The Key to Harry's scar and the Symbol on the Spine of Book Seven

Pages : [1] 2

skalors1
May 14th, 2007, 11:31 pm
This post may be met with some dismay and open animosity. However, it has been a theory of mine since I started reading the first book (which I admit wasn’t until I was a freshman in college and that proves significant) and has been reinforced by almost every Harry Potter book since then (and the second Harry Potter movie but I will leave you folks to figure that out). Also, to my surprise, it has been something that no one has caught on to in all of this time despite the numerous hints that have been in the books. Or if they have, they have kept it quiet like I have done.

This theory may very well answer questions in regards to Harry’s eye color (as well as lily’s) their implied power, Harry’s scar, the symbol on the spine of Book 7 as well as prove that Dumbledore may be wrong about “power which the Dark Lord knows not.”

*Disclaimer: This is a theory. Though the information contained herein will be presented as fact. Also, researching the theory will take more legwork than a long internet search. It will require detailed knowledge of the subject matter and its corresponding theories. You will have to look at other sources regarding this topic. Also, I have never had an interest in the topic matters discussed. My knowledge is based on 4 years of college courses on the study of ancient writing, its origin and uses.

The shape of Harry’s scar is what tipped me off. It is more than a scar and more than a connection between Voldemort and Harry. It is an ancient rune.

However, to truly understand the symbol and its implications, you must first understand the lore behind it which is something I do not have the time to explain in great detail. I will briefly discuss it here, though.

Ancient runes have different origins. Many Runes are similar such as the Sigell (an anglo-saxon rune shaped like Harry’s scar also referred to as another name in HP:TOTP) “, is also almost an exact replica of a later version of an Elder Futhark rune named Sowilo and other runes. You now understand the enormous undertaking this requires; with so many similar forms of rune speak that have been modified since around 3,000 B.C until as recently as the 1939 Nazi regime whose cultist created a new alphabet, finding the correct key that contains the correct symbol can be very time consuming. I will give you a few hints and examples before we actually move this discussion forward.

One of the symbols on the spine of HP:TDH is inside what is known as a Bind Rune. This differs greatly from the wiccan rune scripts which have a specific order for different circumstances on runes placed in a specific order dependant on how many runes they desire to use for a specific spell. You will not find this symbol anywhere online (I don’t think) or in the conventional runic alphabet. This is because it was considered the secret key to the runic code. I am of course referring to the circle inside of the triangle. Therefore, I will tell you what it means. It stands for the Great Mother with her Divine Child, or what we refer to as the “Tree of Life.” Its literal meaning is “One of the.” Secondly, with runes, they can be twisted and reversed which changes the meaning of the runes and in way, their shape. You can research the different meanings more. Also, they can overlap which can make it difficult to determine the intent behind them because 2 different symbols, when combined with another symbol, may look exactly the same.

Now on to the content.

What does this mean for Harry’s scar? It could mean many things. The first being that the runic symbol was part of the Hocrux magic LV was performing. The scar remained because the magic was never finished leaving the evidence of either the true magic behind the Hocrux magic or leaving the evidence of the AK. The other theory, which I like because it makes Harry more powerful, was that it was the magic Lily placed on Harry by sacrificing herself for him which presented itself after the magic was evoked or that it denotes a seperate power he has.

Regardless of the second theory, I believe that the scar on Harry’s head more likely has to do with the killing curse or the Hocrux magic. This is based on the belief that I know what ancient rune alphabet is being used and what a specific symbol means when it is reversed (which makes it look like Harry’s scar).

*Note: I will not discuss the meaning of the symbol on the spine of the cover. However, be forewarned that the meaning of the symbol on the spine is not as important as are its implications.

These are outside of my original theory but it connects well, hence their addition.

If you support the Lily theory, other questions you should ask was whether or not Harry or Lily were born with Green Eyes. I say this because despite my next theory, the possibility that Lily and Harry had green eyes is because of an old and ancient magic placed upon the both of them.

