6 of the horcruxes are pretty much self explaitory. There was obviously
1. Riddles diary
2. Marvalo's ring
3. Slytherin's locket
4. Hufflepuffs Cup
5. Ravenclaws Diadem
6. Nagini

But previously DD said that LV's 7th piece of his soul was still in himself. However it transpired that Harry himself was a horcrux. Therefore does that mean that LV didn't have any soul left at all or was his soul split into 8. Im just slightly confused

When Voldemort went to kill Harry, the addition of two fresh murders and the attempted murder of a child was too much for the soul to handle, and it went unstable, breaking away from Voldemort when his body was destroyed, and latched onto Harry.

This means, as I had predicted and debated for the last year, that Voldemort did make 6 horcruxes, the 7th being within himself, but also accidentally and not to his knowledge made Harry into a Horcrux. I am very pleased that this was the case.

Exactly, Tom. Although I was always on the fence about the harry is a horcrux theory, the way it was done was very good. At any rate, to answer your question:

Many, many people said "7 horcruxes" throughout the past 2 years. In fact, the thread we had made to discuss them was titled "what are the 7 horcruxes?" However, the truth is that there was always only 6. Voldemort himself was the 7th piece of soul, but that doesn't make him a horcrux.

The entire reason behind having 6 horcruxes was mostly supersticious. Voldemort thought that it would magically reinforce them if there were 7. It's not nessessarily true, of course, but that was his thinking. Think of Tom Riddle as being an obbessive personality. He is obsessed with death, and everything he does is first and foremost gonig to reinforce his invincibility and imortality.

There was never a limit to 7 pieces of soul or anything like that. Voldemort simply wanted 7 specifically for the mystic nature of it and for the potential for reinforcement from "the most magically powerful number." When he killed harry, he split his soul into 7 pieces without realizing it. Remember that, at that point, he only had 5 horcruxes. So, when he killed harry, he made a 6th horcrux. Nagini was really, from a cronological perspective, the 7th horcrux. When he made nagini a horcrux, he split his soul into 8 pieces without meaning to.

-Fish

Well put Fish.

However, when LV tried to kill Harry in the forest with AK and he survived again (yay), do you not think that LV realised that he must of made Harry into a horcrux, and had just therefore destroyed part of himself.

And, how was Harry made into a horcrux? Surely there had to be a spell to do it? LV would not have put the spell on Harry before he died, and was incapible of doing so after, therefore how was it done? And how can something/someone that has a whole and complete soul have room to accomodate another piece of soul. It's like trying to fit five eggs into a egg box that has only been made to house four.

With the destroying of LV soul that was in Harry, is Harry still talking to snakes and such?

So there were seven horcruxes, each containing a piece of soul, and there was a piece that was always in LV. The soul was split into 8ths.


If you go back to the main HPDH tread, I started a thread that has some stuff thats very loosly related.

Hmm that's kind of a trick question. I was never really the deep thinking examiner of the books, but at the end of the book his scar was no more. His scar was the connection from Harry to Voldemort and vise versa. Wouldn't you think that his abilities, that he gained from Voldemort, be gone, now that the link is servered and gone? It didn't specifically say....but you have to remember this. We found out Harry is a decendant of Salazar Slytherin. Harry is related to one of the "Three Brothers"....who Gaunt was decended from. Harry may not be the "Heir" of Slyterin but he IS a decendant.

I was confused when everything was being explained and pointed out, not until of course Harry sat down with Dumbledore and the wise man explained everything. So yeah I agree with Fish, Voldemort didn't realize that he was splitting his soul into 8ths when he made Nagini into a Horcux. He didn't realize he already had his final Horcux from Harry. Inside Harry. Which in understandable, since earlier in the book, it points out that Voldemort can't feel the piece of soul being destroyed so he wouldn't of known. (or was it in Book 6 and not 7....-.- god i suck at this)



I'll take a guess at this one. Dumbledore says the part of soul latched onto the the only living soul left in that collapsing building. Say the thories that I have read, where to make a Horcux, you have to do a spell, an enchantment, BEFORE commiting the murder? We never know how to make a Horcux, hermione never reads that out loud. Only how to DESTROY a horcux. I'm going to guess that you have to do SOMETHING before commiting the murder(s) before making the horcux. After the killing curse repelled off of Lily's Protection and to Voldemort it says that, the soul was blasted apart from the whole and latched onto Harry. I don't think this explains anything at all, but I said before I suck at this...

