This thread is to discuss the real meaning behing 'The Deathly Hallows'. Now that we know that it is not a graveyard, nor does it have anything to do with Hallowe'en.

Did anyone else think that they were three sacred artefacts, the Elder Wand, an invisibility cloak and a stone, that would rival the hocruxes? Personally, this surprised me. I was definately a supporter of the Hallowe'en battle at Godric's Hollow. Who could have guessed that the 'Hallows' were anything to do with some kids' fairy tale about three brother called Peverell, who were the the first to 'own' the artefacts, or that Harry had one all along.

If Voldemort knew about the Elder wand, then why didn't he find out about the rest, particularly when the Peverell coat of arms appeared on the ring, that he made into one of his horcruxes?

And what about the fact they they were, in effect Dumbledores own path to immortality?

What about the link between Harry and Voldemort through the Peverell family line?


Post your thoughts here.

That actually surprised me. I wasn't expecting it to be items, I expected a place. Especially with everyone harping on about places and whatnot. I think it was cool to have them rival the Horcruxes. I kinda did think that there had to be a good side to immortality besides the Philosophers Stone, but I never imagined they'd be what they are.

The Invisibility cloak. Hmm. Brought to our attention form the start, everyone was asking why did DD have the Cloak. Some thought it was for sinister reasons (he wanted Lily and James dead) and others thought he was using it for good (lending it to someone who needed it). Turns out we were all wrong. Who would have thought that this cloak was so powerful? We know in PS/SS Ron exclaimed at how rare they were, didn't really catch on to how rare it was.

The wand. Wands are an essential for Wizarding folk. So to have this as one of the Hallows is lame in my opinion. But considering it had to be a powerful object I suppose a Wand was the only thing to be improved on. I really wanted Harry to claim it but I think he might have been tempted to use all three and grant himself long life, and in essence, become like LV.

The Resurrection Stone. I would never have guessed it was the Ring. I always imagined the ring to be wide with the coat of arms stamped onto it, not onto the stone. It almost seems like the darkest object of the trio. It has the power to being the dead back, but not as real physical beings. So it effect it is the dark arts one of them.


Didn't we find out that LV did know about them? Or did I read that wrong? I thought that since he knew of the Wand he would know of the others. But being power hungry and looking for something that would defeat Harry as nothing yet could the Wand would have seemed like the only option. The Cloak would have done anything. The Stone wouldn't either. So if he did know about them he didn't care. We've heard all along that he thought he alone knew certain things, and that was his downfall.

For a minute there I thought that I had made that up....like you said, read it wrong. Anyway I checkd to where I thought it was....'King's Cross', page 577 Uk version,




So he may have known or he may not. But if he had known about each individual piece why would he not have known the significance of the three artefacts together? Or perhaps he decided that the way he was going to be immortal was the right direction.

The Invisibility Cloak. I never paid much attention to the rarity of Harry's cloak, especially after it was mentioned that Mad- Eye had one or was that 2? No-one ever said that there were different types of cloak, but I guess that would have given too much away.

The Wand.

I agree with you there. To me the Sword of Gryffindor was a better bet, or something like this.

The Resurrection Stone: I wouldn't have given the ring a second thought, had it not been for the fact that the name Peverell was mentioned. It had bothered me from HBP about who the Peverells were. And then when the name was said, I automatically did a run through in my head....coat of arms on the stone of the ring'...ahh! the stone! I didn't imagine however, that the Peverell coat of arms was the simple symbol that represented the Hallows.

Yah, I'm pretty sure there were two, because Moody comments in OOTP that whoever it was lost his spare. So the Order members were all sharing. I didn't picture this as being a Hallow either. I know the rarity of it, but it just didn't seem like something of significance other than the issue of it being with Dumbledore and not James Potter.



I recognised the name Peverell when I read it in DH, but like you- I read coat of arms and thought something along the lines of ours in the non-HP world with a helmet and an animal on top, a little leafy thing maybe along the side etc. Not a basic symbol.

I found the Hallows interesting, given Dumbledore's contact with Flamel, that they were meant to be his own method of immortality. This was obviously something that was a big deal for him, but what was wrong with the elixer of life? He was in contact with Flamel early stages of his education, but the Hallows still had to be thrown in there somewhere for whatever reason.

