept of the diary included part of Riddle's soul to make it work.

Verbina's details help with the Hokey memory Tom Riddle. It does seem that the red has intensified. I can accept that it means another Horcrux, but it convinces me more that there is no mention of the ring. I suggest that he had already made the ring a Horcrux and secured it in the Gaunt cabin. My only doubt is that he probably would hesitate to wear the ring around Borgin and Burkes.

Troels Forchhammer makes some good supporting points. I especially like the suggestion that Voldemort could murder any time he wanted to make a Horcrux. septentrion's idea of temporary soul storage also supports the "timeframe doesn't matter" contention.

Thus, the murder-Horcrux timeframe doesn't matter. At least, we can't use timeframe to draw many conclusions.

When he killed the Riddles, he had already split his soul at least four times, but had made, perhaps, two Horcruxes. What's an extra murder for Voldemort. This holds as long as Voldemort isn't trying to make every Horcrux murder "important" (like Harry's).

So, my idea that he waited until after leaving Borgin and Burkes to make any Horcruxes doesn't hold. He made some afterward, and his appearance continued to change, but he also traveled and delved into the dark arts (Dumbledore at the end of PS/SS. See quote in 480.)

Good work team! What should we explore next?

That ring bothers me a bit. There doesn't appear to be an "S" on it, rather some crest. Should we really have two Slytherin Horcruxes? Does the ring have to be from Slytherin just because Marvolo had it?

Sparrowhawk - Aug 7, 2005 3:26 pm (#491 of 2969)

Many people have tried to connect the creation of Horcruxes with significant deaths. I'm not so sure that it is necessary. After all, Frank Bryce's murder appears to have been used, when Voldemort turned Nagini into a Horcrux... and he was a most ordinary Muggle.

There is only one case when we have some degree of evidence that Voldemort decided to combine a highly symbolic murder with the creation of a Horcrux: of course, it was with Harry Potter... But there were two specific reasons: the prophecy, and the fact that Voldemort wanted to create his "last" Horcrux, so splitting his soul in 7 parts (as we know, a highly magical figure).

Therefore, do we really need to connect the making of, say, the diary Horcrux with Moaning Myrtle's murder, or of the ring Horcrux with the murder of the Riddles? It looks to me as if we are giving ourselves a hard time for little reason, and trying to twist the facts so that they'd fit our theories, (and not vice versa, as should be the case...)

Puck - Aug 7, 2005 6:35 pm (#492 of 2969)

I guess as far as the ring and the diary are concerned it doesn’t really matter when he made them, or with who's murder, as they have already been found and destroyed (though it is fun to ponder, and gives us something to think about while awaiting book 7). I think we can take DD at his word that important murders were used for Horcruxes. That gives us -and Harry- a base to beginning finding the last ones.

Frank Bryce I think was more for desperation. LV needed a final Horcrux, so he made it ASAP.

It was stated the DD would have noted the change in Riddle's appearance, and thus known about the Horcruxes. I disagree. No one had ever made multiple ones before, so DD would have no idea that such a thing would be what caused the change in appearance. Plus, he said himself it was not until he saw the diary that the thought of multiple Horcruxes occurred to him.

Paulus Maximus - Aug 7, 2005 6:43 pm (#493 of 2969)

Why did Voldemort need that final Horcrux before his reincarnation? Voldemort said something to the effect of "One more death and Harry Potter is mine", but why would he need that one more death (or those two more deaths, as it turned out)?

Sparrowhawk - Aug 7, 2005 10:40 pm (#494 of 2969)

Puck,

Where did DD state that in Voldemort's mind, the making of Horcruxes had to be connected with important deaths? Important objects, most certainly, but except in the case of Harry, I find no indication that it had to be the case - although you may have noticed something that I didn't...

Surprised

)

Ann - Aug 7, 2005 11:55 pm (#495 of 2969)
Edited Aug 8, 2005 1:02 am

I think that for some reason, it is very important that Horcruxes can be made long after the murder that actually split the soul. (Where the soul bit is during this interim period, I have no idea.) JKR has given us all the elements of a syllogism: The rest of the Riddle family has been murdered by the Slughorn scene (Tom is wearing the ring). Tom does not know how to make a Horcrux at that point (since she stresses his excitement and eagerness when he asks about the method and then the spell). In the memory with Hepzibah Smith, he has made the ring into a Horcrux (he is no longer wearing it--this is quite clear, since there are many, many references to his hands and fingers in that memory without a reference to the ring). Finally, she has Dumbledore state emphatically that he does not believe that Voldemort has killed anyone between the Riddles and Hepzibah Smith. So, during the period in which Voldemort learns to make a Horcrux (between the Slughorn scene and the Hepzibah scene) he has not killed anyone new, yet he has made two Horcruxes (first the diary and then the ring). I don't know why this should be important, but it clearly is, since it is so emphatically pointed at with all sorts of evidence, but also not stated directly, a real give-away with JKR.

Another point that is very well evidenced and yet not clearly stated is that the Slughorn scene took place in the early part of Tom Riddle's sixth year. The basilisk/Chamber of Secrets thing clearly happened in the second half of his fifth (he was a prefect, it was spring, he was 16). We know (Dumbledore says) that he killed his father over the following summer ("the summer of his 16th year"). And in the Slughorn scene, which Harry sees on April 21 (the apparition test date) when he is four months and ten days short of his 17th birthday, Dumbledore tells him that Riddle was "the same age you are now, give or take a few months." So it is almost certainly between September and December of Riddle's sixth year, the first few months, I'd suspect, if he put his 16-year-old memories into the diary and made it a Horcrux at the same time, which seems the simplest way to do it. If he'd already put his 16-year-old memories in the diary, of course, he might have made it a Horcrux after his 17th birthday on December 31, but why bother to put both his memories and the fragment of his soul (which presumably also has his memories) into the diary?

I'd suggest, by the way, that Diary Tom gives us all sorts of psychological clues to Tom's state of mind at that point (beginning to let go of the Slytherin pureblood thing a bit, and focusing increasingly on threats to his personal immortality. It is notable how easily his fascination with how Harry managed to resist the AK curse and his determination to find out how he did it replaces his stated original goal of killing Muggle-borns.

I'd also suggest that the Horcruxes will continue to be destroyed in the order that they were made: the Diary, which Dumbledore says was his first, was destroyed first; the Peverell ring (not a Slytherin heirloom, but presumably from another branch of Marvolo Gaunt's pureblood line--and perhaps significant, since Harry knows about it from the memory and Voldemort apparently doesn't) was destroyed second. The Slytherin locket is almost certainly to be next, then the Hufflepuff cup, then the Ravenclaw whatever, and finally, just before Voldemort himself, Nagini.

I don't think this order is necessary magically, since Dumbledore says he doesn't know which Horcrux is in the cave, but I think it is the writer's way of keeping these things straight for the reader. And perhaps Harry will learn a little about Voldemort at the destruction of each subsequent Horcrux (as he now knows so much about the CoS and Voldemort's Gaunt heritage and birth), and this cumulative knowledge will help him strike the final blow.

Boy, I'm posting long messages since the HBP came out! Sorry for the length!

David Olson - Aug 8, 2005 2:51 am (#496 of 2969)

Does anybody else doubt Slughorn's claim that he doesn't know how to make a Horcrux? If he did, then when Riddle read his mind, he learned the spell. Riddle didn't have to ask how to do it. All he needed was to bring the spell/process to the front of Slughorn's mind.

CatherineHermiona - Aug 8, 2005 3:23 am (#497 of 2969)

I didn't really read posts that are posted before this one so please don't mind if this idea has already been discussed. Horcruxes should be related to persons Voldemort killed. I think that diary is from Myrtle's dead, ring from Riddle's dead, Hufflepuff's cup from Hufflepuff's heir's dead, maybe some Horcrux from Potters' dead, etc.(I don't know anyone more but you will maybe know).

Kate

Sparrowhawk - Aug 8, 2005 3:28 am (#498 of 2969)
Edited Aug 8, 2005 4:29 am

For all his weaknesses, Slughorn is a highly accomplished wizard, and I very much doubt that the 16-year old Voldemort could have so easily used Legilimency on him... On the contrary, when DD asks Harry to retrieve the untampered memory of the discussion between Slughorn and Riddle, he makes it clear that Legilimency, Veritaserum, etc won't work.

mike miller - Aug 8, 2005 5:11 am (#499 of 2969)

I think, like DD, we can draw some conclusions "tighter" than others based on the information we have.

First, I do not think a Horcrux can be created after a fixed period of time has elapsed. I'm not sure as to the duration of that fixed period of time, but I think it is relatively short. Snape tells Harry during Occlumency lessons that time and distance matter in magic and I think something as significant as creating a Horcrux would be bound by this fact to an even greater extent. I don't think you can place a "sliver of soul" into a temporary holding device either. A second transfer would damage the soul.

Second, I do not think Myrtle's death could be used to create a Horcrux. Again, the creation of a Horcrux is extremely sophisticated and powerful magic. Although Tom is legally responsible for Myrtle's death, it was not "by his hand". I think the wizard/witch desiring to create a Horcrux must physically commit the murder to have the desired effect.

Third, In Tom's conversation with Slughorn he tells us that he came across the "concept" of a Horcrux and was interested in learning more. I think this was a lie, since such magic would not be found anywhere at Hogwarts as evidenced by Hermione's attempt to find out more. Tom already knew about Horcruxes, and I'm guessing had already made the Diary into one, by the time he talks with Slughorn. As I stated in a earlier post, Tom was really after information about "multiple" Horcruxes.

Fourth, I think Tom's wearing of the Ring is evidence that it was not yet a Horcrux. The first significant murder that Tom committed was his parents and grandparents which he used to create the Diary Horcrux to prove he was the heir of Slytherin and to one day carry on Slytherin's "noble work".

After this point the speculation gets "looser". Even though much of the above is speculation on my part, it is linked to more "solid" facts.

We know that Tom acquired several artifacts, the Ring, the Cup and the Locket. I can think of at least two other murders, Hepzibah Smith and Dorcas Meadows, that could have been used to create Horcruxes. The sixth Horcrux appears to be Nagini through the murder of Frank Bryce. This murder was out of haste and opportunity, nothing more. Harry was the original target for the final Horcrux, but that plan failed. We will need book 7 to put the final pieces into place.

Shannon aka Brammwell - Aug 8, 2005 6:47 am (#500 of 2969)

Mike; excellent observations on the Horcrux theories in relation to Voldemort/RIddle.

However, I'm wondering if he'd planned to kill Harry what artifact he'd had with him to use as a Horcrux? It could very well be that Nagini was already a Horcrux at this point and that this object could have been used at a later date to complete the final Horcrux. Could it be something of Rowena Ravenclaws?

Given the prophecy Harry's death would have been very meaningful to him, so meaningful that he could have used a very special artifact for securing that soul, also the significance of it being the seventh, and it's being the last. I don't think he would have been hasty about it, it was far too symbolic, and of too great a value.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Wed Jul 20, 2011 7:21 pm

Saralinda Again - Aug 8, 2005 7:06 am (#501 of 2969)

Forgive me if I repeat, but I'm convinced of the following:

When V went to Godric's Hollow, he had two objectives in mind: to kill off the Potter line, and to create a Horcrux.

He had an artifact in mind, a Gryffindor artifact. He already had Slytherin, Hufflepuff, and Ravenclaw artifacts; a Gryffindor would complete the set.

That artifact was/is either somewhere in Godric's Hollow and easily accessible, or actually in the possession of James and Lily Potter.

Obviously, LV's diminution following the failed AK shot that plan to heck. When he re-acquired a body, he had to make do with Nagini.

When Harry makes his journey of discovery to Godric's Hollow, he will locate the artifact, or learn of its existence.

Does this make sense at all, or should I not post before I'm fully awake?

ÙøÙ

mike miller - Aug 8, 2005 8:22 am (#502 of 2969)

Good points both Shannon and Saralinda. Let's step away from the murders and look at the artifacts/relics:

Known Horcrux Artifacts: 1) Diary 2) Ring 3) Locket

Suspected Horcrux Artifacts 4) Cup 5) Ravenclaw or Gryffindor Relic 6) Nagini

Since it is thought that Nagini was chosen out of opportunity more than symbolism, it would make sense that Voldemort had a different artifact/relic in mind for his original plan involving the murder of young Harry. If we take DD at his word in CoS, "it would take a true Gryffindor to pull that out of the hat", it would follow that a Gryffindor relic may have been in James's possession.

I'm speculating that during the coming summer Harry will complete four task that will set him up to return to Hogwarts:

1) Visit the Durlseys' - Confront Petunia and learn something about Lily.

2) Visit Godric's Hollow - Learn something about his father, confirm the relic from each founder hypothesis and possible recover the Gryffindor relic.

3) Visit #12 GP - Recover the Locket Horcrux.

4) Attend the wedding of Bill and Fleur - Talk with Remus, Arthur and others to learn how to destroy a Horcrux. Also, lay out a plan for finding the remaining Horcruxes.

Well there it is, that's all I've got. If my theories about HBP are any indication, very little of this will happen. We only have to wait two years or so to find out.

septentrion - Aug 8, 2005 8:56 am (#503 of 2969)

The fact that Nagini may be a Horcrux confirm my theory according to it it's possible to use a temporary object to keep your sliver of soul : Nagini, as a snake, is mortal, isn't it ? So what happens when the living being you've used for your Horcrux dies ? You have to move away your part of soul or does that part dies with its vessel ?

Ann - Aug 8, 2005 10:04 am (#504 of 2969)

Or perhaps, by being made a Horcrux, Nagini is also made immortal, since the sliver of Voldemort's soul within her is bound to the other bits and cannot leave this life.

Mike Miller, I really don't think you can be right about the time limits. The fact that Voldemort is wearing the ring in the Slughorn memory and not in the Hokey memory; the fact that Dumbledore tells us that Voldemort doesn't wear the ring after it becomes a Horcrux; and the fact that Dumbledore makes a point of saying that he killed no one between the murder of his parents and Hepzibah Smith--all these make it almost certain that you can wait quite a long period after a murder before creating a Horcrux. (I say almost, because it's never explicitly said that he's not wearing the ring in the Hokey memory, although he quite clearly isn't--it's mentioned every previous time and isn't mentioned here, despite myriad descriptions of his fingers and hands.)

When you murder, you tear your soul in two. It doesn't necessarily leave your body, it's simply that your soul is torn in two, damaged by the horrible evil of the act. The creation of a Horcrux takes advantage of this terrible damage by removing a torn half and putting it into something else. I think that, unless you do some sort of penance, or gain some sort of forgiveness that heals your torn soul, the potential to use that fragment remains indefinitely. Voldemort feels no remorse, so he can pick and choose "significant" murders when he has collected the objects he wants. He may not even have yet acquired the object (I would agree, probably a Gryffindor object) that he had in mind for Harry's murder when his AK failed.

Puck - Aug 8, 2005 10:05 am (#505 of 2969)

That piece, I believe would be destroyed with the vessel, as was Diary Tom.

Sparrowhawk, I'm pretty sure in the Horcrux chapter DD states that LV used significant deaths to create the Horcruxes, which is why he wanted Harry. Will look it up later when I have time.

Verbina - Aug 8, 2005 10:46 am (#506 of 2969)
Edited by Aug 8, 2005 11:53 am

Puck, Sparrowhawk and all - DD did say that Voldemort wanted significant deaths for the making of Horcruxes.

Chapter 23, page 506 - "He seems to have reserved the process of making Horcruxes for particularly significant deaths." DD says this in talking to why he thinks Voldemort intended to make a Horcrux from Harry's death.

So the deaths are significant to the making of the Horcruxes in Voldemort's case. Which would make sense since his choosing of items to become Horcruxes was also significant...items of special magical ability and power on their own and with special meaning to him. The items according to DD's words were that the items had to be worthy of holding a part of his soul

Thus it would follow, if Myrtle was in fact the death used for the making of the Diary Horcrux, that the ring was made from the death of his father, the man who had abandoned his mother because he saw himself to be better than her. What better way to "show him" than to use his death to create a Horcrux in a family heirloom of great power and meaning in the Wizarding World. I believe the crest on the ring is of a branch of the Gaunt family, a long standing pure-blood family. By using his father's death for that Horcrux, he would be showing his father his worth in the world and that in truth, he was of a long standing, proud bloodline and deserved more than he received.

I do think though that he had already created the diary Horcrux at the time of his questioning of Slughorn. He "killed" Myrtle near the end of the school term. Over the summer, he killed the Riddles. It is assumed that he began making the diary in the following school term. But when he asked about them of Slughorn, he knew what they were and some basics of how to do them... Slughorn certainly didn't tell him much and we know from Hermione that there is nothing in the school library about it. I think that over the summer, the Riddles and the Gaunt shack were not the only places he visited. I think that somewhere along his travels he learned something of the Horcruxes and perhaps had started to take steps to make his first...the diary which he finished in school. Still working out details on this theory...

I am not 100% sure it was Frank for which the Nagini Horcrux was made. I was thinking about who else it could have been, not that I am questioning DD or anything but...Bertha Jorkins disappeared while traveling, was basically kidnapped by Wormtail and brought to Voldemort for information. We don't know who killed her, Wormtail or Voldemort. We only know that she came out of his wand in the cemetery. That would mean that by the time Bryce was killed, Nagini was already a Horcrux.

Of course, Voldemort may have decided that Frank was a significant death because of his hatred of Muggles and his desire to bring an end to Muggles. To do this, he would have to rise to power again require the regaining of his body. Nagini, being a snake, would represent his rebirth into the world, his desire of immortality and his connection to Slytherin.

Funny thing is that if he made the 7th Horcrux then, he never really accomplished seven Horcruxes because by that time the diary was already destroyed though he didn't seem to know about it yet.

mike miller - Aug 8, 2005 10:47 am (#507 of 2969)

Septentrion - You'll get no argument from me that Nagini is an imperfect Horcrux. This too will prove to be another mistake on Voldemort's part. He was so anxious to complete his seven part soul that he created one as a serious "Achilles Heel". I still don't think the sliver of soul could be moved without irreparable damage - JM2KW.

Ann - The fact that Tom did not commit any murders between his parents/grandparents and Hepzibah makes perfect sense with what I've outlined without the need to delay making the Horcrux. Tom used the murder of his father to create Diary Tom. Only one Horcrux has been created at this point. Tom's in an acquiring mode. He's put together a plan to create a seven part soul and is now working towards finding suitable relics to house his Horcruxes.

We can agree to disagree on the time thing until book 7. I just keep hearing Snape’s voice telling Harry that time and distance matter in magic during his Occlumency lessons.

Mattew Bates - Aug 8, 2005 12:31 pm (#508 of 2969)
Edited Aug 8, 2005 1:33 pm

I'm going to pick a bit of middle ground between Ann and Mike on this, and I'd like to do it by drawing a finer line about what we know by canon evidence, and what we are guessing and assuming.

Ann has pointed out reasonably strong canon evidence that, rather than days or weeks, certainly months, perhaps even years, passed between Voldemort's first murders and the creation of the ring Horcrux. Mike's point from Snape is valid, that time & distance are indeed important; we only have our own guesses as to how. Case in point: we know that love potions actually get stronger if they are allowed to age. So we do not know how time effects the creation of a Horcrux. We do not know whether JKR's soul-fragments-created-by-murder must either heal or fade, or how long such things might take to happen; I am certain, however, that Tom was in no danger of his soul healing - even if that is possible in JKR's story, love must be a part of the process.

Other things that we are not sure of, and can only speculate on, are:

∑ whether the diary was made into a Horcrux first or second

∑ whether Myrtle's death counts as a murder (although it fits the "responsibility for death - frame someone for it - create Horcrux from it" pattern), and whether it was used to create the diary Horcrux

∑ whose murder was used to create the locket Horcrux (perhaps Dorcas Meadowes?)

So far, there are good arguments being made on all sides of these points, so I'm up in the air on these. We can only guess about the Ravenclaw artifact and the murder used for its Horcruxification.

I have to agree with Verbinia's speculation in post 458 - that Riddle enchanted the diary with his memories while he was 16. In my eyes, that places the diary on more equal footing with the rest of the Plan A: objects-to-be-made-into-Horcruxes - a powerful enchanted object of personal significance to Tom. (Pure speculation on my part: he stole the diary from Myrtle.) My thought is that Tom's age when he initially enchanted the diary is what determined Diary Tom's age, not V's age when he Horcruxified it (that's my answer to your post 462 question, Verbinia.)

I think it is safe to presume that Voldemort's Plan A: was to make a Gryffindor relic into a Horcrux from Harry's murder on that long past Halloween (like I said before, he's Gryffindor to the core), and that V has since moved on to somewhere between Plan B and Plan Q. One more bit of speculation, though - since V has learned of the diary's destruction, he has renewed his plan to make a Gryffindor Horcrux from Harry.

Soul Search - Aug 8, 2005 1:34 pm (#509 of 2969)
Edited Aug 8, 2005 3:01 pm

I have been thinking about the overall timeframe for Horcruxes. Tom Riddle makes the first one when he is still at Hogwarts. He is planning on making another (the sixth and last) when he goes to Godric’s Hollow to murder Harry. This is a span of over thirty years. Why would Voldemort wait so long to complete his seven-part soul?

Did he go to Hogwarts to get a Gryffindor trophy?

Either he needed a trophy, perhaps representing Gryffindor, or an "important" death. Either way, he expected to have both at Godric’s Hollow.

Why was Harry important? Son of Gryffindor parents? Doesn't seem enough. Harry was the object of a prophecy! About Voldemort!

Different tack. Harry has known about Godric’s Hollow since Hagrid told him who he was. Hagrid gave him pictures. Harry has dreamed. Sirius mentioned it. In six years, Harry never asked about the place or wanted to visit it or asked about his parents graves, or anything. Suddenly, without any of the usual background or prompts, Harry decides to go there. VERY suspicious. That is going to be a momentous visit.

I also find it suspicious that Harry has been thwarted from visiting his Gringotts vault. We see it in PS/SS, of course, but he had to see the contents of vault 713. In CoS, Mrs. Weasley gets him gold. In PoA he gets gold from Gringotts, but probably from the counter; it doesn't say he visited his vault. In GoF and OotP, again, Mrs. Weasley gets gold for him. In HBP, Bill gets him gold, "to save time." And this after Harry has just received an inheritance from Sirius. Something's going on. What is in the vault?

The diary was a risky Horcrux. No protections, or anything. Tom Riddle used it because he needed part of his soul to make the diary work. No problem, he was planning on making more Horcruxes.

Nagini is also a risky form for a Horcrux. But putting part of his soul in Nagini has given him exceptional control over the snake. Voldemort threatened Wormtail with Nagini a couple of times. With Voldemort in a weakened form, Nagini could have been what kept Wormtail serving Voldemort. In OotP, Nagini was sent into the Department of Mysteries. Could be, having control over a large snake was worth the risk. Or, he could just like snakes and wanted to be able to be one. No accounting for taste.

When did Voldemort acquire Nagini? I thought when he was "deep in an Albanian forest," but I am having doubts. He uses the term "faithful servant" like Nagini has been with Voldemort a longer time.

I don't think Snape's "Time and distance matter in magic" comment to Harry applies with the murder-create Horcrux timeframe. Snape was referring to the act of magic. Accio ... is an example where distance doesn't matter. Since the part of soul would still be with him, and the Horcrux object would be near at hand, the magic could be performed at any time.

wynnleaf - Aug 8, 2005 2:35 pm (#510 of 2969)

I've been really fascinated by all of your thoughts about possible Horcruxes and their origins! Lots of great ideas and interesting reading.

I haven't read a lot of the middle couple of hundred posts, so maybe you guys have covered this (if so, please just direct me backward to the right part of the thread). But Mike Miller mentioned something a few posts back in his list of things to do next:

"Attend the wedding of Bill and Fleur - Talk with Remus, Arthur and others to learn how to destroy a Horcrux. "

Do we have any hints from HBP or earlier books as to who else might have any knowledge of how to destroy a Horcrux? We do know how the diary was destroyed, but in a way, that was a combination of inspiration and desperation on Harry's part. After all, DD never gets around to telling us how he destroyed the Horcrux in the ring, or anything about how the Horcrux in the locket could be destroyed. So where or to whom can Harry go for help in this?

Hogs Head - Aug 8, 2005 2:40 pm (#511 of 2969)
Edited Aug 8, 2005 3:43 pm

Here's the rub -- its a story and its still JKR's story. While we may be able to narrow the field of Horcrux deductions and fun guesses somewhat, I don't think we have enough data to do more than that -- make fun guesses. So, your guess is (almost) as good as mine (except for the fact that mine is indeed mine and therefore beloved by me!). (For those not familiar with my poor attempts at humor, that was one.)

So, while JKR may not have exactly made up the device now portrayed in her series as the "Horcrux," nonetheless as author the "rules" of how they work (in Potterverse) are still solely up to her. And she hasn't stated any rules very fully yet, and has retained great flexibility. So, it is still fair game for her to define those "rules" later in ways we cannot yet predict (on the data available now) but which will make the story work in ways that will delight us all. (All we know so far about destroying one is how the diary was destroyed -- by sticking a poison dripping basilisk fang through it. Where are all those fangs when you need them?)

Proximity to death? Direct involvement in the death? Moving the soul-piece from one temporary place-holder Horcrux to a better, more impressive, more permanent Horcrux? One Horcrux per each of the 7 novels? Diary? Ring? Cup? Tom Riddle's trophy? The flying motorbike? Sword of Gryffindor? Sorting Hat? Harry himself (or his scar itself)? Nagini? The locket (or one of them)? Voldemort himself? Other item(s) to be determined? Items already in "plain view" to us? Other items already found and isolated or destroyed by "RAB"? Is there a secret 8th Horcrux we (and Harry) don't yet suspect but which may stymie an effort to eliminate Voldemort? All this and more is purely up to JKR and is still fair game.

I still think that the story of how the ring "burned" Dumbledore's hand is still ahead of us and will be material both to the Horcrux story line and to the overall plot. (Not to mention whether we are told the hand & ring story by a still living Dumbledore, a revived Dumbledore, a memory, or someone left behind to carry on for him.)

And I for one wouldn't be too surprised if she hasn't already finished thinking through all of the Horcrux story line, at least on an initial basis. She probably does already know what she presently plans for the various Horcruxes to be, but she can fairly change her mind to a large degree between now and the publication date. She even hinted (in her interview) that the ending of the book (and famous last word -- "scar") might be subject to change (but she might have been teasing), so why not the Nagini thing, etc., etc. etc.?

At any rate, its fun to guess but I don't think any of we mere Muggles can be too dogmatic about any of this right now.

Sparrowhawk - Aug 8, 2005 3:10 pm (#512 of 2969)

Thanks Puck and Verbina,

You're both right, I had overlooked that sentence. Surprised

)

The Sword and the Lion - Aug 8, 2005 3:17 pm (#513 of 2969)
Edited Aug 8, 2005 4:41 pm

Hogs Head,

I agree that L.V can move his soul from one Horcrux to another. The events that transpired in the CoS provide substantial evidence for this theory. In the CoS, L.V was extracting a fragment of his soul form the Diary and moving it into Ginny. With this in mind, I still believe that turning the Veil into a Horcrux would be viewed as the ultimate triumph over death by Voldemort.

The Mirror of Erised could also be turned into a Horcrux if Voldemort was able to get his hands on it. Voldemort has already seen the mirror reflect his deepest ambition -- an all powerful and immortal Voldemort. The appeal of turning the Mirror into a Horcrux would be to great for Voldemort to resist. In the PS, Dumbledore makes a reference to the Mirror: "If you ever do run across [The Mirror] again, you will now be prepared" (PS, UK paperback page 157). Although the mirror appeared in the conclusion of the PS, Dumbledore's statement could be foreshadowing events in book 7.

Regardless, I hope the Mirror of Erised makes another appearance in book 7.

Paulus Maximus - Aug 8, 2005 3:47 pm (#514 of 2969)
Edited Aug 8, 2005 4:47 pm

Do we have any hints from HBP or earlier books as to who else might have any knowledge of how to destroy a Horcrux?

It seems as if all you have to do is cause enough damage to the item to destroy the Horcrux. Harry put a hole in the Diary, Dumbledore cracked the stone in the ring, and though neither item was destroyed completely, neither is now a Horcrux...

David Olson - Aug 8, 2005 5:08 pm (#515 of 2969)

For all his weaknesses, Slughorn is a highly accomplished wizard, and I very much doubt that the 16-year old Voldemort could have so easily used Legilimency on him... On the contrary, when DD asks Harry to retrieve the untampered memory of the discussion between Slughorn and Riddle, he makes it clear that Legilimency, Veritaserum, etc won't work.

No, not when an experienced wizard is on guard. But Tom Riddle shocked Slughorn, so there is little chance he was using Occlumency. And with Slughorn shocked and utterly off guard, there is little doubt his knowledge of Horcruxes came to the front of his thoughts. Further, his overdenial of knowledge suggests that he does, in fact, have substantial knowledge of Horcruxes.

Further, we know 11-year-old Tom Riddle was already using Legilimency, "Tell the Truth!" And years later, student Tom Riddle is eerily well informed about unannounced events at Hogwarts, as Slughorn noted when Riddle asked about the pending retirement of the DADA teacher. Clearly he's walking around reading minds.

All things considered, I think there's a decent chance that Riddle learned all he needed to know during that brief conversation with Slughorn.

Puck - Aug 8, 2005 5:49 pm (#516 of 2969)

I hadn't thought much before about him reading minds, but it does seem possible. Slughorn may have given more information than he realized.

I agree that we can only guess, and some of our points -which can first, when did he create them, have little to do with the outcome, but it's still fun to play!

I'm guessing the LV became over confident. Having a "weak" Horcrux or 2 wouldn't matter, because in his mind no one else could ever get to the other 4. And if only 1 survives, then so does he -in some state.

Hogs Head - Aug 8, 2005 6:58 pm (#517 of 2969)

I didn't say Voldemort could move soul-fragments from one Horcrux to another, I said we have insufficient data at this time to know one way or another. Although I agree that theory is just as viable for now as the opposite.

The Sword and the Lion - Aug 8, 2005 7:41 pm (#518 of 2969)
Edited Aug 8, 2005 8:51 pm

Sorry Hogs Head, I misread your previous post.

However, there does seem to be evidence that L.V can move his soul out of a Horcrux:

"Powerful enough to start pouring my secrets into her, to start pouring a little of my soul back into her ..." (CoS, US version hardback, page 310).

Paulus Maximus - Aug 8, 2005 8:34 pm (#519 of 2969)

What Diary Tom did to Ginny might not be so different than what Vapor Voldie did to Quirrell...

M A Grimmett - Aug 8, 2005 9:06 pm (#520 of 2969)

It's difficult to make informed opinions about the Horcruxes because we know so little about them. I'm having some problems with the diary Horcrux because it seems that there might be two spells involved: the creation of the interactive Tom Riddle that preyed on Ginny, and the use of the diary as a Horcrux. We don't know enough to say for certain what a soul fragment of moldy Voldie would do--it's possible that a fragment that was released properly would be immediately available to resoul an inanimate Voldemort. Does the soul fragment have the ability to do anything on its own, or must it be moved by someone? There was no indication when DD destroyed the ring that there was any kind of Apparation of LV. It wouldn't surprise me if each Horcrux was different, that there would be the need to use different means to destroy each Horcrux. You'd have to be sure that the soul fragment was destroyed, not just deforming the object it was placed in. The destruction of the locket Horcrux should be different from the destruction of the Nagini Horcrux.

Trying to figure out Horcruxes makes my head hurt.

RoseMorninStar - Aug 8, 2005 10:18 pm (#521 of 2969)
Edited Aug 8, 2005 11:23 pm

Whew! I have just read through the last 150-200 posts or so and I had a few random thoughts I'd like to add to this mix of interesting conversation. I am not quite sure how it all fits together, but here goes.

After having read some of JKR's interviews (oh, she loves to make maddeningly cryptic comments!!!) I have noticed some interesting things we may be overlooking.

JKR has said that some events mirror 'real world' history. Dumbledore defeated the Dark Wizard Grindlewald in 1945 (Hitler)... this is also about the time Tom Riddle becomes interested in Horcruxes. Coincidence? I think not. I think Riddle saw a weakness in Grindelwald’s defenses and thought he could better his chances of power/immortality. Hence, multiple Horcruxes. I think Tom Riddle knew full well how Horcruxes worked by the time he inquired about them to Slughorn (if he had not already created one) and was curious as to what would happen with the creation of more Horcruxes.

A good point was brought up about the similarities between Voldemort and serial killers. There are many.. the cruelty to animals and children. Wanting power and control over others. Stealing 'trophies'. Magical thinking (i.e. thinking the use of a 'perfect' number will create the 'perfect' situation). AND, serial killers become sloppy and overconfident. It is always their undoing.

The diary-I believe it was Mr. Weasley that remarked that you should always be careful of something that appears to think for itself if you cannot see where it keeps his brain. This makes me think of the Sorting Hat.. but there is a comment in reference to this - that each of the four founders put some of their brains into it and that when it speaks, it speaks for the founders...but in sorting it has NEVER made a mistake.. which she more or less admits that it is because when it is 'sorting' it really is more of a 'thinking cap' and what it says comes out of the wearer's head. I don't think this would make a very good Horcrux. Gryffindor's sword comes to Harry, via Fawkes/pulled out of the Sorting Hat in CoS to aid in killing the Basilisk. That doesn't sound as if it is a Horcrux either. JKR has said that a careful re-reading of the books will point to at least one other Horcrux.

JKR has said that Harry's ancestry is not that important (Harry is NOT the heir of Gryffindor) - that 'Dumbledore's family would be a profitable line of inquiry...'(Hmmm...our 'heir' to Gryffindor perhaps?) JKR has said we will learn more about Dumbledore in book 7.

JKR also says, when asked if the shape of Harry's scar is of any special significance, that the *shape* is not the most important thing about Harry's scar. Which takes me to CoS Chapter 18:

"And so you met Tom Riddle," said Dumbledore thoughtfully. "I imagine he was *most* interested in you..." Suddenly something that was nagging at Harry came tumbling out of his mouth. "Professor Dumbledore...Riddle said I'm like him. Strange likenesses, he said..." "*Did* he, now?" said Dumbledore, looking thoughtfully at Harry from under his thick silver eyebrows. "And what do you think, Harry?" "I don't think I'm like him!" said Harry, more loudly than he'd intended. "I mean, I'm-I'm in *Gryffindor*, I'm..." But he fell silent, a lurking doubt resurfacing in his mind. "Professor," he started again after a moment. "The Sorting Hat told me I'd have done well in Slytherin. Everyone thought I was Slytherin's heir for awhile...because I can speak Parseltongue.." "You can speak Parseltongue, Harry," said Dumbledore calmly, "because Lord Voldemort-who *is* the last remaining ancestor of Salazar CAN-can speak Parseltongue. Unless I'm much mistaken, he transferred some of his own powers to you the night he gave you that scar. Not something he intended to do, I'm sure..." "Voldemort put a bit of himself in *me*?" Harry said, thunderstruck. "It certainly seems so." "So I *should* be in Slytherin," Harry said, looking desperately into Dumbledore's face. "The Sorting Hat could see Slytherin's power in me, and it-" "Put you in Gryffindor," said Dumbledore calmly.'

Based on that, I think one of the Horcruxes is Harry's scar...not intentionally so... but by some horrid error or miscalculation on Voldemort's part. I do NOT think Harry himself is the Horcrux... because then he would be 'possessed' by Voldemort and that is clearly not the case, we know, because of the conversation Ginny has with Harry in HBP. But because of the scar, Harry can sometimes feel Voldemort's emotions.. he can sometimes 'see' what Voldemort has directed Nagini to do (attack Frank Bryce/Mr. Weasley) He can sometimes even feel unwarranted hatred toward Dumbledore that comes from Voldemort. And Voldemort can direct Harry...as he did to try and lead him (falsely) into the Ministry to try and retrieve the prophecy. I think that there is glaring evidence that Harry's scar contains part of Voldemort's soul. If this is the case, does Voldemort realize this?

haymoni - Aug 9, 2005 3:01 am (#522 of 2969)

I really don't want to believe that Harry is a Horcrux, but I wonder now about Dumbledore's "in essence divided" quote from OotP.

Does this line mean something more now that we know about Horcruxes?

Paulus Maximus - Aug 9, 2005 3:08 am (#523 of 2969)
Edited Aug 9, 2005 4:09 am

The problem with Harry's scar being a Horcrux is, how can he destroy it? Dumbledore said he'd have the scar forever...

And unless he can destroy it, how can he kill Voldemort?

Hogs Head - Aug 9, 2005 3:21 am (#524 of 2969)

Assuming, arguendo, that the scar is a Horcrux (a theory that is not without problems), would it have to be destroyed or merely disenchanted?

For instance, the ring was not destroyed but simply cracked -- although we have no idea how the Horcrux spell was removed. It was still usable as a ring, as Dumbledore wore it. The diary remained, albeit with a hole in it, and was then even used for a good purpose (freeing Dobby).

Good Evans - Aug 9, 2005 4:03 am (#525 of 2969)

If LV intended to make the seventh one (Horcrux)when he tried to kill harry as a baby but he was vaporised instead!! Does this mean that the item that he was going to use as the Horcrux is still at Godric’s Hollow?

I know there is speculation that he was going to use Pettigrew (and someone was most probably with him) but if there was an object, could it have been left behind in the confusion???? Not necessarily a Horcrux as it didn’t work (or did it? Was LV technically killed???) but it would be one of the missing Ravenclaw or Gryffindor items that we are assuming he wanted to use?

Hermy82 - Aug 9, 2005 5:47 am (#526 of 2969)

I think that Zacharias Smith has the cup that once belonged to Hepzibah Smith. I can imagine a scene where Harry realizes this and begs Zacharias to give him his most precious family heirloom. Zacharias understands that he must trust Harry who then destroys the Horcrux.

This scene could be repeated with the Ravenclaw artifact and a current student in Ravenclaw.

The point of the students trusting Harry with their family heirlooms is that it unites the houses.

Oliver Wood - Aug 9, 2005 6:29 am (#527 of 2969)

How about a Beauxbatons/Ravenclaw/Fleur connection? After all during the TWT, all the Hogwarts houses were technically represented. Krum and the Durmstrangs obviously sat with the Slytherins because of the Dark Arts Connection, Harry came from Gryffindor, Cedric from Hufflepuff, and Fleur sat with the Ravenclaws. Through OoP, Krum and Fleur don't play major roles, however, in HBP Fleur is back. Basically my theory is, the Ravenclaw Horcrux could have something to do with Beauxbatons, or Fleur. It would explain why the Beauxbatons were drawn to the Ravenclaw table when there is no other obvious connection.

HungarianHorntail11 - Aug 9, 2005 6:55 am (#528 of 2969)
Edited Aug 9, 2005 8:00 am

RoseMorninStar wrote: I do NOT think Harry himself is the Horcrux... because then he would be 'possessed' by Voldemort and that is clearly not the case, we know, because of the conversation Ginny has with Harry in HBP.

In OotP, Big V does temporarily possess Harry. He just couldn't stand it in there. I think it is significant that Harry was able to rid himself of Big V on his own.

In my last post, I don't think I differentiated between Harry and his scar. I think that Harry could serve as a vessel for Big V's soul and since he can think and act for himself, it is not a very good one from Big V's perspective. Hence, it was not his choice, but merely a by-product of the overall set of occurrences at Godric’s Hollow that night. I don't think he counted in Lily's sacrifice/murder, which counts in magic. In OotP, Big V learned that Harry can see into his mind but does he know why? I don't think he realizes this because the unusual circumstances under which it occurred - but it didn't take him long to manipulate what he did know.

I also think that Lily's sacrifice will also come into play when the Horcrux is extricated from Harry. Her protection envelops his soul and will keep him intact.

Just my humble opinion.

Ann - Aug 9, 2005 8:08 am (#529 of 2969)

Hepzibah Smith - Zacharias Smith! Am I the only one that missed this?!? I mean they're even the same sort of Old Testament name, and I believe Zacharias is even in Hufflepuff. Clearly important. I had wondered in passing why he was brought up so much in HBP (the Quidditch commentary). Now I know.

That said, I don't think he's got the cup--Voldie stole it, remember? The family lost both its treasures. But it seems likely to me that he will be involved in (probably hampering) its de-Horcruxification. (I loved the term 'Horcruxification,' so I just had to go it one better.)

Hermy82 - Aug 9, 2005 8:16 am (#530 of 2969)

That's a good point, Ann - I forgot that Voldie had stolen it. However, I still think there will be some sort of connection between Zacharias and the cup.

I also hadn't noticed the Biblical name connection. Good job pointing that out.

Muses - Aug 9, 2005 8:17 am (#531 of 2969)

I agree with HungarianHorntail. The quote from CoS earlier (with Dumbledore realizing that LV left a part of himself unknowingly in Harry) makes it pretty clear that Harry is a Horcrux ("Voldemort put a bit of himself in me?"). I think that it also explains the prophecy ("OoP p. 841 (US) "Neither can live while the other survives...). How it will all work out, only JKR knows. But we do know that LV realized Harry had access or could see into his mind/soul and closed himself off to Harry. So the dangerous part about Harry being a Horcrux is that LV knows and Harry doesn't (yet). The fact that Harry's scar hurts or burns with more intensity has LV becomes more powerful makes a convincing argument that it is the scar. And the love that Harry has inside of himself has separated his own soul. OoP p. 844 (US) "There is a room in the Department of Mysteries," interrupted Dumbledore, "that is kept locked at all time. It contains a force that is at once more wonderful and more terrible than death ... It is the power held within that room that you possess in such quantities and which Voldemort has not at all. That power took you to save Sirius tonight. That power also saved you from possession by Voldemort, because he could not bear to reside in a body so full of the force he detests ... It was your heart that saved you." I think that No. 1 question that should be asked of JKR "Is Harry a Horcrux?"!

CatherineHermiona - Aug 9, 2005 8:29 am (#532 of 2969)

Feel free to ignore me, but is there any possibility at all that Sorting Hat is Horcrux?

Kate

Soul Search - Aug 9, 2005 8:44 am (#533 of 2969)

I don't see the problem of Harry's scar being a Horcrux.