I don't think Harry has his abilities anymore, but, he does still belong to the Salazar Slytherin Bloodline.

I thought somewhere along the way in the build up to the release JK said Harry was definatly NOT a horcrux, but personally i take this as meaning he was, although voldemort didnt actually make him into one, he did accidently didnt he? so did JK lie to us or just twist the meaning to leave us in suspense?

As a former professional genealogist...Just because Harry and Gaunt share a common ancestor - one of the three brothers - doesn't mean they share all common ancestors. They could share Grandmothers on the father's sides but have entirely different grandmothers on their mother's sides.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought you could only be a descendant of someone if that someone is a direct ancestor, that is, a father, grandfather, great-grandfather (or -mother, of course), and so on. And not uncles, great-uncles etc. When there are two children that themselves have children, each start a new branch of descendants.

So, assuming that Salazar Slytherin obtained the ring with the Peverell family crest through direct inheritance and not by some other means, he is proven to be a direct descendent of one of the brothers.

Likewise, it can be taken for true that Harry is a direct descendent of a different Peverell -- the brother who had the Cloak.

Therefore, Harry could never be a descendant of Salazar Slytherin, or be Slytherin's Heir. Slytherin belonged to a different branch of the Peverell family tree.

I am answering questions posed by Tenkin's Smile. I had written as the thread was being closed, so I do not want it to go to waste.




Yes and Yes.



To understand this logic, you must understand the idealogy of "for the greater good". Imagine having the power to save many many lives by giving up one life. It's similar to this dillemma:

Imagine Dumbledore is standing on a cliff.. on one side is Harry, dangling over the edge... and on the other side is the rest of the Wizarding Community. What would you do? Dumbledore had a choice and he knew that Harry would have to die to save the rest of the people from Voldemort. However, something happened that Dumbledore was grateful for.. Voldemort used Harry's blood.. and this leads us into your next part of your post.




With the Blood Situation now know to Dumbledore, Dumbledore is afraid that he may be wrong. He wants Harry to live, but he also wants Voldemort to die. So he sets it up that Harry can have the Hallows so he can master Death and live. Dumbledore didnt want Harry to die.

Harry isn't a horcrux, anymore so than LV was a horcrux. The horcrux is the opposite of a human being. And Harry, obviously, is a human being.

Was anyone else bothered by the idea of the Ravenclaw diadem? The existence of the Ravenclaw diadem was apparently common knowledge among Ravenclaw students and Professors, and the Gray Lady even comments that "You are hardly the first student to covet the diadem" and that "Generations of students have badgered me."

Yet Dumbledore never thought to ask Flitwick he he was aware of any Ravenclaw artifacts? He never thought to ask the Gray Lady where it was located, even though generations of students had, and Tom Riddle was a student himself? Yeah, maybe he wouldn't know where Riddle hid it, but at least he could save Harry some time by saying what it was.

I also can't believe that Harry's eyes didn't light up the moment that Luna first mentioned the diadem. What exactly was he doing all these months?

I have to agree with you there. Although not when Luna mentioned it, but when they went to her house and her father said that he was trying to recreat Rowena Ravenclaw's diadem. The moment i heard Ravenclaw i was like, oh harry ask, ask!! Or why didn't anything stir in EITHER of the Golden Trio's minds about Ravenclaw's anything!?!? They were looking for something of Ravenclaw's...i think by that time. Why?!? Why didn't they have something stir at the very mention of the name. I gasped when I heard the name and thought something was up. So..yeah...i kind of felt like Harry and them forgot what they had been looking for.

Harry can apparently remember that a ring he saw was descended from the Peverell's and that the etchings match the Peverell's symbol from over a year ago, but apparently doesn't notice the fact that the Lovegood's are working on a diadem of Ravenclaw when it's explicitly mentioned to him. Ugh!!!

Why did Voldemort's Avada Kedavra send himself and Harry into the ghostly King's Cross station?

It seems to me that the Elder Wand cannot be turned against its owner (semi-proof: Voldemort's Cruciatus curse did nothing to Harry but make him flop around, the last AK curse meant for Harry rebounded on Voldemort). And when Voldy used AK on Harry in the forest, the Elder Wand apparently refused to harm Harry and instead destroyed the fragment of Voldy's soul that resided in Harry, making him no longer a Horcrux.