The Deathly Hollows totally wrong footed me. I thought it was a place, and the whole story would revolve around Harry hunting Horcruxes. I still am unsure if I like that or not

I must say, that while I theorized MANY things for the Hallows to be, I was not surprised in the slightest that they were objects involving Death, or the mastering thereof.

Click Here to see my post that discusses "Hallows" and the lore behind them. It was strikingly close to tale of which we learn about it DH.

I liked them. I liked the difference between Hallows and Horcruxes and I like that Dumbledore sought immortality in a much 'better' way then Voldemort.

The confirmation on what the Hallows were was known to me early, thanks to the New York Times, but again, I was not surprised really due to all the Legends and Lore I read regarding Hallows.

Well, I was completely off the mark. I would never in a million years guessed that the Hallows were actual artefacts, however I had figured that it would possess some kind of 'anti-Horcrux' power. So maybe I was on the right track...

When i read that Harry was related to the third peverell brother i remembered that Marvolo Gaunt told the ministry official of him being a descendant of the peverells and showing him the ring. This mad m think that if this s true then doesn't that make Harry distantly related to Voldemort though the Peverell brothers.

The Gaunts were descended after a long while from Cadmus Peverell whereas Harry and his family was descended from Ignotus Peverell. Therefore Harry and Voldemort share a common ancestor far back in history, therefore quite removing them from being 'related' in my opinion.

The dilution of their blood relation was present as the Cloak was described to pass from "father to son, mother to daughter". I would imagine the Ring was passed in the same way, though probably exclusively from Father to son, seeing as Pureblood Families would want atleast one son to carry on their name.

Yes, and remember what Sirius said in Book 5, which is that all pureblood families are related in some way because there are so few of them, and the lines that remain go back for centuries. Harry is probably related to the Blacks too, and therefore the Weasleys....

Just to let you know that I am going to merge this with the Dealthy HAllows thread. This is because The Peverell were the original family to hold the Hallows and I think everything can be said here.

i had no idea about the Hallows
i had no theories as all of them were flawed one way or another

but once they were introduced i sort of guessed the wand belonged to Dumbledore, by accident really i thought Elder and though Dumbldore and thought his wand had helped make him the most powerful wizard of his time.

when we learnt about the stone i thought he would somehow bring back Dumbledore or Sirius and they would help him, i was overjoyed to read it was not only Sirius but Lily, James and Lupin that appeared.

As soon as we learnt about the invisibilty cloak i knew it was Harry's it had to be didn't it.
Very pleased they helped save Harry though!

Once I heard Hermione read the story out, I was pretty sure that it was true and that these items were out there, especially since we already knew about the invincibility cloak, but I originally thougth that the Deathly Hallows held the key to destroying the other Horcruxes, I never saw what was coming about what they were really about.

Yep I too thought that the 'Deathly Hallows' was a place and not some objects.

But there is one thing that I noticed:

QUOTE

"We are talking about a cloak that really and truly renders the wearer completely invisible, and endures eternally, giving constant and impenentrable concealment, not matter what spells are cast at it."

If Harry's cloak really is the Cloak of Invisibilty that is one of the Deathly Hallows, then it is not a source of "impenetrable concealment". Moody's eye saw through it remember in GoF? So it is not entirely impenetrable and does not make the wearer completely invisbile as some can still see him. Does this mean that either Harry's cloak is not a Deathly Hallow or that there is no true Cloak of Invisibilty that makes the wearer completly invisible? I know that Moody's eye is probably rare, perhaps unique to him only, but still, you would think that this true Cloak of Invisiblity would be able to stop it.

I wasn't expecting the Deathly Hallows to be three different objects. The story made it all seem so childish, that even though I knew they HAD to exist since they were mentioned, they seemed to be long-lost.
The Wand was pretty cool!. The Rock was Evil, but it could be used for good purposes. The Cloak was a very good object; It didn't harm anyone, and it was helpful in very difficult circumstances.
I think Harry should have had all of them in the end, at least momentarily. Oh, and it was really sad that he dropped the ring and the 'spirits' (or whatever they were) went away form his sight.
I also think he should have kept the wand, but it is true that if he had kept the three of them, then he could have become somewhat devilish. Or maybe he could have resisted and used them for good purposes like DD.
It was really disturbing that LV took the wand out of DD tomb! Why did he break it open? He showed no respect for him... I didn't like that part, but it had to be done LV's way, so it was ok.