My next theory is on the eye color. We know that green eyes in the wizarding world are rare, maybe even as rare as a parselmouth. Maybe green eye color denotes an ability to use Runic magic. Now we know that Dumbledore told us that his power was “love,” and it may be that the overwhelming presence of runes in these books may not connect to eye color at all but just to the certain things mentioned above, however, Dumbledore has been proven wrong in ignoring Harry about the attack on the castle. In your research, you will discover why this magic and its use may be extremely important.


Please watch for a few during your study of Runes. The first are the glaring and obvious references associated with symbols known to us and their names. The second is the subtle addition of the study of Ancient Runes for Hermione and names she has used (someone had to know them). The third is to pay attention to the uses of Rune Lore with divination. Finally, have fun and don’t beat yourselves up over this. I have 4 years of study on this topic and I had a rough time with the Rune on the spine. I was more excited when it confirmed other theories I have (which I certainly will not post here because they are spoilers). Sorry I waited so long to post this, but I figured you guys needed something *ahem* NEW to debate.

PadfootBlack16
May 14th, 2007, 11:42 pm
well...actually...kinda didnt understand to much...but what i did understand i liked...i would like it though, if you went into depper explanation on the simbol on the side of the UK cover!!

toonmili
May 14th, 2007, 11:50 pm
I don't think the colour of his eyes are important. Jk said it was the fact that he has Lily's eyes that is important.

But I just read in another tread that Lily could have been powerless at the time of her death. Now if I combine that theory with some of yours. It could be that she transfered her powerd to Harry or something like that, using rune magic.

Madeline
May 15th, 2007, 12:24 am
The shape of Harry’s scar is what tipped me off. It is more than a scar and more than a connection between Voldemort and Harry. It is an ancient rune.
But didn't JKR say in an interview that the actual shape of the scar wasn't the most significant thing about it? That the shape as well as it's location were so it would be easy for people to recognize and know that Harry was the boy who lived?

PunkRockGirli
May 15th, 2007, 12:41 am
Harry's scar is significant because it ties him archetypically and symbolically to a greater cause and physically shows the pain he has felt through it with his "unhealable wound". It is also symbolic for the early loss of innocence that Harry suffered by being introduced to death at such a young age.

skalors1
May 15th, 2007, 12:48 am
PunkRockGirl, everything in JK's books has symbolism as well as a deeper meaning. I think that you're right, but it doesn't hit on the core issue as was proven in books 5 and 6. There is more to his scar than we know even now.

DarkDaysAhead
May 15th, 2007, 1:01 am
PunkRockGirl, everything in JK's books has symbolism as well as a deeper meaning. I think that you're right, but it doesn't hit on the core issue as was proven in books 5 and 6. There is more to his scar than we know even now.

As Madeline pointed out, though, I don't think the shape of his scar is significant.

"I wanted him to be physically marked by what he has been through. It was an outward expression of what he has been through inside. I gave him a scar and in a prominent place so other people would recognize him. It is almost like being the chosen one, or the cursed one, in a sense. Someone tried to kill him; that's how he got it. I chose the lightning bolt because it was the most plausible shape for a distinctive scar. As you know, the scar has certain powers, and it gives Harry warnings. I can't say more than that, but there is more to say."

PunkRockGirli
May 15th, 2007, 1:07 am
PunkRockGirl, everything in JK's books has symbolism as well as a deeper meaning. I think that you're right, but it doesn't hit on the core issue as was proven in books 5 and 6. There is more to his scar than we know even now.

i was saying that in broader way because what I was a little worried about touching on with the scar is what that means. Normally someone with this "unhealable" wound scenario will die because it is thier one weakness. Harry's weakness is the connection that he has to Voldemort- as it is the same for voldemort. I think that in looking at this in that way Harry's scar is only going to be significant in some way to how he must defeat Voldemort or how he will be deafeated.

skalors1
May 15th, 2007, 1:11 am
I never heard that anywhere. I am reading through JK's interviews now to verify.