But why exactly would this result in Harry and Voldemort's souls being transferred into a spiritual limbo? Unless the AK really killed Harry, but since Voldemort carries Harry's blood in his veins, Voldemort's soul anchored Harry to the living world and Harry's departing soul just sort of dragged them both into the train station. But if this is true, and Harry really "died," then it contradicts the idea that the Elder Wand cannot harm its owner.

Thoughts? Maybe the Elder Wand can only lessen the damage of spells cast upon its owner, so that Crucio makes Harry flop and Avada Kedavra only halfway kills him?

Voldemort killed Harry Potter in the Forest. Harry has Voldemort's accidental Horcrux inside of him, and Voldemort had Harry's blood inside himself as well. They were linked amazingly, as Dumbledore explained.

Harry was also in possession of the Deathly Hallows at the time of the death. Thus he was the Master of Death truly, because he embraced Death.

Harry had to ways of surviving Death, the link to Voldemort's still alive body via the Blood, and the Deathly Hallows. This caused Harry, and the maimed soul piece within him, to reach a sort of Limbo between the World of the Dead and the World of the Living. This is, appropriately, portrayed as King's Cross... the gateway between the Muggle World and Harry's Magical World.

Here, as we know, the Horcrux inside of Harry dies (stays in the Limbo) and Harry talks to Dumbledore.

Harry returns and the Elder Wand does not harm him because he is the owner, but rather for some other reason, and I am afraid I left my book in the car, and cannot fully explain this right now. There is another reason that Harry could be killed by the Elder Wand, and then couldnt be hurt by it.

I think that you are right and that the curses were not as effective on Harry because he was the rightful owner of the Elder Wand, but Voldemort's Avada Kedavra curse is still pretty strong. It was enough to knock Harry out and kill the part of LV's soul that was inside of him. Also remember that Harry did not put up any fight, so he would have been hit with the full blown curse.

Read the very end of the chapter though. Harry asked Dumbledore: "Is this real? Or has this been happening inside my head?" DH, page 723 American edition.

Dumbledore replies: Of course it is happening inside our head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?" DH, page 723 American edition.

Harry was not really "dead" yet. He had a choice. He chose to go back and finish the war and vanquish Voldemort. Remember, Voldemort was still and extraordinary and powerful wizard, but the Elder Wand gave him no extra power. It was a combination of things, I feel, that brought Harry back.

Possession of the wand is an interesting thing, as we find out after Harry returns. Voldemort never truly possessed it and it recognized (somewhat lamely to me, but I get it. . .) that Harry was its real master. . .and therefore the curse only affected the Voldemort soul that was *sigh* inside Harry because that portion wasn't the wand's master and left the Harry soul whole and complete. Complicate this with Lily's blood protection that clung Harry to life while Voldemort yet lived and VOILA! He was able to return and finish the job.

I have to confess, as much as I wish that all those unanswered questions were answered, one thing that has really plagued me is how Voldemort died. I didn't exactly understand it. Did the Avada Kedavra backfire on him because he was not the true owner of the Elder Wand, or was it for some other reason? If someone could maybe help explain it, that would be much appreciated...

I'm not sure if I understand it completely, but I'll give it a shot.

Since the Horcruxes were destroyed, Voldemort was no longer immortal. When he tried to kill Harry, the Elder Wand didn't cooperate because it knew that Harry was its true master. Since the wand couldn't kill its own master, it had to send the curse somewhere. So it simply rebounded the curse upon its caster.

Why did Harry own the Elder Wand? I found this a little tricky to understand, and I'm still not sure if I have it right...Dumbledore and Snape planned Dumbledore's death; therefore, Snape was definitely not the Wand's new master - he had never technically conquered Dumbledore. As far as I can guess, Draco 'conquered' Dumbledore because he (against Dumbledore's will) cornered Dumbledore and had him completely at his mercy. Dumbledore couldn't defend himself against Draco, and Draco could easily have killed him right where he stood if he had had the guts. Just because Draco didn't actually perform the murder didn't stop the Elder Wand form passing into his possession. The Wand recognized Draco as its new owner from the moment Dumbledore was rendered helpless at the end of Draco's old wand.

Then Harry beat Draco - he did not need to commit an actual murder either. He simply bested Draco during battle and gained control of his wand. Even though the Elder Wand had never actually been in Draco's possession, it shifted its allegiance from Draco to Harry.

Does that make any sense to anyone? Please correct me if I made any wrong statements or assumptions.

I agree with the reason that you gave for why the spell rebounded.