But I wasn't clear about something. What did he do with the Wand? Did he took it back to the woods, and left it there, destroyed, just like a piece of wood?

Harry put the wand back in Dumbledore's tomb. He left the ring in the forest, and I would imagine he is keeping the cloak to pass on to his son James.

This was the best part of the book overall. The idea of the Hallows, and Harry's obsession (so Harry!), and finally realizing what they were and that his obsession had led down the wrong path after Dobby's death. And the whole thing with LV not really caring about the Hallows is illustrated with the difference of opinion in the Trio when they all simultaneously pick a different object that they think is obviously the most important one. Ron wants power hence the wand, Harry wants to see his family hence the stone, and Hermione is cautious hence the cloak. LV doesn't like anyone so who would he want to bring back from the dead, he doesn't need an invisibility cloak - he likes his victims to know who's torturing them, so the only thing he really wanted was power.

This was the part of the book that was the most rewarding for me.

This may be off topic and if it is then u can delete it.

Harry says he remembers Marvolo saying he was a desendant of the peverelle family so effectivly LV would be too.

And then Harry says that he is a desendant of ignatious Peverell because of his cloak

so would this mean that Harry and Lord Voldemort are distantly related?

As i say i thiink this may be off topic

Flutterbye

I thought the Deathly Hallows back story with Death was very intresting. Somethign i don't any of us could have real have quessed. I like the sort of morales that the story bought.

Also they where really DD's death in the end. It was his mistake so he wanted the ressurection Stone so bad. It's so sad it couldn't have worked for him.

I thought the whole Elder wand was so mystifieying and yet complicating i had to go toehr things about that a couple of times to actually understand.

But know i do.

I orignally thought the Deathly Hallows was a place to.

I dont know how I felt about the Hallows....

On one hand, I thought that it was a cool story and I liked how it showed the differences in the trio based on which artifact they chose.

However, I was disappointed since they didn't really contribute to the outcome of the story. Plus, I doubted the fact that Voldemort had never actually heard of them, as I thought that he, like Harry, would be intriqued by the story. Also, a few things didn't make sense to me. How is it possible for the Elder Wand to be won by winning a duel with the holder if the Elder Wand makes the holder win every duel? And the description of the Invisibility Cloak Hallow didn't match up with Harry's Cloak, because, as mentioned above, it was detected by Mad-Eye's eye.

I dunno. I guess all in all, I think the story was entertaining, but I still don't see the point of them. The story seemed anticlimatic, especially since as soon as Harry found out about them, he already had 2/3 Hallows.

wow this book was so amazing i swear.

as far as the Hallows i never thought that it was these three sacred artefacts. i thought it was some dark scary place that hary and voldemort was gonna fight at. never did i think harry would own one of the possesions too

dumbledore. hmm... i always thought there was more to dumbledore that meet everyones eye. i just thought i didnt know enought about him or his past that he was hiding from something. i never knew he was on a flight to immortality like voldemort though. i guess thats why he kind of knew so much about voldemort all along.

Voldemort didnt know aboutthe other hallows becasue voldemort never cared about kids tales or anything like that. he only heard through legends about the elder wand, and of its power. this is all he cared for cause that all he seeks is power. not knowing of other powers, which or far greater. which is what dumbledore was explaining to harry.

voldemort and harry related though never thoguht it

Wow, Mrs. Rowling does it again. An amazing book, and the Deathly Hallows were a suprise to me as well.

Dumbledore said that Harry was the only one "worthy" of posessing all of the Hallows, yet Herry didnt even want to be tempted by them. To be Master of Death is to fear death, which is a thing Harry never wanted.

Still, I consider the Deathly Hallows a subplot of the book, something shiny to look at while Mrs. Rowling hits you on the back of the head. Again, as in Half Blood Prince, the title of the book is not really what the book is about. Or is it? Perhaps the plot lines dont lead to the Deathly Hallows, but there are certainly strong morals in the story of the Deathly Hallows.