I am going to comment on a few points (I had to recollect my memory): The first is in regards to JK saying having lily's eyes is important. Here is a quote from JK during an interview with CBBC Newsground in 2000.

"Now, can I ask you: are there any special wizarding powers in your world that depend on the wizard using their eyes to do something? Bit like..."
"Why do you want to know this?"
"I just vaguely wondered."
"Why?"
"Well because everyone always goes on about how Harry's got Lily Potter's eyes."
"Aren't you smart? There is something, maybe, coming about that. I'm going to say no more, very clever."

As to Madeline saying that the shape of Harry's scar was not important, JK said in a world book online chat that "The shape is not the most significant thing about Harry's scar." Which, again, coincides with my theory and even my thoughts on the matter. The meaning is not necessarily as important as what it implies.

PunkRockGirl, actually, JK says in an interview that Harry's worst weakness is shown with the fact that he wears glasses. I always interpreted this as meaning that Harry cannot see clearly without assistance.

Bscorp
May 15th, 2007, 2:56 am
skalors 1 - I think this is a very interesting subject . I wish you would be a little more forthcoming with your ideas. You've read all about it, so why not just share what you know?

Folklore of the Runes branch off in several directions like a webwork underneath Rowling's work. She references them in many ways. There is the myth of Odin who is credited with the discovery of the Runes. He was the Hanged god" that inspired the "hanged man" card of Tarot. The god of poetry and war who could make the dead answer his questions. (I associate this myth with Snape-but it's open to interpretation). The legend of Odin prophesied that he was to be killed by Fenrir the Wolf.

Interesting to not that those who worshipped Odin also formed a sect under another name called the Irmin. Who 's followers were called the Hermiones (which IMO calls back to Hermione and Irma Pince.)

Then there's Harry's er- nickname "Roonil," which sound to me like "rune hill" and reminds me of the rune hills that poetry about Odin referred to.

Here’s what I found so far on the runes mentions above

Sowilo: (S: The sun.) Success, goals achieved, honor. The life-force, health. A time when power will be available to you for positive changes in your life, victory, health, and success. Contact between the higher self and the unconscious. Wholeness, power, elemental force, sword of flame, cleansing fire. Sowilo Merkstave (Sowilo cannot be reversed, but may lie in opposition): False goals, bad counsel, false success, gullibility, loss of goals. Destruction, retribution, justice, casting down of vanity. Wrath of god. (Link (http://www.sunnyway.com/runes/meanings.html))
If I'm correct in my reading- Sigell, is correlated with "Sigtyr" was another name for the god Odin.

I can see where some controversy might spark over the "Sigel" rune symbol as it was used by the Nazis as their symbol for victory. However, I think most people understand that the original meaning behind the symbol can be extracted from that history.

Whether or not any of this tells us anything about where the stories are going to go - i doubt it. Only because Rowling is a postmodern writer who takes symbols from a wide variety of sources and scrambles them to fit a new context.

it's interesting to think about anyway...:p

skalors1
May 15th, 2007, 3:08 am
Bscorp, I am glad that you did a little research. As I said earlier though, the meaning of these runes is not nearly as important than their existence and what it implies. I guess it is hard for me to discuss it further on the board because it very well may ruin a good book for a lot of people.

I will send you a PM and we can discuss it more if you'd like. It is something for others to look into, but I don't really want to disilluson any person or their ideas.

The real point is that the presence of them, especially on the spine of the final book, is extremely significant if you understood more about them.

Bscorp
May 15th, 2007, 3:34 am
Bscorp, I am glad that you did a little research. As I said earlier though, the meaning of these runes is not nearly as important than their existence and what it implies. I guess it is hard for me to discuss it further on the board because it very well may ruin a good book for a lot of people.
. It seems you think you have the key to it all hu? :eyebrows: Well you are in Divination

Well, If anything you could include your ideas in a Spoiler tag. But technically, I don't think you're able to spoil anything until you've actually read the book. I don't think your theories would be more or less spoiler-ish than any of the other theories I've read on this board and everywhere else. Until the day we've all read the book, we all may think we've figure it out but we don't know what's happening or where it will go exactly until July 21st. ;)

Frankie62446
May 15th, 2007, 3:34 am
skalors1, I confess I find myself frustrated with you. How are we supposed to debate anything if you give us nothing to go on (except a few names which can be defined in a thousand different ways), then tell us it's almost useless to try and figure it out?