As for the reason that Harry was the true owner of the wand is because Draco disarmed DD with Expeliarmus (spelling?) leaving DD open. He did not need to kill DD to conquer him. Draco had DD at his mercy which is the same thing as conquering him. Thats my thought at least.

I equated the king's cross station/white room with the limbo between life and death. The white light/mist is what many people with near-death experiences report seeing. This would go along with the Bible verses quoted on the graves of Harry's parents and Dumbledore's mother and sister. DD's treasure is in the afterlife; Harry's parents remind him that the last enemy a believer has to conquer is death-- and that enemy has already been conquered by the King on the Cross. JKR has said that she is a believer and that her faith would have made the ending of the series predictable. I think a little deeper reading makes these ideas evident.

I am not quite sure if this is the place to pose this question, but here it goes anyways...

What was the significance of the blood connection between Harry and Voldemort? Did this connection weaken Voldemort? Or did it protect Harry? I know there is probably an obvious answer to this, but I didn't quite see how having the same blood would effect both of them.

Sorry about this question, I just needed clarification on this subject because it somewhat confused me when reading through the book.

I was, and still am, confused by the newly introduced Elder Wand. As far as what happened and to why Harry was talking to Dumbledore in King's Crossing and why there was some hideous creature nearby...

I think it's crucial to remember that HARRY CHOSE TO GO BACK. Voldemort's curse had to kill someone/something and it was up to Harry whether it would be the part of LV's soul trapped inside him (the creature decscribed similar to the thing on the back of Quirrell's turban in book 1) or his own life.

"I think that if you decided not to go back, you would be able to...let's say..board a train."
(i.e. Harry would die) OR
"..if you choose to return, there is a chance that he may be finished for good..."
(i.e. you'll live and have a real opportunity to defeat him)

Harry himself decided who was gonna die from the curse Voldemort cast in the forest and he obviously chose right!

Continuing the thread about "child" thing:



The child-thing is basically a newborn baby less than a minute after birth. Whether its appearance at "Kings' Cross" was the horcrux fragment or all of Voldys' soul; the implication is that Voldy's punishment is not death, but rather birth, that he can never come out of. Birth and death both occur at the nexus between the worlds of the living and the dead ("Kings Cross", as in "crossing"); as such, Voldys' soul will serve out its punishment at "Kings Cross".

The cruciatus curse( crucio) is derived from the Latin crucius ("cross"), referring to the "Kings Cross" above, necessarily as birth; the effect of the cruciatus curse is to force the victim to relive his/her own birth experience. What this means is that Tom Riddles' soul is condemned to spend the rest of eternity under the cruciatus curse.

First of all, I believe the Chapter said the thing was a small child.. not a newborn baby. It said it was 'maimed' and the skin was wrong. This is the symbolism of the destroyed soul that Voldemort had.. and I believe the raw skin implies that its skin was burned whilst being inside Harry's love ridden body.

I do not think it has anything to do with Birth.



No the Cruciatus Curse is derived directly from the latin word Cruciatus.. which is "Torture", the actual spell Crucio is also directly derived from Latin meaning 'To Torture'. The word for Cross is a different word all together therefore I stand by my opinion that the whole thing has nothing to do with birth or Voldemort's soul being subject to the Cruciatus Curse for eternity.

I have several problems with Harry being a Horcrux. Even after Harry was called a Horcrux in DH.

First, a murder is an essential element in the creation of a Horcrux. We are told that you have to kill for pleasure in order to free up the necessary evil energy. The murder of Harry's mother and father could have qualified if Voldemort had taken his time over it, but his aim was to murder Harry. He undoubtedly took pleasure in taking their lives, but James and Lily were just in the way. I doubt that Voldemort harnessed the energy of their killing, or even spared a thought of that possibility. His mind, his pleasure, was focused on the baby. And that murder failed.
So, there was no murder at Godric's Hollow fit to empower a Horcrux spell.

Next, the logical sequence of making a Horcrux seems to be (-a-) to have an object ready, (-b-) to do murder and (-c-) to use a spell to anchor the torn fragment of your soul in the object. Did Voldemort have an object with him? He seems to have run out of worthy containers, he was still looking for a Gryffindor heirloom to make the sixth. Anyway, is there a need to have the object immediately at hand? Do ripped soul fragments stay around to be captured later? Hmm.