In this book, we find that Dumbledore is NOT perfect, which, I'm sure, is the entire point of Dumbledore's past: to show that no matter the brilliance, power, kindness of any one person, NO ONE is perfect. Even he was tempted by the Deathly Hallows, to be the Master of Death.

Hallows versus Horcruxes - Dumbledore versus Voldemort. To me, the Deathly Hallows simply showed how very similar yet totally different the two most powerful wizards of all-time are. Both wanting to conquer death - yet in totally different ways.

I was so suprised to see that the Invisibility Cloak was a hallow. I knew they were rare, but never saw it as particularly special. After all, as Lauren0891 points out, Moody could see right through it. Yet, I guess this just shows that even the Hallows were not invinsible - The holder of the Elder Wand could be defeated and the Resurection Stone couldn't really bring the dead back to life. Just as in the story of the Three Brothers, the items were not all-powerful - all three brothers died in the end.

Also, did anyone else think at first that the Resurection Stone was the veil? After all, the veil was set on a stone dias. There definately seemed to be a link - a 'veil' was mentioned in the story of the Second Brother who held the Resurection Stone. Perhaps, the veil acts as a kind of 'anti-stone' - Taking away, while the stone brings back.

I think almost everyone was surprised that the Deathly Hallows were three objects, one of which Harry's had almost the entire series. I liked the story of the three brothers and the Hallows vs. Horcruxes thing. I love how Harry puts the wand back, its so like him to do that. I also liked how (like big_al said) each of the Hallows could be defeated. JKR is amazing!

am i the only one but the entire time i was trying to figure out what the reserection stone was i was thinking it was the veil that sirius fell through. i know it said that death picked up a stone but i thought that this could have changed as it was a childrens story

so am i the only one that thought this or is there someone out there in the same boat as me?

The Resurection Stone, I felt, was the most tempting, at least to those who feel. Voldemort never had any affection, and he never felt remorse, though Harry watned him that it was the only way to repair his soul. The wand is raw power, but the Stone is a torment and a repreive all at once.

Not to boast or anything but I knew the hallows were objects I just didn't know how many or what. Right after the title was annouced I looked up hallow to make sure and it said it was a holy artifact or something blessed so i was thinking anti-horcrux but then you guys were taking about places so i started kind of believing that and I never actually posted anything on it. Sorry guys.

marvolo only said that his ring had the peverell coat-of-arms on it.. and had been in their family for a long time.. but not that he was necessarily descended from the peverell bros...and even if he were..there are so few pureblood lines that a common ancestor that far back would be even more irrelevant than arthur weasleys' connection to the blacks...

Funnily enough days before book 7 was released I had been re reading chapters of HPB and when I checked my page marker, it was on this exact one!



No mention that they were descendants of any of the Peverells, then comes in Marvolo's next outburst about the heavy gold locket....



I too, made the assumption that The Gaunts were decsendants of the Peverells, I thought it was made clear in the dialoguge above, but now I read it again, it isn't there is it? Only that they are descendants of Slytherin. I guess it also depends on how far back the legend of the 3 brothers goes, if it's over a thousand years then maybe Slytherin is from the Peverell line, but less than that....maybe the Peverells descend from Salazar Slytherin??

ooo, i thought this was fantastic!

i took it that he was descended from the peverell's....if he was, then harry and slytherin's heir have a relation in common, centuries back :S

I was pleasantly surprised that the Hallows were item that were said to "master" death. I think that was a good addition to the story. In a way it made it so the story could go either way. I think the biggest twist about the Hallows was that the wand was really mastered by Harry. I didn't see that. I like the idea of the Hallows for Harry's sake. It gave him an edge he would need against a powerful wizard like Voldemort.

I liked the idea of the transfer of ownership between Dumbledore-Malfoy-Harry but - for virtually the first time in seven books - the explanation was ill-thought out and clumsily worded.

Another point people have missed is that not only are Harry and Voldemort distant cousins, but Harry is also a descendent of Salazar Slytherin himself. Tom Riddle never realised that he wasn't quite the last heir of Slytherin...