Well, If anything you could include your ideas in a Spoiler tag. But technically, I don't think you're able to spoil anything until you've actually read the book. I don't think your theories would be more or less spoiler-ish than any of the other theories I've read on this board and everywhere else. Until the day we've all read the book, we all may think we've figure it out but we don't know what's happening or where it will go exactly until July 21st.

Agreed.

skalors1
May 15th, 2007, 3:37 am
Well, if no one cares, what do you want to know?

Btw Bscorp, Odin is credited as being the god of magick.

Frankie62446
May 15th, 2007, 3:40 am
Well, if no one cares, what do you want to know?

Mkk how about the meaning of the Rune on the cover? Great Mother with her Divine Child... I looked it up, but found nothing. Is there another name for it?

I found stuff on the Bind Runes, however. It looked mildly intersting, but I still don't see the connection.

EDIT: Just refrenced the canon, and came across something interesting... if not something to chuckle at. Hemione was stressing over two Runes she thought she got mixed up on her OWLs in OoTP. They were none other than Ehwaz and Eihwaz. Doing some research on Ehwaz, I found that:
The third rune of the third aett bears the reconstructed Common Germanic name Ehwaz. Later, its name became Aihws in Gothic (note how archaic Gothic is), and still later, Eh in Anglo-Saxon. If you remember that “k” in Indo-European changed to “h” in Germanic, it’s easy to see that Ehwaz is a close cognate to the Latin “equus,” meaning of course, “horse.”
Dan Radcliffe, anyone? :lol:
This reference goes on to say this about Ehwaz:
Magical and divinatory meanings for Ehwaz include horse, journey, process, faithfulness, trust, dependability, transformation, loyalty, dignity, vacations, orderly change, travel for fun, seeking, driving, and piloting. Ehwaz, the horse-rune, takes us on our spiritual journey of inner transformation. Just as Odin rides Sleipnir, this rune can lead us into the inner realms of our being. Inner insight and growth are the vehicles of inner change as we explore (and experience) the Mysteries of our religion. Other runes involved in this journey are Sowilo (evolution), Perthro (seeking), and inspiration (Ansuz). These set the stage for Ehwaz. Elhaz imparts the will toward transformation.
I'm starting to see a little connection between Ehwaz and Sowilo... Everything I've seen on Ehwaz, however, makes a clear distinction between Ehwaz, the horse rune, and Eihwaz, the Yew rune. Incidently, Voldemort's wand is made out of Yew.

EDIT, CONT.: Are we liking Ehwaz to Harry and Eihwaz to Voldemort? Because the opponent of Ehwaz doesn't seem to be Eihwaz, but Tiwaz (which would make more sense as it was used by the Nazi's).

Please stop me if I am WAY off the mark here.

skalors1
May 15th, 2007, 4:27 am
I did state my theory, but I guess I failed to hit any points at all. Let me first go on to say that I can't really give an answer to any questions about the meaning because while I may be able to identify the runes present in the rune bind, I am definately unable to intepret what reversals are present and their implications. Also, I have been stumped as to whether or not the line through the top are the following: is-i or isa, lagu or tyr. I bend towards lagu because if you study the symbol on the book closely it appears that the top left portion of the triangle is not complete and there is a minor gap there. However, the underlying theme for the rune bind on the spine of the cover involves life and the preservation of it.

As to my theory, well, you folks know the previous quotes that were posted on this thread, but I think one other quote from JK is EXTREMELY important. When asked the difference between charms and transfiguration, JKR responded "With a charm you add properties to something. With a transfiguration you change its nature completely; the molecular structure alters..." Another fact we need to remember is that Lily was extremely talented at charms.