Third, Voldemort's Killing Curse rebounded and rendered him incapable of doing anything afterwards. His body had died. His soul would have moved on if he had not made a Horcrux (and he had made at least five). He didn't have the presence to make a Horcrux out of Harry.

Dumbledore was wrong to call Harry a Horcrux, but otherwise his explanation of the events at Godric's Hollow makes perfect sense. Voldemort had split his soul in so many fragments killing and murdering, that his soul was unstable -- so damaged that it was falling apart. Even if he made only five Horcruxes there had been much more than five killings just for pleasure -- perhaps his soul was rent in a much greater number of pieces, with only the most special ones anchored -- so it is very well possible that his soul was so unstable that another piece was torn free by the intended murder of Harry and that somehow, through the interaction of Lily's protective magic and Voldemort's killing of himself, it lodged itself in Harry's scar.

This explains neatly how Harry could have some of Voldemort's powers and why the scar was so painful. It doesn't explain why Harry was receptive to Voldemort's present emotions, experiences and thoughts, though. Separate soul pieces are unconnected to the remainder that resides in the living body (or resurrected body, or the "less than nothing" thing that Voldemort was when his first body was killed). Voldemort could not "feel" his Horcruxes, he had to check on them physically to make sure that they were still safe. The diary-Riddle did not know anything about Voldemort's present state or until after he learned about it (and Harry) from Ginny.

Harry's connection just has to be accepted as fact. It's just one of those things in the canon that needs a large dollop of assumption.

Umm yes Harry was a Horcrux. It's in the books. I'm not sure where you got "horcruxes are the opposite of human beings" from... it was made clear to us that living things can be Horcruxes.. and we were shown this in HPDH.. Harry was a Horcrux.





Wrong. Any murder can provide the necessary tear in the soul that is needed for the Horcrux. Yes, one may specify the tear with a specific murder, but it isnt necessary.



This has nothing to do with logical sequence. Voldemort's soul could not handle the damage he was doing to it and therefore was unstable. The rebounded curse tipped the scales of unbalance and sent part of Voldemort's soul into Harry via the link they shared provided by the failed Avada Kedavra.

Yes, soul fragments do stay around. One can murder someone at one point in time and create a horcrux from the tear of that murder years later. As long as there was no extreme remorse to heal the soul, you can always make a Horcrux after a murder.. no matter how long.



It is explained above in my post as well as in the book. There was no purposeful making of a Horcrux out of Harry do Voldemort would need no kind of presence to complete the act.



Dumbledore was not wrong at all. Harry was a Horcrux. There is no denying it. No matter how the soul got into Harry (it is explained clearly in DH) Harry is a Horcrux. He is an anchor for Lord Voldemort's soul and therefore is, by definition, a Horcrux.

Im sorry to say, whether you have problems with Harry being a Horcrux or not, it is now canon. Harry was a Horcrux.

You need to eat some more mushrooms.



Cruciatus does mean torture, but it is nevertheless still derived from [crux] cruicis; hence the most famous form of torture in ancient Rome; crucio => crucify => cross is a better way to link them. However, "cross" meaning a nexus or transition is a different word in Latin, so the word association doesnt exist in Latin as it does in English. In either case, a continuous birth could not be anything but torture.



Thats because "newborn baby" would have implied a rebirth rather than a continuous birth, which is aptly represented as a small child whose skin has the raw appearance resembling that of a baby immediately after it comes out.

i think it is also fair to point out that harry as a whole wasn't the horcrux, it was actually the scar left on his forehead that was the horcrux... when they were destroying the locket form RAB, or rather when harry was diving for the sword the locket became angered and tried to stop him, the actual horcrux is what felt pain and anguish, so when voldemort was angered it was not harry going into pain from head to toe... but it was the scar on his forehead that "seared with pain".

errmm excuse me?



No, Cross or "cruicis", is derived from Cruciatus. The term torture would have been used far before the implementation of the Cross to 'crucify'. Crucification is but ONE method of Torture, therefore Cross is the deritive of Crucio or Cruciatus rather than the other way around.

I still do not think its a symbolism for birth.



Perhaps you have never seen a birth, but the baby's skin is not raw when it comes out. Its rather pale, blue sometimes, and covered in amniotic fluid. The small child, not a baby, in the Chapter called King's Cross had raw skin. This implies that it was in a harsh environment.. raw skin comes from irritation, burns, etc... in short, it's skin is raw from being inside Harry's love filled body. It was a physical representation of the soul of Voldemort's in Harry's body... in its maimed, diminished state.