His scar is discussed when he is brought to Privet Drive. It receives an increasing play in each book. Dumbledore tells Harry that Voldemort placed a bit of himself in Harry. His scar hurts when he first encounters Voldemort (as Quirrell, at the first feast.)

There is too much canon supporting Harry's scar being a Horcrux to explain away if it isn't.

No one can fully explain Harry's scar, the pain, nor his glimpses into Voldemorts mind (Riddle House, OotP, and after.) It is unique: there has never been a curse scar that was a Horcrux.

We have no evidence that releasing a soul from a Horcrux, by itself, damages the Horcrux object. Harry damaged the diary, and incidentally released the soul from it. The protections on the ring damaged it and Dumbledore. The protections in the cave damaged Dumbledore, even though the Horcrux wasn't there.

No fear, Voldemort's soul will be released from Harry's scar and Harry won't be hurt (much.)

After all, Harry wasn't hurt when Voldemort caused the scar on Harry's forehead; why should removing it hurt him either.

There's more.

Harry's scar may provide him protection against, or some advantage over, Voldemort!

If Voldemort realizes that Harry has released the souls from all the other Horcruxes (maybe he is wearing the ring, locket, etc, as demonstration to Voldemort) then Voldemort can't hurt Harry without placing himself at mortal risk. What a quandary for him. Might give Harry a significant advantage.

HungarianHorntail11 - Aug 9, 2005 9:09 am (#534 of 2969)

Just as the cup may be a Horcrux, not the base, not the handle, etc., I think it is Harry. The scar may show the entry point, but I think it resides in Harry encapsulated.

That is a great point, Soul Search, that Harry may end up being the final Horcrux to be destroyed and Big V will not know how to go about this.

I agree that, while Harry may be hurt by the removal of it (to what extent, I don't know), but am hopeful he will not be killed. The beginning of Chap. 3 in HBP "drained his face of all color so that he looked ghostly beneath his shock of untidy black hair" gave me the thought that this was a foreshadowing regarding his fate. That tied in with the "orange glare" reference to the alchemy thread ties in nicely with a theory that Harry might almost die, but survive - as the prophecy states. Thanks to all on the alchemy thread for the glimmer of hope!

RoseMorninStar - Aug 9, 2005 9:09 am (#535 of 2969)
Edited Aug 9, 2005 11:26 am

Hungarian Horntail, I guess what I meant when I said that Harry had not been possessed by Voldemort is because when Ginny says to Harry..(something like) why didn't you ask me? After all, I am the one person who knows what it feels like to be possessed by Voldemort. Have you had lapses in time where you don't know what you were doing? End up somewhere and don't know how you got there? Then you have not be possessed by Voldemort. Perhaps there is a difference between being 'possessed/taken over' by Voldemort...and seeing/sensing thru Voldemort... such as when Harry felt hatred toward Dumbledore... which might be more of a control type thing... not total possession.

What happens to the soul bits when they are released from the Horcruxes? Do they go back into Voldemort or are they destroyed? Will Voldemort become more human if the soul bits go back into his body?

I still think that it is possible for Voldemort to attempt to kill Harry with an Avada Kedavra curse and it will rebound (due to the protection/love that he was given by his mother/Dumbledore)hitting Voldemort and it will destroy the last bit of soul holding him to this earth.

Verbina - Aug 9, 2005 9:34 am (#536 of 2969)

But didn't Dumbledore say that all the Horcruxes had to be destroyed before the last bit, the one in Voldemort, could be destroyed, thus ending Voldie's life for good? So if that is the case, Harry would have to destroy himself before Voldie would be destroyed. Possible yet, who would do it? Who would be the one to finish off Voldie?

Hogs Head - Aug 9, 2005 9:43 am (#537 of 2969)
Edited Aug 9, 2005 10:44 am

Neither the ring nor the diary were destroyed, Verbina -- they were just decommissioned, so to speak. Damaged a little, perhaps.

Probably only for the trivia bin, the name "Hepzibah" or "Hephzibah" [the "p" and "ph" are the same letter in Hebrew, but for an optional "dot" added inside by later scribes to note how they thought it would be pronounced], it essentially means "Delight" (see, RSV, Is. 62:4), but the one person noted to have that name was the mother of King Manasseh of Judah (RSV, II Kings 21:1). She was not noted to be particularly good or evil, but her son is generally portrayed in a bad light. I doubt that link has any significance to JKR's story, perhaps other than the fact (noted by others) that it and Zacharias (as in "Smith") both derive from Biblical names. Even that might be a "Mark Evans" coincidence.

Mattew Bates - Aug 9, 2005 9:59 am (#538 of 2969)

Hungarian Horntail11, I agree that the connection between Harry and Voldie does seem very much like a Horcrux, but please remember that a Horcrux is an evil object, created by the darkest of magic. The diary almost killed Ginny, the ring almost killed Dumbledore. Neither Harry, nor his scar, has shown that level of evil. Also, the creation of a Horcrux is a necessarily evil act - and Harry was already protected by his mother's love when Voldie attacked. It was only the "mark" that got through.

To me, it seems like the scar is more like the Death Eaters' dark marks. In a sense, the DE's are connected to Voldie, too, but no one is suggesting that they are all his Horcruxes. They might have Harry's insight into Voldie's head if their marks were on their foreheads.

Verbina - Aug 9, 2005 10:05 am (#539 of 2969)

I keep getting messed up on that point...destroy the soul but not the vessel. Either way, it would be a dangerous situation to say the least.

I was re-reading last night about the part where Dumbledore was drinking the potion and I simply have no idea where this would go so...if I am wrong with this let me know...

I once before said that I thought that the potion was not a poison but a memory potion...and I am even more strongly thinking that. In the chapter about the obtaining of the locket, after Dumbledore drinks and is to the point that Harry has to force him to drink, Dumbledore says something interesting.

"It's all my fault, all my fault," he sobbed "Please make it stop, I know I did wrong, oh please make it stop and I'll never, never again..."

This sounds as if he is reliving horrible memories, memories in which things happen that he feels are his fault....

So the potion weakened him because of it making him relive horrible memories and deal with massive regrets...something Voldemort never has.

RoseMorninStar - Aug 9, 2005 10:35 am (#540 of 2969)

Harry's scar has made him violently ill at times...blinded. The scar causes Harry to feel Voldemort's anger, and it causes Harry pain. I say it is NOT the object that the Horcrux is put into that is evil...it is the bit of soul that is incased in the innocent or inanimate object that is evil.

As far as the Horcrux of the scar (if it is one) needing to be destroyed, I don't think Harry will realize that his scar is one...or if he does, then he may be willing to sacrifice himself to destroy Voldemort. In either case, I do not think Harry will end up dying... as I said before. I think the curse (coming from Voldemort) will rebound off of Harry and hit Voldemort, destroying the last bit of soul, which is in Harry's scar.

Soul Search - Aug 9, 2005 10:59 am (#541 of 2969)
Edited Aug 9, 2005 12:00 pm

YES RoseMorninStar, my vision exactly!

Lily's protection is still in effect. It wasn't a one-shot. It was a forever.

Lily's protection is separate from Dumbledore's "mother's blood dwells" spell, which ends when Harry turns 17.

Now, we do have some complications. Voldemort using Harry's blood for his new body, being able to touch Harry, and Dumbledore's "glint" all confuse the issue a bit.

Still, as Dumbledore mentions, Voldemort will be his own downfall.

HBP 23 - Horcruxes, page 510, US Edition

Speaking of Tyrants ...

"Do you have any idea how much tyrants fear the people they suppress? All of them realize that, one day, amongst their many victims, there is sure to be one who rises against them and strikes back!"

Oliver Wood - Aug 9, 2005 2:56 pm (#542 of 2969)

While it's a very intriguing thought that Harry or part of Harry could be a Horcrux, I think it's crucial to remember one thing. Voldemort knows that Harry must die. He's tried to kill him through Quirrell in SS. He sent the basilisk after him in CoS, He attempted AK in GoF, and appeared in the Ministry of Magic attempting to do him in again. If Voldemort wants Harry dead so bad, why waste his time by making him a Horcrux? It's like wasting a piece of your soul.

HungarianHorntail11 - Aug 9, 2005 3:33 pm (#543 of 2969)

Oliver Wood: in my posts, I specifically state that it was done inadvertently by Big V. I also do not think he knows about it. I think Harry will find out when he returns to Godric’s' Hollow, but Big V won't. He may think the Horcrux incantation he had in place for Harry's death never came to fruition because of the rebound. I say, he didn't count on Lily to get in the way and this murder set the Horcrux incantation into effect and wound up in Harry because of Lily's sacrifice (I.e., he neglected to count Lily's death as another split) rather than killing him.

Mattew Bates: Harry didn't create the Horcrux, neither did the diary, or the locket perform an evil deed. What I am trying to convey is that Harry may as well have been an inanimate object, as the split piece of Big V. had to go somewhere and it went into the next place Big V. aimed his wand. Harry survived because his mother placed a protection on him which took effect upon her death, but it also was another murder - one that Big V neglected to count.

Something else to take into account - those wands don't work properly against each other.

Oliver Wood - Aug 9, 2005 4:34 pm (#544 of 2969)
Edited Aug 9, 2005 5:35 pm

HungarianHorntail11: I can see the possibility that Harry became an "accidental Horcrux" that night in Godric's Hollow. My main problem comes into play, when you consider Voldemort gave Lily the chance to live. Because Lily chose to die for Harry instead, he was protected and didn't die. The rest of course is wizard history. . It's true that Voldemort could have set the Horcrux incantation in place for Harry's death, and that it was inadvertently "thrown off" by Lily's murder however this raises two questions in my mind.

1.) If the Horcrux incantation were in place and another person were murdered first, would there be implications, meaning that the Horcrux could be formed regardless of the fact that the murderer did not strike his anticipated target.

and this is where the prophecy comes in

2.) LV had to mark one as his equal, hence the scar. By that time Lily had already died to save Harry and in doing so ensured that Harry not die, but rather "reflect" the curse. If the prophecy is to be taken rather simplistically, and the scar is Voldemort's mark as an equal and nothing more, then another Horcrux could reside in Godric's Hollow, but it doesn't HAVE to be Harry.

This of course doesn't rule out all the other Harry as Horcrux theories, however, in my mind at least, it raises a few questions on the formation of a Horcrux at Godric’s Hollow that night.

Puck - Aug 9, 2005 6:13 pm (#545 of 2969)

if it was possible to make a Horcrux by accident, wouldn't DD have shared this information with Harry? He was intent on giving him as much knowledge as he could, but Voldemort and a Horcrux. I still believe such evil has to be done willfully.

HungarianHorntail11 - Aug 9, 2005 6:24 pm (#546 of 2969)
Edited Aug 9, 2005 7:27 pm

Hey, it's all speculation, but I think, to answer # 1) that can definitely happen. So many things can go wrong and this is such an evil deed that it is a very dangerous and risky form of magic. I think it goes beyond Unforgivables.

2) She only reflected the killing curse, not the Horcrux incantation. (I also think she protected Harry's soul, hence, Big V's connection with Harry is limited in that he cannot "push aside" a spirit filled with love but is cast out.) To further the Harry=Horcrux, I believe the next magic cast by Big V's wand was directed at Harry. If it had been at a locket, or cup, or similar object, then that would have become the Horcrux.

We also don't know if Big V intended James' death to fulfill a Horcrux. If he did, then Big V may have dropped it at the GH site.

Paulus Maximus - Aug 9, 2005 6:41 pm (#547 of 2969)

Accidental Horcruxes? All of the information we have puts Horcruxes in the same league as Unforgivable Curses, and Unforgivable Curses don't happen by accident...

Verbina - Aug 9, 2005 8:50 pm (#548 of 2969)
Edited by Aug 9, 2005 10:10 pm

Hold on...we are not sure that a Horcrux needs to be made right away or if it can wait a while. We do know from Slughorn that it takes a spell. I think it would have to be said after the murder so I find the chance of an accidental Horcrux to be doubtful. Not impossible, just doubtful in my thinking.

I just thought of something else though. We are thinking of people known to have been killed by Voldemort as possible deaths to be made into Horcruxes. But...the pattern that Voldemort has been following all along is that he would steal the item for the Horcrux, kill a person and FRAME SOMEONE ELSE FOR IT! So looking at people known to have been killed by Voldemort may be the wrong way to look at it!

Ann - Aug 10, 2005 4:18 am (#549 of 2969)

Clever, Verbina! We need to look at deaths thought to be caused by someone else. That leaves a rather wide field, though. And Frank Bryce seems to be an exception.

As to the Harry-is-a-Horcrux theory and its variants, I can't believe that Dumbledore hasn't seen and thoroughly investigated the possibility. After all, he knows far more about Horcruxes and Harry's scar than we do. And, had he decided that Harry or his scar actually was an accidental Horcrux of some type, I can't see him lying by saying that there are only six and then telling Harry about those six as fully as he can. I'd don't think he'd want to protect Harry from that knowledge now; he's old enough to handle it, and Dumbledore wants him to know everything about the Horcruxes that Dumbledore can teach him.

John Reutebuch - Aug 10, 2005 5:17 am (#550 of 2969)

You know; I heard a theory that the Mirror of Erised is a Horcrux and it's also a relic of Ravenclaw's.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Thu Jul 21, 2011 9:06 am

Herm oh ninny - Aug 10, 2005 6:43 am (#551 of 2969)

Hmmmm.... I have a feeling that by the time book 7 comes out, even Harry's Christmas toothpick will have been named as a possible Horcrux!

HungarianHorntail11 - Aug 10, 2005 7:02 am (#552 of 2969)
Edited Aug 10, 2005 8:03 am

We certainly don't know the order or timeframe in which everything must occur - making perfect sense of a theory is almost impossible because of this.

Paulus, taking into account the magnitude of Big V's endeavor, I think there is a great chance for error, what with a backfired AK, and an ancient protective charm Big V didn't expect, not to mention his carelessness.

Remember Slughorn's words "The wizard intent upon creating a Horcrux would use the damage to his advantage. . ." The intent upon creating a Horcrux leaves us open to interpretation as to whether the spell is cast before the murder or after. My line of thinking is that it would have to be done before.

Perhaps even DD didn't know. He was very cautious not to mention Horcruxes to Harry until he had the final piece of the puzzle - when he was certain as to what he was dealing with. Only then did he let Harry in on it.

Mattew Bates - Aug 10, 2005 9:52 am (#553 of 2969)
Edited Aug 10, 2005 10:52 am

One more counter, HungarianHorntail11, then I'm spent. I came up with something over in the "Big Secret in the Chamber of Secrets" thread:

... I always thought that, if Harry hadn't intervened, Tom's body would have become solid and Ginny's body would have died. Perhaps that's what any Horcrux would do: when the original body is destroyed, extended contact with someone will suck the life out of that person until the Horcrux can form a new (primary) body. I don't see it as transference of "bit-o-soul" as much as life force vampirism. If I'm right, this would only happen if the Horcrux creator's body is already destroyed. (Incidentally, if I'm right, this would rule out Harry's scar being a Horcrux.)

This could also be one of the logical fallacies of using a living creature as a Horcrux - if the Horcrux creator's body is destroyed, the bit-o-soul might just start sucking the life out of its vessel.

Now, admittedly, I'm using a theory to counter a theory. I've got some canon to back me up, but so do you. I'm OK with being wrong - I'm just itching to know what JKR has decided is right. Until she gives us more info, we just won't know - other than that we can't both be right. *grin*

HungarianHorntail11 - Aug 10, 2005 10:30 am (#554 of 2969)

That is true, Mattew and usually - I'm wrong *sniff*. I am a stubborn HH, so I will stick to my theory, though, because remember Lily's protection. If it could save Harry from an AK, it surely can prevent an embedded, shredded part of someone's soul from affecting him. Maybe using Sectumsempra was a hint as to what Harry must face in Book 7, when the protection wears off.

Oliver Wood - Aug 10, 2005 2:40 pm (#555 of 2969)

Sectumsempra was an interesting element in the story, that appeared to have no real value to the story other then showing the evolution of the Prince's behavior. As far as Horcruxes go, I would agree with Ann that DD probably would have told Harry if he suspected that his scar or him was a Horcrux. It may have been difficult to do, but DD tried to come clean with Harry, and that's a pretty big secret to hide from him considering everything he knows about the prophecy, Horcruxes, and his ultimate fate.

I think one thing that we’ve all mostly agreed on though is the significance of a Horcrux, and Godric's Hollow. Whether or not Harry was the target of a Horcrux spell, one was created, and how Lily and James played into it. I think huge clues lie there, and it's a definite stop for Harry in Book 7.

Nicholas Schouten - Aug 10, 2005 2:57 pm (#556 of 2969)
Edited Aug 10, 2005 4:01 pm

Wynnleaf asked at post #510:

"'Attend the wedding of Bill and Fleur - Talk with Remus, Arthur and others to learn how to destroy a Horcrux.'

Do we have any hints from HBP or earlier books as to who else might have any knowledge of how to destroy a Horcrux? We do know how the diary was destroyed, but in a way, that was a combination of inspiration and desperation on Harry's part. After all, DD never gets around to telling us how he destroyed the Horcrux in the ring, or anything about how the Horcrux in the locket could be destroyed. So where or to whom can Harry go for help in this?"

Together with Soul Search's notes at #541:

"Still, as Dumbledore mentions, Voldemort will be his own downfall.

HBP 23 - Horcruxes, page 510, US Edition

Speaking of Tyrants ...

'Do you have any idea how much tyrants fear the people they suppress? All of them realize that, one day, amongst their many victims, there is sure to be one who rises against them and strikes back!'

Most likely *Snape*, after helping with DD's hand, *knows* something about how to destroy Horcruxes.

And doesn't the quote from DD just sound like a snake (Slytherin-house related) clue: rises and strikes!!!

lurking-one - Aug 10, 2005 3:15 pm (#557 of 2969)

I just had a thought about destroying the Horcruxes. What about Harry and the rest gathering the items, then throwing them to Dementors? Could the Dementors since the soul bits inside, and attempt to suck them out?

Just a wild theory, feel free to comment.

Oliver Wood - Aug 10, 2005 5:30 pm (#558 of 2969)

Oooo... I like that theory. But the Dementors are most likely to have sided with Lord Voldemort anyway. Also, the Dementors go after the happy memories/feelings in people and I'm not sure that a Horcrux, especially one derived from part of Voldemort's soul would have much happiness in them.

In theory I like the Dementors sucking the soul bits out of the items. However, if the Dementors are LV natural allies, I doubt that they are likely to suck bits of his soul out of Horcruxes.

Paulus Maximus - Aug 10, 2005 6:23 pm (#559 of 2969)

Not only that, but Dementors feed off of despair, and neither Patroni nor inanimate objects can feel despair...

Oliver Wood - Aug 10, 2005 6:47 pm (#560 of 2969)

Horcrux Destruction Theory;

In regards to the Harry = Horcrux

Is it possible that if a piece of Voldemort's soul does reside in Harry, it could be extracted through the creation of a Horcrux? I.e. If Harry killed the physical form of Voldemort, could he create a Horcrux? And if he could, would it be possible, to select the part of his being that is the fragment of LV soul.

If he could, then the newly constructed Horcrux, really wouldn't contain part of Harry at all, but rather the fragment of LV soul, in which case, the Horcrux could be destroyed without any physical harm to Harry. Just a thought.

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 11, 2005 3:17 am (#561 of 2969)
Edited Aug 11, 2005 4:22 am

I've got quite a bit of catching up to do still, but a couple of comments are pressing

Ann wrote in message #504

The fact that Voldemort is wearing the ring in the Slughorn memory and not in the Hokey memory; the fact that Dumbledore tells us that Voldemort doesn't wear the ring after it becomes a Horcrux; and the fact that Dumbledore makes a point of saying that he killed no one between the murder of his parents and Hepzibah Smith

Or that he thinks so anyway, not that that changes anything much - is it possible that Rowling doesn't have a detailed time-line for Tom? Because frankly I am getting more and more confused by this.

We have some items on Tom's time-line (we believe).

"In the summer of his sixteenth year, he left the orphanage to which he returned annually and set off to find his Gaunt relatives." (Dumbledore, HBP-17 'A Sluggish Memory') That would mean the summer before his sixteenth birthday, which would make it the summer before his fifth year.

"In my fifth year, the Chamber was opened and the monster attacked several students, finally killing one." (The memory of the sixteen-year-old Tom Riddle in the diary, CoS-13 'The Very Secret Diary') This, then, was after Tom had killed the Riddles.

"It suggested that he must have made -- or had been planning to make -- more Horcruxes, so that the loss of his first would not be so detrimental." (Dumbledore speaking about the diary, HBP-23 'Horcruxes') So, the diary was the first Horcrux Tom created.

"I have shown you reasonably firm sources of fact for my deductions as to what Voldemort did until the age of seventeen?" (Dumbledore to Harry, HBP-20 'Lord Voldemort's Request') At this point we have the following evidence regarding Tom's years at Hogwarts:

Morfin's memory & the murder of the Riddles

The evidence from the diary

Slughorn's modified memory

Of these only the third can be eligible for Dumbledore's words "until the age of seventeen", so Tom must have been seventeen at the time he asked Slughorn about the Horcruxes. Given that ""he was by no means the eldest of the group of boys"" it seems likely that this was in the latter half of his sixth year at Hogwarts, when some of the other boys would be up to a year and a half older.

"Voldemort had committed another murder; whether it was his first since he killed the Riddles, I do not know, but I think it was." (Dumbledore, HBP-20 'Lord Voldemort's Request') Well, what Dumbledore thinks (when it's not about the trustworthiness of his teachers) is good enough for me. This, then, tells us also that Dumbledore didn't count the death of Myrtle as one of Riddle's murders! And of course it tells us that any Horcruxes made prior to his visit at Hepzibah must have used the deaths of the Riddles.

Continuing this, we have some assumptions:

The diary must have been first created when Riddle was sixteen because he was ""preserving my sixteen-year-old self in its pages" (The memory of Tom Riddle in the diary, CoS-17 'The Heir of Slytherin') and Harry told Dumbledore that "'Riddle wrote it when he was sixteen.'" (CoS-18 'Dobby's Reward). On the other hand, when Snape planted his worst memory in the Pensieve, wasn't that the memory of his 'sixteen-year-old self'? Can we rule out the possibility that the diary was created in several steps:

Buying the diary in the Muggle bookshop

Writing it in the normal way

Magically embedding the memory of his sixteen-year-old self

Encasing a soul-fragment in the diary, making it a Horcrux

Can we really be certain about the relative timing of these steps? I don't think we can - it is assumption.

Riddle had made at least one Horcrux prior to visiting Hepzibah / preserving the memory of himself in the diary. We think so because of the red gleam in his eyes in these two situations, but we also learn that Tom, when he visited Hepzibah, "looked more handsome than ever" (HBP-20 'Lord Voldemort's Request') and in CoS we learned from Dumbledore that Voldemort "disappeared after leaving the school & travelled far and wide & sank so deeply into the Dark Arts, consorted with the very worst of our kind, underwent so many dangerous, magical transformations, that when he resurfaced as Lord Voldemort, he was barely recognisable." (CoS-18 'Dobby's Reward'). This, certainly, was the transformations Dumbledore spoke about, when speaking about Voldemort becoming less human. As before there are good reasons to assume what we do, but it is nevertheless an assumption.

There is a limit to the period where a torn soul-fragment can be used to create a Horcrux. This is required because we need a way to repair at least some of the damage done in case of sincere repentance and redemption and in order to make the Horcrux sensible (the torn soul-fragment would otherwise be, in itself and without the encasing, an independent and separate part of the soul), and certainly the idea of killing several times cannot be alien to Slughorn, for his outrage at Tom's idea of the seven-piece soul implies, IMO, that the rip is only permanent if the torn fragment is encased in a Horcrux.

There is one conclusion that we can make that is absolute: Tom did not make the diary into a Horcrux when he was sixteen!

Apart from that I can see a couple of paths to resolve all this, both requiring that we give up one of our assumptions. Personally I am inclined to favour giving up the assumption regarding the early (pre-Hepzibah visit) Horcruxes, while others will obviously be inclined to give up the assumption of a time limit.

Regards,

Troels

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 11, 2005 3:32 am (#562 of 2969)

Ann wrote in message #529

Hepzibah Smith - Zacharias Smith! Am I the only one that missed this?!? I mean they're even the same sort of Old Testament name, and I believe Zacharias is even in Hufflepuff. Clearly important.

Careful now - Mark Evans, anyone?

But, yes, Zacharias is in Hufflepuff. I've got a list of Harry's year here [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Regards,

Troels

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 11, 2005 3:44 am (#563 of 2969)

Paulus Maximus wrote in message #547

Accidental Horcruxes? All of the information we have puts Horcruxes in the same league as Unforgivable Curses, and Unforgivable Curses don't happen by accident...

Exactly. What little we do know includes that it requires intent and a spell. Furthermore we have Dumbledore's unequivocal statement that Voldemort failed in creating a Horcrux with the attack on Harry: "I am sure that he was intending to make his final Horcrux with your death. As we know, he failed." (Dumbledore, HBP-23 'Horcruxes')

Add to that that it does seem that the item encasing the soul-fragment has to be destroyed in order to destroy the Horcrux, and I can't really see how Harry, or any part of Harry, could be a Horcrux.

Regards,

Troels

SPEW Supporter - Aug 11, 2005 6:37 am (#564 of 2969)

It is in the chapter HORCRUXES where we learn that the "...the idea of a seven-part soul would greatly appeal to Lord Voldemort."

"...Isn't seven the most powerfully magical number? Yes.."(US pg. 503)

JKR I believe is hinting something with the number 7 especially since naming the wizard of the month August '05 as Bridget Wenlock (1202-1285) who is the first to establish the magical properties of the number seven.

So far we have 7 MOM floors, DD's office is located on the 7th floor of Hogwarts, Weasley's 7 children, with Ginny being the 7th, 7 books for 7 years of schooling at Hogwarts, Prof. Lockhart is known for his 7 books, 7 players for Quidditch and now 7 HORCRUXES.

Any other Number 7 clues out there for us to discover or discuss.

Steve Newton - Aug 11, 2005 6:39 am (#565 of 2969)

In OOTP I thought it interesting that when Ron tries to go up to see Hermione in the girl's dorm that he makes it to the sixth step but it says that he did not make it to the seventh. It would support the idea that 7 is a number for maturity or completeness of something. Ron has to make it to 7 before he gets Hermione.

kingdolohov - Aug 11, 2005 8:06 am (#566 of 2969)
Edited Aug 11, 2005 9:07 am

I don't remember if anyone has mentioned this as a possible object to be a Horcrux, but I don't feel like reading every post on this topic.

Since Rowling said that someone would probably guess the last Horcrux by the end of the first week after the book came out, we obviously have been exposed to it. My suggestion comes from HBP, in the room of requirement/hiding place. There is a tarnished tiara that Harry places on top of a head or something. It probably is quite old, and maybe Ravenclaw wore it at some point? It seems to me that the hiding place had to have been important to be introduced.

Another thought: since she said "last" Horcrux, does that mean the other ones we know of are all correct (Nagini)?

HungarianHorntail11 - Aug 11, 2005 10:16 am (#567 of 2969)

kingdolohov, there has been speculation that the tiara and head were set up like a princess, giving us a hint that the book referred to a woman, rather than a man - Eileen Prince.

SPEW Supporter - Aug 11, 2005 10:35 am (#568 of 2969)

Since posting #564 I discovered the thread "Magical Number Seven" and copied that post over there feeling that it belonged there instead of here. (hope that it was legal)

Hogs Head - Aug 11, 2005 11:16 am (#569 of 2969)

Troels:

Your math may be slightly off, but perhaps I'm forgetting when Voldemort's birthday was. If one is 11 at the start of his or her 1st year, wouldn't make them 15 at the start of their 5th year?

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 11, 2005 11:57 am (#570 of 2969)

Hogs Head wrote in message #569

Your math may be slightly off, but perhaps I'm forgetting when Voldemort's birthday was. If one is 11 at the start of his or her 1st year, wouldn't make them 15 at the start of their 5th year?

Tom Riddle was born on new year's eve. His sixteenth year is from his fifteen years birthday until his sixteenth birthday (think of the child's first year) so "in the summer of his sixteenth year" Tom would be fifteen, and therefore starting his fifth year at Hogwarts after that summer.

In the latter part of his fifth year, after new year, he would be sixteen. His 'capture' of Hagrid was, for instance, on 13 June.

Regards,

Troels

Hogs Head - Aug 11, 2005 2:19 pm (#571 of 2969)

Hmmm. Almost everyone in the U.S. would use or interpret the phrase "in the summer of his sixteenth year" to refer to the summer after which or during which the person's 16th birthday occurred. In my case, the "summer of my sixteenth year" occurred just before my 17th birthday in the fall. At least this is so in the U.S. -- some U.K. resident would have to speak up on usage there.

HungarianHorntail11 - Aug 11, 2005 2:29 pm (#572 of 2969)
Edited Aug 11, 2005 3:33 pm

Hogs Head - I hope I am interpreting your post correctly, here goes:

Even here in the USA, the nineteenth century refers to the 1800s. A baby is born and his first year consists of the first month, second month, third month, etc., all the way up until he turns 1. His sixteenth year, therefore, would begin the day after he turns 15 and continue up until just before he turns 16, thus starting his 17th year.

Nicholas Schouten - Aug 11, 2005 3:16 pm (#573 of 2969)
Edited Aug 11, 2005 4:17 pm

Hungarian Horntail11 - technically, as relates to the written word you are still probably correct; nevertheless the phrasing would lend itself to Hogs Head's interpretation. The language, lord love it, is always changing. It reminds me very much of the meaning of the word "peruse", which nowadays is used and understood in complete contrast to its actual meaning (skim over as opposed to read carefully). In fact it's recommended now to simply not use the word because of its double diametrical meanings!

All in all I vote in favor of the colloquial usage and that the summer of the 16th year happened after LV's 16th birthday.

Oliver Wood - Aug 11, 2005 4:33 pm (#574 of 2969)

Alright... On a different topic, I've had a kind of half-baked theory for awhile that's a little far fetched but has some ground to it. Last might I discussed it with a friend, and although she could find some holes in it, the idea intrigued her all the same. So here it goes. Please, tell me what you think.

Are you all sitting down?...

What if Dumbledore was a Horcrux?

Now I know this sounds a little far-fetched, but some main elements fit.

1. First and foremost, it would explain why DD had to die. He pleaded with Snape on the astronomy tower for most of us assumed was something like Harry's protection. But what if there was an alternative motive. If Dumbledore found out that he was a Horcrux, he knew he'd have to sacrifice himself in order for LV's defeat.

2. There's been a lot of talk on the DD thread about his lineage. This "chatter" all centers around the point that DD could be a direct descendant of Godric Gryffindor. Now we've been discussing what the Gryffindor Horcrux is, and many of us pointed to Harry. However, what if it is not Harry at all.

3. The Horcrux related injury. Perhaps DD was trying to remove the Horcrux from within himself, by using the ring. I said in an earlier post that it might be possible to use the shell of a Horcrux, or a whole other object, to transfer a "dirtied" part of your soul into, could DD have been trying to do something of that sort with the ring, when he was wearing it...or could JK throw a little Lord of the Rings flair into the novel, and the soul from the ring was transferred into DD. If was anticipating his death at the end of the story anyway, it might have been a plausible option for him.

Now, why would LV make DD a Horcrux...

One main reason sticks out in my mind, DD was the only wizard LV ever feared. We have what could be argued as the most powerful Dark Wizard, and the only one who could really bring about DD demise, against, well DD. This would explain why LV just didn't kill DD in the ministry in OoP. It would explain why he sent Malfoy to go kill DD, someone who was most likely to die in the process anyway. Unfortunately, Snape's Unbreakable vow assured DD fate in the end. So the question remains...at the start of Book 7, is it possible, LV could be enraged by the death of DD, rather then ecstatic.

Like I said some major holes, but some things fit into place, and we wouldn't expect Jo to give us all the pieces at once would we?!

HungarianHorntail11 - Aug 11, 2005 5:30 pm (#575 of 2969)

Why would he keep this little tidbit from Harry, though?

Oliver Wood - Aug 11, 2005 5:46 pm (#576 of 2969)

Harry would never destroy DD. That's pretty easy to see. So DD figured why put Harry through the trauma of knowing he might have to destroy his beloved mentor and teacher when someone else would finish the job by the end of the year anyway?

Plus, DD instilled the knowledge of the Horcruxes and there destruction even in the last hours of his life. What if the destruction a Horcrux requires a sacrifice on the other person's part. For the diary it was Ginny Weasley's sacrifice of sanity and innocence. For the ring it was Dumbledore’s hand. For the locket it was Dumbledore strength and body. And for DD the Horcrux it was Harry's sacrifice of a teacher and mentor.

That's why harry didn't need to know. It wasn't important that he carried out the destruction of DD, only that he understood enough about the Horcruxes, and trusted and needed/wanted Dumbledore's help so badly that the sacrifice of his moral supporter, would be enough.

Verbina - Aug 11, 2005 5:55 pm (#577 of 2969)

Because he told Harry that he would have to destroy them all? It is an intriguing concept and should be looked at but I find it to be unlikely in my own thinking.

As for the debate on the wording and years...

The summer of a person's 16th year is generally taken to mean the summer in which they are 16...this would be the summer of 1944 for Voldemort. Which would mean that 1944 is the year when the Riddle died and the spring of 1944 is when the Chamber was opened. At least from my figures. So Myrtle died in spring of 1944, Riddle died in summer of 1944, Voldemort began making the diary to hold his 16 year old self in 1944 and he asked Slughorn about Horcruxes in the 1944,45 school term.

Puck - Aug 11, 2005 6:56 pm (#578 of 2969)

I like the idea of a sacrifice of some kind being necessary for a Horcrux to be destroyed. I, however, find the idea of DD -or any other person- being a Horcrux unlikely.

Yes, Tom did frame others for his early murders. But, as LV he no longer felt he had to hide his deeds, so I doubt he would have framed others for them. I mean, who's going to come and arrest the Dark Lord? As a boy, he feared retribution, but as a powerful Dark wizard he did not. I therefore think it like we stick with murders we know, though this would be difficult, since so much of this occurred while he had "disappeared."

Phelim Mcintyre - Aug 12, 2005 12:15 am (#579 of 2969)

kingdolohov - I missed the possibility of the tiara completely. I have been trying to think of what the Ravenclaw artifact could be and thought of a mirror or similar. But the tiara is a nice idea.

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 12, 2005 12:44 am (#580 of 2969)

Regarding the meaning of "the summer of his sixteenth year", Hogs Head wrote in message #571

some U.K. resident would have to speak up on usage there.

Aye, I can agree completely with that. Regardless of what is the mathematically correct usage (the third millennium started on 1 January 2001 ), Rowling's usage will be British colloquial.

All I can do is to do the math

Regards,

Troels

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 12, 2005 5:44 am (#581 of 2969)

Another question to throw on the table . . .

Will Voldemort seek to replace the one Horcrux he knows has been destroyed (the diary)?

I have this image of Voldemort attacking Hogwarts in order to get to Gryffindor's Sword, not knowing that Harry has just killed Nagini, and Harry arriving in the middle of the battle, Voldemort holding Gryffindor's bloodied sword, which he has just used to kill McGonagall in preparation for creating the Horcrux . . .

Enter Harry and final battle ensues

OK, just a picture , but seriously, will Voldemort seek to create a new Horcrux now that he knows the diary has been destroyed, or will he be satisfied that he split his soul in seven (even if one of the seven pieces is gone)?

Regards,

Troels

septentrion - Aug 12, 2005 6:07 am (#582 of 2969)

I don't know Troels, perhaps he's still wanting to create a Horcrux with Harry's death...

Herm oh ninny - Aug 12, 2005 6:17 am (#583 of 2969)
Edited Aug 12, 2005 7:17 am

Troels, please stop, you're scaring me!

Seriously though, the way Dumbledore talked about it, he made it seem(at least to me) that Big V wouldn't be making any more Horcruxes. I mean, a whole year has gone by ( and we didn't see Big V at all). How many murders has he committed in that time. Did he use any of them to make Horcruxes? Dumbledore seemed quite sure that Harry only had to worry about the 7.

Phelim Mcintyre - Aug 12, 2005 6:35 am (#584 of 2969)
Edited Aug 12, 2005 7:37 am

I'm still not convinced that Nagini is a Horcrux. Considering the physical state that Voldemort was in when Frank Bryce was killed I think Mouldy Voldie needed his soul intact until after his rebirth from the cauldron.

So either Nagini was made into a Horcrux later or is a red herring.

M A Grimmett - Aug 12, 2005 9:28 am (#585 of 2969)

Voldemort could keep dividing his soul as much as he wanted if he really wanted to maintain that seven Horcrux total.

Verbina - Aug 12, 2005 9:39 am (#586 of 2969)

The tricky thing about murder and Voldemort is that he is The Dark Lord now. He has returned to power and no longer needs to kill for any reason other than Horcruxes. He now has all the DEs to do his bidding. They take care of the things that he doesn't want to mess with anymore, like killing people. For him to set out to kill, the person has to be of some importance to him. Like Harry.

Lets' look at it this way. He began creating Horcruxes most likely around 1944 - 1945. He had made all but one of the six he needed for his ideal number of soul bits in 1981. He was being very very choosy as to who was to be killed for making a Horcrux. We know he personally killed the Riddles in 1944, Hepzibah Smith was killed after 1945 according to figures. Dorcas Meadows was killed between 1978 and 1981 according to the Lexicon. And if Myrtle is counted that gives us...4 murders known to be attributed to Voldemort. With him intending the death of Harry to be the 6th, there is one in between somewhere we don't yet know about... hmmmmmmm interesting thought here......but doesn't really belong here.

Hogs Head - Aug 12, 2005 10:12 am (#587 of 2969)

Nor are we certain that Voldemort can in fact make more Horcruxes once the originals are destroyed. Just because Slughorn told Riddle, Jr. that multiples could be made from one person's soul doesn't mean that one soul can yield an infinite number. Seven might have been the outer limit, as someone (Albus DD?) said that Voldemort had hardly any soul left of his own and that the last piece remaining in him was itself the seventh.

Leaving capacity aside, any magic in the number 7 might be undone if another (replacement) is made. That might be the 8th in a "magical numbering sense" as opposed to being "replacement of no. 2" etc. Or maybe not -- perhaps we'll have Hermione explaining the Arithmancy (or whatever) of it all to us in the beginning of Book 7.

Wizadora - Aug 12, 2005 11:18 am (#588 of 2969)

Hogs head - I was wondering when Hermione's Arithmancy is going to come into play. We have had something from all of their classes so far, except Arithmancy, Ancient Runes and Muggle studies.

These all seem like very interesting ways of solving the questions left in book 7.

spinowner - Aug 12, 2005 11:51 am (#589 of 2969)

I doubt I'll ever have time to read every post here, but I have questions to pose regarding the Harry-is-a-Horcrux theory. Is a soul fragment actively conscious? In other words, if there's a fragment of LV's soul in Harry, is it aware of what (who?) it is and where it is? Does it contribute to Harry's thoughts and actions, and if so does it do so without Harry being aware that these thoughts and actions are not his own? Is it just a passive observer hidden from Harry's awareness? Is it completely dormant, with neither Harry nor it being aware of the other?

Oliver Wood - Aug 12, 2005 1:09 pm (#590 of 2969)

Spinowner: I think this is an interesting question, which may yet to be seen given that the other Horcruxes have all been inanimate objects, not capable of self-reflection.

Then I had another thought about Nagini as a Horcrux. If she were, would that explain why her venom had a healing affect in LV. If part of his soul were present in the snake and present in its venom, it would be returning to it's original owner making them stronger?!

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 12, 2005 1:24 pm (#591 of 2969)

Oliver Wood wrote in message #590

Then I had another thought about Nagini as a Horcrux. If she were, would that explain why her venom had a healing affect in LV. If part of his soul were present in the snake and present in its venom, it would be returning to it's original owner making them stronger?!

Voldemort was using Nagini's venom before he killed Frank Bryce, and apparently he could not have made a Horcrux with the murder of Bertha Jorkins. Possibly he was too weak when he killed her.

Regards,

Troels

HungarianHorntail11 - Aug 12, 2005 1:33 pm (#592 of 2969)

spinowner, Harry sometimes acts in ways he cannot explain. On the other hand, Big V. has no connectivity with his Horcruxes, meaning that he doesn't know if one is destroyed. I would tend to guess that, inasmuch as it is encapsulated, there is always a natural pull towards a living being. If the living being is strong, or it is in a nonliving item, then the Horcrux cannot absorb into it. My opinion.

Shannon aka Brammwell - Aug 12, 2005 8:47 pm (#593 of 2969)

I'm wondering what the condition of the remaining soul left in Voldemort is, given that it was exposed and affected by the AK curse when he was ripped from his body in Godric's Hollow.

I agree with you HungarianHorntailll that I don't think Voldemort has any connectivity directly with his Horcruxes/souls so that he doesn't know if one is being destroyed. But I do wonder if there may be some effect from it all the same. I remember DD telling Harry that wizards can loose their abilities; could loosing one's soul, bit by bit have such an effect on Lord Voldemort. I just remember DD telling LV that there are worse things then being dead. For LV I believe that being powerless, no greater then a Muggle, no longer being special, could possibly be a fate worse then death.

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 13, 2005 4:52 am (#594 of 2969)

I do admit that I have a problem with Voldemort having so little connection with his Horcruxes that he cannot sense the destruction of one, and yet so strong that they could anchor him in the land of the living. It seems to me almost a matter of less than two and more than ten

Regards,

Troels

bella luna - Aug 13, 2005 6:54 am (#595 of 2969)

Hello all! I'm a new member here, and I've got a query about James Potter. Seeing as this goes hand in hand with Horcruxes, I thought I'd post it here as well.

In HBP, we found out about Horcruxes and what they are, what they do, etc. Now we are all trying to guess where the remaining four are located. I remember before HBP came out, many people thought that James Potter was a descendent of Godric Gryffindor. Did we ever prove that to be a false accusation, or is there still hope that he might be a descendent, seeing as how he is pureblood, and we know that all pureblood families run together somehow, based on what Sirius said in OotP.