When I was reading, it shocked me...
I've never realized that the cloak had a secret meaning after all. Of course, then, Harry and Voldemort should have a blood line shared from the Peverells then, because both are descendants. But after all, you have to know that something must interfere to make Harry alive, and part of the force that made him return where the Hallows I believe.
An intriguing story I must say. And with a simple children tale, how much WE can learn... Because, as I said many times before, many of us grew side by side with Harry, didn't we?
So these Hallows were a good excuse t make this last book more vivid and interesting...

while i was reading the book the idea of the deathly hollows shocked me.. i never considered the meaning that the cloak had more of a meaning than being useful. until i looked through this forum i never quite got the connection that harry and voldemort are distant cousins i believe that point definitey could have been better worded. i liked how the deathly hallows were created to "master death" i think that gave the story a good unpredicted twist

I , as many people have already said, was also pleasantly surprised about the hallows. I liked how the three parts as a whole made someone master death. I have a question though.

He says that the cloak rendered the person TRULY INVISIBLE with no spell being able penetrate it. Now, as I recall that is proved wrong twice before in the series. Once when Mad Eye could see them under the cloak, and the other when Malfoy used Petrificus Totalus on harry in the sixth book. So, that is when I had some question, but I still think it is awesome that he got to keep the cloak.

The entire idea of the deathly hallows was just cool. With Harry being related, and with the snitch and just everything. I was glad to know that harry did not fall victim to the possible power as well.

My interpretation of the text is that Harry and Voldemort shared one ancestor- Ignotus Peverell. His descendents later married into the Gaunts and the Potters. The Gaunt's male line likely married with a Peverell, therefore Riddle died as the last heir of Slytherin.

The legend of the Deathly Hallows being told in wandlore from the viewpoint of those who sought the actual Hallows versus the Wizarding bedtime story, The Tale of the Three Brothers was a rather refreshing concept for me to read. Storytelling brings people together by enticing listeners' with their imaginations while granting bits of common sense and wisdom; both valuable things to have in DH's unstable atmosphere.

I was thinking.. the deathly hallows were the cloak, the stone and the wand. Dumbledore said he thought that the peverell brother's were actually the persons who made the hallows. Harry was the rightfull owner of the cloak, according to dumbledore, as it was past on from father to son. So he mustve be related to peverell. We also know that voldemort mustve been related to the peverells, as it is told in HBP, by one of the Gaunts.

So this proves that Harry and Voldemort actually, far far into the family tree, are family indeed. We know Voldemort was the rightfull owner of the stone, as it was formed into the ring, and Harry had the Cloak. This leaves the Elders Wand... now.. this is just a big leap of guessing, but both the dumbledores and peverells lived at the godric's hollow. Could it be, Dumbledore was a great great great great grand son of the 3rd peverell brother..

I doubt it, because Dumbledore moved to Godric's Hollow, while the Peverell brothers actually were born at the place. Remember, too, that the only brother to be buried at Godric's Hollow (that we see) is Ignatus Peverell. So, I sincerely doubt that Dumbledore is the last successor of the Peverell line.

And I just remembered, the owner of the Elder Wand was murdered shortly after owning the Wand. And the second brother went mad and committed suicide, so I doubt he had any offsprings... Oh My God...

If this is true, either the Gaunts are not part of the 3 Peverell brothers or...

Harry James Potter and Tom Marvolo Riddle are directly related...because the only one who could have had a family was the 3rd Brother...

.....

come to think of it.. you're right...

shocking



Mod Edit: Please remember that one liners and short posts are not allowed on the forums. You will recieving an Owl shortly. Thanks

I agree.
I realized that Harry and Voldemort were related, but I never realized that it could've been directly! You are definitely right about that!

Thank you!!!!!!!!!! *hugs TheShehanigan tightly* Someone kept telling me when Harry stated he was related to the Brothers, and he remembered the Gaunts were related to them too, i kept saying Harry and Voldy were "distantly" related....but thank you thank you! The story...the brothers they couldn't of had decendants if the deaths that happened in the story are true! Thank you so much!!!! Everyone kept making me think i was stupid!!!!!

We have to remember that the story might be different from the tale. The three Peverell brothers may have invented these three great things and then through the history, the tale emerged with different person names and with relation to "Death". The Elder Wand left a bloody trail, whereas the descendants of the first Peverell wouldn't have any claim of it. The resurrection stone and the cloak could be transfered generation to generation but not always from father to son. It can be to a daughter/nephew/niece, so the family name changed. Hence, at the end, the Gaunts and Potters inherited the two Hallows.