I think the lines of connection between crucio, cross, and birth are extremely loose and I simply do not think that is the case.

The reference to King's Cross was the great room they were in.. it was a trainstation.. with the glass ceilings of King's Cross. It was a representation of the place Harry was stuck at.. between life and death... just as the train station was the place between the Muggle World and the Magical World.

Ermmm Harry, as a whole, was the Horcrux. Dumbledore explains this in the King's Cross Chapter and no where does it say that it was only the scar. In fact, it specifically says where the soul attached to:



You see.. Voldemort's soul was not only attached to the scar but rather Harry's soul. Since the soul makes you.. you.. then it is simple to say that Harry, as a whole, was a Horcrux. The scar was merely point that the soul entered Harry's body.. the place where the Avada Kedavra touched him...

The part about Horcruxes being the opposite of a human being is on page 104 of the US version in the chapter "The Ghoul in Pajamas". The soul bit is dependent on the Horcrux for survival, while the soul in the body is not - like Hermione said, if you kill someone, the soul survives.
It makes sense that the "thing" in King's Cross Station was there with Harry. Since it was in a human body, it survived the body's death. The bit that was in Nagini probably survived too.
The thing that makes me still wonder is DD's insinuation in HBP that LV went to the Potter's intending to make the 6th Horcrux. Yet by this time, as we know now from Deathly Hallows, he had already used up the magical items he had collected to make the Horcruxes. What what he planning on using, and is it still in the Potter house? Unless DD was wrong and LV actually intended to make Harry the 6th Horcrux?

So Voldemort really had 8 pieces of his soul, then?
I thought it would have still been 7, because it is the most powerful magical number. Not 7 horcruxes, just sevel pieces of his soul.
I don't think anyone saw that coming.

This confused me, too. You guys all say Voldemort made 6 Horcruxes, but he didn't, he made seven!

1. Riddles diary
2. Marvalo's ring
3. Slytherin's locket
4. Hufflepuffs Cup
5. Ravenclaws Diadem
6. Nagini
7. Harry

The eighth piece of soul was inside himself.


Am I missing something here? Cause that definately seems like 7 Horcruxes to me...

I was confused by these things, too, and am a little more understanding now, but I hate the extremely lame way that Voldemort died. Also, am I right when I say the Crucius curse didn't harm Harry because the Elder Wand can't hurt it's owner? That doesn't make sense, though, cause the original owner of the elder wand, the brother, was killed by the Elder Wand. I don't understand that. I really wish J.K. had explained these things better...

Hello

Congradulations to you Albus and whoever else was debating with me for about a month about it a year ago for predicting that Harry was a Horcrux.

I was wrong of course.

But my old arguements are staying (which are comming back to me as quickly as any memory can):

1.There shouldn't be room in Harry's body to fit both souls
2.The love charm protecting Harry should still have protected him from any Voldamort-related things (because obviously Voldamort is a threat to Harry).

And something new:

It shouldnt be so easy to make a horcrux or else there would be hundreds of horcruxs lying around everywhere from both death eaters Voldamort and past dark wizards. If all you had to do was kill someone to rip your soul off and plant it somewhere then Voldamort would still be alive lurking somewhere like he did before he got a new body. And so would thousands of dark wizards before and after him.

I have a few things to say: I tried my best not to make anything of what I've just said up from my own immagination and change what was the real idea of everything about the Harry Potter books but know I have done that to some extent aswell. I would ask you all to try your best not to do that as well. And I'm sorry if I went over things already said, I was lazy to read the whole thing. Finally if I did make some of this stuff up from my own immagination and not take it from JKR, the true writter of the books, which would have been the best thing to do and the stuff I've said doesn't quite match what her idea of the things in the world of Harry Potter then I am sorry.

Hellooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Oh and one more thing:

I wish this was more explained then it was in the book.

One last thing:

The seventh book said that Horcruxes could posess people. So why not Harry? Why hadn't it?

In the previous arguement, you could say that the soul was no threat to Harry so the Love Charm did not work but now it is definitely a threat.

And if you try saying that it could posess what it was already inside, then here you go: Harry's body is the physical containner of the soul which is different from his mind.

But this goes back to the former Body is different from wherever the soul of somebody is and now adding in the mind.

Well have fun discussing this. As you might see I don't like debating this topic again.

Congradulations on getting it though.