Assuming that James is a descendent of Gryffindor, would it then be safe to guess that he might have had a relic of some sort of Gryffindor's? Hepzibah Smith was a descendent of Hufflepuff, was she not? And she did have the teacup of Helga Hufflepuff's.

SO! This is all guesswork, of course, but IF James is a descendent (somehow) of Gryffindor and IF he did have a relic of Gryffindor's somewhere in his house... would it be logical to guess that Voldemort took that relic? I mean, really, how does anyone know what happened in the time frame from when Lily died to when Voldemort attempted to AK Harry? No one was there, and according to Dumbledore in HBP, Voldemort hadn't completed all his Horcruxes when he went to Godric's Hollow. Could he not have made another Horcrux after he killed Lily and before he attempted to kill Harry?

Would it then be safe to guess that the Gryffindor relic in James Potter's house was stolen by Voldemort and used as a Horcrux? I would then guess that Voldemort left the Horcrux in the ruins of the Potter's house, just as he did with the ring at the Gaunts' house. It worked one time, didn't it? (or so he thought.)

So, when Harry goes to Godric’s Hollow next year (well, I guess it would be this summer before seventh year), do you think he might find more than he intended to find at his parent's house? Whew! I really hope that we haven't already proved that James can in no way, shape, or form be related to Gryffindor because that means this theory is a load of tosh. Please, reply with comments, I'm interested to see what everyone is thinking!

Phelim Mcintyre - Aug 13, 2005 7:20 am (#596 of 2969)

bella luna - welcome.

Nice theory, but J K Rowling has said that Harry's family is unimportant. Also in Half-blood Prince, Dumbledore refers to Gryffindor's sword as the only known relic of Godric Gryffindor. As Dumbledore was so close to the Potters to be able to be a possible secret keeper, he would have known if there was a relic in James's keeping. Dumbledore appears to have an idea about Horcruxes even then. He would have been alert to such a possibility.

Therefore I doubt that while he was there Voldemort made a Horcrux after killing either James or Lily. Horcruxes appear to be tied up with important deaths. The important death to Voldemort would have been Harry's not his parents'.

Though it is possible that Voldemort hid a Horcrux there, but because of the failure to bring about the significant death I doubt it.

Oh yes, if you haven't posted on the introduction thread, please do so we can get to know you.

Saralinda Again - Aug 13, 2005 7:42 am (#597 of 2969)
Edited Aug 13, 2005 8:44 am

It's also possible that there was a relic there, and it is now irrelevant, since LV got blasted before he could use it, and it's since been moved elsewhere. For all we know, the Gryffindor sword might have been in Godric's Hollow prior to 31 October 1980. It does not have to have been in the possession of the Potters; any resident of that hamlet could easily be a descendant of GG.

I think that LV planned to eliminate the Potter line (not the Evans line) and boogie over to where the relic was kept, pinch it, and make himself his final Horcrux.* I am hoping that this is the reason Harry is to visit the Hollow early on in Book Seven.

* It's also possible that LV had the relic with him that night and it was dropped when his AK blew back at him. Since we know that someone else was there besides chez Potter and Voldie, perhaps that person harvested the relic, for good or ill?

Good Evans - Aug 13, 2005 8:19 am (#598 of 2969)

Bella Luna

you are on the same thought pattern as myself - only I don’t think that LV stole it from the house but took it with him. he intended to make the seventh Horcrux on the death of Harry. His relic was with him, the spell did not work - so whether it is just a relic or a Horcrux I am unsure, but it may well have been overlooked / left behind at Godric’s Hollow after the attack.

So I think there is something there, the question is whether it is valid as a Horcrux or note, Harry may well have to retrieve it to find this out.

Oliver Wood - Aug 13, 2005 11:04 am (#599 of 2969)

Phelim Mcintyre wrote...

"Nice theory, but J K Rowling has said that Harry's family is unimportant. Also in Half-blood Prince, Dumbledore refers to Gryffindor's sword as the only known relic of Godric Gryffindor."

It may be what DD refers to but it's not all that true. The book states that the Sorting Hat was also a possession of GG. Now some people have ruled out the Sorting Hat as a Horcrux but here's a new thought. The Sorting Hat occasionally makes predictions about what is going to happen. His message is always the same, to band together, but his warnings are sometimes "unexpected".

Could it be possible that the Sorting Hat can give these warnings because it to has a connection to LV. Harry can see things through LV eyes, or through the eyes of one of LV pawns. That's why it was crucial for him to take, Occlumency.

Could the Sorting Hat have some greater connection to LV and that's why it knows when to warn the school?

Just a thought and like always complete with many holes.

Paulus Maximus - Aug 13, 2005 11:28 am (#600 of 2969)

Possible. But I think that the connection between Harry and Voldemort is stronger (read: different) than the connection between Voldemort and his Horcruxes. Voldemort knew absolutely nothing about Diary Tom until Malfoy told him, but if he had the same connection to Diary Tom that he has to Harry, he should have known...

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Thu Jul 21, 2011 9:18 am

Dame Peverell - Aug 13, 2005 2:08 pm (#601 of 2969)

If the cup belonged to Hufflepuff, and the Locket to Slytherin, and, if there are no remaining Gryffindor artifacts beside the sword, then the Peverell crest ring may be a Ravenclaw artifact. Please note however, how similar it sounds to the black family ring at #12. Wait. Did DD say there were no more Gryffindor artifacts AFTER he had cleared the ring?? This whole subject turns my brain to jelly. Sorry.

Oliver Wood - Aug 13, 2005 2:11 pm (#602 of 2969)

I've been thinking of other objects that have entered the books at some point that are very old. There are dozens of course but a couple have a larger significance.

Now many of these have already been mentioned, the mirror of Erised, the tiara, the cup, Gryffindor's sword, and the Sorting Hat, but here's a new one. Has anyone considered the Goblet of Fire?

It's very old and was "out of commission" for a while. Does anyone know the origin of it. Could it be a relic of Hufflepuff or Ravenclaw? Or did it serve its purpose in GoF and now it's done?

Puck - Aug 13, 2005 6:46 pm (#603 of 2969)

There was some discussion about they goblet back a while ago. I think most decided it had been held under lock and key too tight for LV to have gotten his hands on it, if he even knew about it. (After all, the tournament hadn't been held in over 100 years.)

Paulus Maximus - Aug 13, 2005 7:34 pm (#604 of 2969)

And besides, what significance would that goblet have to Voldemort? It doesn't exactly have the prestige that Hufflepuff's cup or Slytherin's locket have, nor is it a throwback to his childhood or heritage, as the diary and the Gaunt ring are...

Hogwarts Class of 85 - Aug 14, 2005 1:29 am (#605 of 2969)

Back quite a view posts, there was a theory presented that there is a Horcrux presented in each book (which I think is a good theory). Having re-read POA - could it be that the Head Boy badge is a Horcrux? LV would definitely have had access to it and it may explain why Percy is so obnoxious. Just a thought...

Saralinda Again - Aug 14, 2005 6:32 am (#606 of 2969)

Whoa, Hogwarts Class of 85 -- that is a seriously creepy idea. Smile

Oliver Wood - Aug 14, 2005 9:45 am (#607 of 2969)

Hogwarts Class of 85 that idea seriously rocks.

But why wouldn't DD have drawn that conclusion, especially if it was right there in the school the whole time?

Great idea though! Worth a thought at least!

Hogs Head - Aug 14, 2005 10:56 am (#608 of 2969)
Edited Aug 14, 2005 12:00 pm

The idea that there is a separate Horcrux in each of the books is an intriguing idea and perhaps a clever one, but whether it is a good theory depends upon whether it is accurate, which of course is wholly beyond our ken at the present time. As a theory, it provides structure to the Horcrux scavenger hunt but is one that should be abandoned (rather than forced) if it doesn't fall into place. Also, although this may or may not apply, avid readers of mystery novels look to solve puzzles of this sort by finding things with enough clues to give fair notice (I.e., they are "fair") while still being wary for the red herrings, false clues, etc.

Aside from the "Harry is a Horcrux" or "Harry's scar is a Horcrux" theories, frequently and adequately discussed in other posts by other folks, I for one am hard pressed to find a Horcrux in Book 1* that is "fair" game in the mystery novel sense.

(*fn -- Of course, something like the Flying Motorbike that was at Godric's Hollow soon after the death of the Potters, the Sorting Hat, etc. could be Horcruxes, as sometimes theorized. All of these have problems, however -- the main one being that the only reason we have for guessing such items to be Horcruxes is that we are on a Horcrux scavenger hunt, they are present, etc. - otherwise these items have not "misbehaved" or, to our knowledge been trophies of some evil deed by Voldemort.)

In Book 2 (CoS), we are told by DD (in HBP) that the diary was a Horcrux. But I wonder if Tom Riddle's award might also be one. That could be "fair game" in the mystery novel sense. (I've seen it linked by some to being one and the same as the Hepzibah Smith cup, but I doubt that could be -- Tom Riddle, Jr. won the "Special Award" in the year the Chamber was first opened, for exposing Hagrid, while the Smith cup was stolen later by Voldemort after he'd left school and gone to work for Mr. Borgin.) The collapsed passage way is first seen in Book 2 (no?), and perhaps we've not seen the last of that.

In Book 3 (PoA), there is "lots of stuff" laying around in terms of loose items, but what items were either Riddle/Slytherin family treasures, trophies of Voldemort misdeeds, relics of founders, or other items that might have caught (in prior years) Voldemort's attention? Again, I think we have to lean a little bit to find an "aha!" Horcrux in Book 3 -- nothing that would really fit the mystery novel "fair clues" model, is there? At least I can't think of it.

In Book 4, Dumbledore of course has guessed Nagini, and that may or may not be correct (as DD himself said it was a guess). Others have guessed the Goblet of Fire - perhaps, but that has problems as discussed elsewhere, too. The Head Boy badge guess is also interesting, but do they use the same one over and over again? One of you former UK schoolers tell me, but isn't that usually a patch the Head Boy or Girl of a school gets to keep as a trophy, and they give the next one the next year a new patch? Oh well -- lots of loose items laying around in Book 4 could be Horcruxes, but what else is compelling? What else is "fair" in the mystery novel sense?

But when one gets to Book 5 (all the things at 12 Grimmauld Place, for example) and Book 6 (all the things enumerated and all the new locations associated for the first time with Riddle), there could again be far more than one Horcrux shown for the first time in each of those Books. Sticking to the one per book theory, I guess we'd have the locket showing up in Book 5 and the Gaunt ring showing up in Book 6? But there are so many other items of intrigue in Books 5 and 6, and so few (as I've said) in Books 1, 2 (other than the diary and the Riddle award) and 3.

All in all, although JKR could easily write it to be either way, I'd have to say from a logic vs. present clues standpoint, that it is more productive for now to try to find some or all of the missing Horcruxes somewhere in the first 6 books rather than trying to find one and only in each of these books. And who knows, perhaps more than one new Horcrux (previously unsuspected) might pop up in Book 7 for the first time.

I'll bet JKR is having a little fun now and again watching us all flap in the breeze on this and the "is DD really dead" question, don't you?

David Olson - Aug 14, 2005 12:34 pm (#609 of 2969)

Finally it dawns on me... Horcruxes... one from a relic from each house... Sole heir to Slytherin... Voldemort wanted to take over Hogwarts and unify the houses under his thumb!

Despicable!

Puck - Aug 14, 2005 1:30 pm (#610 of 2969)

Hogs Head, Thank you! I have been thinking the same, that a bit too much emphasis has been placed on the 1 per book theory.

I don't think LV would have made a Head Boy badge that gets passed down into a Horcrux, but if did indeed get to keep own his badge, I think it possible he would use it for a Horcrux.

vball man - Aug 14, 2005 7:24 pm (#611 of 2969)

I looked over this thread quickly - I can't find this question:

Why didn't Dumbledore track down the Horcruxes before Voldemort returned?

I mean when Harry was a little kid. Dumbledore would not have known that there were 7. That info came from The Sluggish Memory, which Harry got. But Dumbledore knew that there was one. Surely he could have found one of them.

And now - why does Harry have to track down the Horcruxes and then kill Voldie? Would the order matter. If Voldie were killed first, and then the Horcruxes were destroyed, what would happen?

Paulus Maximus - Aug 14, 2005 8:00 pm (#612 of 2969)
Edited Aug 14, 2005 9:02 pm

Voldemort has already "died" once, and if he were to "die" again before his Horcruxes were destroyed, I'm sure that the results (being reduced to less than the meanest ghost) would be the same.

Yet... without a Horcrux anchoring him to the mortal plane... well, ghosts cannot be forced into the world beyond the veil, and I don't think that Voldemort can either, unless he has a body and no Horcruxes...

I wonder... if a Wizard dies by falling through the veil, could he come back as a ghost? Sirius fell through the veil and did not come back as a ghost, but if someone less prepared to die did...

Puck - Aug 15, 2005 1:51 am (#613 of 2969)
Edited Aug 15, 2005 2:53 am

Sirius didn't become a ghost because he was not afraid of death, his spirit was willing to move on, as Nick explained it. So, yes, I think you could become a ghost after falling through the veil.

V-Ball man, I think I posed similar questions at one time, but never really find answers. I feel that it would be smart to kill off LV and stop the war, then track done the Horcruxes. Then, find and destroy Vapormort. Perhaps, though, DD feels that the task of the Horcruxes will better prepare Harry for facing LV, or if he just doesn't like the idea of him floating around out there once more. Or, it could be that DD realizes that the DE will be more prepared this time, and LV will make his return much more quickly. (Bella would be proud to have a silver hand.)

Even if DD didn't know about the Horcruxes until the end of Harry's second year, it still seems strange that he hadn't found more. Perhaps he used the time since then to track done all those memories, and was only now able to put the pieces together and start to look for them? Still, it took him all that time to find 2 (and one was a fake), and now poor Harry has a year to find 4 and then kill LV himself?

Paulus Maximus - Aug 15, 2005 10:15 am (#614 of 2969)

If ever there was a Wizard who was afraid of death, it's Voldemort... which means that he HAS to come back as a ghost no matter how he dies... unless Harry finds a way to not only kill him, but force his spirit into the hereafter...

Verbina - Aug 15, 2005 11:41 am (#615 of 2969)

I don't think that Dumbledore knew for certain that Voldemort had made even one Horcrux. Voldemort was very good at covering his tracks I.e. framing others for the murders. So while Dumbledore may have suspected something he had nowhere to start from. It wasn't until he found out about the diary, after it had been destroyed, that he had a starting point to work from. Knowing Voldemort the way he does, he was able to go from that point and search out memories. That would take some time to do. For instance, he had to find Morfin and actually get him to remember what had happened that night, even though a false memory had been put in place. Once he found out, he went to the Gaunt house and searched, finding the ring. I think that it has taken him all this time to track down accurate memories and to actually find the location of two Horcruxes (even though one was a fake)

As to the question of killing Voldemort's body then destroying the Horcruxes then lastly killing Vapormort...how would one kill a spirit? He would essentially be a spirit that could in all reality go anywhere. So how would one track on down and destroy it? Personally, I wouldn't want to face off with Voldemort, vapor or not, twice.

As we know, he seems unaware of the destruction of Horcruxes and the souls they contain. It would make much more sense to destroy the Horcruxes then face of with Voldemort. Not knowing that he only has one soul bit left, he would likely make mistakes assuming that no matter what happens, he can always return. An error that would of course be his last.

Puck - Aug 15, 2005 5:36 pm (#616 of 2969)

Could LV become a ghost? Does he have enough soul left?

Hogs Head - Aug 15, 2005 6:38 pm (#617 of 2969)

Good point, Puck. "It don't mean a thing if you ain't got that zing." Doo wap? You can't have a ghost if you ain't got no soul, man.

Paulus Maximus - Aug 15, 2005 8:37 pm (#618 of 2969)
Edited Aug 15, 2005 9:44 pm

Is the Bloody Baron covered in his own blood, or someone else's?

If he's committed murder and split his soul, then that proves that a wizard with a split soul can still become a ghost...

...though perhaps it doesn't prove that a wizard who's split his soul enough times will become a ghost...

On second thought, if Voldemort could come back as a ghost, you'd think that he would have been more than or at least equal to the meanest ghost when he failed to kill Harry...

Mikey - Aug 16, 2005 5:26 am (#619 of 2969)
Edited by Aug 16, 2005 6:57 am

Well, I have been reading the posts for a little while, and I have had a thought that no one has seemed to mention yet. What about Voldemort's wand as a Horcrux? Number one, it is powerfully magical, and very, very personal to Voldemort. Number two, it contains a feather from Fawkes, also powerfully magical, and also possibly a relic of Gryffindor's no? Please correct me if I'm way off base on that one, but I think I have seen it somewhere that Godric owned the Fawkes. Anyways, LV's wand as a Horcrux makes sense for a final battle scene, and it seems to me the simplest idea. Use your wand which has a feather from a magical animal that never dies to ensure your own immortality. Oh, and Harry Potter has the only other wand in the world with the same core...hmmm...and this is one of the first clues JK gives in the first book. Another thing that leads out of the idea that Fawkes may have been Godric's is that the Gryffindor heir is very likely Dumbledore. He retains possession (obviously before he was "killed") of the Sorting Hat, and the sword. Two huge clues, but if Fawkes was Gryffindor's it really starts to make sense. Well, I think that is way more than enough for now. Let me know ya'll, I look forward to more posting!

Also: hasn't Ollivander gone missing in HBP? very strange indeed, that the wandmaker would vanish...

1985 Muggle Born - Aug 16, 2005 5:52 am (#620 of 2969)

I was recently re-reading Order of the Phoenix, when I came across in chapter 6 'The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black', in this chapter Sirius, Mrs. Weasley, Harry, Ron and Hermione are in Number 12 Grimmauld Place and they are clearing out the cabinets in the same room where the family tree of the Blacks is, and this chapter says about a "heavy locket that none of them can open" and then Sirius throws it away. It is this locket which I think is one of the Horcruxes of the HBP because in the HBP one of the Horcruxes is a locket but is a fake Horcrux and has the initials R.A.B on, who I think is Sirius' brother Regulus Black, so I'm suggesting that if the fake Horcrux/locket in HBP is the same locket as in Order of the Phoenix chapter 6, then Harry and some of the others have already come across the real Horcrux that Regulus Black stored away in that room in Number 12 Grimmauld Place.

Mikey - Aug 16, 2005 1:15 pm (#621 of 2969)

A note on the idea of Vapormort and Horcruxes in general: It seems to me from the reading that a Horcrux allows a fraction of your soul to be attached (physically, and not just as a ghost) to the mortal plane once your body is killed. Obvious right? It would make sense that the body itself acts like a Horcrux, it is a physical object attaching the soul (or whatever fragment left) to the mortal plane. It would follow then that just as when you would destroy a Horcrux, if you destroy the body the soul cannot hold to the mortal plane (for all intents and purposes, outside of being just a ghost unable to come back from the dead). That's why you need a Horcrux, otherwise if you were killed your ghost could go around just bringing itself back to life like LV does, and you would also never be able to get rid of the fraction of the soul entombed in a Horcrux.

Well, many people contend that killing LV would somehow result in a Vapormort that would have to then be destroyed. I don't think this assumption is correct. It would seem more logical an assumption that once you kill his body, whatever piece of soul left in it has nothing to be attached to and is gone from the mortal plane. Only his Horcruxes remain with their respective pieces of his soul attached. It would then follow, that the reason that there is a piece of Voldemort left that is 'less than alive' after his attempt on Harry is because it is a piece that was protected in a Horcrux (perhaps the most recently made) Humor the following: Voldemort goes to kill Harry, and kills his father and mother and attempts to kill Harry with the intention of leaving his final and greatest mark (Horcrux) in an object in his possession. LV's attempt to kill Harry backfires, as his mother hoped (her sacrifice would lead the destruction of LV and the safety of her child, so it's a fair deal right?), and LV is destroyed (along with whatever fraction remains in his body (though Lily probably would not have known about all LV's Horcruxes).

Aside from that, we come back to the fact that without a Horcrux, LV would have vanished from the mortal plane altogether, and that one piece of his soul is for all intents and purposes gone after the attempt on Harry. Given that, the assumption that LV is after 7 total Horcruxes, that he hopes to make the final one with Harry's murder (possibly, though he could have already done so with James or Lily (very powerful witch), and that the body acts as one (obviously), we have a tally of the following Horcruxes:
- The Diary
- The Ring
- The Locket
- The Cup
- Nagini (though I have low confidence in this, and only add it b/c DD specifically mentioned it, and we know how JKR uses DD.
- LV's Body (destroyed during the Boy Who Lived episode)
- LV's Wand (I contend that this would be his choice for final and most powerful Horcrux (remember all Horcruxes are in some way magical-possibly to help keep the soul fragment here/to help the soul come back from its less than life state), it has the Fawkes' feather core (also possibly Gryffindor's Phoenix), and did I say already, it's a Wand, the perfect focusing device for a less than life soul fragment who wants to turn back into a wizard again)
- So instead of LV turning Harry's death into his final Horcrux, he destroys his body, and leaves himself with five or six remaining Horcruxes (depending on how you look at it)

As an aside: We all know that LV still leaves his mark, along with some of his powers with Harry. Possibly some form of Horcrux?, or rather the opposite, that which will ultimately cause your destruction instead of your immortality? (that would be a heavy assumption)

Well, we'll see, that's for sure.

RoseMorninStar - Aug 17, 2005 1:09 am (#622 of 2969)

There have been some interesting posts since I was last here. I find especially intriguing the idea about Voldemort's wand... but I still do not discount the possibility of Harry's scar being an unintentional Horcrux.

Can a skilled Wizard tell when an item is a Horcrux without destroying the item? Or can it only be determined once it has been destroyed? I am thinking of Gryffindor's sword.. wouldn't Dumbledore have been able to tell/test it? He said that magic always leaves traces. If Dumbledore guessed that Harry's scar could possibly be a Horcrux, he might not want to tell him unless he was absolutely sure of him being able to handle the information, in the same way he didn't want to burden Harry with the prophecy. Perhaps he figured there would be time for him to figure it out for himself and deal with the consequences if need be just as Harry felt that Dumbledore 'allowed' Harry to learn enough & deal with Voldemort on his own?

If Voldemort intended to make a Horcrux the night of Harry's parents murders, would Voldemort KNOW for sure that his 'bit-o-soul' went into the intended object? Could it have misfired? Especially after so many unexpected things happened and he was perhaps unable to complete things as planned. After all, we are talking about Voldemort...a dark lord who is treading in unknown territory. No one had gone as far as he had to immortalize themselves-no one knows how this will all work out...including Voldemort himself. Perhaps he does not know for sure exactly where his soul is housed. Or, perhaps he thinks he does know...and he is wrong? In SS/PS Dumbledore says that Voldemort shared his soul with Quirrell (an interesting choice of words in light of book 6).

In CoS Dumbledore says to Harry, "....Unless I'm much mistaken, he transferred some of his own powers to you the night he gave you that scar. Not something he intended to do, I'm sure..." "Voldemort put a bit of himself in *me*?" Harry said, thunderstruck. "It certainly seems so."

JKR has also said that the shape of Harry's scar is not the most important thing about Harry's scar (what else could there be?)Why would a curse that is not supposed to leave any trace leave such a mark on Harry? Why would a scar cause someone to feel violently ill when the person who caused it is feeling anger? Why would they be able to 'channel' one another's deepest emotions. I don't think this is something Voldemort intended or has thought through well. He only thinks about how he can use it to his advantage (as he did to get Harry into the Ministry of Magic) but not how it might be his undoing. Why did Voldemort want the prophecy so badly? Because he now suspects there is something he has not planned for. Something he has missed or not thought about.

Voldemort has several weaknesses as do all those who lust after power and dominion. They underestimate their opponents. They become careless in their own overconfidence. They do not understand the idea of personal sacrifice and what lengths people will go to for others - as they (the evil ones) usually value their own skin far more than anything or anyone else and cannot understand that everyone doesn't think the same way.

Voldemort thinks he has overcome the blood protection Harry received from his mother Lily by using it in his rebirthing ceremony. And it is quite possible he may have to some extent...he is now able to touch Harry without pain (Harry will always have his mother's loving protection-but from a magical point of view it seems Voldemort overcame that particular obstacle by making, in essence, Harry his 'blood brother'--ewwwww, that sends shivers down my spine!). But if (and it's a big IF) Dumbledore realized this he may have chosen to sacrifice himself so that Harry would continue to have a protection that 'the Dark Lord knows not...' when he realized how the course of events might play out in light of Snape’s Vow.

JKR felt that some people would guess what the final Horcrux was fairly soon... but we don’t' know who the 'correct' one is!! The correct idea must be out there!

I still think all of Voldemorts Horcruxes, except the last one, will be used up (unknown to Voldemort) when he and Harry have the final showdown and that Voldemort will try to kill Harry once again with the Avada Kedavra curse and it will once again backfire (due to Dumbledore's sacrifice) hitting Voldemort thereby destroying the final Horcrux/bit-o-soul, which I think will turn out to be Harry's scar. Even if it is not Harry's scar, I think it could work the same way. I do not think JKR will have Harry kill Voldemort outright...and if the prophecy is correct... and if you think about the tricky way it is worded...this is very likely the way it will have to play out.

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 17, 2005 1:12 am (#623 of 2969)

mikey wrote in message #621

A note on the idea of Vapormort and Horcruxes in general: It seems to me from the reading that a Horcrux allows a fraction of your soul to be attached (physically, and not just as a ghost) to the mortal plane once your body is killed. Obvious right?

Yes, that does indeed sound obvious - and yet

If it is this obvious, though; how, then, can it be that Tom, even in his reduced, partial-spirit state cannot feel the loss of a fifth of the power that anchors him to the ‘mortal plane’ (or whatever we might call it)? If the Horcrux is connected to the partial soul residing in the body with sufficient strength to actually anchor it in life, then I find it rather incredible that Tom could lose a fifth of that ‘pull’ without noticing.

It would make sense that the body itself acts like a Horcrux, it is a physical object attaching the soul (or whatever fragment left) to the mortal plane.

It is one of the interesting differences between Rowling's use of Horcruxes and the traditional use of she chooses to let one part of the soul remain in the body, and then to also let the body be vulnerable. Traditionally, in folk-tales, the soul is completely externalized (most often in one object, but occasionally in more), and that the body becomes invulnerable from that. I get the feeling that the 'person' - the sense of self - is as much tied to the body as to the soul in these old tales.

A couple of interesting quotations here:

In a Tartar poem two youths cut open the body of an old witch and tear out her bowels, but all to no purpose, she still lives. On being asked where her soul is, she answers that it is in the middle of her shoe-sole in the form of a seven-headed speckled snake. So one of the youths slices her shoe-sole with his sword, takes out the speckled snake, and cuts off its seven heads. Then the witch dies. Another Tartar poem describes how the hero Kartaga grappled with the Swan-woman. Long they wrestled. Moons waxed and waned and still they wrestled; years came and went, and still the struggle went on. But the piebald horse and the black horse knew that the Swan-woman’s soul was not in her. Under the black earth flow nine seas; where the seas meet and form one, the sea comes to the surface of the earth. At the mouth of the nine seas rises a rock of copper; it rises to the surface of the ground, it rises up between heaven and earth, this rock of copper. At the foot of the copper rock is a black chest, in the black chest is a golden casket, and in the golden casket is the soul of the Swan-woman. Seven little birds are the soul of the Swan-woman; if the birds are killed the Swan-woman will die straightway. So the horses ran to the foot of the copper rock, opened the black chest, and brought back the golden casket. Then the piebald horse turned himself into a bald-headed man, opened the golden casket, and cut off the heads of the seven birds. So the Swan-woman died.

(The Golden Bough by Sir James George Frazer [1922] ch. 66 'The External Soul in Folk-Tales' paragraph 16)

And also later

THUS the idea that the soul may be deposited for a longer or shorter time in some place of security outside the body, or at all events in the hair, is found in the popular tales of many races. It remains to show that the idea is not a mere figment devised to adorn a tale, but is a real article of primitive faith, which has given rise to a corresponding set of customs.

We have seen that in the tales the hero, as a preparation for battle, sometimes removes his soul from his body, in order that his body may be invulnerable and immortal in the combat. With a like intention the savage removes his soul from his body on various occasions of real or imaginary peril. [...]

(Ibid. ch. 67 'Chapter 67. The External Soul in Folk-Custom. Section 1. The External Soul in Inanimate Things.' paragraphs 1 and 2)

It would follow then tha just as when you would destroy a Horcrux, if you destroy the body the soul cannot hold to the mortal plane (for all intents and purposes, outside of being just a ghost unable to come back from the dead).

Yes, provided that there is no (remaining) Horcrux, killing the body will ultimately kill the person.

That's why you need a Horcrux, otherwise if you were killed your ghost could go around just bringing itself back to life like LV does, and you would also never be able to get rid of the fraction of the soul entombed in a Horcrux.

Hmm. I'd say there is an important distinction to make here. The partial spirit that has inhabited the body of a wizard who has created one or more Horcruxes does not become a ghost. I believe that we have no easy phrase for this existence - possibly even the Dark Wizards taking advantage of this technique find it sufficiently abhorrent not to invent a word for it. We do, however, have Voldemort's description of what it is like.

I was ripped from my body, I was less than spirit, less than the meanest ghost - but still, I was alive. What I was, even I do not know - I, who have gone further than anybody along the path that leads to immortality.

(GoF ch. 33 'The Death Eaters')

[...] It would seem more logical an assumption that once you kill his body, whatever piece of soul left in it has nothing to be attached to and is gone from the mortal plane. Only his Horcruxes remain with their respective pieces of his soul attached.

That is not consistent with the descriptions in the book.

'But firstly, no, Harry, not seven Horcruxes: six. The seventh part of his soul, however maimed, resides inside his regenerated body. That was the part of him that lived a spectral existence for so many years during his exile; without that, he has no self at all. That seventh piece of soul will be the last that anybody wishing to kill Voldemort must attack -- the piece that lives in his body.'

(HBP ch. 23 'Horcruxes')

That last seventh piece did not come from any of the five Horcruxes Voldemort had created before his first downfall, because in that case he would have had to re-create an extra Horcrux, and his specter (for want of a better word) would have been encased in a Horcrux, not free to roam around in the world. It is quite obvious that the Horcruxes ensure that the last piece of the soul, that part which resides in the body, can live this kind of ‘spectral existence’ if the body is killed or even destroyed.

It would then follow, that the reason that there is a piece of Voldemort left that is 'less than alive' after his death.

Phelim Mcintyre - Aug 17, 2005 2:39 am (#624 of 2969)
Edited Aug 17, 2005 4:39 am

Troels - wow. Great research.

I like the seven-headed speckled snake. Very Voldemort.

Phelim Mcintyre - Aug 17, 2005 3:39 am (#625 of 2969)

Reading through notes I made of possible clues from CoS for HBP one was that Lucius Malfoy had the diary.

Did Lucius know that the diary was a Horcrux? Why did Lucius have the diary in the first place, is there something more to the fact he should have smuggled it into Hogwarts when Voldemort wanted him to? Does that mean that the other Horcruxes will be in the hands of Death Eaters?

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 17, 2005 3:59 am (#626 of 2969)

Phelim, regarding Malfoy and the diary, Dumbledore says he didn't know:

Of course, Lucius did not know what the diary really was. I understand that Voldemort had told him the diary would cause the Chamber of Secrets to reopen because it was cleverly enchanted. Had Lucius known he held a portion of his masters soul in his hands, he would undoubtedly have treated it with more reverence -- but instead he went ahead and carried out the old plan for his own ends.

(Dumbledore, HBP ch. 23 'Horcruxes')

And I was also thrilled when I got to the seven-headed snake, though I was also pleased to see a reference to the old Norse tale of the giant who had no heart in his body, but mostly because I had made a reference to that story back in March when we were speculating about Rowling's two questions

I am generally also very intrigued by the differences between the classic use of the external soul in the folk-tales and folk-custom and then Jo's use of the external soul both in Horcruxes and the victims of the Dementors' Kiss.

Regards,

Troels

Good Evans - Aug 17, 2005 4:10 am (#627 of 2969)

can I ask a stupid question... you see it has been bothering me

How can the ring be a Horcrux? now wait a second... yes we know that he killed the riddles and blamed Morfin and we have assumed that this was the first Horcrux making moment, we assumed that as DD brought the ring back it was a Horcrux. I don’t remember reading anything that actually confirms that DD did say - "yes the ring was a Horcrux", or did I miss this ? if so please put me right

You see the reason I am confused is that after Riddle had killed and stolen the ring , it was then that he asked Slughorn about Horcruxes (in the memory riddle is wearing the ring). If riddle already knew about Horcruxes, how to make them and what they are for, and had indeed made one, why was he asking Slughorn?

Am I totally losing the plot? if the Horcrux was in the ring (as we have all been supposing) then would someone explain why he was asking Sluggy about them after he had already started the path that he wanted ???

I expect I am being dim and someone will give the answer in about two seconds!!!

kingdolohov - Aug 17, 2005 5:57 am (#628 of 2969)

Good Evans-

Harry says something like there are six Horcruxes out there to find, but Dumbledore corrects him by saying that Harry already destroyed one (the diary), and he destroyed another (the ring). I don't have my book right now but I believe it went like that.

As for Riddle asking Slughorn, it has been speculated that he wanted to know if anyone else had gone further than one Horcrux, because he wanted to go farther than anyone else.

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 17, 2005 6:31 am (#629 of 2969)

Good Evans, it is easy - the ring was not turned into a Horcrux when Tom killed the Riddles, but much later. The first Horcrux was the diary, according to Dumbledore, so Tom must have waited quite a bit.

I wrote a bit about the timing involved in message #561 though there is some doubt whether Jo's use of ‘in his sixteenth summer’ can be assumed to be mathematically correct (I.e. whether Tom killed his father and grandparents in the summer before or the summer after his fifth year when he opened the Chamber of Secrets).

Regards,

Troels

septentrion - Aug 17, 2005 9:04 am (#630 of 2969)

euh...is a Horcrux a bit of a soul or an object containing a bit of a soul ? I was under the impression it was the former.

So Sirius - Aug 17, 2005 9:53 am (#631 of 2969)
Edited Aug 17, 2005 10:53 am

I don't understand Dementors, how they came to be, what they are exactly, but we do know they can suck the soul (a kiss) out of someone. I wonder if there's some way that Harry can control one, if he can get one of them to suck the soul LV placed in the Horcruxes, out?

Good Evans - Aug 17, 2005 10:35 am (#632 of 2969)
Edited Aug 17, 2005 11:36 am

Many thanks folks - so I am not losing the plot, just need to read a bit more carefully! Troels I must have missed your earlier post - thanks

Septentrion - is not the Horcrux the encasing of a bit of soul in to an object? if so its somewhere between the two????

cheers again

septentrion - Aug 17, 2005 11:54 am (#633 of 2969)

Good Evans, seems we're both confused ! LOL

Hogs Head - Aug 17, 2005 11:57 am (#634 of 2969)

Good Evans -- at a minimum, we do know that the ring did become a Horcrux but no when it became a Horcrux. It could have been later than the Slughorn incident. Or, as someone else suggested, Riddle's inquiry might instead have gone to whether there can be more than one rather than "how do you make the first one." More to learn on that score.

Troels: You may be interested in the treatment in the Lexicon of the "summer of 16th year" issue. See:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

You may or may not agree with the Lexicon's application of the timing issues.

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 17, 2005 12:41 pm (#635 of 2969)

Septentrion, my impression is that the Horcrux is the union: the fragment of a soul encased in an object and the object itself.

The diary, and the ring were Horcruxes, we were told explicitly, but neither of them became Horcruxes before a fragment of Voldemort's soul was encased in them.

Hog's Head: thanks for the link, and yes, mathematically I have to disagree with the lexicon article (I will, of course, point this out to Steve or whoever has written that article). Speaking mathematically Riddle's sixteenth year can only have been the time when he was fifteen years old. I am, however, as I have also stated earlier, ready to concede that British usage in this might be inaccurate. I would still urge a UK native speaker to speak up and lay down the law for us.

Regards,

Troels

nu9p - Aug 17, 2005 1:00 pm (#636 of 2969)

Does a Horcrux work like an anchor that keeps the soul from having the ability to move on. So if Harry destroys the Horcruxes, in effect he is cutting the ropes that hold anchors, leaving Voldemort's soul to float away?

Mattew Bates - Aug 17, 2005 1:11 pm (#637 of 2969)

It's just been added to the Lexicon:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

It adds a few more possible Horcruxes to the mix, too.

septentrion - Aug 17, 2005 1:31 pm (#638 of 2969)

That gives us the problem of the living Horcrux : who choosing a dying Horcrux ? If you put a bit of your soul in, say, a snake, you know that the snake will die one day. So can you move your bit of soul or is it lost ? If Nagini is really a Horcrux, do you think LV used her in a desperate moment ?

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 17, 2005 10:46 pm (#639 of 2969)
Edited Aug 18, 2005 12:56 am

I'm quite disappointed by that Lexicon article

Somehow the author fails to realise that the Hufflepuff Cup is just as much conjecture on Dumbledore and Harry's part as Nagini. Not only that, the author completely ignores to mention that Dumbledore identifies Nagini as a Horcrux and that the Ravenclaw / Gryffindor candidates are for the same unidentified spot.

Regards,

Troels

nu9p - Aug 18, 2005 5:54 am (#640 of 2969)

That article explains what a Horcrux is, how it is made, and what it does. I wanted to know how it works. For instance, do they work as a anchor not letting the soul go on. Or, if you kill someone, who has a Horcrux, does the Horcrux bust and the soul part leak out and find its owners body to bring them back. Or, if you kill someone, who has a Horcrux, does the Horcrux bust and the soul part wait for someone to find it a new body. If either of these latter two are correct it would be like having multiple lives. In the case of Voldemort he could die seven times before he used up all his Horcruxes. Or, if you kill someone, who has a Horcrux, does the Horcrux... and so on.

And I agree Troels, that article was a little disappointing.

Mattew Bates - Aug 18, 2005 9:47 am (#641 of 2969)

nu9p, I think this Dumbledore quote from the 'Horcruxes' chapter clarifies the question you're asking:

'The [final] part of his soul, however maimed, resides inside his regenerated body. That was the part of him that lived a spectral existence for so many years during his exile; without that, he has no self at all. That seventh piece of soul will be the last that anybody wishing to kill Voldemort must attack -- the piece that lives in his body.'

As I read it, the part of Voldemort's soul that is in the regenerated body was never encased in a Horcrux; it is the part that survived the destruction of his original body. Otherwise, you could get rid of Voldemort simply by killing his body six more times. That is why, as Dumbledore says, Voldie's body must be killed last. Otherwise, he could (with Death Eater assistance) just keep regenerating new bodies endlessly.

nu9p - Aug 18, 2005 11:27 am (#642 of 2969)

So then you would say the Horcrux anchors the soul to keep it from leaving this existence, and in Voldemort's case, it is a extremely powerful hold for seven is a powerful magical number.

Would you think that since Voldemort's soul will only be 1/7 when Harry faces him for the final showdown will he be easier to kill.

I'm pretty sure I remember Dumbledore saying his magical abilities would not be affected, but perhaps his will to live, or ambition, or fight for survival will be weakened.

I'm rambling, what are you're thoughts?

Mattew Bates - Aug 18, 2005 12:51 pm (#643 of 2969)
Edited Aug 18, 2005 1:57 pm

Well, unless Voldie's been busy making replacement Horcruxes, he'll never achieve his desired "seven part soul," but his soul will have six pieces missing. Remember, the diary was destroyed before he had a chance to make his sixth Horcrux, and the ring has since been nullified. Even if Voldie has made his sixth Horcrux, the most functional soulbits he's had are six. Also, quantifying the soulbits in the Horcruxes as equal to the amount left in his body feels off, somehow. I do like the anchor analogy - and anchors aren't equal in weight to the rest of the ship. Still, I feel I'm splitting hairs.

I don't think Voldemort's fear of death or determination not to die will be diminished by the fracturing of his soul. He undervalues his soul. His investment of self-identification into it is so miniscule, so little of his ego resides in it, that his personality remains largely unchanged as he rips off bits and stuffs them away. He wasn't using his soul very much before he started making Horcruxes, so he hardly notices the difference. Animal instincts like survival will only be strengthened buy the stripping away of pieces of his most human of possessions. His essential humanity, however, is diminished. His tolerance for essentially human things - like Harry's capacity for Love - is diminished more with each additional Horcrux he creates. One way or another, it is that weakness that will be his undoing.

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 18, 2005 1:56 pm (#644 of 2969)
Edited Aug 18, 2005 2:59 pm

Part One

I can't take the credit for this idea - it was posted to alt.fan.harry-potter today, but given the strong alchemical community here, I think we can take it and run with it

The whole thing relies on an interpretation of the Tarot card, ‘The Magician’ in the famous Rider-Waite-Smith deck.

A youthful figure in the robe of a magician, having the countenance of divine Apollo, with smile of confidence and shining eyes.

The Pictorial Key to the Tarot by Arthur Edward Waite [1911], I. The Magician

Yeah, right ... can you see if the eyes are shining red on this handsome and confident young man?

Above his head is the mysterious sign of the Holy Spirit, the sign of life, like an endless cord, forming the figure 8 in a horizontal position.

(Ibid.)

The lemniscate, the infinity sign.

In spiritual terms, the lemniscate represents eternity, the numinous and the higher spiritual powers. The Magus, the first card in the Major Arcana of the tarot, is often depicted with the lemniscate above his head or incorporated into a wide-brimmed hat, signifying the divine forces he is attempting to control.

The Lemniscate (Infinity Symbol), Black Arts Diary, April 17, 2005

Among the multiple possible inspirations for the lemniscate is the Moebius strip, a closed band, a twisted ring.

About his waist is a serpent-cincture, the serpent appearing to devour its own tail. This is familiar to most as a conventional symbol of eternity, but here it indicates more especially the eternity of attainment in the spirit.

The Pictorial Key to the Tarot by Arthur Edward Waite [1911], I. The Magician

The Ouboros, as I am sure our alchemical friends will quickly tell us

A serpent symbolising ‘the eternity of attainment in the spirit’ - the perversion of that would surely be a serpent Horcrux: Nagini, anyone?