So if Harry is related to voldemort, and voldemort is a direct decendant of salazar slytherin, this means harry too is related to salazar slytherin...hmmm intresting when you put it into context, i wonder if JK Rowling realized all this when she was writing it all out. So HArry is related to Salazar slytherin and Voldemort who else is he related to now that we know he is related to those two?

Marvolo only said that the ring had the peverall coat of arms on it; and that it been in his family for a long time; and not that he was necessarily descended from the peverell bros. But in either case, there are so few pureblood lines that its impossible for Harry not to be related to Voldemort.

Hi there stepje

I have merged this thread with the one we already have a open discuss the relationship between LV/H through the Peverell line, that you can find here.

Before opening any new threads in future, could I ask that you use our search engine.

If you need any further assistance, please contact any Wizengamot or Head Auror

Thanks

Well, I too thought the same thing about Harry and LV being related when it came to the part about Harry being a descendant of the Peverell's. Then I remembered that DD only mentions that the cloak will work properly only to its true master from the family line. DD had the cloak but he said it wouldn't work properly for him because he was not its owner. That apparently you had to be in the family line to own the cloak and have it work properly for you.

The wand worked for whoever conquered it just like it states in wandlore so you didn't have to be a direct descendant.

However, the ring was not said to have to be a direct descendant or conqueror. So we don't know if SS was a descendent of Peverell or vice-versa (can't remember who would have been born first). Could SS have conquered or taken it from Peverell or descendent and then claimed it as his own? Or perhaps they are indeed related from obviously a very distant route. Like someone else stated all pure-bloods are related some way or another. With James being pureblood along with the Gaunts family line, I guess it could be possible.

I had honestly no idea what the Hallows were, but was inclined to say that they would be something to help Harry fight LV. Which was sort of right.

The Resurection Stone, The Elder Wand, and The Cloak was given to the three brothers as they asked for it. Why would Death have made/given them their wishes in these objects? Why not something else?

The fact that only the third brother survives, means that his is the only line in which blood relation can continue. I think that it is almost impossible without more info to trace whether Harry and LV and SS are related. Maybe JKR will provide more info later on. In the Encyclopedia maybe. Thats if she agrees.

~ Potters Phoenix ~

related yes. but harry isn't necessarily a descendant of slytherin if slytherin is actually a descendant of the perevell's. is it mentioned at all how old the perevell brothers were?


thats assuming they didn't have families before they received the DH. i would believe that cadmus (receiver of the resurrection stone) however did not, as his love died before they could marry. as for the other 2 brothers i believe they would have already had families for this reason. i don't believe that the hallows were gifts from death. thats merely a fairy tale. i would tend to believe that the three brothers created the objects themselves. which would suggest that they had knowledge and wisdom under their belts.

the hallows in real life are quite obviously not literally as powerful as the ones the the story. e.g. the cloak was supposed to hide it's owner from death itself! i highly doubt this as harry could still be stunned whilst under the cloak (HBP) and seen with moody's eye (GoF). the only difference between harry's cloak and other cloaks i can see is that it is indestructible. that is not necessarily a supernatural property for a wizard. and the wand may be powerful but not unbeatable. albus defeated grindelwald in a wizards duel. even more surprising is draco defeated albus! if it was unbeatable i would assume it would do something like what harry's wand did to voldermort.

upon learning the title to book 7 i looked up in the dictionary Hallows. one of the definitions was a holy or powerful relic. putting the two words together i figured it would be powerful relics which cause death. i was close...it still liked how JKR made it out tho...very good.

Come on, is that really so important? I mean, if we take for granted that the Gaunts were descendants of one Peverell brother, because they had the stone, does it really matter, which brother it was?

So Harry and Tom M. Riddle are "directly" related. IMHO, it dosen't makes much of a difference if it is by one Peverell brother (if the other two died before having an family) or by their parents. Be honest, what is one generation in, probably, a (few) hundred?

i think he might of known about all the hallows but his main interest was in the wand because it had great power and as i think dumbledore said who would voldemort want to bring back from the dead and he wouldnt need the cloak because he had enough dark magic to make himself invisible.