Hello

Harry was a horcrux as the book says. I to wondered how the extra bit of soul fitted. Because Harry's body was not designed to hold one and a bit pieces of soul. What I said somewhere else, was that its like having five eggs, and trying to put them into an egg box that only has four holes for the eggs to sit in. Someone replied and said it was the fact that the size of the soul is not consistant to fill a set space or something. I'll see if I can find that quote. Here it is:



Here's a link that is related to the horcruxes and that's were I got the quote from. Click here. Because I have thought of a really strange thing that is quite important. The tread discussess the size and strenght and proportions of LV's soul.

Anyway, the fact that the love that Lily provided the ultimate protection for Harry agains LV, seems a bit strange. Maybe it only works in a physic attack, not when souls are involved. I'm not sure, because LV tried to possess Harry in HPOotP and couldn't because of the powerful emotion of Love. I don't think that it says here that it was Lily's love. I might be wrong.

But basically, there were 7 horcruxes, but eight bits of soul.

~ Potters Phoenix ~

hey ,

dartsith 19 hope this can help about the crucio curse and why it worked against harry

to the elder wand , harry wasn't his rightful owner but dracos wand was . so when the crucio happened , harry had dracos wand put away , so the elder wand didn't reconize harry as his new owner .
but later when they were fighting and harry had the wand at the ready , the elder wand reconised draco's wand and couldn't defeat his owners wand , so in this moment , the wand sees harry as his new rightful owner .
that's what I think

the only thing that I don't get is in the end , were harry said , if I don't use the wand , the magic of it will die with me .
but then i think if harry ever lose his wand in a fight , the elder wand would have to see the guy who won of harry as his new owner so the magic of it wouldn't die with him

You are exactly right. Harry is basically hoping that no one ever disarms/defeats him in a duel and the power of the Elder Wand will die with him. Basically, Harry is assuming that Dark Wizards are never going to be around for the rest of his life. Who knows, maybe he also knows that if he ever really needs the wand, he can always return to where he has left it (back in Dumbledore's tomb) so he can use it.

I am willing to guess, however, that Harry is just thinking/hoping that since Voldemort has been defeated, no one is really going to mess with him anymore.

voldemort made 6 horcruxes knowingly

1.Nagini
2. the diary
3. ravenclaws diadem
4. the hufflepuff cup
5. the ring
6. slytherins locket

while harry was a horcrux voldemort did not know that so while voldemort had split his soul into 8 pieces (the other two besides the list being in himself and harry) he only believe that he had split them into 7

Sorry to irk several of you but it is not canon that Harry was a horocrux. I still would say he wasn't one. You had to say a spell to make a horocrux and if JKR was wanting it to be perfectly clear that Harry was a horocrux I am sure in this final book she would have informed us that Voldy had performed the spell to turn Harry into a horocrux.

It seems to me that Voldemort had his 7 horocrux's: Diary, Diadem, Cup, Locket, Nagini and the ring. Harry was an accident. His soul was blasted and latched itself onto the only living soul left in the collapsing building. That just means that a part of his soul latched onto Harry. That doesn't mean that part of his soul was a horocrux. Voldemort didn't even know it had happened and the age old discussion of "why would he try and kill Harry if Harry was a horocux" still holds true. He never would have been trying to kill Harry if Harry was one of his horocrux's. Since he was trying it holds true that he didn't know Harry was a horocrux. If he didn't know Harry was a horocrux then it's painfully obvious that he didn't perform the spell or finish whatever he needed to do to actually make a horocrux.

I think that Harry just ended up with a piece of his soul but was not actually a horocrux.

A couple thoughts:

• I figured the creature in Kings Cross was the same as the one in Goblet of Fire in terms of description, etc. I should probably go back and check.
• There is some question in my mind whether the Voldemort in Kings Cross is the bit from Harry, or if it is the actual Voldemort. Voldemort is knocked unconscious when he 'kills' Harry; it is possible they are both in the same limbo area. It also makes sense in the context of Dumbledore's comment that it doesn't want to return there; if it was Harry's Voldemort piece, it wouldn't be returning anywhere. But this is still an open question in my mind.
• I like the fact that Harry was a Horcrux, and that Voldemort then split his soul 8 ways instead of 7. It explains a lot, especially about some of Voldemort's dumber moves. If he hadn't made Nagini, he probably couldn't have been defeated.

Hmmm, could you please explain that? I'm not sure I get it. Why would Voldemort's creation of the Nagini-Horcux determine whether or not he could be defeated.