In the Magician's right hand is a wand raised towards heaven, while the left hand is pointing to the earth. This dual sign is known in very high grades of the Instituted Mysteries; it shows the descent of grace, virtue and light, drawn from things above and derived to things below. The suggestion throughout is therefore the possession and communication of the Powers and Gifts of the Spirit.

(Ibid.)

Again the very idea of Horcruxes seems a perversion of what this Tarot card symbolises

In the Horcruxes, there is no light or enlightenment, but a possessive mutilation of the soul, in complete disregard of the gifts of the spirit.

And the wand is reminiscent of the old baton; a stick symbolising authority, and even before that the right to speak, but also the runner's stick, which is the simplification - or metaphor - of the missive of old: the scroll (or, as I am bound to mention, the original ‘book’ a short staff inscribed with runes) - possibly the page from the commander in the field, describing the days events ...

To be continued ...

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 18, 2005 1:57 pm (#645 of 2969)

Part Two

On the table in front of the Magician are the symbols of the four Tarot suits, signifying the elements of natural life, which lie like counters before the adept, and he adapts them as he wills.

The Pictorial Key to the Tarot by Arthur Edward Waite [1911], I. The Magician

The ‘four Tarot suits’ are the Cup, the Sword, the Pentacle and the Wand (or Staff), symbolising each of the four elements; water, fire, air and earth.

In this picture the Pentacle appears on something looking like a medallion, though without a chain - a locket, possibly?

The Pentacle symbolises earth, which would, however, not fit with Slytherin according to the accepted designation of elements to the houses - and the cup symbolises water, which isn't the element normally ascribed to Hufflepuff: actually those two would be swapped.

But the sceptre (or staff) is the symbol of fire, while the sword symbolises air, but is also a Gryffindor relic. Somehow these two pairs seem twisted: the symbolism stands, but the two suits that we know to be also Founder relics (the cup and the sword), do not fit the element of the house they're supposed to belong to.

I'd like some comments from people more knowledgeable in the area of the medieval lore of the elements (my knowledge stops with Aristotle's Physics which was rather earlier than Flamel ). But at all steps, the idea of the Horcruxes can (with a bit of stretching, perhaps) be interpreted as a pervasion or evil twist on the symbology of this Tarot card.

Beneath are roses and lilies, the flos campi and lilium convallium, changed into garden flowers, to show the culture of aspiration.

(Ibid.)

It's almost certainly nothing, but I always get suspicious when I see anything related to the lily when I am doing Potter-related research. Possibly because there are lilies everywhere

This card signifies the divine motive in man, reflecting God, the will in the liberation of its union with that which is above.

(Ibid.)

And again the Horcrux seems a deliberate perversion of that. It is a division founded in man's most unholy of divine aspirations - the quest for eternal life.

It is also the unity of individual being on all planes, and in a very high sense it is thought, in the fixation thereof.

(Ibid.)

And again - the Horcruxes is specifically a division of the self on all planes rather than a union.

With further reference to what I have called the sign of life and its connection with the number 8, it may be remembered that Christian Gnosticism speaks of rebirth in Christ as a change "unto the Ogdoad." The mystic number is termed Jerusalem above, the Land flowing with Milk and Honey, the Holy Spirit and the Land of the Lord. According to Martinism, 8 is the number of Christ.

(Ibid.)

More perversion: not life, but an evil semblance thereof; not the resurrection and promise of eternal life in Christ, but the eternal life in the ultimate rejection of the promise of the soul.

So, is this just the delusional musings of late night, or is there a meaning to this that one might take further? I eagerly await your judgment

Regards,

Troels

Nathan Zimmermann - Aug 18, 2005 4:44 pm (#646 of 2969)
Edited Aug 18, 2005 5:44 pm

Troels your commentary on the four elements and their relationship to the four houses reminded me of the melding of that brought about the creation of the Sorting Hat because, the Sorting Hat itself does not represent an individual founder but, the melding of the ideals and beliefs of all four founders into one. From the melding of those four elements comes the fifth element, quintessence. In essence while I would argue the four houses represent the four elements and Hogwarts as represented by the Sorting Hat represents quintessence.

Having said that I believe that it could be possible that Voldemort used the Sorting or his special award for services to the school to create as a Horcrux because either of this relics could represent the school as a whole.

Paulus Maximus - Aug 19, 2005 9:40 am (#647 of 2969)
Edited Aug 19, 2005 10:45 am

Can a soul be divided into more than sevenths? Dumbledore implied that the ring contained 1/7 of Voldemort's soul, so I doubt that the soul is actually split in half (which has been suggested here). If by creating a Horcrux you lose a 7th of your soul, then by creating 7 Horcruxes you lose your entire soul...

...in which case Voldemort can't make a 7th Horcrux even if he wanted to... Or perhaps it would have the same effect as being soul-sucked by a Dementor...

I wish I knew the tru7h about Horcruxes...

Sparrowhawk - Aug 19, 2005 10:30 am (#648 of 2969)
Edited Aug 19, 2005 11:31 am

I don't think that in JKR's world, a soul gets split just like some cake. A soul is something infinite, that you can't measure by ordinary standards - therefore there is no theoretical limit to the divisions, but for the fact that the person who keeps splitting his own soul progressively looses what's left of his humanity...

IMO, this is one of the reasons why JKR insisted that Voldemort had a fixed number (7) in mind, and that he didn't know when a Horcrux was destroyed... Otherwise, the quest could be infinite!

Hogs Head - Aug 19, 2005 10:59 am (#649 of 2969)

I'm not sure you are correct about the infinite part, Sparrowhawk, at least in JKR's make believe world. I think JKR is implying or maybe even stating that even one tearing of the soul does great damage. More tearing is even more damaging. A seven-fold division of the soul (made up of 6 Horcruxes and the little battered piece still resided with Voldy) stretches him to some potential limit -- or perhaps just beyond it -- in the sense that there may be a price to pay or a capacity or power or resilience lost as a result.

Granted, I do not know, but I'm guessing that in JKR's portrayal of it all, Voldy is now left with only limited (or maybe no) residual capacity to make new or replacement Horcruxes (even if he did innately know (or found out) about the destruction of one or more of his six extant Horcruxes).

RoseMorninStar - Aug 19, 2005 1:16 pm (#650 of 2969)

I had originally figured that if a person's soul is divided with a supreme act of evil (murder) and in Voldemort's case to 'rip it into 7 pieces'.. (Dumbledore comments that no other wizard had 'ever done more than tear his soul in two') that with the first murder the soul would be divided in two, with the second murder there would only be half a soul left to divide so the second Horcrux and Voldemort would only contain a 1/4th bit-o-soul...and increasingly smaller bits would be in each successive Horcrux and a correspondingly small bit in Voldemort. Voldemort and the 6th Horcrux would end up only having something like 1/64th a bit of soul apiece. I really don't know if I believe any mathematical formula applies, but there must be some 'reduction' of sorts otherwise some dark wizard would have made multiple Horcruxes in the past. I really don't know how that would work-we know that JKR isn't really a 'math' person (I am not either) and she doesn't think in mathematical terms so perhaps all of this figuring is a mute point.

But I would think it is safe to say, no matter how it works, that with each Horcrux made the soul within Voldemort-his humanity-became less and less until it is just barely connected to his corporal self. Interestingly enough, this sounds something like what I had always thought a Zombie would be like. I looked up the term 'Zombie' and it says that a Zombie is, in the voodoo cults of W. Africa, the python deity -or- any voodoo snake deity -or- in West Indian Voodoo, a supernatural power through which a corpse supposedly is brought to a state of trancelike animation and made to obey the commands of the person exercising the power (sounds like an Inferius). I would think that would be worse than death. A living death in which someone else is in control. That could be something Voldemort would fear-but then would a Zombie-Inferi be aware of its situation? If it is unaware, I hardly think that is just desserts for Voldemort.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Thu Jul 21, 2011 9:23 am

Verbina - Aug 20, 2005 1:53 pm (#651 of 2969)

I don't think that Voldemort dares to do more than the ideal 7. If with each murder and Horcrux he became more and more damaged by way of the soul and this effected his appearance...to even attempt to create another could be devastating to him. He can't have much left but I get the feeling that the piece that is housed within his body is like a concentrated form of him. His essence, his core of being. This would make it much more difficult to destroy. At least that is what it appears to me.

Paulus Maximus - Aug 20, 2005 1:57 pm (#652 of 2969)

The problem of a soul being infinite is that a seventh of infinity is... infinity...

Sparrowhawk - Aug 20, 2005 3:14 pm (#653 of 2969)
Edited Aug 20, 2005 4:14 pm

Exactly, Paulus Maximus, and that's the reason why we should maybe stop thinking along mathematical lines, and accept this 7th-parts soul idea for what (I believe) it is: something of a symbolic nature, not rational or pseudo-scientific.

Elanor - Aug 20, 2005 10:57 pm (#654 of 2969)
Edited by Catherine Aug 28, 2005 6:20 am

Troels, very interesting research about the Magician card. This is what I found about it in my encyclopedia of symbolism: the Magician is the One who plays, somehow he is the creator of worlds that are only illusions and he needs the "true knowledge" to do that.

Some cards of the Major Arcana are connected to the 4 elements: the Fool is the air; it has the number 0 and the number 22 at the same time in the Major Arcana, that is to say the first and last card of it (this is the ouroboros again). He is searching for the truth and his madness is, in fact, true wisdom.

The Hanged Man (number 12) is water (we talked about that symbol a lot on the alchemy thread, especially about Little Hangleton and the Hanged Man's pub in GoF).

The Judgment (number 20) is fire. It means spiritual rebirth and the end of the trials.

Does it help your research?

You said: "But at all steps, the idea of the Horcruxes can (with a bit of stretching, perhaps) be interpreted as a pervasion or evil twist on the symbology of this Tarot card."

That is a very interesting idea and fits with what I was saying some time ago, that is to say that the concept of Horcrux is the negation of what the alchemical journey is, the opposite of what alchemists believed in, that is the opposite of DD's views. Don't you think so?

About the 4 elements in alchemy, it is at the same time very simple and very complicated (as always) and I need to work on it a bit to summarize their conceptions. I'll try and do that soon! :-)

Elanor, I saw your correction to this post in a later post, so I popped in to fix it for you. Per your correction post, I changed the "words to "worlds."

HungarianHorntail11 - Aug 21, 2005 4:33 pm (#655 of 2969)

That is a very interesting idea and fits with what I was saying some time ago, that is to say that the concept of Horcrux is the negation of what the alchemical journey is, the opposite of what alchemists believed in, that is the opposite of DD's views. Don't you think so?

Elanor, that is what I was thinking when I was reading Troels' very interesting research. I couldn't quite articulate what you so eloquently did. My thoughts were to compare it to a flame (and use the opposite for Big V.), the more flames you make from the first, the more light of which you can make infinite numbers. On the other hand, the more the soul is split, the more faint it becomes.

RoseMorninStar - Aug 21, 2005 11:57 pm (#656 of 2969)

A person's soul is not of a physical substance but I don't think one's soul could be 'infinite'... because that would mean that the soul was vast and endless. In that case, it would not matter whether one 'tore their soul in two' or not. It wouldn't matter if they divided themselves into a million bits. If this were the case (at least for JKR/fictional purposes), dividing one's soul wouldn't cause the person to lose their humanity or cause any problems-and therefore would not have been considered such an abhorrent taboo. Now, I agree that it may be unquantifiable (unable to express with numerical terms/logic), but I don't think it is infinite.

That said, it seems that the book supports the idea that when one's soul is split, it is diminished in some way quantifiable or not. This diminishment weakens ones humanity ...although not ones power. If it had been unheard of to make more than one Horcrux before Voldemort did so, we really cannot know what outcome JKR has in mind for Voldemorts diminished soul & the resulting Horcruxes (plot-wise) we can only guess. I would guess, that if Voldemort's humanity is diminished with each murder/Horcrux, that each Horcrux made in the diminished state could also be 'lesser'-OR-leave the maker of the Horcrux with just that much less soul, a total breakdown of his humanity.

Reading about the Dementor's Kiss, the Dementors suck the soul out of a person, leaving them not alive but not dead either... a miserable existence. It would seem, at least in JKR's world, that the soul can be totally removed from a living physical body.

Sparrowhawk - Aug 22, 2005 3:20 am (#657 of 2969)
Edited Aug 22, 2005 4:23 am

I agree, RoseMorninStar, unquantifiable is a much better word for what I had in mind - like a quantity of water in a pond, or something like that... Thank your for your suggestion!

And your comparison with the Dementor's kiss is very relevant, although the situation is reversed, sort of mirror-like, IMO. When Voldemort lost his body in his first attempt to kill Harry, what was left of his maimed soul had to undergo a miserable existence, a cursed half-life, as indicated several times by JKR. Victims of a Dementor's kiss lose their soul, not their body, but the consequences are sort of parallel - it's like another kind of splitting, between the body and a terribly damaged soul...

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 22, 2005 7:21 am (#658 of 2969)

Elanor, thank you

I'd be interested also in hearing if you have any comments on the assignment of the elements to houses and Tarot suits. Are we already over-analysing too much or what? I think in particular of the Sword, representing air, being the relic of Gryffindor, and the Cup, representing water, being the relic of Hufflepuff.

RoseMorninStar, I believe, speaking as a physicist, that you misunderstand the concept of infinity as applied to a person's soul (and to some extent also the concept of infinity in math - we can actually compare infinities quite well in math). In this context the point is that it doesn't make sense to speak of fractions, that we should simply not speculate about the relative sizes of the soul fragments.

It also means that any soul-fragment is equally capable to inhabit a body, and that this inhabitation is not in itself different from that of a whole soul even though the soul-fragment in question is maimed and tarnished.

Regards,

Troels

Sparrowhawk - Aug 22, 2005 8:04 am (#659 of 2969)
Edited Aug 22, 2005 9:05 am

Thanks Troels,

It was your turn to express what I had in mind way better than I did myself, and in a more scientific manner... I'm not a scientist, but a historian and art historian with a strong interest in philosophy; besides, although my English is fluent enough, there are times when I wish I could phrase such thoughts in French, my mother tongue!

I particularly appreciate your comment that "any soul-fragment is equally capable to inhabit a body, and that this inhabitation is not in itself different from that of a whole soul..." BTW, I believe this to be one of the literary reasons why JKR had to set a limit, and decided that Voldemort would want to split his soul in 7 parts, no more no less (with all the symbolical advantages of that particular figure): otherwise, Harry's quest could never end...

Hogs Head - Aug 22, 2005 8:20 am (#660 of 2969)
Edited Aug 22, 2005 9:22 am

I'm personally not too big on tarot cards (but obviously not offended by the discussion), and I wonder how much JKR is. Trelawney is not exactly her surrogate spokesperson in the novels.

Although I sort of chimed in on it, the metaphysics of the quanta of the soul sort of makes my head hurt on a Monday morning -- not enough coffee, yet, I suppose.

But returning to an inquiry posed by someone else but not yet answered. Any of you former UK schoolers out there -- are the Headboy and Headgirl badges reused and recycled (which might make the Headboy badge used by Percy (our Birthday Boy today) a relic handed down from Voldy and hence might mean that Percy is "infected" with some residual curse or hex) or does each year's crop get their own keepsake badges? Or does it differ from school to school? Does anyone recall whether Percy's badge was new ( I.e., new as in just made, as opposed to "new to Percy") or used when Percy got it?

septentrion - Aug 22, 2005 11:39 am (#661 of 2969)

Troels : It also means that any soul-fragment is equally capable to inhabit a body, and that this inhabitation is not in itself different from that of a whole soul even though the soul-fragment in question is maimed and tarnished.

That's why the fragment of soul in the diary could give life to a memory and use Ginny to become "real".

Sparrowhawk, are you French yourself ? I'm French, as are Elanor, Essidji and Delightful Task (you may have seen one or another on the threads).

Elanor - Aug 22, 2005 11:55 am (#662 of 2969)
Edited Aug 22, 2005 12:58 pm

I am not a Tarot expert at all and I only searched about the meaning the alchemists were giving to the Tarot cards, which has nothing to do with divination. In fact, they use those images, just as they used mythological ones, in connection with their work, with their symbolism. This is what I wrote a long time ago on the achieved alchemy thread (post # 760) about the Minor Arcana suits, again as they were seen by alchemists:

"Each arcana is bound to one or more elements, and if we look carefully, to elements of the Wizarding world too.

- cups (the "potter" work) are bound to the Earth and Water elements. A cup, a goblet, the connection is (too?) easy here...

- coins are bound to the Earth element. The most important court card here seems to be the knight who is connected to the symbols of Perseus and Pegasus we already encountered, if memory serves, when we talked about the chimera.

In French it is called "deniers", that is ancient money and I have to say that the WW money always made me think of the old monetary French system (before the French Revolution). Then you paid in livres (pounds), sols (sols) and deniers (deniers) with a curious system of count: 1 pound was equal to 20 sols and 1 sol was equal to 12 deniers. When you counted money then, you had to do just as we do with hours, minutes and seconds now: for example 25 sols=1 pound and 5 sols... It is just the same in the WW except that here a Galleon equals 17 sickles and a sickle 29 knuts. I always found it funny! In fact, counting like that is not as difficult as it seems first, it is just a matter of being used to it (and I know what it is since I had to recount the accounts of a whole hospital of the 17th century for history researches).

- swords are bound to the Air and Fire elements. The most important character here seems to be the Queen of swords. It is bound to a lot of symbols, including the sword the Archangel Gabriel used to bring down a dragon. The connection with Godric Gryffindor's sword is easy too.

- batons, or should I say wands, are bound to the Fire element. The baton (the stick) and the wand are the same symbols here. It represents mercury and some alchemists called it "the father of the Work". The most important court card here is the jack, the "valet" (servant) in French, that is to say Mercury. "

So, it fits even better than we thought first with the houses and objects listed as Horcruxes (or possible Horcruxes) since the sword is not only bound to air but also to fire (Gryffindor house) and the cup is bound to earth too (Hufflepuff!).

Now, there are also the coins. Isn't it funny that one of the most important court cards here is Perseus and that you just talked about his badge Hogs Head? That would fit well with the coins, don't you think so?

And there are the batons, the wands. Could a wand be a Horcrux? After all, a wand is the most precious thing a wizard owns, isn't it? Could Voldemort's wand be a Horcrux?

Besides, "batons" reminds me of Beauxbatons and the Beauxbatons students sat at the Ravenclaw table during GoF (not to mention the fact that they came to Hogwarts by air...). I've always wondered why... Maybe is there a connection between that school and Rowena Ravenclaw? What if that "something of Ravenclaw's" was in Beauxbatons?

PS: thank you so much Hungarian Horntail! What you wrote about the flame is exactly what I was thinking of!

Sparrowhawk - Aug 22, 2005 12:32 pm (#663 of 2969)
Edited Aug 22, 2005 2:11 pm

Septentrion, actually I'm a French speaking Belgian, although I went to French schools abroad until I was 12 - that's a long time ago, I'm now 45!

Elanor, your post is fascinating, good research! But although it looks as you have found the correct associations for two elements - earth/cup and fire/sword -, we should be careful and look for all possible objects related to the missing ones, as I am sure that we would discover that many other associations are possible... and who knows which combination got JKR's preference?

To give a few examples of what I mean, in Hall's Dictionary of Subjects and Symbols in Art, we get the following possibilities for the more mysterious objects (supposing that the Ravenclaw one is indeed associated with Air, the Slytherin one with Water):

AIR: peacock, anvil (I'm not dwelling into the details why, but it is in association with the goddess Juno), birds, chameleon,, even toy windmills and blown bubbles...

WATER (mainly associated with Neptune): urn, dolphins, hippocampi, sea-centaurs... So far, I don't see where the locket would fit (the urn appears very far-fetched).

I'm sure that some careful research would allow to discover many other possibilities.

Ann - Aug 22, 2005 12:56 pm (#664 of 2969)

Troels and Elanor, great stuff on the Tarot. It wouldn't surprise me at all if it is relevant. But I'm troubled by the locket as the coin. Gold is used for both, true, and both are round (or diamond shaped? heart shaped?) But a locket seems a very weird object to be associated with Slytherin. First of all, did people wear lockets in the 11th century? It doesn't seem a very medieval thing. And Slytherin really doesn't seem like the type to wear a gold locket with a picture or a lock of hair in it. The fact that Marvolo gives it to his daughter, who he doesn't much care for, rather than wearing it himself, suggests it is a bit effeminate for a guy.

M A Grimmett - Aug 22, 2005 1:03 pm (#665 of 2969)

Makes me wonder whether there was anything pertinent in the locket (pre-Horcrux).

Hogs Head - Aug 22, 2005 3:28 pm (#666 of 2969)

Since JKR seems to be pretty thorough in researching even little points, I do not doubt that she has looked at Horcrux mythology, alchemy, tarot cards, etc. She may have even borrowed (although usually by adaptation) an idea or two from this source or that. However, I seriously doubt that she will ever have a reliable "voice of JKR" character (like Albus Dumbledore or Hermione, as opposed to Trelawney) make any such reference.

RoseMorninStar - Aug 22, 2005 8:10 pm (#667 of 2969)
Edited Aug 22, 2005 9:11 pm

Troels & Sparrowhawk, Thank you for your comments. (Sparrowhawk, I would not have guessed that English is not your first language!)

As I have said before, Math is probably my worst subject. It is also a subject JKR dislikes, and she has said in several interviews that she does not think in mathematical terms and it has caused her some plot issues in the past (like how many Hogwarts students there are altogether). I am into Art and history/art history (something else Sparrowhawk & I have in common! Very Happy

) I guess the point I was trying to make is, that after I read Half-blood Prince *originally* I had thought about how the division of ones soul would effect the (for lack of a better word) strength/quantity of the remaining soul. In my most recent post, I was *trying* to say that I realized that my original thinking was most likely a mute point, as JKR does not think in those terms.

That said and semantics aside, I stand by what I said - IMO I think that the division of ones soul (in JKR's fictional world anyway) DOES create some type of diminishment/reduction/decrease/depreciation/befoulment of the soul. If the soul were infinitely divisible without ill effects, it would not be viewed as such a horrific taboo. And I think JKR definitely intended that the division of ones soul to be a horrific, damaging act... AND the more division that takes place, the more damaging it is. Damaging to ones humanity and ones soul. Whether that makes any of the Horcruxes lesser than any of the others won't be known to us until we read the final book.

P.S. Hogs Head... I'm sure glad I didn't have the 666th post on this thread! Very Happy

septentrion - Aug 22, 2005 11:26 pm (#668 of 2969)

Damaging to ones humanity and ones soul

I whole-heartedly agree. The effect of the Dementor's kiss shows us a human being is only an empty shell without their soul. If you diminish it, you're therefore less human.

Sparrowhawk, I live in North France, in the area of Valenciennes. Are you far from the boundary ? My email is in my profile, have no hesitation to contact me.

Sparrowhawk - Aug 23, 2005 4:12 am (#669 of 2969)

Hi RoseMorninStar,

I guess that we are basically in agreement, although we phrased our ideas in a slightly different way! Indeed, I wholeheartedly agree that, in JKR's books, the splitting provokes some terrible damage to the soul, and that the creation of a Horcrux makes it permanent (no healing process is possible). Also, the process may well be extremely painful (although we don't know, JKR has given no indication so far); anyway, the price is so terrible that only Voldemort has ever attempted to split his own soul in more than two parts...

For what we know so far, I don't think that one Horcrux could be any "lesser" than the others - there didn't seem to be much humanity left in Diary Tom anyway, did there? As to Voldemort himself, he's well past any sort of recovery, and one more Horcrux wouldn't make much difference IMO - but for the magical advantages connected to the "7" figure.

HogwartsExpress5972 - Aug 23, 2005 7:01 am (#670 of 2969)

I’m new to this forum and maybe missed a previous thread that may have dealt with this issue. I believe that Professor Shape may be one of the Horcruxes. This is based on the fact that in Chapter 16 of the HBP (Scholastic page 337) it is mentioned that the ‘Advanced Potion-making’ book was nearly 50 years old. That is during the time that LV was a student at Hogwarts. Probably about the same time the Chamber of Secrets Diary was cursed. This could also explain why Professor Snape was so good with potions. He got the book used, the power transferred to him, and he’s cursed with the powers of LV. Any thoughts?

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 23, 2005 10:47 am (#671 of 2969)
Edited Aug 23, 2005 11:50 am

Oh dear - what a lot of good stuff to go through now again

Hog's Head, you wrote ‘I'm personally not too big on tarot cards (but obviously not offended by the discussion), and I wonder how much JKR is.’

I think that is a very important point you're making here: that we must consider not only how we can twist things to fit our own perceptions of the books, but also what Rowling actually intends: how much she knows about the subject.

In this case the best we have, as far as I know, is Trelawney's use of the Tarot cards in HBP, emphasized by her use of the name of one of the cards for the climactic chapter, The Lightning-struck Tower!

‘The Headmaster has intimated that he would prefer fewer visits from me,’ she said coldly. ‘I am not one to press my company upon those who do not value it. If Dumbledore chooses to ignore the warnings the cards show -’

Her bony hand closed suddenly around Harry's wrist.

‘Again and again, no matter how I lay them out -’

And she pulled a card dramatically from underneath her shawls.

‘- the lightning-struck tower,’ she whispered. ‘Calamity. Disaster. Coming nearer all the time ...’

HBP ch. 25 The Seer Overheard

The use of that particular name for the card might suggest another source for Rowling's knowledge than the set and descriptions from which the picture and my description of The Magician came (the Rider-Waite-Smith deck and The Pictorial Key to the Tarot by A.E. Waite [1911]). In The Tarot By S. L. MacGregor Mathers [1888], the card is called ‘The Lightning-struck Tower’ and it is given the description ‘A Tower whose Upper part is like a crown, struck by a lightning-flash. (Two men fall headlong from it, One of whom is in such an attitude as to form a Hebrew letter Ayin.) Sparks and debris are falling. It shows Ruin, Disruption. ‘, and the meaning - or interpretation - is given as ‘Ruin, Disruption, Over-throw, Loss, Bankruptcy; R. These in a more or less partial degree.’

All of this might be seen as an indication that Rowling has used another source than that picture and that description I gave earlier, but the various descriptions of this card are quite similar.

Regards,

Troels

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 23, 2005 11:28 am (#672 of 2969)

Moving on ...

Septentrion noted that ‘That's why the fragment of soul in the diary could give life to a memory and use Ginny to become "real". ‘ and I think she hit the nail on head here.

And to RoseMorninStar, I am sorry that my comments were somewhat curt - they honestly weren't intended that way. I have spent quite a lot of time working with some of the numerical and physical impossibilities in the books (asking me, for instance, which years the book happen in is not exactly a good idea unless you have a lot of surplus time to kill ), and in consequence I tend to get a bit (that is, I hope it is only a bit) ... can't we just say ‘assertive’? I completely misunderstood your meaning: sorry!

Now, you also said:

That said and semantics aside, I stand by what I said - IMO I think that the division of ones soul (in JKR's fictional world anyway) DOES create some type of diminishment/reduction/decrease/depreciation/befoulment of the soul.

I agree entirely. My point was merely that the soul cannot be measured, and it is nonsensical to speak of ‘amount’ of soul.

We know that there is a ‘maiming’ and ‘mutilation’ of the soul, and I do get the feeling that something is lost with the creation of the Horcruxes. I get the impression that this is a question of abilities, or capabilities, such as, for instance, the ability to love. One thing that I think that Voldemort has irretrievably lost with the creation of his Horcruxes and with the destruction of two of them, is his capacity for redemption. I am sure that Voldemort has now completely lost any chance of redemption.

If the soul were infinitely divisible without ill effects, it would not be viewed as such a horrific taboo. And I think JKR definitely intended that the division of ones soul to be a horrific, damaging act.. AND the more division that takes place, the more damaging it is. Damaging to ones humanity and ones soul.

Well said!

The big question is of course what the nature of this damage is

Whether that makes any of the Horcruxes lesser than any of the others won't be known to us until we read the final book

I am not sure what you mean by ‘lesser’ here. As I said above, I think it is pointless to speculate in terms of amount of soul, but on the other hand we agree that the later Horcruxes have been created from a soul that was already maimed and damaged.

I have wondered if it would make sense at all to look at the Horcruxes as encapsulating some of the positive, redeeming, character traits such as the capacity to love, the capacity for compassion etc. I'm not sure either way, though - Voldemort's loss of these abilities might as well have preceded his creation of Horcruxes as it can be the result of the Horcrux creation. And even if it's a result of the Horcruxes, it might also be that each Horcrux encases a bit of his capacity for all these redemptive qualities of the soul, such that what we see today is the cumulative result of having created six Horcruxes.

Regards,

Troels

Round Pink Spider - Aug 23, 2005 11:50 am (#673 of 2969)
Edited Aug 23, 2005 1:06 pm

Dumbledore indicated that Voldemort appears to be using things that have some symbolic meaning to him. I wouldn't think that Snape would hold any particular symbolic significance for Voldemort...

Elanor just invited me to come and play here in an e-mail. I was very interested in the information about the Tarot card, although I was already familiar with a few of the details. I was very surprised when the cup ended up belonging to Hufflepuff, instead of Slytherin (Hufflepuff? ). Elanor, I found your comment about cups representing Water AND Earth very enlightening.

I had also been guessing that one of the objects would be a wand, because of the alchemy/Tarot connection. By your comment about wands being associated with Fire, Elanor, if one of the objects to be found was a wand, that would probably make it Godric Gryffindor's, not Rowena Ravenclaw's, as I had been thinking (Fire instead of Air).

I haven't read all the posts, so I don't know if this has come up, either: I'm wondering if the reason why Voldemort wanted the post of DADA teacher could be that he was hoping that something was concealed in the DADA teacher's office. Perhaps the wand? Remember that Voldemort sent Snape to apply for the Defense Against the Dark Arts post originally. And Quirrell might have been an ideal host for the same reason. Of all the offices, the one belonging to the DADA teacher is the one Harry has seen the most. Harry might be in a good position in book 7 to search the office if he needed to...

I know that the Harry-is-a-Horcrux theory has already been thoroughly beaten over here. One more point to consider: if Harry was an accidental Horcrux and neither Dumbledore nor Voldemort knew it (which I think would have to be the case), then that would mean that Nagini (if she is a Horcrux) would contain the eighth bit of Voldemort's soul. That would go along with the symbolism of Nagini as an Ouroboros (an eternity symbol), and it would make Harry #7, the most powerful magical number. (Voldemort, as the original vessel of his soul, would be #1.) Since JKR has indicated that some numbers are magically important in her story, wouldn't it make sense that she might do something like that?

Someone had said earlier that Dumbledore would have known that Harry was a Horcrux. Well, one would certainly think so... but JKR has mentioned several times now that Dumbledore could make mistakes, and that they could be really big ones. I think, with her reminding us of that so carefully, that we might find out that Dumbledore made a big mistake somewhere concerning the Horcruxes. Since his last mistake occurred because he cared so much about Harry, perhaps this one did, too. Maybe he refused to look at the possibility that Harry might be a Horcrux, because that might mean that Harry would have to die. Maybe Dumbledore was, once again, in denial.

EDIT: Troels, your comments are, once again, wonderful. I agree that the quantity of soul issue is probably not going to come up (especially with JKR's dislike of maths... ) Dumbledore himself indicated that the continuing creation of Horcruxes was making Voldemort "less human":

"...Lord Voldemort has seemed to grow less human with the passing years, and the transformation he has undergone seemed to me to be only explicable if his soul was mutilated beyond the realms of what we might call 'usual evil'..."

On the other hand, Harry, whom Dumbledore said has a soul "untarnished and whole," suffered tremendously from the pain of grief, which Dumbledore said was "part of being human."

septentrion - Aug 23, 2005 12:38 pm (#674 of 2969)

Always wonderful posts in this thread !

RPS, your theory about the symbolism of numbers makes me reconsider my unbelieving of Harry being a Horcrux.

About the conception of the soul in Jo's world, I understood it to be more something like quintessence of the being, like the "thing" that makes a human being able to feel, have a conscience, be a whole but not having its own conscience, power etc I wonder if the Horcrux in the diary could have infected Ginny if there wasn't the memory there to give substance to LV. Hope I'm understandable.

Ann - Aug 23, 2005 12:44 pm (#675 of 2969)
Edited Aug 23, 2005 1:49 pm

Round Pink Spider, JKR has said that Dumbledore is largely right about the Horcruxes, I think:

"Harry now knows - well he believe he knows - what he’s facing. Dumbledore's guesses are never very far wide of the mark. I don't want to give too much away here, but Dumbledore says, ‘There are four out there, you've got to get rid of four, and then you go for Voldemort.’ So that's where he is, and that's what he's got to do. ... Dumbledore has given him some pretty valuable clues and Harry, also, in the course of previous six books has amassed more knowledge than he realizes. That's all I am going to say."

I just don't think that Harry (or his scar) can be a Horcrux. The accidental transfer of powers and the forging of the connection between them does not make a Horcrux. For one thing, a Horcrux is an evil, evil thing in part because you have to make a conscious decision to render the tear in your soul permanent by putting it in something else. It seems to me that it is so evil in part because it prevents any possibility of regret or redemption. And your decision to do that is based on the cowardly fear of death and an attempt to thwart the natural order of things by preventing yourself from moving on to "the next great adventure." The fact that it's not accidental is part of the point.

Secondly, Dumbledore knows, far more than we do about the transfer that's taken place, and also far more about Horcruxes. Surely when he began to think about Horcruxes and the transfer of bits of soul, he would have considered the possibility. Remember, he can sense the presence of magic and he has a feel for its nature. If he knew that Harry was a Horcrux, he would have told him; I don't think he would lie to him at this point, even by omission, even to save him pain. He's learned, surely, from his earlier mistake. The fact that Dumbledore has not told him this, means that Dumbledore has rejected the possibility, and he has more information than we do.

Finally, so much has been made of Harry's humanity and his ability to love, in contrast with Voldemort's inhumanity and inability, that it is hard to imagine that a bit of Voldemort's soul could reside in him, or even in his scar. After all when his soul possesses Quirrell, he can't even touch Harry because of the protection of his mother's love (and yet the scar has always been there); and when he tries to possess Harry himself in the Ministry of Magic, the love in Harry's heart expels him.

I just don't think it's possible. The mystery Horcrux is the Gryffindor/Ravenclaw one, and Dumbledore might be wrong about Nagini (though I doubt it), but I think the others are more or less set at this point.

Oh, and about the numbers: I see what you mean about Voldemort being number 1, but that doesn't seem to be the way Dumbledore is numbering them. He says the diary is the first, and the memories imply that the Peverell ring was the second. I think it's pretty clear that they'll be discovered and destroyed in the same order they were made: the locket next (that should be comparatively easy), then the cup (where they at least know what it is and what it looks like), and then the Ravenclaw (probably) relic. Nagini is usually near Voldemort, and I think she'll be destroyed just before he is--and the fact that she's destroyed will somehow make him aware that the others are gone, too (Dumbledore hints at that) and he'll despair, which will make it easier for Harry to kill him. But anyway, Voldemort himself is the seventh, not the first.

Sparrowhawk - Aug 23, 2005 1:00 pm (#676 of 2969)
Edited Aug 23, 2005 2:02 pm

Septentrion,

Concerning the lack of power or conscience of a Horcrux per se, I think that you expressed your view very well , and I agree that the Horcrux couldn't have done anything, had it not been put in a diary specifically meant to give substance to Tom Riddle.

However, when it comes to counting Harry as a possible Horcrux, I can't share that point of view, mainly because I don't think that a Horcrux can be created accidentally. For what we know, a deliberate murder has to be committed, then the Dark Wizard who perpetrated it has to "turn it to his own advantage" with the use of a very specific spell, of the darkest sort. Nothing in the books suggests that this spell is a very simple bit of magic, nor that it can be cast before the murder has actually taken place. We know what happened to Voldemort when he AK'd Harry, therefore it looks totally impossible to me that a Horcrux could appear "spontaneously", so to say...

Steve Newton - Aug 23, 2005 1:12 pm (#677 of 2969)

I'm not sure that I am following and I don't understand most of the stuff on this thread but...if Harry is one of Voldemort's Horcruxes (Horcruxi?) wouldn't it have been changed/damaged/destroyed by the love that Harry has felt? (Sorry if this is what Ann was implying above.)

JILL HUBER - Aug 23, 2005 1:34 pm (#678 of 2969)

This is the first post I have seen mentioning the Sorting Hat. Everyone has been saying that it will be objects significant to Voldemort. Well, since Voldemort considered Hogwarts his home, many have suggested items from each house. Additionally, the Leaky Cauldron has mentioned the whole earth, fire, water, air thing for the houses. Wouldn't it make sense that the Sorting Hat, which was present in Dumbledore's office and all the other headmasters of Hogwarts. It is also mentioned that most teachers were charmed by Voldemort when he was a student.

If Voldemort was at Hogwarts for seven years, was a prefect, was given an award for services to the school, it makes sense that he would have been in the headmaster's office and even alone. Dumbledore has always been accused of having his own favorites, such as Harry. Dumbledore left Harry alone in his office so it would make sense that any headmaster who was charmed by young Tom Riddle might do the same. He had every opportunity to put an enchantment on the hat, sword or any other item in the office. In light of the connection between Hogwarts and Voldemort, the hat seems a likely candidate. Why not pick something from each house plus the Sorting Hat which links them all?

JILL HUBER - Aug 23, 2005 1:58 pm (#679 of 2969)

Just a possibility here everyone, what if the reason he couldn't kill Harry was because it was his intent to use him as an 8th Horcrux? Maybe 7 is the limit of times the soul can be split. Maybe that is the reason why he lived. Since it was Voldemort's intent to make Harry's death his final Horcrux victim...maybe his misinterpreted himself as the 7th part. Maybe that is why Harry is the boy that lived and not a Horcrux, but rather an attempt at an 8th.

Blots - Aug 23, 2005 7:13 pm (#680 of 2969)

Is Harry Potter a Horcrux? Much of the answer to this question will depend upon getting more information about this invention of Rowling. We need to know more about how a Horcrux behaves.

I would hazard a guess about one key aspect of a Horcrux. I would guess that, if a wizard attempted to destroy his own, the effects would be fatal for that wizard. Since the Horcrux, we are told, is a ‘piece’ of the wizard’s own soul, attempting to destroy one's own Horcrux would be tantamount to attempting to kill oneself.

If this is the case, one thing seems clear, if Harry is Tom Riddle’s Horcrux, Voldemort would not attempt to kill Harry....Unless of course, Voldemort did not know. Most of the speculation I have read in this thread, that Harry is a Horcrux of Voldemort, assumes it would have happened inadvertently. Indeed there is some suggestion of circumstances making this possible. After reviewing Slughorn’s memory, Dumbledore says, ‘I am sure that he was intending to make his final Horcrux with your death.’ (HBP p. 506.) Just before attempting to kill Harry, he kills James. This may not have been anticipated, and may have triggered the creation prematurely. It is particularly tantalizing that he says this immediately after noting that an animal can be a Horcrux. However, Rowling makes it clear that a Horcrux is created through a spell. As many have noted above, it seems extremely unlikely that Voldemort could have unconsciously or unintentionally cast the spell. Not only does this seem inconsistent with the rules Rowling has set for spell making, but it is reasonable to infer this spell is particularly difficult and rare.

However, there is another possibility. Is it not predictable that, when Voldemort was informed it had been a prophesied an infant had been born who could defeat him, he would see to it that the infant was killed? Moreover, we have it from Dumbledore that Voldemort would characteristically wish to do such a thing himself. It would seem a perfect opportunity to lay a trap.

Who would lay such a trap? Who would have the knowledge, and the skill, and a number of very attractive motives (and perhaps access to a previously constructed Horcrux) to do it? One thing we do now know, only two people heard the prophecy, and of them, only one would have a convenient means, as a Death Eater, to relay the information about the prophecy to Voldemort. That person is Severus Snape.

Round Pink Spider - Aug 23, 2005 7:24 pm (#681 of 2969)

Jill, your suggestion that Riddle might have been left alone in the Headmaster's office for a time is a very interesting idea. My only problem with the Sorting Hat idea is that, since it's handled a great deal, and since it has a certain "intelligence", using it as a Horcrux might not be a very good idea. It seems like, in most cases, Voldemort probably took the object and hid it away (the diary being an exception). He became very angry that even the diary was lost, so he must be pretty protective of his Horcruxes. It seems a little out of character to use an object that would be handled so much. Now, if it had disappeared...

On Dumbledore... JKR's words might indicate that there really are only a total of six Horcruxes, but they also indicate that something Dumbledore told him in regard to the Horcruxes isn't quite right.

Ann and Sparrowhawk, I suppose that what I am visualizing in the sense of Harry being a "Horcrux" is that a fragment of Voldemort's soul was already ripped away (since he had just murdered two other people), and when his spell rebounded off Harry, the fragment of soul was simply left behind in Harry. Perhaps that wouldn't make Harry a proper Horcrux, but only JKR could decide, since it's her world.

I think there's no question that something got transferred to Harry:

1. We know that Voldemort "transferred some of his powers" to Harry, but we don't know exactly how it happened. I believe that the only information we have is from CoS. In that book, when Harry said that Voldemort put a part of himself in Harry, Dumbledore said, "It certainly seems so." I agree that the "part" could simply refer to powers. But because of this, Dumbledore has already admitted that something of Voldemort resides in Harry.

2. Both Harry and Voldemort have noticed similarities between the two of them, as if an element of Voldemort's personality might also have been transferred -- not enough to make Harry evil, but enough to affect him. It made them similar enough that the wand that was the brother to Voldemort's chose Harry.

3. A still-unexplained connection exists between Harry and Voldemort. We're so used to this idea that we simply overlook the fact that no one's ever explained why it's there. That connection would allow Voldemort to possess Harry, if Harry's nature weren't so antithetical to Voldemort.

I think it's generally assumed that the snake that entered the Ministry was Nagini, although I don't think JKR has ever actually said so. Snape indicated that there's a limit to how far magic can operate. If the snake was Nagini, is Voldemort able to possess her from a distance, just like Harry? If not, would Voldemort have to have been close to the Ministry to possess the snake?

You could be totally correct, and I'm not unwilling to concede the point. However, it does appear that a "part" of Voldemort (whether powers and a touch of his personality, or a fragment of his soul) is in Harry.

Elanor - Aug 23, 2005 9:45 pm (#682 of 2969)
Edited by Catherine Aug 28, 2005 6:26 am

Great posts here again! Here are some details that you may find interesting:

About the Lightning Struck Tower card, you said Troels:

"All of this might be seen as an indication that Rowling has used another source than that picture and that description I gave earlier, but the various descriptions of this card are quite similar."

Actually, it would not surprise me at all if JKR would search several sources, when she uses some symbols, and choose then the one that fits her story the best. But, when Sybill talks about that card in the HBP, she only tells us what JKR wants us to know about it at that point, which doesn't mean she (Jo) doesn't know more about the symbol and that the rest of the symbolism is not valid. She has given us a clue, we now have to "add 2 and 2"...

BTW, the description of the Lightning Struck tower I have in my encyclopedia is quite similar too, though it says that symbolically it represents human presumption (leading to that question: was DD presumptuous in trusting Snape as it seems at first sight or was Voldemort?).

Another curious detail, this card is connected to Mars, the planet of war again (which is very important in the whole series symbolism)!

RPS, glad to see you enjoy the discussion! About the numbers and the ouroboros symbolism, what you said reminded me of the fact that the 4 elements are connected to the ouroboros symbol as well since: 1+2+3+4=10, and 10 (which is also 1 - 1+0=1) is the ouroboros! Which means that we may well be on to something when we connect the Horcruxes to the 4 elements, aren't we?

Is it "overanalyzing"? Maybe... But all the fun is in investigating every possibility, isn't it?

PS: BTW, I've just realised that I made a typo in one of my previous posts (#654), about the Magician card. You should read: "the Magician is the One who plays, somehow he is the creator of worlds that are only illusions and he needs the "true knowledge" to do that."

I had written "words" instead by mistake in that post. Sorry!

Elanor, I fixed your post #654 to read "worlds" instead of "words."

RoseMorninStar - Aug 23, 2005 10:51 pm (#683 of 2969)
Edited Aug 23, 2005 11:56 pm

Great discussion in here as always!

Round Pink Spider (interesting name) I agree with your reasoning. As you have said, I think that Voldemort was intending to create a Horcrux with Harry's death. If Voldemort had said the spell or set the process in motion for creating a Horcrux before attempting to kill Harry-yet Harry did not die-Voldemort had already committed the murders necessary for a Horcrux to be created (just not the murder he had planned on using for its creation). Perhaps Voldemort even had the object with him that he intended to encase his soul into or he had yet to obtain the object, but because things went so horribly wrong that evening & did not turn out as he intended, the Horcrux might have been prematurely or improperly made. If this is the case, I don't think that Voldemort realized that is what happened-at least not until perhaps very recently.

I would add one thing. The reason I think that IF Voldemort inadvertently made Harry into a Horcrux that evening, it is the scar and not Harry himself that is the Horcrux. I think that is an important distinction. We know that Harry has not been possessed by Voldemort as Ginny was when she was being used in Tom Riddle's diary. I think Ginny made that clear when she asked Harry if he had any periods of time he could not account for or found himself in places where he did not know how he arrived there. He had not. Even in the battle at the Department of Mysteries at the end of The Order of the Phoenix when the creature (presumably Voldemort?) spoke through Harry-Harry was still very conscious of his own body & thoughts. Harry feels pain in his scar when Voldemort is having particularly evil thoughts & deeds.

About the diary (and Horcruxes hidden safely away). The diary was supposed to be hidden safely away at the Malfoy residence. Evidently Lucius did not know it was a Horcrux, he only knew that it would help to reopen the Chamber of Secrets and aid the True Heir of Slytherin in returning. Lucius thought Voldemort was gone and wanted to open the Chamber, thereby causing problems for the Muggle-born. I doubt that if he had known the diary encased a bit of his Dark Lords soul he would have treated it so lightly. The knowledge of what Lucius had done & the resulting destruction of the diary, made Voldemort very angry.

I doubt that Voldemort will chose to create any more Horcruxes, even though he knows, for example, that the diary Horcrux has been destroyed (if for no other reason than for plot purposes). But WHY do you think he will chose not to make any more? Would it be because of the original number of 7 ( and not the maintenance of the number 7 total Horcruxes) or because in his somewhat weakened state he is unable to create any more...or because his soul is so diminished he is unable to create any more?

JILL HUBER - Aug 24, 2005 4:42 am (#684 of 2969)
Edited by Catherine Aug 28, 2005 6:28 am

YES, I UNDERSTAND YOUR REASONING THAT THE SORTING HAT IS TOUCHED A LOT, BUT THEY NEVER SAY IT COULDN'T BE DONE. AFTER ALL, THE SORTING HAT, WHILE ENCHANTED, IS AN INANIMATE OBJECT AND NOT A PERSON. TO ASSUME IT HAS A MIND OF ITS OWN WOULD ASSUME TOO MUCH ABOUT THE NATURE OF THE SORTING HAT. YES, THE HAT HAS THE ABILITY TO DISCERN QUALITIES IN EACH STUDENT TO PLACE HIM/HER IN A HOUSE, BUT IT IS NOT A PERSON. I STILL THINK IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO MAKE THE HAT A HORCRUX. ALSO...THIS SUPPORTS THE CLAIM, DON'T REMEMBER WHO SAID IT, THAT VOLDEMORT IS TRYING TO CONTROL WHO THE SCHOOL ADMITS. NO SORTING HAT, NO HOUSES...AT LEAST NO TRACE OF THE ORIGINAL (ALL 4) FOUNDERS' INTENT FOR THE SCHOOL. SOMEONE WHO DOES NOT WANT MUGGLEBORNS AND MUDBLOODS ADMITTED COULD CERTAINLY DO IT THAT WAY.

EDIT: Jill, please remember to use proper capitalization in your posts. Posting in all capital letters is the internet version of shouting, and I'm sure this is not what you intended to do.

Sparrowhawk - Aug 24, 2005 6:46 am (#685 of 2969)

My main problem with the theory that the Sorting Hat was turned into a Horcrux, is that apparently Voldemort doesn't attach any value to it, as indicated in CoS:

'This is what Dumbledore sends his defender! A songbird and an old hat! Do you feel brave, Harry Potter? Do you feel safe now?'

Is there any reason to believe that he changed his mind some time later? I personally don't see it...

Soul Search - Aug 24, 2005 6:57 am (#686 of 2969)
Edited Aug 24, 2005 8:28 am

We saw how using different spells can have an unexpected effect when the gang and twins attacked Malfoy and friends on the train at the end of GoF. There was a lot of magic being used at Godric’s Hollow that night: Voldemort, Lily, James, Wormtail and the secret keeper charm, Snape was probably there too. There also might have been some sort of guard from the Order.

None of that magic was, specifically, "give Harry a scar." The scar was an accident, or a consequence. The prophecy says that the dark lord will mark him as his equal, meaning Voldemort caused the scar. (It has always bothered me a bit that Harry's scar was not an assertive act of Voldemort's, as implied by the prophecy grammar.) So, the scar did not result from Lily's protective spell. And, something of Voldemort WAS transferred with the scar. There is considerable cannon support in SS/PS, CoS, GoF, OotP, and HBP.

We also know that Voldemort was intending to create the sixth Horcrux. So, the Horcrux spell had been performed, or was ready to be performed, or something, and, likely, the intended Horcrux object was there, as well.

With all that magic around, and the transference that did occur, an accidental Horcrux cannot be excluded.

We have overwhelming cannon that there is some mental connection between Harry/Harry's scar, and Voldemort. If not a Horcrux, then what? We have been wondering about that connection since, at least, the end of CoS and Horcruxes seem to be the only explanation given.

Dumbledore suggests the Harry/Voldemort connection, but also accounts for the six Horcruxes, without one of them being Harry.

The same authoritative character has allowed a major conflict. I can't think of any cannon background that helps clarify it. But, I am still looking!

On the Sorting Hat, sword, etc.

I am not enamored with the idea of the Sorting Hat as a Horcrux. Mostly because Dumbledore seems to exclude it, although indirectly. Dumbledore is accounting for Gryffindor objects and only mentions the sword.

Tim Riddle left Hogwarts when Dippet was headmaster. Dippet was fond of Tom Riddle, Tom was head boy, and could easily been alone in the headmaster’s office, with the Sorting Hat. But, the Sorting Hat already had a lot of magic in it; using it for a Horcrux would not have been easy. I understand the appeal, the hat represented Hogwarts and all four founders, but Riddle wanted something specific, and only, Gryffindor's.

Do we know what house Dippet represented? I don't see him as a Gryffindor. Gryffindor's sword belonged to Dumbledore, not Hogwarts or the current headmaster. The sword was in Dumbledore's office in Harry's time because it belonged to Dumbledore. It was not in Dippet's office when Tom Riddle was a student. (No mention, anyway.)

As an alternative, I like the idea that the sword belonged to the Potters and it was at Godric’s Hollow that night. After all, Dumbledore had James' cloak. (Maybe, the hat brought the sword to Harry in CoS because the sword belonged to Harry.)

Now the sword belongs to Harry, and Dumbledore's "will" confirms this and grants it to him. Interesting, but unsupportable, twist. Although, Harry will return to Godric’s Hollow for some important reason.

Riddle came to visit headmaster Dumbledore for a reason very important to him. He still needed a Gryffindor object. He didn't get one. He waited a long time, maybe 30 years, before he was ready to create the sixth Horcrux at Godric’s Hollow. It took him a long time to locate a worthy Gryffindor object and a worthy person, Harry, to murder and create his last Horcrux.

We (especially I) have kicked "Horcrux timing" around a lot. I am wondering if the murder is a part of the spell to create a Horcrux. That is, not just any soul split caused by a murder can be used. The murder, Horcrux spell, and Horcrux object are a package that must be together for it to work. While Harry did not die, as Voldemort intended, VOLDEMORT "DIED," so the requirements for creating a Horcrux were met.

How did this post get so long? I only intended to bring up the "multiple spells" idea.

Verbina - Aug 24, 2005 10:09 am (#687 of 2969)

Very very true, Soul Search about the multiple spells. I can see where with all the magic in the air that it was almost inevitable.

We only know that he was in all likelihood going to make a Horcrux from Harry's death. We don't know that he had started the process or that he even had the object with him. We do know that he did not need to make the Horcrux immediately after the deaths because if the death of Myrtle was used for the Horcrux, he waited the entire summer before making the diary. Even if the diary was made from the death of his father, he still waited until he was back at school before creating it. In either case, there was a period of weeks or months before he started. So...I put forth the question...why would he change his method of operation in the making of the last?

If you look at Voldemort as a serial killer...you can see the parallels sharply. The trophies, the set methods with few if any deviations. I would like to point out that the trophies in cases of serial killers is normally an item which belonged to the victim or is closely connected to them in the killer's mind.

Voldemort is a creature of habit...we can see that from Dumbledore's memories. As a child, he stole. As a teen, he stole from Morfin and he did so again when he gained the locket and the cup. As a child he used fear to manipulate people. As an adult the same thing happened. So for him to vary from his set methods is unusual to say the least.

If you look at the known Horcruxes and the events surrounding them...you can see a pattern.

The diary - possibly created from the death of Myrtle - death blamed on Hagrid. I would also suggest as I know someone here has before, that the diary was stolen possibly from Myrtle herself.

The ring - very likely created from the death of Tom Sr. - ring stolen from Morfin. Morfin blamed for the death.

The locket - possibly created from the death of Smith - locket stolen from Smith - House elf blamed for Smith's death

The cup - See above for locket

From here though we go into pure speculation.

Nagini was not a stolen item as far as we know. But she could have been. The death of Bryce was in all likelihood blamed on someone though we have no idea who. (Do we?)

In every case the item that become a Horcrux represents something to Voldemort in more than one way. The Diary could have belonged to Myrtle and also represents the work he did in discovering his heritage. The ring represented his birthright in the wizarding world, his hatred of his father because of rejection and his claiming of the birthright from Morfin, one he felt did no deserve it. The Locket also would represent his birthright but also could very likely represent his mother in his mind. The cup...the cup would have been his first step into an attempt to dominate Hogwarts...his claiming of the Hufflepuff object. In essence his thinking that he can dominate all in the wizarding world.

So looking at those things then considering the events of Godric's Hollow, I don't think Harry is a Horcrux. I do think that with the amount of magic there, the bizarre backfire placed a bit of Voldemort in Harry but not a bit of soul. Something more like memories than an actual part of soul.

I will have to tinker more with my theory of course but...this post at least explains my line of thinking.

irish flutterby - Aug 24, 2005 5:05 pm (#688 of 2969)
Edited Aug 24, 2005 6:11 pm

okay, I still have 152 posts to get through to catch up, but I'm bursting to get some of this off my chest, so if it's already been stated, you can pelt me with dung bombs or slip me some pepper imps.

"It seems as if all you have to do is cause enough damage to the item to destroy the Horcrux. Harry put a hole in the Diary, Dumbledore cracked the stone in the ring, and though neither item was destroyed completely, neither is now a Horcrux..."

Is it possible that you have to (let me think about how to word this) remove the Horcrux's ability to serve its purpose. Examples: The Diary was meant to be read and written in. You can't read a book if there's a huge hole in the middle, and it's not much good for writing in either. The ring's purpose was to display the stone. If the stone isn't worth displaying, the purpose is ended. I'm not sure that makes total sense, but that's the direction my brain is moving. Can anyone else clarify my thoughts for me? (wishful thinking, I know)

Also, following the Harry/ Harry's scar is a Horcrux theory: If Harry destroys LV, would the soul bit inside him leave his body to repossess LV, thereby freeing Harry (w/out his demise) to destroy the last remaining soul bit which would then be LV...again?

Also, someone mentioned that the Shrieking Shack was new when Remus started, but is it possible that the house itself was there but possibly inhabited, or even abandoned. Tom could have hidden a Horcrux there. Even if there wasn't a secret passage. It's in Hogsmeade and they have surely been having Hogsmeade weekends since forever.

Also, (last one) is there something possibly mentioned in the scene when Harry and Ron go down to the Slytherin common room that might be a Horcrux?

Madame Librarian - Aug 24, 2005 6:05 pm (#689 of 2969)

Just a question. Sorry if this drifts off in another direction. Everyone has more questions than answers on this thread.

When Tom, Jr. murdered his father and grandparents, he killed three people. Did he create three Horcruxes? Could he have? Or was his dad the significant murder and the grandparents just an opportunistic killing on his part not resulting in two additional Horcruxes?

Ciao. Barb

Nathan Zimmermann - Aug 24, 2005 6:50 pm (#690 of 2969)

Verbina, I thought the cup was stolen from Hepzibah Smith?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Thu Jul 21, 2011 9:36 am

Madame Pomfrey - Aug 24, 2005 7:06 pm (#691 of 2969)

Irish Flutterby said.. "Also, following the Harry/ Harry's scar is a Horcrux theory: If Harry destroys LV, would the soul bit inside him leave his body to repossess LV, thereby freeing Harry (w/out his demise) to destroy the last remaining soul bit which would then be LV...again?"

This is the only way I can see Harry/scar possibly being a Horcrux. Harry has the power to destroy the Dark Lord so how can he do this if he is a Horcrux and would have to destroy himself first? If Harry had to sacrifice himself then someone else would have to kill Voldemort. If this is the case, then why would Harry be the chosen one when anyone with the knowledge of the Horcruxes could destroy Voldemort?

Elanor mentioned a wand being a possible Horcrux. What about the wand on the faded purple cushion on display at Ollivander’s? After the title HBP came out, when I did a reread of SS I thought perhaps the wand might have belonged to a powerful wizard, perhaps Godric Gryffindor. I also noticed that the back of Harry's neck prickled after entering Ollivander's, could he possibly detect magical concealment and not know it? He thought he could feel the magic in the cave but thought perhaps it was just from being cold. I think when doing my rereads I'll pay more attention to when Harry's neck prickles. I know it has been mentioned a lot in the books.

Helen Lehman - Aug 24, 2005 7:23 pm (#692 of 2969)

LV as Tom Riddle (from the diary) tells Harry that a portion of his soul is in Ginny. Does this mean that Ginny is a Horcrux? What will Harry do if he finds out that this is so?

HungarianHorntail11 - Aug 24, 2005 8:10 pm (#693 of 2969)

Nice to see you posting again, Round Pink Spider. As always, they are chock full of great information and theories.

If Big V wanted to use Harry for his final Horcrux, then he wouldn't want another split between James and Harry. This would explain why he told Lily to stand aside.

He created another split with her murder, cast the Horcrux spell at Harry, the AK rebounded because Lily's death (not only created another split in Big V's soul) sealed a charm she set in place for Harry's protection. Since Harry didn't die, it didn't create another split in Big V's soul. It did, however, seal off a part of his soul in Harry.

I can see a standoff that ends as it began (that would fit in with your ouroboros theory, Eleanor) with Big V. casting an AK at Harry, it kills the Horcrux in Harry (knocking him out), creating a violent reaction which rebounds and kills Big V (the last remaining soul bit of him). Harry surviving with his soul intact - without murdering.

Soul Search, it seems as though the soul is split with a murder. A Horcrux spell will encase it into something called a Horcrux.

Helen Lehman, JKR made it very clear that the diary was completely destroyed and Ginny is not a Horcrux.

TwinklingBlueEyes - Aug 24, 2005 9:30 pm (#694 of 2969)
Edited Aug 24, 2005 11:39 pm

"It did, however, seal off a part of his soul in Harry."

Where? In Harry? Or in his scar? And round and round we go again.

Harry is too good and full of love and compassion.

In his scar? I think not. "Yes," said Dumbledore. "He'll have that scar forever." And, "Even if I could, I wouldn't. Scars can come in handy." PS/SS

Maybe what is contained in that scar is not a part of LV, but a force so powerful it is contained behind locked doors at the MoM.

Love.

Harry has been loved by others, but has never felt the experience of being loved himself. Came close with Molly's hug, closer with Sirius's death, DD's (maybe) death will bring him closer. Ginny's love may open him up. DD told him many times, love saved you, love will defeat LV. The scar is a window to LV. Harry and others have said Harry has escaped so far by luck. Notice DD just taught him "a little of this, a little of that" in private lessons? No fantastic spells, no quick fixes... if Harry can focus the love in his heart through that window into LV...I think LV will be defeated. Without Harry AK'ing him.

...toddles off for another butterbeer...

Edit: If this makes no sense, feel free to ignore it :-)
Edited to make more sense.

Dame Peverell - Aug 24, 2005 9:50 pm (#695 of 2969)

head spinning 'round and round...

The (talking?) Sorting Hat??? - It being in DD's office under the watching eyes of all the former headmasters - not the best spot to make a Horcrux. Same for the sword (if it wasn't at Godric’s' Hollow)

I love the idea of the wand on the pillow at Ollivander’s.

Where does it say LV was mad at Lucius about the loss of the diary? I say LV has only his 16-year-old self to blame for that one. 'course I guess that whole story never really got around...

As I recall, in GoF, LV says something like he used many methods to insure he would not die. Perhaps the Horcruxes will not be the whole answer. Or perhaps these other methods have complicated matters even more. Like we need more complicated.

DD also ominously said, in the battle at the Ministry, that there are some fates worse than death. Maybe that's what he really has in mind for LV. That LV should be crippled by overwhelming grief and live without any powers until his long feared, but natural death seems much more like justice to me. And Harry wouldn't have to lose part of his own soul to destroy him.

TwinklingBlueEyes - Aug 24, 2005 10:07 pm (#696 of 2969)
Edited Aug 24, 2005 11:08 pm

"Where does it say LV was mad at Lucius about the loss of the diary?"

"When Voldemort discovered that the diary had been mutilated and robbed of all its powers, I am told that his anger was terrible to behold." "But I thought he meant Lucius Malfoy to smuggle it into Hogwarts?" "Yes, he did, years ago, when he was sure he would be able to create more Horcruxes, but still Lucius was supposed to wait for Voldemorts say-so, and he never received it, for Voldemort vanished shortly after giving him the diary. No doubt he thought that Lucius would not dare do anything with the Horcrux other than guard it carefully, but he was counting too much upon Lucius’ fear of a master who had been gone for years and whom Lucius believed dead. Of course, Lucius did not know what the diary really was. I understand that Voldemort had told him the diary would cause the Chamber of Secrets to reopen because it was cleverly enchanted. Had Lucius known he held a portion of his master's soul in his hands, he would undoubtedly have treated it with more reverence - but instead he went ahead and carried out the old plan for his own ends. By planting the diary upon Arthur Weasleys daughter, he hoped to discredit Arthur and get rid of a highly incriminating magical object in one stroke. Ah, poor Lucius . . . what with Voldemorts fury about the fact that he threw away the Horcrux for his own gain, and the fiasco at the Ministry last year, I would not be surprised if he is not secretly glad to be safe in Azkaban at the moment." HBP

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 24, 2005 11:59 pm (#697 of 2969)

Round Pink Spider wrote in message #673

JKR has mentioned several times now that Dumbledore could make mistakes, and that they could be really big ones. I think, with her reminding us of that so carefully, that we might find out that Dumbledore made a big mistake somewhere concerning the Horcruxes.

One of the basic tenets of faith in Potterverse, in my opinion, is that Jo Rowling is the creating author, and Dumbledore was her prophet As such I am constitutionally unable to agree with that

As for Dumbledore making mistakes, Jo has addressed that in the TLC/MN interview, specifying even what kind of mistakes he would be liable to make[EXT: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

ES: How can someone so -

JKR: Intelligent -

ES: be so blind with regard to certain things?

JKR: Well, there is information on that to come, in seven. But I would say that I think it has been demonstrated, particularly in books five and six that immense brainpower does not protect you from emotional mistakes and I think Dumbledore really exemplifies that. In fact, I would tend to think that being very, very intelligent might create some problems and it has done for Dumbledore, because his wisdom has isolated him, and I think you can see that in the books, because where is his equal, where is his confidante, where is his partner? He has none of those things. He's always the one who gives, he's always the one who has the insight and has the knowledge. So I think that, while I ask the reader to accept that McGonagall is a very worthy second in command, she is not an equal. You have a slightly circuitous answer, but I can't get much closer than that.

As I read that, Dumbledore doesn't actually make factual mistakes, but he is liable to make ‘emotional mistakes’, such as e.g. trusting where trust isn't warranted, trusting ‘ trusting almost to the point of recklessness’ (let's take Crouch Jr impersonating Moody in OotP as the less contentious example ).

I know of one example of Dumbledore making an erroneous statement of fact. That occurred when he described Harry and Hermione as ‘two thirteen-year-old wizards’ (PoA ch. 21 ‘Hermione's Secret’). Hermione was actually fourteen at the time.

All in all, I am completely convinced that Dumbledore's guesses are completely correct, that Voldemort did not create any Horcrux on the night he attacked the Potters and that Nagini is indeed a Horcrux.

Some have quoted Jo's comments about this in the TLC/MN interview as to imply that there is an implied uncertainty in that[EXT: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

MA: Here at the end you sort of get the feeling that we know what Harry's setting out to do, but can this really be the entire through line of the rest of the story?

JKR: It's not all of it. Obviously it's not all of it, but still, that is the way to kill Voldemort. That's not to say it won't be extremely an torturous and winding journey, but that's what he's got to do. Harry now knows - well he believe he knows - what he's facing. Dumbledore's guesses are never very far wide of the mark. I don't want to give too much away here, but Dumbledore says, ‘There are four out there, you've got to get rid of four, and then you go for Voldemort.’ So that's where he is, and that's what he's got to do.

As I read the above, however, the only implication is that there will be things Dumbledore did not foresee, but that was always obvious. The summation of Dumbledore's instructions (they're never put that directly in the book ) is put forth as the authoritative answer of what Harry has got to do, but with the implication that actually doing it won't be as simple as all that.

Oh, sorry to go on and on for so long about that I just feel that this is an important aspect to any analysis of the books.

Regards,

Troels

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 25, 2005 12:32 am (#698 of 2969)

On to more constructive stuff ...

Elanor (…len˙r to us who prefer Quenya ), Round Pink Spider, mikey, Madame Pomfrey and others, I'm sure, who have mentioned the idea of a wand Horcrux for Gryffindor, I think the idea is very intriguing, though I am also somewhat put off by the fact that Dumbledore doesn't know about that wand. I am torn between shouting that if Dumbledore didn't know about it, then it cannot be, and then that hungry expression of Tom's, thinking ‘I want this!’

To head off in s slightly different direction, assuming for a moment that the remaining Horcrux is a Ravenclaw artifact, after all. I would preclude a sword, not only because it would be too ‘unladylike’ for a dignified witch in that age, but also because we already know about one sword as an artifact from a Founder. My question, then, is whether there are any other items that would be associated with air - items, obviously, that could have been enchanted to hold magical power, and which could have survived the intervening thousand years. My own first (and so far only ) idea is a quill, but I think someone here should be able to do better ...

With respect to the Slytherin Locket, I agree that this is a rather mysterious artifact for Slytherin. Are snakes associated with any special element? I am naturally thinking of the serpentine letter 'S' on the locket when Riddle holds it up in Hokey's memory.

And a note about the Hufflepuff Cup: before I went into the Tarot/four elements stuff with the Horcruxes, my initial reaction was to compare the cup to another ‘cup’ from the Arthurian legendarium: the Holy Grail. I am not sure if there is anything whatsoever to such a comparison - other than that both became the object of a quest for someone pure at heart ...

OK, I'll shut up now !

Regards,

Troels

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 25, 2005 12:46 am (#699 of 2969)
Edited Aug 25, 2005 1:46 am

Argh! I posted the previous before I saw (re-read, actually) that Sparrowhawk, in message #663, had already addressed the issue of other items associated with air - sorry!

AIR: peacock, anvil (I'm not dwelling into the details why, but it is in association with the goddess Juno), birds, chameleon,, even toy windmills and blown bubbles...

Heh - one of Lockhart's peacock quills as a Ravenclaw artifact and Horcrux? - nah, I don't think so: we've associated Ravenclaw with air, not with airheads

Somehow I also find it slightly difficult to imagine Ravenclaw leaving an anvil behind , and Fawkes, while a bird (albeit unusual), hasn't had any owners prior to Dumbledore (and I would think that the Phoenix in particular would transcend the elemental air association with birds and be wholly tied up with elemental fire.

And the other things - I'm afraid they are either too short-lived (blown bubbles keeping for a millennium?) or not of the right sort (toy windmills kept by one of the Four Founders?).

On the other hand - if there is no comfortable way to associate the Slytherin Locket with elemental water, then we should perhaps not look in the direction of the four elements at all when discussing the (possible) artifacts left by the Four Founders?

Regards,

Troels

Phelim Mcintyre - Aug 25, 2005 4:38 am (#700 of 2969)

Troels, agree that the four element thing doesn't fit. Partly because you would need a Horcrux from both Gryffindor and Ravenclaw to fit the theory.

So let's look at the relics. A locket from Slytherin, a sword from Gryffindor (which is probably not a Horcrux), and a cup (possibly a chalice or goblet type of vessel) from Hufflepuff. Looking at the characteristics of the houses Gryffindor is set apart for their daring and chivalry, so a sword fits as the artifact. A cup, an everyday object, fits in with the down to earth (in Sprout's case literally) Hufflepuffs. A Locket fits sneaky Slytherin. So what suits the intelligent Ravenclaw? So may be a quill, or an inkstand is not so daft.

Soul Search - Aug 25, 2005 6:28 am (#701 of 2969)
Edited Aug 25, 2005 7:54 am

After 700 Horcrux posts, I am losing track. Maybe a little review will help. Here are my basic assumptions. Do you all agree?

Tom Riddle, while still at Hogwarts, decides to insure immortality by splitting his soul into seven parts. That means six Horcruxes. To satisfy his ego and trophy collecting, the soul splitting murder and Horcrux object need to be "particularly significant" to Tom Riddle. (I think my quotation marks show Dumbledore's words, but couldn't find the passage.)

Tom Riddle further decides that four of the Horcrux objects will represent the four founders of Hogwarts. That leaves two other Horcrux objects.

There has been background story on all the murders and objects. When we read book 7 there will be heel-of-hand-to-forehead recognition. Assumption, but based on six books of always getting background before anything significant comes up.

Dumbledore identifies some Horcrux objects, and suggests some others. I will assume he's right (he knows more that I do.)

For sure, we have the diary and the ring. The diary is one of the extras. The ring satisfies the Slytherin criteria. Handed down in the Gaunt family and worn by Tom Riddle's grandfather and uncle. But, it has a crest that is not an "S." Bit of a puzzle.

Hufflepuff's cup is likely one. No clue as to where it might be.

The locket is likely one, since it was supposed to be in the cave, but there are some puzzles. It has an "S" on it and was handed down in the Gaunt family, so is associated with Slytherin. A locket does not seem to be the right thing for mighty Slytherin to wear, but if there are heirs of Slytherin there must have been a Mrs. Slytherin and, probably, daughters. Worn by Tom Riddle's mother. So, I accept it, for now. Anyway, the ring is for Slytherin, so the locket is one of the extras.

Dumbledore says Tom Riddle was planning to make his last Horcrux from Harry's murder, so either the Ravenclaw or Gryffindor object. It didn't get made, so for outstanding objects we have either a Ravenclaw or Gryffindor object, and the other object that is not a Horcrux. I would like it that the Gryffindor object didn't get made, for no good evidence.

We don't have any good candidates for the Gryffindor object. Dumbledore seems to rule out the sword and the hat doesn't quite fit as a "Gryffindor only" object. We know of no other Gryffindor objects, but we must know of it (see assumption above) but just don't associate it with Gryffindor.

An obvious Ravenclaw object is the "tarnished tiara" Harry used to mark his potions book's hiding place. Nothing else seems to have any legs.

Tom Riddle/Voldemort's visit to headmaster Dumbledore seems to be somehow related to either the Gryffindor or Ravenclaw objects. Just how is a puzzle: Was he still looking for an object? Did he know of a candidate object and want to steal it? Had he already made the Horcrux and want to retrieve it? Did he just want to check if his Horcrux was still safe?

Dumbledore suggests that Nagini is the sixth Horcrux made from Frank Bryce’s murder in the Riddle house (GoF). He sites Voldemort's unusual control over the snake as evidence. If so, a desperation act performed before he had his full powers back. I think this one is questionable, but have no other candidates. Nagini substituted for whatever object Voldemort was going to use with Harry's murder.

It is too bad a topic can't have a summary page, perhaps controlled by the topic starter, that can be used to help work things out.

My suggestion is that each of us that are still active on this topic summarize conclusions so we can see where we are.

haymoni - Aug 25, 2005 8:21 am (#702 of 2969)

Soul Search - I don't think of the ring as the Slytherin item.

I think it is just a souvenir of his visit to his mother's home.

I don't think he wanted a souvenir from his father's home.

I think the Locket is the Slytherin item.

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 25, 2005 8:37 am (#703 of 2969)
Edited Aug 25, 2005 9:38 am

Soul Search wrote in message #701

After 700 Horcrux posts, I am losing track. Maybe a little review will help. Here are my basic assumptions. Do you all agree?

Brilliant idea there, Soul Search! I agree completely that a recapitulation is overdue.

Tom Riddle, while still at Hogwarts, decides to insure immortality by splitting his soul into seven parts. That means six Horcruxes. To satisfy his ego and trophy collecting, the soul splitting murder and Horcrux object need to be "particularly significant" to Tom Riddle. (I think my quotation marks show Dumbledore's words, but couldn't find the passage.)

Here goes ...

But would Lord Voldemort use tin cans or old potion bottles to guard his own precious soul? You are forgetting what I have showed you. Lord Voldemort liked to collect trophies, and he preferred objects with a powerful magical history. His pride, his belief in his own superiority, his determination to carve for himself a startling place in magical history; these things, suggest to me that Voldemort would have chosen his Horcruxes with some care, favouring objects worthy of the honor.

(HBP ch. 23 ‘Horcruxes’)

And I agree with the conclusions here (not that there is anything to disagree about )

Tom Riddle further decides that four of the Horcrux objects will represent the four founders of Hogwarts. That leaves two other Horcrux objects.

Indeed. Provided, however, that he did manage to collect four artifacts from the Four Founders.

There has been background story on all the murders and objects.

Do you mean that you assume that we have already been introduced to all the objects and all the murders? Because in that case I will have to differ I don't think we can say with complete confidence that we know of other murders than that of Frank Bryce that has been used by Voldemort to create a Horcrux, though there is an, in my opinion small, possibility that one or more of the murders on the Riddles were used to create the first one or two Horcruxes. It depends to some extent on the relative dating of things (in particular what Jo meant by ‘in the summer of his sixteenth year’.

When we read book 7 there will be heel-of-hand-to-forehead recognition. Assumption, but based on six books of always getting background before anything significant comes up.

Objection! I cannot agree that we have always been ‘getting background before anything significant’ Crouch Jr is, I believe, a point, and in general the new DADA teacher has (except for HBP) never been seen before the book in which he appears as teacher. This is not to say that I think it is impossible that we have seen the last Horcrux, but we cannot know.

Dumbledore identifies some Horcrux objects, and suggests some others. I will assume he's right (he knows more that I do.)

Hear! Hear!

Allow me to list them - I do so love lists

• The Diary
• The Peverell Ring
• The Slytherin Locket
• The Hufflepuff Cup
• Unknown Horcrux - assumed to be artifact from either Gryffindor or Ravenclaw.
• Nagini - intended to be Harry, but Nagini used instead when Voldemort regained a rudimentary body.

Sorry - there's a strong streak of Hobbit in me: the way they are about e.g. family trees ‘Hobbits delighted in such things, if they were accurate: they liked to have books filled with things that they already knew, set out fair and square with no contradictions.’ (the prologue to The Lord of the Rings)

For sure, we have the diary and the ring.

Yes, these are definitive.

[...] The ring satisfies the Slytherin criteria. [...]

I'm not sure about that, though. It comes from the Gaunts, but there have been a lot of years and generations between Salazar Slytherin and Marvolo Gaunt. The ring, which Dumbledore does not identify as a Slytherin artifact, can have entered the Gaunt family at any point, and the Peverell arms suggest another origin than the Slytherin line.

Hufflepuff's cup is likely one. No clue as to where it might be.

Very likely, I'd say

The locket is likely one, since it was supposed to be in the cave, but there are some puzzles. [...] So, I accept it, for now. Anyway, the ring is for Slytherin, so the locket is one of the extras.

I think it's the other way around: the Ring is the extra.

Dumbledore says Tom Riddle was planning to make his last Horcrux from Harry's murder, so either the Ravenclaw or Gryffindor object. It didn't get made, so for outstanding objects we have either a Ravenclaw or Gryffindor object, and the other object that is not a Horcrux. I would like it that the Gryffindor object didn't get made, for no good evidence.

I agree with the preference here, though I wouldn't dare use it as basis for my conjectures

We don't have any good candidates for the Gryffindor object.

It's a reason, at least.

Dumbledore seems to rule out the sword and the hat doesn't quite fit as a "Gryffindor only" object.

Good point about the hat. Good thinking!

We know of no other Gryffindor objects, but we must know of it (see assumption above) but just don't associate it with Gryffindor.

Dumbledore doesn't know about any other Gryffindor artifacts, so I think there is very good case to make for the conjecture that there is no Horcrux using a Gryffindor artifact.

An obvious Ravenclaw object is the "tarnished tiara" Harry used to mark his potions book's hiding place. Nothing else seems to have any legs.

That went by just a little too fast for me (sorry to be dense). Why would that be ‘obvious’?

To be continued ...

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 25, 2005 8:39 am (#704 of 2969)

It didn't fit in one post, so here is part two:

Tom Riddle/Voldemort's visit to headmaster Dumbledore seems to be somehow related to either the Gryffindor or Ravenclaw objects. Just how is a puzzle: Was he still looking for an object? Did he know of a candidate object and want to steal it? Had he already made the Horcrux and want to retrieve it? Did he just want to check if his Horcrux was still safe?

I think the presence of what Dumbledore calls ‘the only known relic of Gryffindor’ at Hogwarts gives us a good starting point for speculations as to that. In my experience, when dealing with the Potter books, the obvious explanation is usually the correct one.

Dumbledore suggests that Nagini is the sixth Horcrux made from Frank Bryce’s murder in the Riddle house (GoF). He sites Voldemort's unusual control over the snake as evidence. If so, a desperation act performed before he had his full powers back. I think this one is questionable, but have no other candidates. Nagini substituted for whatever object Voldemort was going to use with Harry's murder.

Nagini is a substitute, I agree. An act of desperation is a good way to put it, but Dumbledore's guess is as good as a written statement by Rowling stating the same ... in my opinion

It is too bad a topic can't have a summary page, perhaps controlled by the topic starter, that can be used to help work things out.

Agreed!

It is one the subjects I dread having to summarise for the FAQs - I can't just do the Snape trick, stating that the discussions rage and link to some of the discussions

My suggestion is that each of us that are still active on this topic summarize conclusions so we can see where we are.

I'll get around to that later ... (I'm off to our scout meeting now)

Regards,

Troels

Elanor - Aug 25, 2005 11:12 am (#705 of 2969)
Edited Aug 25, 2005 12:17 pm

Great summary Troels, we indeed needed it!

But you said (post #699): "On the other hand - if there is no comfortable way to associate the Slytherin Locket with elemental water, then we should perhaps not look in the direction of the four elements at all when discussing the (possible) artifacts left by the Four Founders?

Well, I think I know one way to associate the Slytherin locket with the element water, I don't know if you will think it is a "comfortable way", but it is undoubtedly one... In one of my alchemy books there is a kind of lexicon of the alchemical symbols that lists the elements, metals or alchemical processes and the symbols alchemists drew in their texts and notes instead of naming those said principles and processes (a sort of "Y", for example, meant "dragon's head" / caput draconis).

There are different symbols that represent water (depending on the context) but one of them is just like a "S" with two small horizontal strokes on it (like the equal sign). It looks like the dollar symbol ($) but with horizontal and not vertical strokes on it if you prefer.

Some other symbols, involving water, are also made with some sort of serpentine lines (a bit like the astrological symbol of the Aquarius sign). So, I don't think we can completely put aside the 4 elements connection, don't you think so?

Elanor (who don't mind being called …len˙r, the Ancient Tongue is beautiful - and the Ents love it! )

Verbina - Aug 25, 2005 11:40 am (#706 of 2969)

Okay from where I see it, this is my summary at least.

Facts as we know it... Tom Riddle had a tendency to steal from his victims things to act as trophies for him.

He opens the Chamber of Secrets and brings about the death of Moaning Myrtle, framing Hagrid for the death. Over the following summer, he searches out and kills his father, framing his uncle Morfin for the deaths. That fall he returns to Hogwarts with the ring of Morfin and asks Slughorn about the making of Horcruxes and making multiple Horcruxes. He also began to create the diary in this time period.

After he leaves Hogwarts, he gains access to the Hufflepuff Cup and the Locket of Slytherin by killing Smith and framing her house elf for the death.

After a period of years he returned to Hogwarts, claiming to want the DADA position but in truth after something else, which Dumbledore feels was a relic of either Gryffindor or Ravenclaw.

So of the Horcruxes we have the following:

• diary - first made due to the age of the soul within (16 years) - soul released from the diary by Harry.
• Ring - possibly made while in Hogwarts - soul released by Dumbledore
• Locket - very likely made into a Horcrux - found and perhaps destroyed by mysterious RAB
• Cup - Very likely made into a Horcrux.
• Nagini - made much much later after plan to kill Harry failed.

I was thinking though...we are looking at what Voldemort did but not what he planned. He planned to make a Horcrux out of founders' relics. Which means that we know he did have a relic of Slytherin and Hufflepuff and may have gotten one of Gryffindor and/or Ravenclaw. He did not plan to make Nagini a Horcrux. So this is what I am thinking.

He did make a Horcrux of a Ravenclaw object. But what could it be? I am leaning towards the idea that it is, as Troels stated, related to air as well as the intelligence Ravenclaws are known for. It could not be a book as a book has been done with the diary. A wand is possible really or perhaps...something related to a wand.

He also knew where to get hold of the Gryffindor object. Before it appeared in the Chamber for Harry, do we know where it was? (I can't find my book to check to see if Harry saw it in Dumbledore's office before.) We know that it is now kept safe there but do we know where it was before? There are two possible things....if it were in Hogwarts all this time, he may have been trying to get hold of it and had planned that once he had the Potter family out of the way, he could easily storm the school and gain control of it and the sword. Or the sword was somewhere else and he knew where it was...perhaps at the Potters, perhaps somewhere else. But he INTENDED to make it his final Horcrux as it would be his final show of triumph, to have the relic of the great Godric, proponent of Muggle borns, hold his final piece of immortality.

Soul Search - Aug 25, 2005 11:42 am (#707 of 2969)
Edited Aug 25, 2005 12:48 pm

Response to haymoni (702) and Troels Forchhammer (703, 704) excellent comments regarding my 701 post.

I like to think we have seen all the objects, although we may not be able to associate them with a founder. Otherwise, we might as well close the topic and wait two years.

I agree with the "murders" comment. I think we know of the murders used for each of the Horcruxes, but, since there are so many, we may have trouble exactly assigning each. Frank Bryce may be the only one we can nail down from cannon, given that Nagini is a Horcrux.

Maybe we can't KNOW, but after six books, we can be almost sure. There have been a few surprises, as Troels mentioned, but background buildup is the overwhelming style.

I think we did well with bracketing the timeframe for some of the murders and Horcruxes using cannon references, "important" murders, and the change in Voldemort's appearance, but that is all.

There were so many good ideas related to murder-Horcrux creation timing that I changed back and forth a couple of times. Not sure I would even say, for sure, that Myrtle was used for the diary. I am willing to defer trying to assign the murders. At best, we might be able to have a list of possible candidates for some.

The ring and the locket deserve some more thought. I never liked the idea that two objects seemed to be of Slytherin. Not out of the question, just questionable and suspicious. If we have to choose for now, then I think the locket, with the "S," is more certainly the Slytherin item, even though a "locket" doesn't seem to fit my image of mighty Slytherin. Maybe styles have changed in a thousand years. (What was IN the locket before the note. A lock of Slytherin's hair?)