Also, to give my opinion on a question asked earlier:

Why didn't the piece of Voldemort's soul in Harry possess him? I think it affected him (allowing him to speak Parseltongue, allowing him access to Voldemort's thoughts etc.), but did not actually possess him because Voldemort did not make it an actual Horcrux. He didn't utter the spell or intend for Harry to be a Horcrux. It was accidental, so it wasn't nearly as powerful as an intended Horcrux.

Helloooooo, you said that it shouldn't be so easy to create a Horcrux, because then every Dark wizard would be creating them right and left with every murder. I don't think this is accurate. The only reason Voldemort was able to accidentally create a Horcrux was because his soul was already so unstable. With each part of his sould that was ripped off, the remainder became more and more volatile, threatening to splinter apart with each new murder.

In the graveyard in GoF, Voldemort says, "I, who have gone further than anybody along that path that leads to immortality." I take this to mean that no wizard, no matter how Dark, has ever attempted to split his soul into more than two parts. A soul split in two wouldn't be nearly as unstable as an eight-part soul. So no one else was in danger of having their soul randomly break apart and lodge into another human.

I dont know if this is the place to pose the question, but did Harry's blood protection die at 17? The reason I ask this question is Dumbledore said Harry's protection was kept ALIVE in Voldemort. So, I was wondering if this protection died in Harry and if not, why wasn't it enough that Harry had to keep him alive? Why did Voldemort have to have it too for Harry to stay alive? I guess that is really about 3 questions, and I apologize if this has been discussed and I missed it. Thanks

This is going back a bit, but I have to agree with Bumblebee. Harry was a descendant of the 3rd brother, while Salazar Slitherin (and subsequently Voldemort), were descended from the 2nd. While Harry is distantly related, he is by no means a descendant of Slitherin.

On the point of Harry's death. I agree with Albus, although I had never considered that before. He was in possession of all 3 Hallows when he was cursed, so he would have been the Master of Death. This would be why he went to the King's Cross purgatory. He had the option to choose whether to remain dead, or return to the living.

The death, however was a real one. If it wasn't then he wouldn't have been able to get any answers out of Dumbledore. If it was all a figment of his imagination, then Dumbledore would have only been offering platitudes and extolling Harry's thoughts on the subject. The fact that Dumbledore was offing insight into his own past, proves that the death was real.

This is such an interesting thread - I want to explore it more later. But there was some disbelief that THarry and Ron and Hermione were so slow to pick up on the Ravenclaw diadem, especially when the Lovegood's had made it a new project, and it was seemingly right in their face. The reason I think they did not was because it was the Lovegoods. Rowling set us all up to dismiss their ideas and projects because lets face it, who's ever heard of a Nargle? Its one of the best red herrings, I think. And the fact that Mr. Lovegood's creation resembles somethng out of Jim Henson's Muppet Creature Shop makes it all the more believable. Anyway, I'd like to come back when I have more time and read all the great theories everyone's posted. This is great fun!

The Blood Protection (BP) prevented Voldemort from hurting Harry (and thus Quirrell could not touch him in the first book). When Voldemort came back to life in GOF, by taking Harry's blood, he was able to touch Harry, something he could not do before. However, Harry's BP was now extended outside of himself; the only way Voldemort could've killed Harry was if he killed Harry and himself. In a way, Voldemort had become a pseudo-Horcrux for Harry.

i can probably explain that point the seventh horcrux is in harry's soul and when voldemort wanted to live again he used harry's blood so he used this part of his soul but it was still in harry's blood so the seventh horcrux was in two pieces in harry's and voldy's bodies

After Harry is hit by Voldemort's Killing curse he ends up at Kings Cross with Dumbledore and the creature. I know the creature was supposed to be part of Voldemort's soul right?What I don't get is why it was there crying and in the form of a baby. Does anyone else have ideas of what the baby was symbolic of. Does it have anything to do with these facts?
Voldemort had been in the form of a babyish creature in the fourth book before he took Harry's blood.
Harry was a baby when Voldemort's soul was lodged in him.
In this thread anyone can discuss their views and ideas on this subject.

I read the book preety thoroughly and unerstood preety much anything(after 2 or 3 times reading the same chapter...). The only thing i was puzzled with was the dark,small,skinny child at King's Cross Station that seemed to frighten Harry, but at the same time making him want to help. He also mentioned to Dumbledore 2 or 3 times wether they could help but he said no... What was that? ?