Then the ring is either an extra, the Gryffindor object, or the Ravenclaw object.

We know from the hat that Gryffindor and Slytherin were, once, great friends. Could the ring be the Gryffindor object? All we have to go on is the crest. What does it mean ... or even hint at? I never was comfortable with Slytherin wearing a ring with a crest that wasn't an "S" anyway. We have a little wiggle room here; Dumbledore said the sword was the only known Gryffindor relic.

If the ring is either the Gryffindor or Ravenclaw object, then that leaves one "extra" open, bringing other possibilities into play. I always liked Tom Riddle's award as a candidate Horcrux. Not only would it be a slap-in-the-face to Dumbledore, but it would be safe in a trophy case in Hogwarts, and, every now and then, someone would polish it!

I am not sure Tom Riddle's visit to Dumbledore had anything to do with the sword (‘the only known relic of Gryffindor’). Not sure Riddle even knew about the sword. There is no mention of it in Dippet's office. I think it was Dumbledore's, or someone's, and not belonging to Hogwarts; not all headmasters were Gryffindor. Dumbledore is confident that it could not be a Horcrux, suggesting that it was always in his possession and not loose in Dippet's office.

Is any (observed by Harry) reference made to the sword DURING the meeting? Riddle could have researched it or known Dumbledore had it, and went to check. Come to think of it, THAT could have been the reason for his visit: check if Dumbledore really had Gryffindor's sword!

Okay, "obvious" for the "tarnished tiara" was a bit strong. Let's just say "a candidate." I am suspicious of such casual mentions, however, and would put it high on the list. It does seem like something that would have been Ravenclaw's. And, Harry has seen it and can easily check it.

Re-think on Nagini. Maybe "desperation" wasn't quite right. We know that Voldemort thought that a seven-way soul split had magical significance. Since his last attempt didn't work, he was one short. He wanted to achieve the magical seven before undertaking his new body and rise to power. He wasn't, then, powerful enough to take on an "important" murder, nor to find or retrieve the final Horcrux object. He settled for Frank Bryce and Nagini. And blames Harry for it, too.

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 25, 2005 12:18 pm (#708 of 2969)
Edited Aug 25, 2005 1:23 pm

OK ... my summary of Horcruxes (part 1) ...

First of all; the Voldemort Horcruxes. I trust Dumbledore to be correct in his guesses, so I will trust that Harry will have to deal with six Horcruxes, and I am confident that Dumbledore has them listed correctly. That means that we are dealing with the following:

• The Diary
• The Peverell Ring
• The Slytherin Locket
• The Hufflepuff Cup
• Unknown Horcrux - assumed to be artifact from either Gryffindor or Ravenclaw.
• Nagini

It is perhaps noteworthy that there has never been more than five Horcruxes existing at any time as the last Horcrux was only created after the destruction of the first.

1: The Diary

Voldemort has now learned that this Horcrux has been destroyed:

‘Does Voldemort know when a Horcrux is destroyed, sir? Can he feel it?’ Harry asked, ignoring the portraits.

‘A very interesting question, Harry. I believe not. I believe that Voldemort is now so immersed in evil, and these crucial parts of himself have been detached for so long, he does not feel as we do. Perhaps, at the point of death, he might be aware of his loss & heips; but he was not aware, for instance, that the diary had been destroyed until he forced the truth out of Lucius Malfoy. When Voldemort discovered that the diary had been mutilated and robbed of all its powers, I am told that his anger was terrible to behold.’

(Harry and Dumbledore, HBP ch. 23 ‘Horcruxes’)

The anger, ‘terrible to behold’, which Voldemort displayed might imply that the important power-gain from the seven-part soul is the simultaneous existence of seven separate soul-fragments. If that is indeed the case (as I suspect it is), then I will expect Voldemort to attempt to create a new Horcrux. In that case he will most likely try to do that which he failed sixteen years ago: to create a Horcrux using the significant murder of the Chosen One.

2: The Peverell Ring

‘That's right!’ roared Gaunt. For a moment, Harry thought Gaunt was making an obscene hand gesture, but then realised that he was showing Ogden the ugly, black-stoned ring he was wearing on his middle finger, waving it before Ogden's eyes. ‘See this? See this? Know what it is? Know where it came from? Centuries it's been in our family, that's how far back we go, and pureblood all the way! Know how much I've been offered for this, with the Peverell coat of arms engraved on the stone?’

(Marvolo Gaunt, HBP ch. 10 ‘The House of Gaunt’)

This Horcrux is now destroyed, and Voldemort's knowledge about this will depend on Mr. Severus Snape. Personally I am sure Voldemort knows that this Horcrux also is destroyed, but obviously others will disagree. In my opinion that makes it likely that Voldemort will be looking towards creating two new Horcruxes, one of which he may try to create before he goes after Harry. In that case we can only pray that Harry discovers it anyway and destroys it in time.

3: The Slytherin Locket

Gone from the cave, taken by the mysterious R.A.B.

To cut a long story short, I am quite mainstream on this one: Regulus A. Black removed it and stored it in Grimmauld Place 12, where it was seen by the cleaning crew in the beginning of OotP, despite the lack of any mentioning of the Slytherin ‘S’ on it. What is more, I believe this is the Horcrux Rowling referred to in the TLC/MN interview [EXT: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

ES: It seems like it would be impossible. If Harry had gone to the cave, he never could have done it on his own, it seems like.

JKR: Well, I'm prepared to bet you now, that at least before the week is out, at least one of the Horcruxes will have been correctly identified by careful re-readers of the books.

So I believe Harry will have reasonably easy access to that Horcrux once he realises the connection.

4: The Hufflepuff Cup

She opened the lid. Harry edged forwards a little to get a better view and saw what looked like a small golden cup with two finely wrought handles.

[...]

‘A badger,’ murmured Voldemort, examining the engraving upon the cup. ‘Then this was ...?’

(HBP ch. 20 ‘Lord Voldemort's Request’)

Sorry, no ideas. My initial thoughts turned to the Goblet of Fire, but that wouldn't fit the Cup being in the Smith family for generations, ‘Didn't I tell you I was distantly descended? This has been handed down in the family for years and years. Lovely, isn't it?’. Since Voldemort stole the Cup, it seems unlikely that it is back with the Smiths, and Zacharias probably won't be much help here (except that he might like to get it back if he is also connected).

5: Unknown Horcrux

I cannot answer for whether he ever managed to find anything of Ravenclaw's. I am confident, however, that the only known relic of Gryffindor remains safe.

(Dumbledore, HBP ch. 23 ‘Horcruxes’)

As I have said earlier, Dumbledore's guesses count for me as certain knowledge, so though I find it intriguing and puzzling that Dumbledore didn't mention the Sorting Hat (I really like Soul Search's explanation that the Sorting Hat by virtue of it's function no longer counts as a uniquely Gryffindor item, though it would still count as a Founder relic).

So, I do think we'll have to look for some Ravenclaw item. Looking at the Hufflepuff Cup and the Slytherin Locket, I don't think we can make any assumption that the item will be something we would immediately associate with Rowena Ravenclaw, but if it were to be something like that, I would be looking in the bookish department: books, quills, ink-stands etc.

It is, in my opinion, likely that we haven't seen this Horcrux before (I'm split about fifty-fifty on this) - so I am reluctant to embark on a guessing game.

6: Nagini

The desperate Horcrux, the one Voldemort created when he had only a rudimentary body.

One might wonder whether he wanted to make sure that he was still protected: was he afraid that someone had been going around destroying Horcruxes since he last checked on them? We cannot know.

To be continued ...

Regards,

Troels

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 25, 2005 12:24 pm (#709 of 2969)

My Horcrux summary (part 2). The last bits

The non-Horcrux: Harry

Nope, I am sorry, but I cannot get myself to accept that idea. Not only is it Dumbledore who tells Harry about the transfer of Powers, but without considering Harry for a Horcrux (even stating directly that ‘we know, he failed’ to create a Horcrux with Harry's death), but the creation of a Horcrux not only requires that the soul is split by taking a human life, but it also requires that the split off soul-fragment is encased in the Horcrux by the use of a special spell. Voldemort was certainly in no position to cast spells after he had tried to kill Harry, and encasing soul-fragments is too vile and evil a thing for it to happen accidentally.

Potential Horcruxes

I have suggested that I believe - or rather ‘think it likely’ - that Voldemort will be seeking to create one or two new Horcruxes, knowing of the destruction of one or two of those that he has made earlier. If that is really the case, then I think it likely that Voldemort will try to complete his Founder collection by making a Horcrux of ‘the only known relic of Gryffindor’ with the murder of the Chosen One. This would presage a final confrontation taking place at Hogwarts in a carnage of blood: Harry and Voldemort fighting each other while the students and staff fight the Death Eaters (I'd put McGonagall against Snape, Lupin against Fenrir and Neville, supported by other DA members, against Bellatrix).

Regards,

Troels

Soul Search - Aug 25, 2005 12:42 pm (#710 of 2969)
Edited Aug 25, 2005 2:04 pm

Verbina! I think you are right about the sword in your 706 post.

Dumbledore knew the sword could not be a Horcrux, not because he had "always" had it, but because Dumbledore has had it since Voldemort failed to make it a Horcrux with Harry's murder.

It doesn't matter whether Voldemort brought it with him, or knew it was at the Potter's. Although, it is interesting if the Potter's had the last known Gryffindor relic. Also, it now belongs to Harry, just like the cloak.

Back to Horcruxes. The sword was the Gryffindor object, but it didn't get made into a Horcrux. (I like that.)

Then, the ring is either an "extra," and we need Ravenclaw candidates, or the ring is the Ravenclaw object, and we need "extra" candidates.

The more I think of this, the more it explains.

Minor comment on the ring. Marvolo says "... Centuries it's been in our family."

Well, it should have been in the family for ten centuries if it came from Slytherin. Does this mean anything? Don't see what.

More on the Nagini Horcrux.

In the graveyard scene in GoF, Voldemort tells Harry about his being well protected. He knew, meaning he explored! He settled for Nagini because Harry was too well protected.

irish flutterby - Aug 25, 2005 1:17 pm (#711 of 2969)

"As I read that, Dumbledore doesn't actually make factual mistakes, but he is liable to make ‘emotional mistakes’, such as e.g. trusting where trust isn't warranted, trusting ‘ trusting almost to the point of recklessness’ (let's take Crouch Jr impersonating Moody in OotP as the less contentious example )."

I was thinking more along the lines of DD caring too much about Harry to tell him about the prophecy.

I have a question. Has anyone considered that perhaps the Ravenclaw and Slytherin lineage crossed paths at some point? Could it be that the ring perhaps was in some way a Ravenclaw relic? She very likely was pureblood also, wasn't she. If this isn't possible, could someone explain why. Thanks

Soul Search - Aug 25, 2005 1:34 pm (#712 of 2969)
Edited Aug 25, 2005 2:53 pm

irish flutterby -- It is not only possible that founders' family lines crossed, but required. The wizarding world was a closed, and rather small, set of bloodlines. Sirius mentions that "all pureblood families are related" in OotP when he is discussing the tapestry. There are previous references explaining why wizards and witches have married Muggle-born and even Muggles.

While the Gaunts may have married first cousins, the rest of the wizarding world was likely hard pressed not to marry second or third cousins.

Might explain that "Wizarding Genealogy ..." book; needed it to check on relationships before considering marriage.

Not sure how this helps though. The ring could be a Ravenclaw relic without lines joining. Some Slytherins could have stolen it.

Can we associate the crest with Ravenclaw?

Ann - Aug 25, 2005 1:52 pm (#713 of 2969)
Edited Aug 25, 2005 2:59 pm

I don't think the Peverell ring can be the "Something of Ravenclaw or Gryffindor" in Harry's list. Dumbledore knows about it, he presumably knew who Peverell was. And he's unsure about that 5th Horcrux.

Incidentally, I think the fact that Harry summarizes Dumbledore's conclusions so neatly, and then repeats that list to himself and even dreams about it is another good reason to regard it as a 'to-do' list. I think JKR is using that to keep the reader keep track of things.

So, my view (in the order of their creation, and I think what will be the order of their destruction as well). Note that I believe (I won't repeat my arguments) that Horcruxes can be made long after the murders that are used to make them.

The Diary, probably made very soon after the Slughorn memory, in Riddle's sixth year (before New Years, if he was still 16). The murder was Moaning Myrtle (she fits the pattern of letting someone else take the rap, and he clearly sicced the basilisk on her). The hiding place (anomalous, since the Horcrux, exceptionally, was functional): with Lucius Malfoy.

The Ring, probably made the summer between his sixth and last years, with the murder of his father the previous summer. I say the summer, since he left it in his mother's ancestral home, and he probably couldn't have gone there during the school year.

The Locket had to have been made after he stole it from Hepzibah and murdered her, but I suspect the murder that he used to make it was either Caractus Burke (who cheated his mother heartlessly in buying it) or the director of the orphanage (also connected with his mother/childhood). Hiding place: the Cave, from his childhood; present location, 12 GP or the stashes of Mundungus or Kreacher. (RAB being Regulus). I think they'll find it rather easily. Note: There is no doubt that the locket is a Horcrux, given RAB's note and the way it was protected. And the fact that Accio Horcrux activated the Inferi.

The Cup was probably made with Hepzibah Smith's murder. Hidden, I suspect, somewhere at Hogwarts (Chamber of Secrets?), or conceivably Borgin & Burke's?

"Something of Ravenclaw or Gryffindor" is, I suspect, something of Ravenclaw, since Gryffindor would have been appropriate for Harry (son of two Gryffindors, killed in Godric's Hollow) and also since JKR has been making enigmatic remarks about Ravenclaw coming into its own. I don't think the tiara, since gender agreement isn't necessary (see locket). Maybe the bloody axe? Just kidding--it's probably something academic/intellectual. Fan-fiction like suspicion: Maybe Riddle had a girlfriend at Hogwarts, not love obviously, but for status reasons and convenience, and she was a Ravenclaw and later dumped him when his eyes began to go red. The books keep stressing how good looking and charming he was, and one would expect a Head Boy to have a girlfriend, whether he wanted one or not. Whatever this is, I suspect finding out the back-story will be a major part of Book 7. (If it was a girlfriend, this may be where Dumbledore made his "emotional mistake"; perhaps he didn't ask someone who knew her well for his or her memories--like McGonagall?)

The Snake is pretty straightforward unless Dumbledore has this wrong. The scene where Dumbledore consults the little twirly instrument in OotP the night Arthur is bitten seems to me to make it fairly certain. Murder: Frank Bryce (he's the Riddle House caretaker, after all, his father's family servant. a parallel to the ring), and the hiding place is apparently wherever Voldemort is, since Nagini is his pet.

Soul Search - Aug 25, 2005 2:10 pm (#714 of 2969)

I like Ann's summary, generally. Still not sure about murder-Horcrux timing. Don't know where "girlfriend" came from.

How about we call the ring an "extra" that represented Tom Riddle's maternal line, or something.

When Tom Riddle went to the Gaunts', he wasn't looking for the ring, or any Horcrux object; he didn't know the ring existed. His acquiring it was a side benefit. It doesn't have to be from any Hogwarts founder.

If, after looking as hard as we all have, we can't find cannon supporting a Ravenclaw object, let's not try to force it. After all, Dumbledore couldn't figure it out either. Maybe just list a few candidates, so when we read about them in book 7 we can say we were right.

Sparrowhawk - Aug 25, 2005 4:31 pm (#715 of 2969)

Concerning the idea that the tiara mentioned while Harry was hiding the HBP book in the Room of Requirement, I have found one detail that may be worth mentioning.

According to the Dictionary of Subjects and Symbols in Art, the element Air (which, in JKR's books, could be associated with Ravenclaw) is connected with the goddess Juno, who, as the wife of Jupiter, is often represented wearing a crown or a diadem...

Another minor point concerns the Slytherin locket. It has been difficult to associate it with the 4th element, Water, but as a matter of fact we don't know what it contains, and the connection may well become obvious when Harry eventually manages to open it.

Just my two knuts...

Hogs Head - Aug 25, 2005 5:48 pm (#716 of 2969)

Sorry, but I think almost every goddess in Greek, Roman, Persian and whatever mythology wore a tiara or a crown or headdress of some type. So did virtually every queen that lived from 6000 BCE (formerly BC) to 2005 CE (formerly AD) -- Her majesty Queen Elizabeth II wears one on occasions of state, doesn't she? So, I'm not sure the tiara is a meaningful clue, at least not yet.

(Unless Old Moldy Voldy once fancied himself a sweetheart and he gave her a tiara, but I thought JKR had pretty well ruled out a love life for him, didn't she?)

Dame Peverell - Aug 25, 2005 8:04 pm (#717 of 2969)

A few mixed knuts:

LV killed Morfin and created the ring Horcrux immediately and magically hid it in the Gaunt home right away. Perhaps he killed Hepzibah, made the cup a Horcrux and magically hid it there too.

Maybe the water connection to the locket is the seaside location of the cave.

Ravenclaw was well known for her design of Hogwarts itself. LV was DADA teacher as Quirrell. The secret passageway F&G used to use collapsed while LV/Quirrell was there. Perhaps a Horcrux is buried there.

When Lupin left Hogwarts as the DADA teacher, he carried with him an apparently empty aquarium which was not in his personal possession when he arrived. Why?

Who was the DADA teacher when TR was at school?

Sparrowhawk - Aug 25, 2005 11:06 pm (#718 of 2969)
Edited Aug 26, 2005 12:21 am

Hogs Head, actually it is not that simple. Minerva mostly wears a helmet, Diana has her hair tied back and wears a crescent moon over her brow, Venus doesn't wear anything, Cybele wears a turreted 'mural' crown, Ceres a crown of ears of corn... most fortunately, because otherwise identification would be very difficult for us archaeologists and art historians!

On the other hand, cups and swords are the attributes of a vast number of gods and heroes - does it mean that it is not relevant at all, that Hufflepuff's attribute is a cup, and Gryffindor's a sword?

The only point I wanted to make was that, if JKR decided to connect each House with one of the Four Elements, then the tiara was a distinct possibility for a Rowena Ravenclaw relic - no more, no less.

Hogs Head - Aug 26, 2005 2:58 am (#719 of 2969)

No, I didn't mean the tiara was ruled out or irrelevant; only that at this time we have "insufficient evidence," as they say.

irish flutterby - Aug 26, 2005 3:13 am (#720 of 2969)

While I don't think we can rule it out, would LV be that keen to hide a Horcrux in a room full of other people's stuff. Of did he just pace back and forth in front of the Room of Requirements and think..."I need a place to hide this Horcrux. It has to be here at Hogwarts." three times. The dood appeared and he thought (arrogantly) "I'm so magical, I amaze myself."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Thu Jul 21, 2011 9:41 am

Sparrowhawk - Aug 26, 2005 3:39 am (#721 of 2969)
Edited Aug 26, 2005 4:48 am

Irish Flutterby, if Voldemort wanted to plant a Horcrux at Hogwarts, the most obvious place was undoubtedly the Chamber of Secrets, where it would be pretty safe, being guarded by the basilisk. And when he applied for the DADA teacher post for the second time, maybe Voldemort hoped to do just that; but if he didn't have enough time to go to the Chamber, maybe he thought that the House of Requirement would be the best alternative, until the time came when he could transfer the Horcrux to the Chamber. It is even possible that he put it in the Room before his appointment with DD, intending to fetch it a little later, but he couldn't and had to leave it there...

I don't envision this as more than a remote possibility, though.

Abracapocus - Aug 26, 2005 3:44 am (#722 of 2969)

Dame Peverell, I think the DADA teacher when Tom was in school was Professor Merrythought.

Dame Peverell - Aug 26, 2005 4:41 am (#723 of 2969)

Thank you so much. Doesn't appear to be any help though. Do you know, can someone tell me, in what chapter DD explains to Harry how he fried his hand?

Hogs Head - Aug 26, 2005 5:50 am (#724 of 2969)

DD never actually got around to explaining to Harry how his hand was "fried." That was always a story that was going to be told later, in depth. Maybe it will yet be told in Book 7 in some manner.

However, DD did tell Harry that his hand was injured while recovering the ring -- the bare facts. Can't get to my Book 6 right now to find the citation.

Ann - Aug 26, 2005 7:17 am (#725 of 2969)
Edited Aug 26, 2005 8:26 am

Dumbledore explains that his hand injury was a result of the protections put on the ring.

But Dame Peverell, you said

LV killed Morfin and created the ring Horcrux immediately and magically hid it in the Gaunt home right away. Perhaps he killed Hepzibah, made the cup a Horcrux and magically hid it there too.

The problem is, he could not have created the Horcrux immediately. He killed his father's family (not Morfin, who just got blamed for it) and took the ring from Morfin during "the summer of his sixteenth year." (Probably, given JKR's dislike of mathematics, this means the summer of the year he was 16, rather than his actual 16th year, during which he'd be 15.) He then wore the ring all year at school, during which time (as we know from Slughorn's memory) he got information about making Horcruxes out of Slughorn. He has not yet made a Horcrux at the time he asks, because if he had, he would know the spell and would hardly have risked alienating Slughorn by eagerly asking about it. I think he probably didn't make the Horcrux until the following summer--or possibly even later. And Dumbledore says explicitly that Voldemort didn't wear the ring after it was made a Horcrux, but hid it in the Gaunt House. He also says that he doesn't think Voldemort had murdered anyone between the Riddles and Hepzibah Smith (at the end of his Borgin & Burke's stint).

Even if Dumbledore is wrong, he does know how Horcruxes are made, and since he thinks it probable that there were no murders in between, that means that a Horcrux can be made long after the murder that tore off the bit of soul. In other words, if Horcruxes had to be made with fresh murders (so to speak), Dumbledore would have reconstructed his timetable differently.

I wonder how, with a multiple murderer like Voldie, he designates precisely which murder he wants to use to make the Horcrux--so he doesn't accidentally use one of the "unimportant" murders for splitting his soul. I'd bet the name of the victim has to be mentioned somewhere in the spell. That would tie in with my assumption that the murder used to create a Horcrux has to be premeditated and to some extent personal.

Soul Search - Aug 26, 2005 7:22 am (#726 of 2969)
Edited Aug 26, 2005 9:49 am

Ann -- Your comment that Dumbledore knew about the Peverell ring and had not associated it with Ravenclaw is a good deduction. I'm convinced that the ring can't be a Ravenclaw object. I think we have decided that the Gryffindor object was the sword, that didn't become a Horcrux, so the ring must be an "extra."

There is a bit of sense here. Tom Riddle makes the diary and ring Horcruxes. He then needs four more, but what objects? He is still at Hogwarts. Four more Horcruxes -- four Hogwarts founders. Fits.

I like your locket summary, except for "director of the orphanage." You suggest a good reason, and we have met the character, but, to my mind, we have enough known murders without assuming more.

If the cup is at Hogwarts he had to have hidden it when he went to visit Dumbledore. I am not sure about that. If not at Hogwarts, then where? Borgin and Burkes? The "Purloined Letter" approach could work, but it might be sold and Voldemort would lose track of it. This inspired another thought, see later.

It has been suggested that Tom Riddle hid the Horcrux cup at Hepzibah's. I like this. It could also be the reason for the Zacharias Smith connection: he lives at Hepzibah's old place and Harry needs to get there to check for the Horcrux cup.

Dame Peverell -- I missed the "Ravenclaw designed Hogwarts" connection. Can you help?

Good point. (Heel-of-hand-to-forehead!) Voldemort controlled Quirrell for a time before Harry went to Hogwarts and possessed him at Hogwarts for most of the school year. He could have had Quirrell do anything, including what he wanted to do on his much earlier visit to Dumbledore.

We know that he had already made five Horcruxes, so he didn't have Quirrell make a Horcrux, but he could have hidden something he had already made.

Now, about that secret passage you mentioned. It has been mentioned before, but not recently. It is suspicious; why mention it at all in PoA? We know it was clear when the map was made. We know it had "collapsed or something" when F&G gave the map to Harry. (F&G know what the blockage is, they checked it.) How do we know it collapsed (or something) when Voldemort/Quirrell was there?

If we can show, with cannon, that the passage collapsed while Voldemort/Quirrell was there, then we have identified the location of the Ravenclaw object. And, we have demonstrated that we can't know what it is, and why Dumbledore could not identify it; he hasn't seen it either! And, who better to tell Harry what is under the collapse, but a ghost -- The Grey Lady! And to confirm that it once belonged to Rowena Ravenclaw.

An alternative is that the cup was hidden under the collapse.

Problems. Why hide a Horcrux in a collapsed passage? Seems like the Chamber of Secrets would be more secure, and fitting. Even the Room of Requirement storeroom would be safer. Well, all of those places are inside Hogwarts, which may not have been easily accessible to Voldemort. The collapsed passage is still "in" Hogwarts, but can be accessed from the other end, presumably in Hogsmeade. In fact, if the passage collapse occurred before Voldemort tried to kill Harry, then Voldemort could have tasked a Death Eater to take the object, cup or Ravenclaw object, to Hogwarts and hide it. The collapsed passage was the best they could do.

I like the passage collapse theory, but here is another thought inspired by Ann's Borgin and Burkes suggestion for the cup. The necklace. The description of the necklace suggests it would be suitable as a Rowena Ravenclaw heirloom (old, fancy, lots of gemstones).

We know that Tom Riddle was at Borgin and Burkes. We know some Horcruxes are protected with powerful magical spells, lethal ones. The necklace has good background, Harry having noticed it in CoS. Draco's using it in HBP was a bit stupid; maybe that storyline was just to call Harry's attention to it and to get it to Hogwarts where the Grey Lady can recognize it and Harry can find it easier.

It seems in character for Voldemort to make the Ravenclaw necklace a Horcrux, hex it with such a lethal spell that no one can touch it, then hide it in plain site at Borgin and Burkes. It would be even more fitting if Caractus Burke, who cheated Tom Riddle's mother, was murdered to create the necklace Horcrux.

With a powerfully lethal spell on the necklace, it would likely stay at Borgin and Burkes, or come back if it left. It was there until Draco took it. Borgin cited a price of 1,500 galleons for the necklace. Why would such a lethal object have such a high price, unless it was also a Ravenclaw heirloom?

There's more. Lucius Malfoy greatly angered Voldemort for messing with the diary Horcrux. Now Draco Malfoy has taken the necklace Horcrux to Hogwarts. The Malfoys will be in even bigger trouble when Voldemort finds out about his necklace Horcrux. They might even have to switch sides just to stay alive. Lucius may even know something about other Horcruxes.

Soul Search - Aug 26, 2005 8:55 am (#727 of 2969)

Problem with necklace Horcrux.

It depends a little on timing of HBP. I need to research it, but had Dumbledore seen the necklace before or after he tells Harry that he doesn't know what the Ravenclaw object might be? Not sure this matters, since the necklace could be the Ravenclaw Horcrux and Dumbledore didn't immediately identify it as such. Did Dumbledore even see the necklace? Maybe just McGonagall saw it.

HungarianHorntail11 - Aug 26, 2005 9:04 am (#728 of 2969)

Do we know for sure that Lucius knows the diary was a Horcrux? Big V was angry, but giving away the idea of Horcruxes would be careless because it would leave him exposed/vulnerable. Lucius may have thought Big V was so angry because the basilisk (very old) and a powerfully enchanted diary were destroyed, not to mention the fact that the Chamber was opened by a 'Mudblood'. DD never says that Big V told Lucius he had destroyed a 'precious' (to be read like Gollum) piece of himself.

haymoni - Aug 26, 2005 9:18 am (#729 of 2969)

I know this contradicts what I said earlier, but if there was a Horcrux at Hogwarts, why didn't Quirrellmort get it instead of wasting his time with the Stone?

And why didn't Quirrellmort just whisk on over to the Gaunt house & snatch up the ring?

Certainly a teacher doesn't have to be at Hogwarts 24/7. They obviously get Hogsmeade weekends too!

HungarianHorntail11 - Aug 26, 2005 9:51 am (#730 of 2969)

Judging by the way the locket was hidden and the meaning of having a Horcrux (keeping you linked to earth), I can't see that Big V would ever think he would need to see these Horcruxes again. One in a very well hidden, cursed area would be difficult enough to get to, but six? I can't see why he would want to retrieve any of them. They are serving their purpose merely by existing.

irish flutterby - Aug 26, 2005 10:22 am (#731 of 2969)

I wonder if DD may have placed certain memories in his pensieve before he left that night. That would be one way for Harry to find out for sure a few things. It is a possibility because DD had no idea exactly what they were going into, but he knew he might die in the process of retrieving the Horcrux. There we night find out how his hand got "fried", if Harry can trust Snape, and other info that we can't possibly imagine.

HungarianHorntail11 - Aug 26, 2005 10:25 am (#732 of 2969)

I remember DD saying to Harry 'this is the last memory I have to show you'. I took it literally.

Steve Newton - Aug 26, 2005 10:27 am (#733 of 2969)

When Dumbledore showed Harry his own memory he poured it out of a vial. I think that that memory, and probably some others remain at Hogwarts. Harry will return to look at them.

irish flutterby - Aug 26, 2005 11:48 am (#734 of 2969)

"I remember DD saying to Harry 'this is the last memory I have to show you'. I took it literally."

If one were to take it literally, then as DD is unable to show Harry any other memories at this point, Harry could find more and learn from them without DD's actual participation.

Paulus Maximus - Aug 26, 2005 11:55 am (#735 of 2969)
Edited Aug 26, 2005 12:56 pm

Not to mention the fact that the Chamber was opened by a 'Mudblood'.

Sorry to pick nits (well, actually, I'm not...), but the Chamber was only ever opened by Slytherin, Voldemort, Ginny (under the influence), and Harry. None of them are 'Mudbloods'...

HungarianHorntail11 - Aug 26, 2005 12:00 pm (#736 of 2969)
Edited Aug 26, 2005 1:11 pm

What is Harry considered?

Okay, I've just been told - half blood.

You are picking nits Wink

JILL HUBER - Aug 26, 2005 1:55 pm (#737 of 2969)

Not to beat a dead horse, but...I still think the Sorting Hat is a potential candidate, or at least worthy of examining further. We keep talking about Hogwarts here, about how it was Voldemort's home and the only safe place during his first rise in power. We are basing Voldemort's opinion of the Sorting Hat on incomplete information. Voldemort's memory was speaking, his 16 year old memory. A 16 year old who had not yet finished his transformation into the dark arts. A 16 year old who was still attending school (as we all know, things look a little different in hindsight) at Hogwarts at the time. A 16 year old who may not have completely formulated his plans for not only Horcruxes, but for his rise to power. The school has to be a part of this equation. Otherwise, why even put emphasis on all 4 houses (especially since, as a Slytherin, he may not have regarded the other houses as particularly special). The point is, Riddle did come back to Hogwarts, very much a changed individual. We cannot base his opinion of the Sorting Hat on what he thought when he was 16. Regardless of what he became, he was not completely that person yet. Maybe delving into the dark arts changed his thoughts on certain things, well it obviously did.

Additionally, I think that the ideas everyone has are great. Perhaps this could be the way we should be looking at things:

1. Slytherin artifact 2. Ravenclaw artifact 3. Hufflepuff artifact 4. Gryffindor artifact 5. Hogwarts artifact 6. Personal artifact

The idea of the quill or wand for Ravenclaw seems quite plausible. Also, the idea of the wand in Ollivander's shop, what if the core is some type of feather? That would fit both criteria, wouldn't it? Through all of the discussion here, it seems like we are forgetting or overlooking something...I can't pinpoint it, but something does not seem to add up. Some connection we are not seeing. Not to bring up too obscure of a topic here, but J.K. Rowling notes in her interview the use of a relationship as a red herring. So this Lupin and Tonks business or even Lavender and Ron, what was going on around these two couples that we could be missing? Is it possible that it was covering up something about the Horcruxes?

Madame Pomfrey - Aug 26, 2005 2:51 pm (#738 of 2969)
Edited Aug 26, 2005 3:58 pm

I like the idea of the necklace being a Horcrux. It being a magical object with a history of claiming the lives of 19 Muggles is probably pretty significant to Voldemort especially if it had at one time belonged to a founder. Could it be possible that Voldemort made it into a Horcrux before selling it from Muggle to Muggle? He is known to have killed enough people to have an army of Inferi but so far we only know of several-not really enough for a army.

Paulus Maximus - Aug 26, 2005 4:22 pm (#739 of 2969)

Is there anything magical about the number 19?

All I know about that number is that it's prime... but then, 7 and 13 are also prime...

...as are 2, 3, 5...

Madame Pomfrey - Aug 26, 2005 4:54 pm (#740 of 2969)
Edited Aug 26, 2005 5:55 pm

I had wondered why Jo chose the number 19 Paulus, but sadly I am terrible at maths.

I Am Used Vlad - Aug 26, 2005 5:40 pm (#741 of 2969)

I've ruled out the Sorting Hat as a potential Horcrux based solely on the fact that it is self-aware and can speak. Wouldn't Voldemort have been afraid it might say this:

'Twas Gryffindor who found the way,
He whipped me off his head
The founders put some brains in me
So I could choose instead!
And later on the Dark Lord
Split his soul so he'd never be dead
He couldn't get ahold of Godric's sword
So he put a bit in me instead.

irish flutterby - Aug 26, 2005 6:58 pm (#742 of 2969)

Lovely poem. I'd just like to say that as intrigued as I am by this thread. I almost dread seeing the "1 new" beside it because the posts tend to be...well... tediously long. However, they all are very informative and my curiosity always gets the better of me.

I also agree, the hat seems a bit of a stretch. Not impossible, but a stretch.

RoseMorninStar - Aug 26, 2005 11:35 pm (#743 of 2969)
Edited Aug 27, 2005 12:39 am

Oh, this thread moves fast!

Haymoni- Quirrellmort!! LOL That gave me a good chuckle.

Madame Pomfrey- Oh how I loved your poem. I was going to make the same point you did (about why I don't think the Sorting Hat would be a wise choice for a Horcrux) but you did it in such a creative and humorous (not to mention very good) way!! Very Happy

Ann- I think you may be on to something with the idea of premeditation and the splitting of one's soul to make a Horcrux. What if the spell is something that has to be said BEFORE the murder-or at least with intent of some sort... what would happen if the intended victim (like Harry) did not die? Or, if another murder was committed before the one intended (ex. James was murdered, the Horcrux/intention spell was said, and he was off to kill Harry-but Lily got in the way first, could that be why he told her to get out of the way?) Those are definitely good things to ponder.

Greetings from the Shire to fellow ringers out there -fellow hobbit lass Elanor & hobbit gent Troels... I'm sure how much 'hobbit' one can be-and be into maths- ;D (and a physicist to boot!).

TwinklingBlueEyes - Aug 27, 2005 1:46 am (#744 of 2969)

"the posts tend to be...well… tediously long."

...toddles off reminding self to be brief and not tedious...

Edit: topic, oh yes, Ann I like that idea.

Dame Peverell - Aug 27, 2005 2:54 am (#745 of 2969)
Edited Aug 27, 2005 5:21 am

I am working from the Jim Dale version of HBP. I love his funny voices and I love being able to listen as I do other things. I will buy the book when it comes out in soft cover but until then it is very difficult to find quotes. So I need the chapter where DD talks about how he fried his hand. Was it as a result of the protections on the ring, the protections hiding the ring, the ring poisoning him for him having worn it, from trying to take it off maybe or from trying to destroy it?

And just as a by the way, call me crazy, but thinking of DD's hand always screams Peter Pettigrew at me. Haven't heard anything from him since about the time DD showed up with that blackened hand...(Now if they tossed ol' DD into a trunk and replaced him with Wormtail, would the silvery hand be black?) It's too much, but there, I said it.

Soul Search - The Ravenclaw designing Hogwarts connection is in the Lexicon. ‘It’s thought that she came up with the ever-changing floor plan’ Famous Wizard Card. Now about the passage. When they gave the map to Harry they said, this passage is no good. We used to use it but there was a cave-in last year. That would have been the SS year. I always figured it was how Quirrell/LV got the troll in. It doesn’t necessarily follow that the Horcrux is hidden there but it does show that Quirrell/LV might have been leaving the grounds without anyone’s knowledge. Furthermore, but not to cloud the issues at hand, Wormtail may also have been at Hogwarts then with Percy and he definitely knew that passageway was there.

I am not keen on the opal necklace being a Horcrux. 1500 galleons seems cheap to me for such a fine piece of jewelry, particularly if it did belong to Rowena Ravenclaw. Also, it was so deadly that you would think the MoM would have it destroyed if they found it.

Jill-

That 16 year old had already been torturing animals and children. He got Hagrid expelled, (and sent to Azkaban too, as I recall) caused Myrtle’s death, (which actually, may have been inadvertently) and then murdered his father and grandparents. He was already skilled enough to create the diary and that was a bit of very fancy magic. Tom Riddle was already walking on the dark side when he came to Hogwarts and his choices thereafter just led him in deeper.

As I see it, the emphasis on the four houses relates to his ambition of taking control of Hogwarts. Then the houses will be symbolically unified forever and bound to his soul.

Hogs Head - Aug 27, 2005 4:08 am (#746 of 2969)

Tedious, I'm not sure, but we're often too long winded. I'll confess to that one and ponder the tedious part.

Here's another wild idea that merges a few prior ideas. Tom, Jr. steals the cup and kills Smith. He later enchants it to be a Horcrux. He alters its appearance to look like an award to Tom, Jr. (himself) for service to Hogwarts and hides it in plain view in the school trophy case while visiting Hogwarts on the pretext of asking to be DADA teacher. Whether there already was an award or what the then slightly older and now Voldemort did with the original award, I don't know.

Okay, just my wild guess of the morning.

Soul Search - Aug 27, 2005 5:12 am (#747 of 2969)
Edited Aug 27, 2005 7:11 am

Okay. I get the point. Not sure I can do much about "tedious," but I can try to keep posts shorter.

Dame Peverell -- Thanks for the info. The twins gave the map to Harry in PoA. So, "last year" would have been CoS. Unless we can stretch "last year," I don't see any connection to anything if it was CoS. Ideas, anyone?

I really liked the idea of Voldemort/Voldemort moving a Horcrux and hiding it with the cave in.

Soul Search - Aug 27, 2005 5:55 am (#748 of 2969)

One open question is Harry/scar also being a Horcrux. Does our nailing down the six Horcruxes eliminate Harry/scar being a Horcrux?

I think not.

Voldemort used Nagini for a Horcrux to complete the "magical seven." If Harry/scar was accidently made a Horcrux, Voldemort didn't know it. Still doesn't.

While Voldemort was going for the "magical seven" I don't think that it was any kind of limit. Actually, when he made Nagini a Horcrux, he didn't know that the diary had been destroyed. With Harry/scar, that would have been seven soul bits, but Voldemort didn't know it.

So, the question of Harry/scar being a Horcrux, or containing a bit of Voldemort's soul if not actually a Horcrux, is independent of the other six Horcruxes.

Madame Librarian - Aug 27, 2005 6:12 am (#749 of 2969)
Edited Aug 27, 2005 7:13 am

Wait...another question from a math-challenged person:

When Tom started the whole "project" to create 7 Horcruxes--a number he chose for its magical properties--he had to commit to that. See, if I'm correct here, once he made one Horcrux, using 1/7th of his soul, he couldn't switch fractions. Would it be possible to put 2/7th in one object? Unlikely--I'd guess the magic doesn't allow that, something like one Horcrux chunk (1/7 in his case) per "significant" murder.

If so, and if I'm understanding this whole thing correctly, that would mean that there are no more than 7 total pieces of his soul, the plan being to place 6 in meaningful objects, one staying in his own body. If one of the Horcrux objects gets destroyed, he can replace it assuming he knows about it, but there can only be a maximum of 7 at any one time.

Is this right?

Ciao. Barb

Hogs Head - Aug 27, 2005 6:33 am (#750 of 2969)
Edited Aug 27, 2005 7:35 am

Barb, I suppose it depends upon one's theory of how Horcruxes work in Potterworld. I hope this doesn't violate my new self-imposed rule on brevity.

In some of the extra-JKR myth's cited, the person who out-places a piece of their soul is protected from death until the foe finds and kills that extraneous soul fragment. The person using the protection is not required to retrieve the hidden piece of soul. This may perhaps be seen in Potterworld by Voldemort surviving the infant Harry incident even as a bodiless mist -- relying then on then 5 or 6 extraneous Horcruxes.

However, the diary, which might have had more than one function, seemed able and programmed to reassemble an intact, living, embodied 16 year old ("looking not a day over 16," if that helps our discussion about the timeline factor) Voldemort from its embedded soul fragment.

So, can each of the extant Horcruxes (3 or 4 left, depending upon whether the locket was "deactivated" by R.A.B.) do like the diary and independently reassemble a separate Voldemort, as the diary appeared capable of doing? Or are they simply hiding places for soul bits that protect the life of the original, until they are found and destroyed? Or may (or must) they be retrieved to revive or strengthen a weakened Voldemort? I think much of this remains unclear to the reader.

If Harry finds them and destroys them all fast enough, then we need never know the extent of their utility or function. However, I'd guess that at least one will elude his search until near the very last, even if he thinks he has destroyed them all.

irish flutterby - Aug 27, 2005 7:03 am (#751 of 2969)

Okay. Maybe tedious was the wrong word. I'll just say that my eyes and head regularly get blurry after reading this thread, which is in much case due to the content, and in part due to the length.

Back on topic. In my opinion, Madame Librarian, It isn't possible for a person to "predivide" his soul for Horcruxation. I think the "size" of the soul remaining in LV depended on how many he had made previously. I which contributes to the continued dehumanizing of his appearance. Also, I believe that the size of the "soul bit" in the Horcrux doesn't matter because the intent is only to "anchor" the soul to earth. Therefore, I think with each Horcrux LV's soul was divided in half, thereby reducing his humanity with each significant murder.

Paulus Maximus - Aug 27, 2005 7:03 am (#752 of 2969)
Edited Aug 27, 2005 8:04 am

As I see it, the emphasis on the four houses relates to his ambition of taking control of Hogwarts. Then the houses will be symbolically unified forever and bound to his soul.

I see... "One Ring to rule them all" all over again...

Yet, given Voldemort's gift for spreading discord and Dumbledore's insistence that "we are only as strong as we are united", how could uniting the Houses benefit Voldemort?

Dame Peverell - Aug 27, 2005 7:52 am (#753 of 2969)
Edited Aug 27, 2005 8:53 am

Maybe the Sorting Hat knows...

(toddles off to see if that book is really under the bed after all...)

septentrion - Aug 27, 2005 9:24 am (#754 of 2969)

A tiara is more and more likely a Horcrux in my opinion : there are two of them in HBP, which is a rather frequent occurrence. There's the tiara in the room of requirement, used by Harry to mark the place where he hided his potion book, and the goblin-made tiara of the great-aunt Muriel Molly proposes to lend to Fleur for the wedding. It's not that often that such kind of rare object (tiaras aren't everyday objects) are cited.

Soul Search - Aug 27, 2005 9:28 am (#755 of 2969)

Well spotted septentrion. I agree that two tiara references in HBP increases the chance that one (hopefully the RoR-Storeroom one) is the Ravenclaw Horcrux.

(Keeping postings short. Takes great control, though.)

Madame Librarian - Aug 27, 2005 10:37 am (#756 of 2969)
Edited Aug 27, 2005 11:43 am

Both Hogs Head and Irish Flutterby offer very intriguing ideas there.

Hogs Head suggests that the Diary might have had a dual purpose. It was some other magic Tom did on it when he first got it that allowed it to activate a 16-year old Diary Tom, albeit a soulless one, who needed to steal a soul from some unsuspecting person (Ginny here), AND it was a Horcrux hiding place that could have been used to revive its creator, but wasn't in this particular instance.

Did 16-year old Diary Tom not know there was a Horcrux tucked away in the book because he was created before it was used as a hiding place? Why didn't he just use that bit of soul and not bother with someone else's? Was it because at that point Voldemort himself (the Mist version) not Diary Tom had to be the one to activate the Horcrux, and it had to be done at the point of death or nearly so? He would have had to have the Diary with him to perform the releasing magic.

OR--do all Horcruxes need to be re-activated by borrowing another's soul for the process? Is that why they're going to prove extremely dangerous to destroy?

Irish Flutterby suggests something really cool about the fractions question. It reminded me of the brain teaser where you attempt to tear a piece of paper in half, then take a half, and tear it in half, and then take one of those halves and tear it in half, and on and on. It's a poser that is used to demonstrate the concept of infinity. You can never totally use up the piece of paper. (Obviously, we are talking a virtual piece of paper or what Einstein and other physicists would call a "thought problem"). If I can grasp this mind-bending concept and remember it from school, I'm sure JKR can, too, even though she's "bad at maths." It's a great application for the how many soul fragments V created debate.

I honestly can't decide which I would vote for: a finite number of fragments based on the original fraction he removed (1/7th) or the infinite number should he have kept going in creating them. There is something pedestrian about the finite plan. The infinite plan strikes me as quite elegant due to it's being based in a concept that always smacks of the mysterious and magical...infinity. And, it allows for an ever-decreasing humanness (?) in the person who keeps on fragmenting his soul.

It may not matter which is right in the end since JKR has clearly stated in the Q&A with Melissa and Emerson (I think that's where she said it) that Harry's task in the 7th book is to find those remaining 4 Horcruxes. Voldemort made 6 and doesn't seem to have made any more.

Too long, sorry.

Ciao. Barb

RoseMorninStar - Aug 27, 2005 1:14 pm (#757 of 2969)
Edited Aug 27, 2005 3:09 pm

Madame Librarian, the math question you raise is one I contemplated when I first began to think about 'how much' soul would be in each Horcrux and remaining in Voldemort. Also, if some Horcruxes were 'stronger' than others. I came up with 1/64th each for the last Horcrux and Voldemort after my figuring (NOT being a math person myself-and not counting if there is a possible 8th division) but I have since discounted that line of thinking. JKR doesn't think mathematically so she probably didn't do it that way. I have just decided to reconcile myself to the idea that the splitting of the soul creates a diminishment/debasement of some sort to ALL parts of his soul.

Soul search, In regards to your mention of Voldemorts creation of perhaps yet another Horcrux (making a total of 8 soul bits) if he inadvertently/accidently made Harry or Harry's scar a Horcrux. That could very well be... OR ...what if Voldemort (going with the idea of premeditation/spell before the murder idea) thinks he created an object Horcrux, but it really somehow went into Harry/Harry's scar instead? What if the spell went awry because Harry did not die so it did not go into the object but Harry.... Voldemort may think he has a Horcrux object out there that is not?

irish flutterby - Aug 27, 2005 5:52 pm (#758 of 2969)

"JKR doesn't think mathematically so she probably didn't do it that way."

I'm not a math person either, that's why I think Jo could do it. It's not really a matter of how big the bit is. As long as there is some piece of the person's soul here on Earth in another object, the soul, though it is diminished, will be anchored. Actually, I guess it's kind of a useless point in that case; except that it would help to explain LV's de-humanization. It's been said that what separates humans from animals is that humans have souls. That could be an explanation of LV's animalistic, reptilian appearance.

EDIT: With regards to the length of your posts...Alright already, you've riddled me with guilt (no pun intended). "Everybody have fun tonight. Everybody post tons tonight."

Verbina - Aug 27, 2005 8:09 pm (#759 of 2969)
Edited by Aug 27, 2005 9:12 pm

But...wouldn't that be a terrible risk? Starting the process so that if things go wrong or something it just not exactly right, the soul bit goes somewhere else? Guess I am having a vision in my head of Voldemort trying to kill someone when a dog runs by with a bone in its mouth. If things don't go exactly right, the soul bit could end up in the dog or the bone or both!

I like what you said irish flutterby about the animal appearance. It would make perfect sense!

With Harry being a Horcrux, I am not convinced. Yes, Harry has a bit of Voldemort inside him as Dumbledore said but...there is one thing that troubles me about it. Voldemort is unaware of the destruction of a Horcrux as we know from the destruction of Diary Tom and Voldemort's not knowing about it until later. If Voldemort is unaware of what happens with Diary Tom, it would follow that Diary Tom was also unaware of what happens with Voldemort. He knew that Harry had defeated Voldemort from Ginny writing in the diary, not because he knew from Voldemort.

Yet we know that Harry can tell what Voldemort is feeling and on occasion what he is doing. And Voldemort can do similar with Harry in OotP. So, how can that be if Harry has a bit of Voldemort's soul and the soul bits are unaware of Voldemort's feelings or actions? It isn't adding up for me.

I also hit upon a thought that if someone else thought of...I am sorry. But it is possible that Tom knew about Horcruxes from somewhere. I am thinking he possibly hung about Borgin and Burkes a few times. After all, he went to Diagon Alley alone right from the start and Knockturn Alley would hold interest for him.

So he hears about Horcruxes from Borgin and Burkes then after events with the chamber, he decided to create at least one Horcrux and so set about learning about them. But the diary is more than a Horcrux but almost a weapon to be used to reopen the chamber so he may have started part of the process just before school or just after arriving.

Over the summer he killed his father and got the ring. Once in school, he started working with what he did know about Horcruxes and likely scoured the bookshelves for information. The diary was essentially ready but he needed to have one thing...the spell. Unable to find the one thing he needed he had to ask Slughorn. By this time, he has already thought about creating more than one and came up with seven as being powerful.

He talks to Slughorn. Why him? Because the DADA teacher who would be the logical choice, would be totally aware of Legilimens being used on him. Slughorn at this time may not have been as aware as he was later. Using Legilimens (sp?)he gets the one missing piece he needed from Slughorn's mind. Then he began to ask about multiple Horcruxes, having in mind the creation of the ring Horcrux. Dumbledore said the ring was cursed thus his hand was injured. I am basically thinking that it takes a bit of prep on the object to make it into a Horcrux, like protections and such. The spell to transfer the soul part could be the last to be done.

Okay, shoot holes in that theory. I am interested in what you make of it.

RoseMorninStar - Aug 27, 2005 9:35 pm (#760 of 2969)

Verbina, I agree with you that Tom was 'dark/evil' from early on... even before he knew he was a wizard. If we are to believe Slughorn's memory, Slughorn told Tom, when he was asked what it takes to make a Horcrux, "There is a spell, do not ask me, I do not know."

I have a funny feeling that in the last book the dark Lord Grindelwald may come into play. He is the dark wizard Dumbledore defeated in 1945... Tom Riddle graduated from Hogwarts in 1945. I don't think that is a coincidence. Grindelwald would probably have been at the height of his power during the years Tom Riddle attended Hogwarts. So, is Tom Riddle just is trying to improve upon on the mistakes of the vanquished Grindlewald? Was he an apprentice of sorts of Grindelwald? JKR has been a bit evasive when questioned about there being some sort of connection between the two.

About the 'Is Harry a Horcrux' question... IF Harry is an (accidental) Horcrux...It would be his scar and not all of him (because he is not possessed). Voldemort obviously learned how to channel Nagini to do his bidding-whether via Horcrux/soul means or through his abilities as a Parseltongue... but Harry not only feels Voldemorts anger/emotions- through his scar- .. he can 'see' through the eyes of Nagini. That leads me to believe there is a good possibility that there is a soul connection. Also, Voldemort did not know, until OotP, that Harry was somehow receiving/connecting with him in some way. Voldemort must not be able to sense Harry-but he found out that Harry could sense him. So he uses that to his advantage and lured Harry into the Department of Mysteries to retrieve the prophecy. JKR has said that the shape of Harry's scar is NOT the most important thing about his scar. She could throw something new at us (as the Horcruxes are new)in book 7, but I tend to think book 7 will be about clearing up the existing mysteries (not introducing new ones).

Dame Peverell - Aug 27, 2005 11:03 pm (#761 of 2969)

You know, that whole lead up to Harry winning the TW Cup was just plain dumb, even if it did make for a cool story. It has been pointed out before that Moody/BC (who made 12 OWLS) could have found some simpler and less risky way of transporting Harry to the graveyard at the proper time. So why go though all that effort and suspense for months and months?

What must have been the important thing was to have both Harry and the Cup there at the same time and that sounds to me like LV was planning on making a Horcrux then. Perhaps the Tri-Wizard Cup could stand for International Wizarding???

(brain addled with Potter trivia)... Pardon me

Soul Search - Aug 28, 2005 6:02 am (#762 of 2969)

Verbina -- I still haven't closed my book on Horcrux creation, it still seems a bit confusing, but here is where I am at now.

Just any murder does not "split" the wizard's soul; it "tarnishes" it, but there isn't a "split." Otherwise, the Death Eaters, and others, would have tiny soul fragments all over the place.

The spell to create a Horcrux, itself, requires a murder to effect the soul split. The murder is an essential part of the Horcrux spell. Thus, the murder and Horcrux are done at the same time.

It was Frank Bryce and Nagini that convinced me of this. Voldemort has committed many murders, so should have had a lot of soul-bits around if he wanted to make Nagini a Horcrux. But, he waits until someone (conveniently, Frank Bryce) comes around to make the Nagini Horcrux. Voldemort needed someone to murder then to make Nagini a Horcrux. In HBP, Dumbledore says (not exactly) "... he used the murder of Frank Bryce to make (Nagini) a Horcrux."

I think we are getting too hung up on soul-piece math. JKR would not go into such detail. Any soul fragment serves to anchor the wizard's essence to the living plane and not go on. A Horcrux prevents a part of a soul from leaving the living plane, and until all of the soul can leave, no part can leave. That's why Harry has to free the soul bits from all the Horcruxes before he can defeat Voldemort. (See RoseMorninStar #757 and irish flutterby, #758).

RoseMorninStar - good thought that Voldemort doesn't know if the Horcrux he was planning on making at Godric's Hollow (we think with the sword) took or not. I don't think he knows Harry's scar is a Horcrux.

Perhaps he made Nagini just to be sure, or, he might have made Nagini a Horcrux only to gain more control of a physical being. Remember, his form was just some sort of "baby" at the time and he might have thought he needed to control Nagini to manage Wormtail. The "baby" could barely hold a wand, and he didn't trust Wormtail at all. New thought, but it makes sense.

Dame Peverell -- I like the idea of Voldemort wanting to make the Tri-Wizard Cup a Horcrux, using his murder of Harry: good trophy and "significant" murder. Only problem I see is he had already made Nagini his last, "seventh," Horcrux. He didn't, at that time, know the diary Horcrux had been destroyed, so he would have been making an eighth. So, it depends on how hung up Voldemort was about the magical number seven.

There was a great post some time ago, well before HBP, that explained perfectly all the trouble he went through to get Harry to the graveyard in GoF. Briefly, what if Voldemort had succeeded killing Harry? What would he have done next?

Once Voldemort has a body and Harry is disposed of, in front of his DEs, he has the Tri-Wizard Cup portkey back to the Hogwarts stadium, a load of faithful Death Eaters, a Death Eater at Hogwarts (near and trusted by Dumbledore), and a whole audience to witness his dramatic return. What fun that would have been.

Instead, he is thwarted by a kid. A kid he failed to kill as a baby. So, he spends the next (OotP) year lying low and trying to find out about that @#$%&* prophecy!

Ann - Aug 28, 2005 8:04 pm (#763 of 2969)

Soul search, I think the tearing of the soul occurs with any murder. What is special, and particularly evil, about making a Horcrux is that the torn bit of soul, instead of remaining in the body where it has the potential to partly heal with remorse and repentance, is magically removed from the body and placed in a separate container.

It thus seems to me that if one doesn't make any attempt to heal one's soul after a murder (as Voldemort doesn't, of course), a Horcrux can be made at any point afterwards. Myrtle and the Riddles were all killed before LV's 6th year at Hogwarts; he asks Slughorn about Horcruxes during his 6th year, and by the time he murders Hepzibah Smith (which Dumbledore says is the next murder after the Riddles), he's made two Horcruxes. Therefore, he made them some time after the murders.

I agree with you, though, that the mathematics of soul fragments is probably not something one can work out precisely, except that the unhealed tears on the original soul make LV less human over time.

Frank Bryce *is* a significant murder--he is a servant of the Riddles, the caretaker of LV's second ancestral house.

Abracapocus - Aug 28, 2005 8:07 pm (#764 of 2969)

I am naught but a humble office manager. I admit I have not fully read (or even understood) all the posts on this thread, but I do have a question.

In the Horcrux chapter, Slughorn gives Tom Riddle the explanation of the creation of a Horcrux: By and act of evil- the supreme act of evil. By committing murder. Killing rips the soul apart. The wizard intends upon creating a Horcrux would use the damage to his advantage. He would encase the torn portion -

It sounds to me like any murder would rip the soul. If the proper spell is performed to create a Horcrux, the soul bit would remain earth-bound, if you will, encased in whatever was used to create the Horcrux. If not, what would happen to the soul bit? Wouldn't it just go away to the place where evil soul bits and souls go? Wouldn't each progressive murder continue to tear the wizard's soul apart whether he created a Horcrux or not?

HungarianHorntail11 - Aug 28, 2005 8:34 pm (#765 of 2969)

RoseMorninStar, the idea that Voldemort didn't know about his connection with Harry is a big giveaway that Harry is a Horcrux. DD said that Big V isn't aware when a Horcrux is destroyed. This lack of awareness has all the earmarks of a hint to me.

Paulus Maximus - Aug 29, 2005 7:55 am (#766 of 2969)
Edited Aug 29, 2005 9:00 am

Voldemort is much more aware of his connection to Harry than his connection to his Horcruxes.

Therefore, his connection to Harry is quite different than his connection to his Horcruxes.

Besides, if Harry is a Horcrux, how could he possibly kill Voldemort?

Voldemort must not be able to sense Harry-but he found out that Harry could sense him.

I think Voldemort CAN sense Harry. He heard Harry saying that the prophecy was destroyed, and I don't think he decided to go to the Ministry and finish Harry off until then...

HungarianHorntail11 - Aug 29, 2005 1:26 pm (#767 of 2969)

He has only been aware of it since OotP, Paulus M. This connection is indeed different, then again, no one has ever had an AK rebound in such a situation as Harry's, combined with someone using a Horcrux spell. I say, anything goes.

Besides, if Harry is a Horcrux, how could he possibly kill Voldemort?

I posted one thought on the In the End thread, as I don't think it fit as well here.

timrew - Aug 29, 2005 1:41 pm (#768 of 2969)

Besides, if Harry is a Horcrux, how could he possibly kill Voldemort?

Or vice versa?

David Olson - Aug 29, 2005 2:21 pm (#769 of 2969)

I've been a part-time supporter of the Harry's-scar-is-a-Horcrux, but in a chapter discussion someone pointed out another idea: when the ring was destroyed as a Horcrux, the stone was broken. So the idea is that after Voldemort got nailed by his rebounding AK, his "main" soulbit tried to possess Harry but was pushed out, causing the scar. That fits fairly well with what we know about the diary soulbit, which tried to possess Ginny, and with what happened in the MoM, where Voldemort's attempt to possess Harry was rejected again.

Mrs. Brisbee - Aug 29, 2005 2:36 pm (#770 of 2969)

pushed out, but stayed connected?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Thu Jul 21, 2011 9:50 am

Paulus Maximus - Aug 29, 2005 2:41 pm (#771 of 2969)

pushed out, but stayed connected?

Maybe they AREN'T connected anymore.

I know that Dumbledore attributes Harry's lack of insight into Voldemort's mind to Voldemort's use of Occlumency, but Dumbledore can be wrong...

RoseMorninStar - Aug 29, 2005 3:37 pm (#772 of 2969)

Paulus M. I think you must mean Legilimency. Voldemort uses Legilimency to read other's minds (Occlumency blocks the mind from being read). But Legilimency almost always requires direct eye contact or being physically very near the target. Even Snape was unable to perform Legilimency on Harry until he could see into his eyes. We might be able to brush off Voldemort's control of a snake by saying he uses his skills as a Parseltongue to control the snake, but Harry, although he is also a Parselmouth, is no snake.

I still say that the scar, whatever it is, created some special connection between Voldemort & Harry. I think that if the scar is the Horcrux (and not Harry himself)it does not mean that Harry inevitably needs to die in order for Voldemort to die.

Mrs. Brisbee - Aug 29, 2005 5:44 pm (#773 of 2969)
Edited Aug 29, 2005 6:46 pm

RoseMorninStar, I had this vague theory before HBP came out that the scar might have been caused by Voldy's soul trying to survive the rebounding AK by attempting to possess Harry, and the soul being expelled by Lily's protection, but a connection remained that acted as an anchor to keep Voldy from becoming properly dead. But unfortunately for me I found that Rowling had stated once in one of the books that the AK was what caused the scar. I can't remember which one off hand, maybe I can find the quote later.

We do know though that the act of murder tears the soul. Maybe it is that the violence against another person's soul is like two great heavenly bodies almost colliding, their massive gravity tearing at each other. Maybe it is the would-be killer using that murderous intent that sends the tearing soul with the magic of the AK towards the victim. In Voldy's case that particular torn bit never completely severed because the murder went wrong. But it attached to Harry, and stretches between them.

Just trying to come up with an explanation of the connection. Though I favor the unintentional Horcrux idea, because it has too many fun plot implications.

RoseMorninStar - Aug 29, 2005 10:38 pm (#774 of 2969)

Mrs. Brisbee, I think you are on the right line of thinking. What we know: Voldemort tried to kill Harry with the Avada Kedavra curse... Harry did not die because of the voluntary sacrifice his mother made for him (Voldemort gave Lily the chance to live if she would have moved out of the line-of-fire to Harry). Harry had a protection of 'love' in his very blood by that sacrifice. We now know that the reason Voldemort did not die when the curse rebounded is because he had Horcruxes hidden away. So, the question is... what DID that AK curse do? What became of it? I don't think Voldemort knows. I don't think anyone knows for sure because it hasn't ever happened before. I do however think that what later happens in GoF gives us a clue. Some type of rebound effect.

Voldemort had a clue that Harry had some special protection afforded within his blood (Quirrellmort could not touch Harry) and that is why he had to use Harry's blood in his rebirthing ceremony. Now, the excellent protection that Harry had from his mother, no longer applies because that blood now runs in Voldemort's veins too...unless... Dumbledore found a way of reinstating the same type of protection, unknown to Voldemort of course (by a similar voluntary sacrifice? Dumbledore's sacrifice?).

Had Voldemort not had Horcruxes, he would have died when he tried to kill Harry as a baby. So, if the curse rebounded off of Harry to Voldemort, it should have killed Voldemort but did not because of the Horcruxes, but it must have destroyed a part of his soul when it hit him, reducing Voldemort to the meanest existence. But then, why the scar? What if the murder & spell to create a Horcrux needs to be/or can be premeditated? What if Voldemort said the spell prior to attacking Harry to create the Horcrux-what would happen to that soul bit that is looking for a place to rest when things did not go as laid out in the spell? What would the premeditated creation of a Horcrux & its spell do if the murder that was supposed to create it did not take place? What became of the object that the soul part was supposed to go into? Does Voldemort believe that a Horcrux was created that night or did he go on to create another (8th Horcrux) because he thinks the one he tried to create that night 'didn't take' -OR- that there is an object out there that he assumes to be a Horcrux but it is not because it is in Harry's scar?

I cannot remember who said it a couple of posts back, but I think they had a great point when they said that murder creates a splitting of the soul-it is a supreme act of evil. But if the split soul remains in the body, it has a chance to heal-a chance for redemption and forgiveness. The reason the making of a Horcrux is so taboo-so vile, is that the encasing of the soul outside of the body does not allow for healing or redemption to take place. It renders the murderer irreparably evil and broken.

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 29, 2005 11:01 pm (#775 of 2969)
Edited Aug 30, 2005 12:03 am

Hi. I just wanted to explain my absence: my wife was put into hospital last Friday and had a gallstone removed yesterday (Monday). As a consequence I've been busy caring for our kids (all four of them ) when not visiting my wife. It will likely be some time before I will have the time to post regularly again, at which point I will doubtlessly have a lot of catching-up to do

I had almost finished the following when my wife called Friday, and I have taken the time to finish it today. You may have addressed a lot of the issues I raise here, I'm afraid that I simply don't have the time to catch up right now, but I wanted to post it anyway (seeing that it was almost finished anyway ).

Horcruxes - other issues (part 1)

I considered replying to point from all around, but that would probably just make my points that much more circumstantial ... OK, then: long-winded

So, I agree with a lot of what is being said, and disagree with a little of it. Generally my starting point is to stay very close to the text, and to trust Dumbledore's knowledge of his facts absolutely.

I am going to keep my quotations to a minimum (to save space), and attempt to make it clear what is canon knowledge and what is inference from that, but I am bound to slip up, so please challenge me if you don't agree with my statements.

Continuing

Time line

I can't make sense of the time-line surrounding the creation of the Horcruxes - there is just no way I can make it fit together.

So, what I do is to work with some of the least unlikely scenarios.

The soul-fragment that is ripped off upon taking another human being's life will, IMO, eventually grows back together with the ‘main’ soul. Otherwise there would be many examples of wizards who had split their soul in many pieces, and the whole idea of encasing the fragment in a Horcrux would be void. This is an assumption, but one I cannot deviate from - it is an absolutely necessary ingredient in making sense of most of the statements about souls and the splitting of a soul. The time frame of this - specifically the window a wizard will have to create a Horcrux after killing someone - is, IMO, variable. For various reasons I am compelled to think that it can much longer than my initial ideas - up towards a couple of years with a triple killing.

Tom Riddle went to see Morfin ‘in the summer of his sixteenth year’. That is the summer he was fifteen, and thus the summer between his fourth and fifth Hogwarts years - the summer before he opened the Chamber of Secrets.

The big point here is that if you believe that Rowling has a detailed time-line for Riddle's young years (I am in no way convinced that she does - it seems to me likely to be another of those keeping track issues that isn't how she thinks), then one must accept that she would be careful to phrase things correctly, in which case Tom was fifteen-years-old when he killed the Riddles. The other version is that Rowling does indeed not have a detailed time-line in mind, in which case this whole section is utterly nonsensical

The Slughorn memory is the only candidate for what Dumbledore could mean by having shown Harry ‘reasonably firm sources of fact for my deductions as to what Voldemort did until the age of seventeen’ - the Slughorn memory must belong to he time when Tom Riddle was seventeen, which puts it in the latter half of his sixth year or early half of his seventh. I tend to favour a very early placing, I.e. soon after new year, so that he was only just seventeen.

It also means that Dumbledore does not count the death of Myrtle as a murder committed by Tom Riddle.

The majority of his Horcruxes were clearly made in the years he was out of sight - the years when he transformed from a handsome young man to something that wasn't recognisable. Dumbledore clearly notes these transformations as the result of the creation of Horcruxes, and the major part of the transformation took part in those years, so I am confident that he created at least three of his Horcruxes between the time when he disappeared after the death of Hepzibah Smith and when he resurfaced as Lord Voldemort.

The time periods involved here are very vague, ‘But before they were sure beyond doubt that the cup and the locket were both gone, the assistant who had worked at Borgin and Burkes, the young man who had visited Hepzibah so regularly and charmed her so well, had resigned his post and vanished. His superiors had no idea where he had gone; they were as surprised as anyone at his disappearance. And that was the last that was seen or heard of Tom Riddle for a very long time.’. We don't know precisely how long Voldemort stayed with Borgin and Burkes, nor how long Dumbledore's ‘very long time’ could be, but he had definitely resurfaced ten year before Harry's birth (‘We've had precious little to celebrate for eleven years.’), so it would seem likely that he gone for something like twenty years (five years at B&B, twenty years disappeared, five years build-up, ten years fight, ten years for Harry to grow up, all periods round to nearest multiple of five ). In that period he turned both the Hufflepuff Cup and the Slytherin Locket as well as at least one more item (I would guess at a Ravenclaw relic) into Horcruxes, using murders in that time frame which we do not know about. It is possible that the murder of Hepzibah Smith was used to create a Horcrux - though I don't think it can be ruled out that this was be the Peverell Ring, or even the diary.

I do, however, believe it is more likely that the diary Horcrux was created a couple of years after the murders on the Riddles (the separation of the split soul lasting so long because it was the result of a particularly evil triple-murder on close relatives), and nearly a year after the creation of the diary as a magical device containing the memory of how he had opened the Chamber of Secrets. The value, what made it special, of the diary was that it contained the evidence of Tom's own descent from Salazar Slytherin; that evidence being the memory of how he opened the Chamber of Secrets.

So, Tom resurfaced as Lord Voldemort some ten to fifteen years before the birth of young Mr. Potter (a guess at the time covered by ‘The years of Voldemort's ascent to power,’ which Dumbledore in GoF assures us ‘were marked with disappearances.’), having now created some four or five Horcruxes. He then relaxes his pursuit of Horcrux-worthy items for a while and begins to build a power-base. He may have created a single Horcrux between resurfacing as Lord Voldemort and hearing about the prophecy, but the main part of his transformations were already effective, and he must therefore also have created the main part of his Horcruxes.

The rest of the Riddle time-line is firmly established in the books, so there shouldn't be any need to go over that again.

Regards,

Troels

Troels Forchhammer - Aug 29, 2005 11:05 pm (#776 of 2969)

Horcruxes - other issues (part 2)

As usual I can't restrict myself to what can be posted in one message ...

So here is the last part of that which I had prepared:

Murders and items

As I have implied above, there must be at least two murders that Voldemort used, and which we don't know about. He could have used the death of the Riddles and the death of Hepzibah Smith, but that is only two Horcruxes, and when he resurfaced as Lord Voldemort, he must have had at least four Horcruxes made in order to account for the transformations he had undergone in those years.

There is an extra Horcrux that could have been made also while he was out of sight, but which might also have been created after he resurfaced, in which case it might of course be one of the killings we have heard about, though none of them would seem to have any special significance until the murder on the Potters. But we don't know everything, and it is just as likely that we don't know why the killing should be significant as that we don't know about the killing at all.

Voldemort seems to have hidden his Horcruxes after creating them (at least he did that with the Peverell Ring and the Slytherin Locket, though not with his first Horcrux, the diary, but that one had another purpose before it was turned into a Horcrux, ‘to lead another in my footsteps, and finish Salazar Slytherin's noble work.’) This may suggest that the Ravenclaw relic Horcrux (as I believe) has been hidden since long before the beginning of PS - even before the beginning of chapter one of PS - in which case we cannot have seen the item (except possibly in one of the Pensieve scenes in HBP, though I doubt it), and we will at most have heard about it as a lost or disappeared item.

Regards,

Troels

Dame Peverell - Aug 30, 2005 5:44 am (#777 of 2969)

Troels- What transformations are you referring to here:

..."but the main part of his transformations were already effective, and he must therefore also have created the main part of his Horcruxes."

Soul Search - Aug 30, 2005 5:55 am (#778 of 2969)

Troels,

Your contributions have been valuable. Take care of wife and kids, then come back. I, at least, will hold off posting until you do, so you won't have so much catching up to do.

JK

Ann - Aug 30, 2005 7:28 am (#779 of 2969)
Edited Aug 30, 2005 8:29 am

Great deductions, Troels. I've been arguing for a while that there can be a time-gap between the murders and the creation of the Horcrux, and the resistances I've encountered to that idea perhaps made me overlook the possibility that all the Horcruxes could have been made after the Hepzibah memory. It's possible--there's nothing in the text to refute that explicitly.

But I think there are hints that the Ring Horcrux had already been made before then. If you read the Hepzibah memory, there are many, many mentions of Riddle's hands and fingers--he dangles the cup from his index finger--and yet no mention of the ring. Surely it would have been mentioned if he were still wearing it then.

I also think Rowling meant he killed the Riddles when he was 16. That is the most common (though incorrect) usage, and I can't see JKR even thinking about it. Also, Harry recognizes him right away in the memory, and teenagers change a lot during those years. Wouldn't Harry have noticed if he'd looked almost 18 months younger? (Lots of negative evidence here, I know.)

Thirdly, I don't think the Diary Horcrux was a magical object until he made it a Horcrux. It can't really have ever just held his memories (the little windows like the one Harry looked into), because he wouldn't have wanted those known, not exactly as he remembered them. He needed a bit of his soul in there to direct them, so that they wouldn't be used inappropriately. So in fact, the diary would probably not have worked at all if it didn't have Riddle's 16-year-old soul inside it--and the Riddle who came out of the diary was definitely a 16-year-old, not 25 or whatever he would have been after the Hepzibah Smith memory.

Dumbledore calls the Diary LV's first Horcrux, and I think it was made with his first murder, Moaning Myrtle, who will, I think, turn out to be intentional and significant. I think it was made between the Slughorn memory (when he clearly didn't know the spell you need to make Horcruxes) and his seventeenth birthday a few months later.

And Dame Peverell, the transformations Troels mentioned are those that Dumbledore talked about at the end of Chamber of Secrets--though, interestingly, Diary-Tom already had a red glint in his eyes, so the transformations had already begun.

Paulus Maximus - Aug 30, 2005 7:33 am (#780 of 2969)
Edited Aug 30, 2005 8:38 am

Paulus M. I think you must mean Legilimency. Voldemort uses Legilimency to read other's minds (Occlumency blocks the mind from being read).

Nope, I meant Occlumency. According to Dumbledore in book 6, Voldemort was using Occlumency against Harry, and that's why Harry WASN'T able to read Voldemort's mind (as he usually could).

But Harry's inability to read Voldemort's mind in book 6 might have been for a different reason... The connection might have been severed completely...

septentrion - Aug 30, 2005 10:17 am (#781 of 2969)

I didn't think moaning Myrtle's death was significant until today. It has just struck me she's the ghost we see the most and she's the one who speaks with Draco, she the ghost made by Tom Riddle. I'm not sure her death was used to make a Horcrux but there may be more to her than meets the eye.

Ann - Aug 30, 2005 10:29 am (#782 of 2969)
Edited Aug 30, 2005 11:31 am

Septentrion, I agree that she's likely to be significant. Do we know for certain that she's a Muggle-born? I'd wondered if she might not have been a Potter--she has messy dark hair and glasses. And one of the essays on the Red Hen site has suggested that she may have annoyed Riddle particularly: she's a kind of a professional victim, and if he was cruel to her (and who wasn't, in her own view?), she would make a big deal of it. And the fact that Draco confides in her (and that she defends him by screaming when Harry hurts him) might suggest that she was a Slytherin.

And I've also wondered if we'll hear any more of Olive Hornby, the girl who laughed at her glasses and whom Myrtle haunted until prevented from doing so. She's another classmate of LV's. (It's getting so we know almost as many students from that time period as the Marauders'!) I suspect we'll get at least one more memory from that time (perhaps McGonagall's?) that will throw light on the mysterious Ravenclaw/Gryffindor Horcrux and tie a lot of these stories together.

Madame Librarian - Aug 30, 2005 5:31 pm (#783 of 2969)
Edited Aug 30, 2005 6:33 pm

As to the is-Harry's-scar-a-Horcrux debate, I'd like to offer this wacko suggestion:

What if the scar is an unintended Horcrux containing a bit of V's soul, and Lily's ancient protective magic also created one with an itty bitty bit of baby Harry's soul and it's now uncomfortably residing in V? They, um, traded Horcruxes. While V is living as a mist version of himself, that's what was keeping him barely alive.

This goofy idea helps explain the sharing thoughts and emotions phenomenon, some of DD's comments about "essentially divided," the strange wording of the prophecy--"neither can live while the other survives" ("the other" really referring the other bit of soul each is containing right now, not the other person).

It also fits nicely with the power of a protective love like Lily's if you think of it as a polar opposite of a murder tearing the soul. It would be a very powerful and ancient spell only to be used in the extreme circumstance of protecting one you love with your own death. The ultimate sacrifice can also be used to split a soul, but for the good, for saving it from being destroyed. It gave Lily the tiniest of chances that if a bit of Harry's soul could be split off and stored, he'd survive the AK. When the curse rebounded, it contained that little bit and deposited it in V. Maybe she didn't quite plan where it was stored, but it served to save Harry.

OK, I'm under cover now, you can throw those dungbombs. Ready--aim--fire!! E[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Ciao. Barb

RoseMorninStar - Aug 30, 2005 10:38 pm (#784 of 2969)
Edited Aug 30, 2005 11:40 pm

Troels, I sincerely hope everything is well with your wife & family. I'll try not to post too much until you are back in action. Very Happy

Olive Hornby is dead. Moaning Myrtle said she haunted her until her death (In GoF, Chapter 25 Myrtle says, "..And then she saw my body...oooh, she didn't forget it until her dying day, I made sure of that...followed her around and reminded her, I did."

Madame Librarian, I don't think Lily's protection of Harry worked that way. The creation of a Horcrux is an evil, vile thing. I think Lily's protection manifested in a pure, selfless way in Harry's blood. A blood bond/protection that somehow carries through to Petunia...Harry's only living relative. I cannot help but think that perhaps Lily was an unspeakable and worked in the department of mysteries.

I do not believe that Tom Riddle was in his 7th year at Hogwarts the year he asks Slughorn about the Horcruxes because in HBP Chapter 23 while Harry is viewing the full version of Slughorn’s memory it says;

'Tom Riddle merely smiled as the others laughed again. Harry noticed that he was by no means the eldest of the group of boys, but that they all seemed to look to him as their leader.'

I would think Tom would have had to be at least one year younger than some of those boys to be noticeably younger.

One additional thought here. What if Tom already knew how to create a Horcrux at the point he speaks to Slughorn but did not want to let on that he already had that knowledge so he broke into the conversation by pretending he knew nothing about creating Horcruxes so that he could ask about creating multiple ones. Harry has already remarked how skillful Tom was at wrestling information out of people, you don't do that by making Professors think you already know quite a lot about such a touchy (not to mention banned) subject.

Phelim Mcintyre - Aug 31, 2005 12:03 am (#785 of 2969)

Could Tom have taken something else from his maternal grandfather's house other than the ring? Like a book that talks about Horcruxes? If not how did Tom Riddle find out about them?

Ann - Aug 31, 2005 6:29 am (#786 of 2969)
Edited Aug 31, 2005 7:32 am

RoseMorningStar, I don't think Riddle already knew about Horcruxes when he talked to Slughorn. When Slughorn says he'll give him an overview, he asks how it works and "His voice was carefully controlled, but Harry could sense his excitement." And later "Riddle's hunger was now apparent; his expression was greedy, he could no long hide his longing."

This sounds more to me like he'd seen a vague mention of Horcruxes when he was reading something about various ways people attempted to stave off death (the sort of thing he would be reading), and a little bit of research had shown him, as Hermione found later, that the library had nothing on the topic. So he's carefully asking around and hits the jackpot with Slughorn. No wonder his face is "full of that same wild happiness it had worn when he found out that he was a wizard." You can be sure he's thinking "Kill people? I've done that! This is gonna be great!"

Once he knew there was a spell, and that it was considered a really Dark one, he probably owled Borgin & Burkes or some Dark bookshop. He'd been to Diagon Alley by himself for years and years at that point, and I suspect he was quite familiar with Knockturn Alley as well.

irish flutterby - Aug 31, 2005 3:00 pm (#787 of 2969)
Edited Aug 31, 2005 4:00 pm

" I cannot help but think that perhaps Lily was an unspeakable and worked in the department of mysteries."

Jo mentioned in one of her interviews (I think the Mugglenet/TLC one) that it is important that Lily's wand was good for charms. Maybe that's why. Maybe she learned some charm working in the D.o.M. that she used on Harry that night.

RoseMorninStar - Aug 31, 2005 4:33 pm (#788 of 2969)

Irish flutterby, I think that the protection Lily passed on to Harry was due to her love and sacrifice for Harry. It was her selflessness and the fact that she was given a choice. yet still sacrificed herself anyway. I don't think she cast a specific spell knowing that it would create a special protection-it was just a mother's gut reaction. It (as Dumbledore said somewhere) was Love, the greatest magic of all-not something that only a witch or wizard could produce by means of a spell that protects Harry.

Verbina - Sep 1, 2005 8:14 am (#789 of 2969)

Phelim Mcintyre - I have been puzzling over the same thing. We know from Hermione that there are no books talking about Horcruxes in Hogwarts save for the one she found which mentioned them only to say they were vile and would not be discussed. They are not taught in the school at this time and from Tom having to ask about them, they were not taught in Hogwarts while he was there either. So I would assume from this that the topic of Horcruxes had been banned from Hogwarts for a long time. So...where on earth did Tom hear about them? He claims to have read about them but...where did he get such a book? Not the school. That is why I am thinking that he had some kind of contact with Borgin and Burkes long before he worked for them. It didn't take long after he left Hogwarts for him to begin working for them (at least that is the feeling I got) and I am sorry, I seriously doubt that Borgin and Burkes would hire someone fresh from school to basically appraise magical items and make deals unless they knew they were very very capable of doing the job. Big reason to think that Riddle had a relationship with the shop before. Perhaps...perhaps his family connection came into play here? Yes, Old Marvolo and Morfin were nuts but they were pure blood in a direct line from Slytherin. A very very old family.

So, we can gather that Tom already knew what a Horcrux was. He didn't ask what they were but how they were made. And I would think that whatever book he found that told him what they were would also tell him something about the making of them, even if just mentioning a spell without elaborating. Which brings me to my other notion...

When Hermione goes into Borgin and Burkes to try and find out what Draco had bought there yet could not carry with him, she asked but in a round about way. Albeit not well done. She asked about other things then asked about the necklace. Not that she wanted to purchase it but that she wanted to know if anyone had purchased an item and left it in the shop. Then she was told to leave the shop.

Now think of Tom talking to Slughorn. He wants to know something about Horcruxes. He already knows what they are. Very possibly has an idea of how they are made. If all he wanted to know was how they were made, the moment Slughorn said there was a spell but didn't know it Tom either could have gotten it from his mind using Legilimency (sp?) or he would have kept trying to get the spell from Slughorn. Instead, he changed tactics and asked about the making of more than one and the power of seven. This struck me as odd. Why would he get so close to finding out how to do it then back off and ask about multiple ones? The only reason I came up with was that he knew the answer to the first question already and it was a round about way of asking what he REALLY wanted to know...could multiple ones be made. He had already killed three people on purpose and one possibly by accident. He had nothing to lose in finding out about making more than one and Riddle strikes me as the type to want to use that to his advantage.

I know I keep waffling back and forth as to if he had already made the diary a Horcrux at this time or not. It is a tricky situation.

haymoni - Sep 1, 2005 8:29 am (#790 of 2969)

I'm guessing young Tom Riddle spent as much time in Diagon Alley as he possibly could.

Harry wanted to, but couldn't because Hagrid kept moving him along.

Imagine if you had no parent and lived at a place that was thrilled to be rid of you as much as possible. I'll be he knew more about Diagon Alley and Knockturn Alley than most wizarding kids by the time he actually set foot on the Hogwarts Express.

Phelim Mcintyre - Sep 1, 2005 9:23 am (#791 of 2969)

Verbina - thanks for the support. I have had similar thoughts, hence my post. I doubt Flourish and Blotts would sell books on Horcruxes so Borgin and Burkes seems a good bet. Or something from the shelves of his mother's family home.

Esther Rose - Sep 1, 2005 11:47 am (#792 of 2969)
Edited Sep 1, 2005 12:49 pm

I don't know if this has been discussed but is it possible that we have been introduced to a Horcrux or 1/7th of Voldemort's soul per book? SS: Voldemort himself COS: The Diary POA: Harry or Harry's Scar??? (but hoping it is something else) GOF: Nagini OOTP: The Locket HBP: The Cup and the Ring.

Actually, I am hoping the ring or the Hufflepuff cup was in POA. But, I know it is not. However, isn't POA when Harry won both the Quidditch and the House Cup? We still don't know if talking to your own mirror image is normal yet or not though. We assume that it is but it could easily not be. We assumed talking to snakes was normal in SS and found out it wasn't in the COS. It would be funny if the Horcruxed item was the Griffin Knocker and the reason why no DADA teacher has lasted more than a year since.

RoseMorninStar - Sep 1, 2005 4:56 pm (#793 of 2969)

Phelim & Verbina, I have a funny feeling that Tom Riddle's knowledge of Horcruxes may tie into (somehow) the Dark Lord Grindelwald. Dumbledore defeated Grindelwald in 1945, the same year Tom graduated from Hogwarts. When asked about any connections to Voldemort & Grindelwald, JKR is rather evasive. I think it may be entirely possible that Dumbledore defeated Grindelwald while Tom was at Hogwarts, and perhaps he knew that Grindelwald had created a Horcrux but Dumbledore destroyed it allowing for Grindelwald to be vanquished...hence the idea that Tom gets for more than one Horcrux. It's just a suspicion I have that there is some connection there. Very Happy

DM Havox - Sep 1, 2005 11:02 pm (#794 of 2969)

Verbina,?

Just a thought but what about the Room of Requirement? When Harry went to hide the HBP's potions book...

"He was standing in a room the size of a large cathedral, who's high windows were sending shafts of light down upon what looked like a city with towering walls, built of what Harry knew must be objects hidden by generations of Hogwarts inhabitants. ... There were thousands and thousands of books, no doubt banned or graffitied or stolen. (HBP pg 526)

I agree on the part about Tom and Slughorn.

Phelim Mcintyre - Sep 2, 2005 12:05 am (#795 of 2969)

DM Havox - nice catch! What could Harry find in there?

RMS - I agree about the Grindelwald/Voldemort link. But what is it? Role on book 7.

Ann - Sep 2, 2005 6:22 am (#796 of 2969)
Edited Sep 2, 2005 7:24 am

I like the idea of Grindelwald as the source of Riddle's interest in Horcruxes. It would explain why Slughorn says Dumbledore is 'particularly fierce' about enforcing the ban. (He was still only the Transfiguration Master at the time, so I think it's significant that Slughorn mentions him.) True, he wasn't defeated until a few years later, but Dumbledore could be looking for the Horcrux, or have already destroyed it to great public acclaim, which would bring the subject up.

I disagree, Verbina, that any book that mentioned Horcruxes is likely to give a complete description of what it is, how to make one, and the spell. After all, Hermione found one that mentions the word but says nothing else. The reason Riddle stops asking for "how to" information is that he pushes so hard in his excitement that Slughorn begins to suspect that his interest is more than academic--and to worry about what he's told him already. Riddle backs down really quickly, probably deciding he's heard enough to find the information elsewhere.

I think that he's found the same reference that Hermione did. Rather than thinking, as she did, 'what a terrible thing--something they wouldn't even put in a Dark Magic book with horrible, horrible things in it'--Riddle thinks, 'wow, something that evil has got to be really neat!' I think his growing excitement as Slughorn tells him that it is a way of making oneself immortal is proof that he didn't have much of an idea, initially, even what they were.

I've always found very puzzling Dumbledore's statement that it was the question about multiple Horcruxes that was the important one--something Riddle couldn't have found in a book, that he could only have got by asking Slughorn. This seems quite weird to me, partly because Riddle seems to me so obviously unaware of the basics at that point, but mostly because Slughorn doesn't really tell him anything about multiple Horcruxes; he just expresses horror at the idea. The bit about multiple Horcruxes was the most important part of the conversation to Dumbledore, but I don't think it was to Riddle.

Verbina - Sep 2, 2005 9:45 pm (#797 of 2969)

Ann - I would agree if it wasn't for one thing...Tom wasn't asking what a Horcrux was...he was asking how they were done and about multiples. He knew what they were already. Hermione was unable to find anything on what they were other than them being vile.

I'm not saying that a book that mentioned Horcruxes would explain everything about them. But I guess I am thinking of it this way. If a book on dark magic in Hogwarts refuses to even say what they are...a book that explains what they are would likely mention something... even just a tiny tidbit of information on there being a spell or even the need for a murder to accomplish it. It may not give the spell or give any specifics. I just keep going back to how Tom knew what they were when he asked Slughorn.

I wonder how wide spread the knowledge of Horcruxes is in the wizarding world?

irish flutterby - Sep 3, 2005 4:33 am (#798 of 2969)

Maybe I'm mistaken, but I think DM Havox was referring to Tom finding a book on Horcruxes in the RoR. Perhaps that is where he got his info.

septentrion - Sep 3, 2005 6:51 am (#799 of 2969)

The RoR ? That's a brilliant idea ! Harry should think of that too.

irish flutterby - Sep 3, 2005 8:41 am (#800 of 2969)

For that matter, could Harry go pace back and forth in front of the RoR and say "I need a place to find out as much info about Horcruxes as I can." ? would a room full of books and stuff about Horcruxes open up?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Thu Jul 21, 2011 9:54 am

Hogs Head - Sep 3, 2005 11:26 am (#801 of 2969)
Edited Sep 3, 2005 12:28 pm

With so little information about Grindelwald, does any of it preclude him from also being a Hogwarts professor during Tom, Jr.'s years there? Since Slughorn was potions professor and Albus DD was transfigurations professor, does any canon preclude Grindelwald from being the defense against the dark arts professor? I've always presumed, perhaps from the Germanic sounding name and the 1945 link, that Grindelwald was located on the continent, but perhaps he was closer to Hogwarts, and hence the direct source of the Horcrux incantation for Tom, Jr.? I even wonder if Tom, Jr. may have betrayed information about Grindelwald's single Horcrux to Albus DD -- a play designed to grab the no. 1 "bad boy" role? With two years to go, we have too many opportunities to run down so many possibilities and rabbit trails, no?

Dame Peverell - Sep 3, 2005 12:18 pm (#802 of 2969)
Edited Sep 3, 2005 1:37 pm

I thought that the books in the RoR were already included. My first conclusion about where he learned so much about Horcruxes and Possession was in those old books. I have believed for a long time that the knowledge stored in books hidden at Hogwarts must be integral to Lord Voldemort's future and ultimate plans. It is part of why he wanted the DADA job. He must find some way to spend time studying there... I can see him spending his Christmas holidays camped out there. Perhaps he could hide there all summer too, though it seems doubtful.

I also think we are placing too much trust in Slughorn’s memory. We know he doctored his memories so why are we so quick to believe the one he gave Harry?

For all we know, what REALLY happened was that he said something like "seven is good but nine is better when you're talking about immortality" or perhaps in reality he handed Tom a book and doesn't want DD to know that. I know DD trusts this memory, I just don't know WHY. Dumbledore does after all, make mistakes, and some of them are big ones.

Rose Morning Star - I like "I cannot help but think that perhaps Lily was an unspeakable and worked in the department of mysteries" I can see her working in the room behind the closed door and of finding a way to dose Harry with extra quantities of love. But weren't she and James Aurors?

RoseMorninStar - Sep 3, 2005 2:25 pm (#803 of 2969)
Edited Sep 3, 2005 3:30 pm

The Longbottoms were Aurors, the occupations of James and Lily have never been stated (and I am simply stunned )that Harry has never asked what their occupations were. They were members of the Order of the Phoenix, but they would not have had to be Aurors to be in the order. JKR has been silent on the subject.

I don't think Grindelwald could have taught at Hogwarts, at least not at the time when Tom Riddle would have been a student, because he was already known as a Dark Lord at that time. I wonder if there is some connection between Dumbledore (and the scar on his knee), his defeat of a dark lord.. I wonder if Dumbledore had a prophecy said about him too? There is very little we know about Dumbledore's background and JKR has said we will learn more about Dumbledore's back-story in the final book. If Dumbledore is dead...and we have yet to be 'learning about his back-story', it must be important to the plot.

The ideas that have been raised about the 'Room of Requirement' are very intriguing. From comments that have been made previously by JKR in interviews, I have come to the conclusion that Hogwarts will most likely be operating next year, even if in a reduced state. If Harry/Hermione/Ron attend or not we will have to see. I would definitely think that Draco & Snape would not be there, and if all of that 'tension' is gone...no Quidditch, etc.. leads us to believe that much of the action will occur elsewhere, right?

DM Havox - Sep 3, 2005 2:46 pm (#804 of 2969)

My interpretation of the RoR is that Harry was looking for a place to hide his book, and because he was looking for a place "to hide something", and not a place to use the bathroom; like DD, or a place to hide from someone; like the brothers Weasley, or a place to practice DADA; like with the DA. It seems like many generations of students have asked for a place "to hide something", and for who knows how many generations. How far does the "hiding RoR" go back? I got the impression that it was as old as Hogwarts itself and contained so much stuff. It seemed very JKR that it was mentioned, just in passing as so many other things have been, that the books were in "no doubt banned or graffitied or stolen". What better place to hide banned books, I.e. old books that contained dark magic or information on dark magic? We don't know if Riddle knew about the RoR, but I would venture a guess and say yes. Evil, yes, a very gifted wizard, yes, but very evil.

irish flutterby, I would say yeah. It's the Room of Requirement, it can be anything anyone can need. Harry's problem was his logic, in the way he tried to enter the room. He kept trying to open the room thinking "I need to see the place where Malfoy keeps coming secretly," or "I need you to become the place you became for Draco Malfoy." (HBP pg 458)

I take the RoR to become only what you need, not what someone else wants it to be, because the room can't tell what they want it to be if they are not there. It was just Harry's logic. You can ask for a place to eat pumpkin pastes, and it would appear, but if I asked it for a place that Harry would go to eat pastes, it would just stay blank.

As far as the second memory from Slughorn being a fake too, I don't think so. it had the seamless clarity that the other didn't. Besides, Slughorn seems the type to shy away until he is discovered, then fess up, just as when DD and Harry go to find him. He didn't try to stay hidden, he just said, Ok, ya got me.

DM Havox - Sep 3, 2005 2:53 pm (#805 of 2969)

RoseMorninStar, you gave me a theory. JKR said in a interview something about her favorite room at Hogwarts. She said something like, it’s a room that Harry knows about, and will become very important to him. What if she was referring to the RoR for two reasons, Harry's DA meetings, and info about Horcruxes? I will try to find the exact interview quote.

Sparrowhawk - Sep 3, 2005 3:23 pm (#806 of 2969)
Edited Sep 3, 2005 4:24 pm

More simply, since this interview took place well before the publication of HBP, I think that JKR was referring to the fact that throughout book 6, Harry would find the RoR very important, because he would be desperately trying to enter it... But you're right, DM Havox, this room will certainly play a very significant part in book 7, there are so many things hidden inside it, that deserve careful scrutiny! JKR wouldn't have described it the way she did, without good reason.

Madame Librarian - Sep 3, 2005 3:39 pm (#807 of 2969)

Could Grindelwald have taught at Durmstrang? Names are both German-derived. But in GoF I got the impression that it was located in some vague in Eastern European stronghold. Still, a more likely geographical setting for him.

At some point during Tom's education at Hogwarts there would have been a Triwizard tournament, no? Maybe they first met then.

Ciao. Barb

Paulus Maximus - Sep 3, 2005 3:58 pm (#808 of 2969)

As of book 4, the Triwizard Tournament had not happened in 200 years, if memory serves.

It would not have taken place while Tom was at Hogwarts.

Alvaladejo - Sep 3, 2005 7:23 pm (#809 of 2969)

Took me a while, but I finally finished reading this thread and must say I am impressed by all the theories here exposed.

I am glad to see that I am not the only one to think that the RoR is going to play an important role on the next book, and that most likely that is where the information on how to destroy LV's Horcruxes will be found. I must say though, that I don't think we will see much of the RoR, since that kind of investigation will most likely be up to Hermione.

The possibility of a tiara belonging to Ravenclaw is something that caught my attention. Do you guys think that if a tiara is the missing item from Ravenclaw it would be the one found in the RoR? Or is it likely that the Weasley's could be somehow related to Ravenclaw, making Great-Aunt Muriel's tiara the missing item?

Hogs Head - Sep 3, 2005 9:14 pm (#810 of 2969)

What little lore we have about Rowena Ravenclaw doesn't make her seem like the tiara type of gal.

RoseMorninStar - Sep 3, 2005 9:19 pm (#811 of 2969)

Krum plays for Bulgaria, so I would venture to guess that Durmstrang is in a mid or eastern part of Europe, possibly even Siberia, given how cold they describe the area as being.

Grindelwald is the name of a town in Sweden, not that that makes any difference, but JKR did confirm that there is a connection -however loose- between Hitler and Grindelwald and the fact that the defeat of Grindelwald took place in 1945..as did the end of WWII. She says she likes the Wizarding world (and it's troubles) to mirror what is going on in the Muggle world.

Someone on another thread mentioned the idea that the Mirror of Erised may help find any remaining Horcruxes.. what a great idea! I wonder where that is stored (and why didn't Dumbledore think of that?!!) I do think that Harry will return to Hogwarts at some point, I don't know if he will attend his last year of school there, but I think he will need to go there to resolve some issues before the end. I do think we will see the room of requirement before it's all over...and also JKR has hinted that the department of mysteries (within the Ministry of Magic) will be seen again too.

Paulus Maximus - Sep 4, 2005 5:59 am (#812 of 2969)

She says she likes the Wizarding world (and it's troubles) to mirror what is going on in the Muggle world.

I wonder what wars Muggles were fighting in the late 1990s...

septentrion - Sep 4, 2005 9:28 am (#813 of 2969)

Plenty : Yugoslavia, Sudan, Timor, Angola, Liberia etc

Round Pink Spider - Sep 4, 2005 6:07 pm (#814 of 2969)

A few comments on the posts I've skimmed since I posted last:

I think it's possible, maybe, that Tom Riddle might have found some information about Horcruxes in the RoR, but I do think it's more likely that it'll be useful to Harry in the next book.

I'm not sure that Grindelwald is going to be too important, except in passing. But I suppose he could have had something to do with Tom Riddle's learning about Horcruxes.

Some people have suggested that Riddle could have used Myrtle's death to create a Horcrux. I don't think he could have, because he didn't murder her directly. Totally aside from the fact that I don't think he knew how to create Horcruxes until years later, it was the basilisk that killed her, not Riddle. He didn't know she was in the bathroom (she was hidden, crying), and she died just because she came out at the wrong moment. It was an accident (not that he was crying about it, but still...) So although he was responsible for her death, I don't think that counts as murder.

RoseMorninStar, I find it equally incomprehensible that Harry would never have asked about his parents' occupations. Let's be honest -- he didn't ask because JKR is hiding the information from us. He's just a character. A real kid would have asked by now.

Since she hasn't come clean on the topic, or anything else about Harry's family, I think we can be pretty sure that, when we DO find out about Harry's family, it's going to be a big bombshell! If she had to keep it a secret all the way into book 7... Golly, I can't wait!

Hogs Head - Sep 5, 2005 4:51 am (#815 of 2969)
Edited Sep 5, 2005 5:52 am

I wonder what wars Muggles were fighting in the late 1990s...

Shopping wars. IPO wars. "Is my SUV as big as my neighbor's SUV" wars. Those were Dursleyesque days.

Oliver Wood - Sep 5, 2005 11:52 am (#816 of 2969)

There's been a lot of discussion about the tiara in the RoR being that of Ravenclaws and bring a Horcrux tied to that house. I posted a different Ravenclaw theory a while back and didn't get a response to it, so I'll sum it up again seeing as now it has become the hot topic.

It goes back to GoF and the champions. Basically, the jist of it was. The Durmstrang students sat with the Slytherins, and the Beauxbatons with the Ravenclaws. Obviously the Durmstrang students were drawn to Slytherin by the dark arts, I mean Malfoy did say his father had considered sending him there. That would be an obvious connection. But why would the Beauxbatons sit with the Ravenclaws?

It could have no apparent connection whatsoever, but, by sitting with the Ravenclaws each house of Hogwarts was represented by the Goblet. Cedric from Hufflepuff, Harry from Gryffindor, Krum from Slytherin, and Fleur from Ravenclaw. Cedric is dead, therefore out of the story, Harry is still obviously around, Krum pretty much dropped out of the storyline, but Fleur came back in HBP.

Any chance there's a Ravenclaw/Beauxbatons connection that Fleur could help Harry solve?

RoseMorninStar - Sep 5, 2005 1:52 pm (#817 of 2969)
Edited Sep 5, 2005 3:11 pm

Oliver Wood, I do think there is something to that. There almost has to be. JKR has talked about how much she has had to leave out of the story because it did not move the plot forward and was not essential. So, if she included it, it must be essential to the plot.

Viktor seemed like a 'reluctant' Slytherin type. I think we will somehow see Krum come into play. I am not sure how important Durmstrang will be. Viktor was older than Harry/Hermione/Ron, so he has already been out of school a year or two. BUT, Bulgaria (where Krum is from) is next to ALBANIA. And we KNOW Voldemort was in Albania for a while. Karkaroff (the headmaster of Durmstrang) was obviously the DE that was afraid to return and has presumably been killed or at least on Voldemort's hit list. Perhaps Krum's reappearance will have to do with the search for the Horcruxes in that region perhaps it will have to do with fighting Voldemort. We shall see.

Fleur & Beauxbatons... hmmm...well, Madame Maxine and Hagrid have already made a 'contribution' to the cause.. at least in attempting to get the giants on the side of OotP. I think they will continue to be a 'team'. ;D And obviously, Fleur and Bill will be members of the OotP, and Fleur will have helpful connections to other wizards/witches that can join the cause.

Hermionefan(#1) - Sep 5, 2005 4:51 pm (#818 of 2969)
Edited Sep 5, 2005 5:52 pm

I don't know if anyone's said this yet, or anything like this, I only read about 10 posts but anyway, we know Lucius Malfoy told LV about getting the diary destroyed, so wouldn't LV have made a new one to replace it? And then what if he went to go check on all of his other Horcruxes but then found the fake locked? What if he then made the fake locked into a real Horcrux, because no one would suspect it, so then Harry really has to destroy that too?

Also, does Harry know how to destroy the Horcruxes? Could he feed them to a Dementor?

Madame Librarian - Sep 5, 2005 6:04 pm (#819 of 2969)
Edited Sep 5, 2005 7:05 pm

I'm still concerned about that diary. Harry stabbed it in the Chamber and "disabled" Diary Tom and his heinous plan. But the book itself is still in existence. It didn't disintegrate or completely burn up, right? In fact, it ends up back in Lucius' hands when Harry tosses it to him stuffed inside his sock.

My question is this: is Diary Tom the piece of soul put there later by Tom/Voldemort to make the diary a Horcrux, or is he just the particular diary magic version created before the Horcrux plan was put in place? Are there two separate sorts of magic implanted into that diary?

If there are two, it's very scary that the diary was returned to Lucius. There is a chance that the Horcrux magic part is still intact or nearly so (repairable, so to speak). I read and re-read that scene at the end of CoS to make sure that Lucius really storms off from DD's office with the diary. It seems he does (ch.18, "Dobby's Reward"). To my mind JKR crafted the "choreography" of that scene carefully not only to have Dobby end up with the sock from his master, but to have Lucius end up with the diary again. Makes me nervous.

On last thing--a teeny argument supporting the suggestion that the Horcrux soul segment and Diary Tom are separate issues. In CoS, ch. 17, pg. 308, US paperback there's this exchange when Harry first meets Diary Tom in the Chamber:

Are you a ghost?" Harry said uncertainly.

"A memory," Riddle said quietly. "Preserved in a diary for fifty years."

Hmmm. The word JKR chose to use here--memory, not soul.

Ciao. Barb

Soul Search - Sep 6, 2005 6:06 am (#820 of 2969)
Edited Sep 6, 2005 7:12 am

I would like to suggest/confirm the ordering of the ring and diary Horcruxes. Our discussion of "in the summer of his sixteenth year" lead to this, that is, Tom Riddle was fifteen in the Gaunt cabin scene.

The pensive scenes of Tom Riddle at the Gaunts' and Slughorn's memory are presented to Harry in a chronological order, confirmed by Tom Riddle wearing the ring in Slughorn's memory.

The "memory" Tom Riddle from the diary is the sixteen-year-old Tom Riddle. Tom Riddle had been working five years to discover how to open the Chamber of Secrets. Thus, he opened the Chamber after learning about Horcruxes.

This suggests that Tom Riddle was leading the basilisk around looking for someone to murder to make the ring Horcrux. Myrtle’s death wasn't any kind of accident. She was a murder of convenience, like Frank Bryce later.

His Riddle family was Tom Riddle's first murders, blamed on Morfin. The ring was an unexpected "trophy."

Tom Riddle learns about and develops the idea of splitting his soul into seven parts with six Horcruxes. He needs to test the Horcrux spell, and has the ring "trophy" for it. He has also discovered how to open the Chamber of Secrets and control the Basilisk. He's clever, using the basilisk for the murder will direct responsibility to the monster in the Chamber and away from himself.

Myrtle was his next murder, blamed on Hagrid's monster, specifically sought, and used to make the ring Horcrux. Her murder was specifically for making a Horcrux. It was not an accident just because she happened to be in the bathroom that was the entrance to the Chamber.

Shifting the blame for opening the Chamber and freeing the monster to Hagrid was a later benefit. He actually received an award, when he was responsible for everything.

Only Dumbledore is suspicious. We don't see him wearing the ring after the Slughorn memory; perhaps fearing that Dumbledore might recognize the ring or could detect that it was a Horcrux. At some later time, he returns to the Gaunts' cabin and secures the ring Horcrux.

But, he can't risk opening the Chamber again. That would cast doubt on Hagrid's guilt, so he creates the diary so it could be used to control someone and open the Chamber later.

The diary was the next Horcrux. Murder unknown.

Thus, the ring was the first Horcrux, the diary the second.

JILL HUBER - Sep 6, 2005 2:01 pm (#821 of 2969)

Okay, I have been away on vacation so I am so excited to see all the ideas! Okay, since book 7 isn't out and we do not know if the SORTING HAT is or isn't a Horcrux, I will let that one go. Another thought that seems really overlooked is related to the Horcrux contained in Tom Riddle's diary. The diary is clearly enchanted with Tom Riddle as he started to come into Lord Voldemort, that is its significance. I think Riddle enchanted the diary with the hope of re-opening the chamber and then saw this chance to make it into a Horcrux. While we know that a Horcrux keeps someone alive by retaining part of one's soul, how does one retrieve it, or does one have to somehow retrieve it or perform a spell or incantation? Regardless of this question, Ginny Weasley is clearly important to bring Voldemort back to life. The diary had a duel purpose. Additionally, the diary, like the SORTING HAT, had brains. The diary was only significant to Voldemort in the wizarding community and no one else. NO one would buy it because it had belonged to Tom Riddle as they would a sword of Gryffindor. We have talked about the significance Voldemort thought was held in an item...well, he drew on much from his past that no one knew of, such as the cave.

vickilh42 - Sep 7, 2005 6:34 pm (#822 of 2969)

I'm currently rereading the series and came across some interesting passages in GoF that made me reflect on the storylines of HBP.

(p256) DD's "age line" reminded me of Tom's "age line boat"" ... Harry's age and skill level enable him to ride the boat across the lake with DD.

(p279)"We all know Professor Moody considers the morning wasted if he hasn't discovered 6 plots to murder him before lunchtime, " said Karkaroff loudly. (6 plots = 6 "Horcrux plots"?! --The 6 separate plots to destroy the 6 Horcruxes will lead to Tom's murder/vanquishment?)

I know it's a bit of stretch to apply the above passages to HBP plotlines but it is fun to try! Snooping around the books looking for clues and red herrings is all we have till Ms. Rowling offers us some more tidbits.

I just wonder how much she rewrites just to slide some of her clever "foreshadowing" into storylines!

RoseMorninStar - Sep 8, 2005 12:34 pm (#823 of 2969)
Edited Sep 8, 2005 1:37 pm

About the diary, I think the Horcrux within can be destroyed without destroying the object (so I am hoping that if Harry's scar is a Horcrux and not Harry himself) that the scar can be destroyed without destroying Harry. The Marvolo ring was de-Horcruxified without totally destroying it...yes, it had a crack in the stone, but it was not completely destroyed.

I am also wondering. In OotP Dumbledore checks a silver instrument in his office and a greenish smoke emits from it revealing a snake and Dumbledore says, 'in essence divided?' and the snake splits in two. Given that Harry can 'see' through the eyes of a snake (presumably Nagini) I wonder if when Voldemort attempted to kill Harry that he was planning on creating the Horcrux Nagini? Instead of using the split soul bit from Harry's murder it uses the split soul bit from the murders of his parents... one going into the snake, the other going into Harry. Perhaps that is why Harry is a Parseltongue. Voldemort can obviously intentionally control the snake to some extent, perhaps he also 'channels' Harry at the same time. This would not be like possessing Harry (as Ginny makes clear in OotP when Harry says he does not have large gaps in unaccounted for time). Maybe that is why Voldemort was unaware of this connection until he learned of Harry's alert on the attack on Arthur Weasley.

JILL HUBER - Sep 8, 2005 1:03 pm (#824 of 2969)

I just thought of something...no, not about the darn diary! How do we know for sure how many Horcruxes he made? Voldemort is the only one who really knows for sure. How did Dumbledore find out and how reliable is the source? Voldemort didn't tell him, I can guess that much. I can't see anyway we could really know unless we ask him and I don't think he would tell us if we did, he would AK us. Smile

septentrion - Sep 10, 2005 11:05 am (#825 of 2969)

Well, Jo told DD was never very off the mark, so I assume like him there 7 Horcruxes.

I've just reread "the secret Riddle" in which we see DD's memory of his first encounter with Riddle and I wonder how it is we never saw it : Tom takes 3 trophies from the kids he bullied (a yo-yo, a mouth-organ and a sliver thimble). at the end of the "lesson", DD tells Harry the mouth organ has never been anything else than a mouth organ so we can eliminate it as a Horcrux. Left are a yo-yo and a silver thimble. I wonder if the thimble or the yo-yo is a Horcrux. And it would be hidden in the orphanage. The matron of the orphanage tells DD they found Billy Stubbs's rabbit (another orphan) hanged from the rafters. My conclusion is there's probably a Horcrux hidden near the roof of the orphanage, but I don't know if it would be a yo-yo or a silver thimble, or another object which may remind of those trophies.

Eloise Black - Sep 10, 2005 3:15 pm (#826 of 2969)

Hi Guys

I have a feeling that Sirius's mirror is a Horcrux. I do not have the books with me at present but I believe that it is described as being small like a ladies compact. It is also one of a pair of mirrors used by SB & RB to communicate.

We also learn after SB death, when Harry tries to communicate with him, that the mirror does not work. JK, has allowed us to believe that it does not work because SB is dead. A clear example of hiding clues right in front of our noses.

Also, I keep thinking it odd that two guys use what looks like a ladies compact to communicate and I wonder if RB switched his mirror with SB mirror, knowing that it was a Horcrux. This ties in nicely with the "R.A.B." theory. Could the mirrors have belonged to Rowena Ravenclaw, at some point in time.

Please let me know what you think of my theory.

Eloise

DM Havox - Sep 10, 2005 3:37 pm (#827 of 2969)

I thought Harry, at the end of OotP threw the mirror into his chest and it broke. Since then there is no mention of it. IMO the mirror was there as a way Harry could have prevented the entire situation. Kids being young and believing they and only they know everything about everything... I just think it was a painful example of how much more growing up Harry still had to do at the end of the book, and how inexperienced he was. I am not Harry bashing by any means, I just think it is a good way to develop his character, to have him have flaws and make mistakes

RoseMorninStar - Sep 10, 2005 7:54 pm (#828 of 2969)
Edited Sep 10, 2005 8:55 pm

Here is an interesting quote from JKR about that mirror that Sirius gave to Harry. She's very cagey about her answer! Perhaps Harry repairs this mirror? I don't think it's a Horcrux...but do you think he may still be able to communicate with someone using this mirror...or perhaps another mirror?

Question: Why did Harry have to forget the mirror he had been given by Sirius in 'Order of the Phoenix'?

Answer: I can’t give a full answer to this, because it is relevant to books six and seven. However, the short answer is that Harry was determined never to use the mirror, as is clearly stated in chapter 24: ‘he knew he would never use whatever it was’. For once in Harry’s life, he does not succumb to curiosity, he hides the mirror and the temptation away from himself, and then, when it might have been useful, he has forgotten it.

The mirror might not have helped as much as you think, but on the other hand, will help more than you think. You’ll have to read the final books to understand that!

Nicholas Schouten - Sep 10, 2005 9:03 pm (#829 of 2969)

Eloise Black - I like this thought about the mirror. Not sure if it plays out on careful inspection, but it really, really has a great appeal; especially if we think of the similarities that Harry feels with Tom Riddle/LV - a mirror would be perfect.

The crack in the mirror (not mentioning 7 years' bad luck), doesn't necessarily mean the mirror is "destroyed"; just that it's "impaired".

- Nick

Eloise Black - Sep 10, 2005 11:05 pm (#830 of 2969)
Edited Sep 11, 2005 12:09 am

Hi Nicholas

I don't think the mirror is actually broken, it is just under some type of spell that makes the person trying to use the mirror think that it is broken. I.e. The mirrors true use is to open a communication channel with the pair, which is owned by RB. Remember also that Harry, was trying to use the mirror before he threw it into his trunk and broke the glass in it.

This is like the locket that could not be opened at 12 Grimmauld Place. I think that the Horcruxes are held within these objects and the objects are charmed to appear broken.

I also feel that these compact mirrors would have belonged to Rowena Ravenclaw and Helga Hufflepuff. They were the best of friends.

Thanks Eloise

1 MPTomb - Sep 11, 2005 2:55 pm (#831 of 2969)

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned, however, I found in OOTP, on pg. 116, while the kids and Mrs. Weasley are cleaning the cabinets, "a HEAVY LOCKET, that no one could open". As this locket is in the Black family home, this could be the real Horcrux and RAB didn't have time to destroy it. Just a thought.

Hogs Head - Sep 11, 2005 3:55 pm (#832 of 2969)

Yes, the 12 Grimmauld Pl. locket has been discussed quite a bit on this thread, the RAB thread, and others. But nice to catch it on your own.

Hermionefan(#1) - Sep 11, 2005 4:34 pm (#833 of 2969)

Maybe I'm wrong, but I've heard a lot of theory about that locket and I think it's a great idea, but I thought that was a silver locket, and I think Slytherin's was gold. I suppose RAB could have changed the color to disguise it or something though.

TwinklingBlueEyes - Sep 11, 2005 11:49 pm (#834 of 2969)

OoP just describes the locket as heavy, "a heavy locket that none of them could open;"

All references to Slytherin's locket in HBP are gold. Interesting...

...toddles off to ponder some more...

Sparrowhawk - Sep 11, 2005 11:51 pm (#835 of 2969)
Edited Sep 12, 2005 12:52 am

Hermionefan, I believe that there is a little confusion here. In OotP they remove several objects, including "an unpleasant-looking silver instrument", and "a heavy locket that none of them could open". There is nothing to tell us whether the locket was silver or gold, or anything else for that matter, we just know that it was heavy...

JM2Ks

TwinklingBlueEyes - Sep 12, 2005 12:52 am (#836 of 2969)

That's what makes the locket in OoP so interesting Sparrowhawk. The lack of descriptive detail.

"See this?" he bellowed at Ogden, shaking a heavy gold locket at him, while Merope spluttered and gasped for breath.". And, "There upon the smooth crimson velvet lay a heavy golden locket.". Riddle's reaction, "Slytherin's mark," he said quietly, as the light played upon an ornate, serpentine S.".

One would think that if the locket at #12 had an "ornate" S(for Slytherin), or B(for Black)one of the people present would have picked up on that.

Harry does occasionally notice little things. "He turned the locket over in his hands. This was neither as large as the locket he remembered seeing in the Pensieve, nor were there any markings upon it, no sign of the ornate S that was supposed to be Slytherins mark."

Seems odd that Harry doesn't associate it with one he has seen before at #12, but does know the goblet that Dung had, even without it's crest.

Are we on the right trail with the locket at #12, or fishing for a red herring?

Round Pink Spider - Sep 12, 2005 4:59 am (#837 of 2969)
Edited Sep 12, 2005 6:00 am

Welcome back, TBE.

Combining the initials R.A.B. combined with the missing locket, and the mention of a locket at Grimmauld Place, the fact that Harry now owns Grimmauld Place and Kreacher, and JKR's mention of Kreacher taking things and hiding them away, I think it's pretty likely. If that isn't the real locket, then that's the biggest red herring she's ever planted on us.

As far as her not describing the locket in any detail, if it is the real locket then she was already handing it to us on a silver platter. I mean, look how quickly everyone guessed about that locket? She wouldn't want to make it even more obvious by describing it as golden with an ornate S on it. Otherwise, she would have had people guessing about it before they even finished reading HBP!

You know, I'm feeling really stupid. I thought that the ring had been cracked even on Marvolo's hand, but I went back and checked, and no crack was mentioned. It was cracked the first time we saw it, on Dumbledore's hand, but by that point it was already finished as a Horcrux. That might indicate that destroying the bit of Voldemort's soul will always damage the object/creature that has been used to make the Horcrux. I wonder if destroying the object would be enough to eliminate it as a Horcrux? Having a little more basilisk venom on hand might be helpful to Harry...

It's too bad that Slytherin had to go and use valuable magical objects to make his Horcruxes. Not to mention what that might potentially mean for Harry...

irish flutterby - Sep 12, 2005 5:03 am (#838 of 2969)

Harry was very distracted while they were cleaning 12GP. I don't think he'd remember it any more than he remembered that Sirius' brother's name was Regulus.

Potter Ace - Sep 12, 2005 9:56 am (#839 of 2969)

I have posted this thread in the HBP discussion thread but it goes here as well.

When LV's 1st body is destroyed, does Quirrell use/find a Horcrux in order for LV to possess him? I would have to assume so or he would have simply died like Sirius. If that is the case, then Harry needs to only find three, not 4 as stated in the book.

Thoughts?

irish flutterby - Sep 12, 2005 10:20 am (#840 of 2969)
Edited Sep 12, 2005 11:24 am

I don't think that's completely right. I think (and I may be wrong) that if LV needed to have a Horcrux to possess Quirrell, he would also need one to possess all of the snakes and rats and such that he possessed while in Albania. I think, in that he was nothing but spirit, he didn't need to become corporeal to possess someone. Also, my understanding of a Horcrux is that it is simply a sort of anchor to keep your soul from leaving earth. Though one's body might die, the soul remains. I think that's why LV had to come up with his own "rebirthing" spell and potion. His spirit was stuck, but he didn't have his own body.

Who knows, I could be way off base.

Paulus Maximus - Sep 12, 2005 10:38 am (#841 of 2969)

I don't think you are.

The soul that was in Lord Voldemort's body was NOT destroyed when he tried to kill Harry. Nor will it ever be destroyed as long as any of his Horcruxes remain. That's why Harry has to destroy the Horcruxes before he can try to kill Voldemort for good.

Hogs Head - Sep 12, 2005 11:12 am (#842 of 2969)
Edited Sep 12, 2005 12:14 pm

I think Paulus is correct. The Horcruxes aren't like extra lives in a video game that are "used" and then gone. They are more like tethers that hold you in this world. They have to be searched out and destroyed before the beneficiary can be shown the door to the next world.

We've talked at times about how Voldy seems not to have any awareness of the status of his six extraneous pieces of soul embedded in the Horcruxes. Notice that it works the other way around, too. Although the diary was (we presume) one of the Horcruxes that kept Voldy among the living when his attempt to AK infant Harry backfired, the persona of Tom, Jr. hiding in the diary had no awareness of what had befallen the "real" Voldy until Ginny spilled the beans during Harry's second year at Hogwarts, some 11 or 12* years later.

(*No time to look at the Lexicon timeline now, but I can't remember whether the Halloween of Harry's first year (the night of the troll in PS/SS) was ten years or eleven years earlier, since the pre-school conversation refers to "ten years ago" as of the July before school term started.)

Hermionefan(#1) - Sep 12, 2005 2:03 pm (#843 of 2969)

Oooh yeah, okay, well maybe it is, I don't know, it seems like too many people have figured it out, usually no one accurately predicts what JK Rowling is going to do. I do agree though, it is a good possibility.

Paulus Maximus - Sep 12, 2005 5:14 pm (#844 of 2969)

Harry was exactly 15 months old when Voldemort tried to AK him.

It was exactly 10 years later that Quirrell let the troll into the dungeon. And it was about 11 years later that Ginny started writing to Tom.

Hogs Head - Sep 12, 2005 7:02 pm (#845 of 2969)
Edited Sep 12, 2005 8:04 pm

11 months later that Ginny started writing, I think you mean, but thanks for the calculations. By the time I get home to where my books stay, I'm too tired to look it all up.

And I take it that means that Harry was 12 when Ginny started writing to the diary, and that this was 11 years (less one month) after Voldy gave himself the old boomerang AK. So, for 11 years or more, the diary and its embedded spirit fragment / Horcrux didn't know that anything had happened to its author / creator.

Potter Ace - Sep 13, 2005 5:00 am (#846 of 2969)

So was the fact that he had already created many Horcruxes is the reason that he wasn't destroyed (like everyone else, except Harry)?

Now that the whole Horcrux thing has been brought to light, it brings many questions to light.

Perhaps the body & soul that preformed AK on baby Harry were both destroyed by the backfired curse, and the soul in the nearest (geographically) or the newest (most recently made) is released from it's shell, as it were to begin it search for a new body.

Has JKR ever explain how a soul contained within a Horcrux would be restored?

Paulus Maximus - Sep 13, 2005 6:36 am (#847 of 2969)
Edited Sep 13, 2005 7:40 am

Sorry... 11 years after Voldemort tried to AK Harry... 11 months after Quirrell let the troll in...

Weird how that works, isn't it?

Perhaps the body & soul that preformed AK on baby Harry were both destroyed by the backfired curse, and the soul in the nearest (geographically) or the newest (most recently made) is released from it's shell, as it were to begin it search for a new body.

That's not how Horcruxes work. Dumbledore (and JKR) already explained that as long as part of one's soul is contained in a Horcrux, the part of the same soul that inhabits a body can't be destroyed.

So, the fragment of soul that was in Voldemort's body when he tried to kill Harry was never dispatched, and cannot be until the Horcruxes are destroyed.

Hogs Head - Sep 13, 2005 6:38 am (#848 of 2969)

Potter Ace: My read of JKR's version of the Horcrux legend, coupled with some of the more consistent folk tales recited by Troels and others on this thread, is that the person is protected from death because the soul or a part of it is away from the body and hence away from the harm. To make the person vulnerable, the extraneous Horcrux has to be destroyed first. But the extraneous Horcrux soul piece is not like a videogame extra life that has to be found, consumed or used up to do its "job."

At least Voldy seems to have thought that the multiplicity of Horcruxes gave him extra protection -- whether that was so or not remains to be seen in Book 7. At least the numerosity makes it more difficult for Our Heroes to find and destroy them all.

And Voldy seems to attach significance to the number 7, and again whether he is correct or simply being superstitious remains to be seen. I do think we are supposed to get the image that the creation of each of the 6 extraneous soul fragments / Horcruxes further weakened Voldy and somehow reduces the quality, if not the quantum, of the soul remaining within him. He looks less human as time goes by.

Somewhere in the Books -- I have no daytime access to the text -- I think JKR explains (through Dumbledore? or was it Hagrid? Maybe Quirrell or Fake Moody or a combo of all of these) that Voldy's body was totally destroyed but that a bare thread of the soul fragment that had remained in his body survived as a mist. (Consistent with the scene at the end of Movie 1 after Quirrell crumbles, although that per se did not appear in Book 1.)

I do not think we are supposed to regard that then disembodied, original Voldy soul fragment as seeking out a Horcrux fragment to consume it and hence restore itself. The Diary Tom Horcrux in CoS (Book 2) would have made an independent creature it seems -- something like a clone made from the DNA of the original. (Old Voldy vs. New Voldy might have made a great side story, but alas!) Nor are any of the Horcruxes used in the scene at the end of GoF (Book 4) to re-embody Voldy.

The only peek we've had about a Horcrux being used in a restorative sense is that scene in CoS (Book 2) where Diary Tom tries to come back to life, so we suppose it could be done -- but whether that was a feature unique to the combination of a Horcrux with the enchanted, thinking diary or whether other Horcruxes can be used in the same way, we don't know (yet).

At least that's my read. For now.

Verbina - Sep 13, 2005 7:32 am (#849 of 2969)

Someone (sorry can't remember who right now) once said that if the locket at Grimmauld place was decorated with the S for Slytherin, surely someone would have noticed. It suddenly occurred to me that the Blacks were a very "devout" Slytherin family. So to have things with a snake like S on them was not unusual for them. Just something to toss in there.

Soul Search - Sep 13, 2005 8:57 am (#850 of 2969)

Verbina -- You are right. Even the handle on the front door was a snake.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Horcruxes

Horcruxes

Horcruxes (18 Jul 2005 to 11 Dec 2006) - Index I

Horcruxes (11 Dec 2006 to 8 Aug 2009) - Index II

Horcruxes (18 Jul 2005 to 11 Dec 2006) - posts #1 to #50

Horcruxes (18 Jul 2005 to 11 Dec 2006) - posts #51 to #100

Horcruxes (18 Jul 2005 to 11 Dec 2006) - posts #101 to #150

Horcruxes (18 Jul 2005 to 11 Dec 2006) - posts #151 to #200

Horcruxes (18 Jul 2005 to 11 Dec 2006) - posts #201 to #250

Horcruxes (18 Jul 2005 to 11 Dec 2006) - posts #251 to #300

Horcruxes (18 Jul 2005 to 11 Dec 2006) - posts #301 to #350

Horcruxes (18 Jul 2005 to 11 Dec 2006) - posts #351 to #400

Horcruxes (18 Jul 2005 to 11 Dec 2006) - posts #400 to #450

Horcruxes (18 Jul 2005 to 11 Dec 2006) - posts #451 to #500

Horcruxes (18 Jul 2005 to 11 Dec 2006) - posts #501 to #550

Horcruxes (18 Jul 2005 to 11 Dec 2006) - posts #551 to #600

Horcruxes (18 Jul 2005 to 11 Dec 2006) - posts #600 to #650

Horcruxes (18 Jul 2005 to 11 Dec 2006) - posts #651 to #690

Horcruxes (18 Jul 2005 to 11 Dec 2006) - posts #691 to #720

Horcruxes (18 Jul 2005 to 11 Dec 2006) - posts #721 to #770

Horcruxes (18 Jul 2005 to 11 Dec 2006) - posts #771 to #800

Horcruxes (18 Jul 2005 to 11 Dec 2006) - posts #801 to #850