Runes, in a magical sense, were meant to add magical properties to objects or items. In fact, one of Britains ancient hallows (or treasure, *they can sometimes be deadly*) was a the Dyrnwyn, gleddyf Rhydderch Hael (sp?) which had a rune of fire upon it. I don't think the properties matter in this instance.

Nonetheless, I think it is safe to say that the fact that Lily was an excellent charmer can possibly be attributed to an ability to use rune magic.

(Be patient, I am almost there)

The runes which can be most closely attributed to Harrys scar is the EIHWAZ or EOH rune which is a rune of protection and the SIGEL, SIGIL, SOWELU or SYGEL which is a rune of victory. Many rune alphabets attribute that there is no reverse to them, but there are some, especially english rune lore, which state that they can indeed be flipped to mean the opposite.

This can have a few implications for the last book. The first is that Harry, with some skill, can learn to use this rune lore to his advantage. It may be as simple a process as concentrating on a specific rune while casting a spell to imbue the spell with properties or concetrating on a person when casting a spell.

However, all evidence points to Lily placing that protection on Harry not being intentional. It doesn't mean that what she did still wasn't some sort of rune magic.

It also could have been part of the spell casting for Voldemorts Hocrux magic or it could be the underlying magic for the AK curse.

Nonetheless, if this is an ability that Harry posseses it will be a great aide to him.

We all know that Harry is going to learn something when he returns to Godrics Hallow. There is also a reason why Voldemort was insistent on letting Lily live. Could he have desired her abilities the same way he desired Slughorns? I think that he was asked to not harm lily, but that may not be the truth. He never had an intention to let James live. Her abilities may have been latent, but I think they were present and she was able to unknowingly use them. I think the real question we should be asking is if Nevilles mother was given the same options as Lily, and chose to die for Neville, would that protection have been placed on Neville as well?

Frankie, the symbol can most prominently be found in the Liber Mutus. It is the first symbol in a very long and complex explanation of Magic. It is the symbol where all other magical properties come from. In essence, it gives life.

Frankie,

To shed some more light on the subject for you, try to find references to the witches "tree of life."

Bscorp
May 15th, 2007, 4:44 am
Elhaz is the seventh Rune of the second aett (group of eight). Its name means "elk," in the European sense of the word. The European elk is essentially the same animal as the North American "moose." The North American elk (wapiti) is a part of the same species as the European red deer.

Just reading into this a bit- For one. Harry's Patronus might be a metaphor for this rune.


Elhaz has an alternative name, "Algiz," which means "protection," which is indeed one of the meanings of this Rune. The Gothic letter corresponding to Elhaz went by the name "Algis." Others include deer other than moose, hunting (what humans usually do to deer), hallowing (Elhaz is commonly used to ward/bless sacred space prior to a blot), anything regal (think of the dignity of a stag, or the fact that all the deer in England once belonged to the king), honor, and grandeur. (link (http://realmagick.com/articles/85/2185.html))

Frankie62446
May 15th, 2007, 4:45 am
This is very confusing! I'm having to look up definitions for stuff I'm looking up definitions for! I'm starting to see little links, though I'm not quite sure how to put them together. I have 0% experience with Runes.

Tiwaz seems to be an upward pointing arrow... it means "Warrior" and represents the god Tyr. help me out here? I don't see the connection of Tiwaz to anyone.

According to a cource Tiwaz is...
Honor, justice, leadership and authority. Analysis, rationality. Knowing where one's true strengths lie. Willingness to self-sacrifice. Victory and success in any competition or in legal matters. Tiwaz Reversed or Merkstave: One's energy and creative flow are blocked. Mental paralysis, over-analysis, over-sacrifice, injustice, imbalance. Strife, war, conflict, failure in competition. Dwindling passion, difficulties in communication, and possibly separation.

If I could see Tiwaz representing anyone, it's Hermione.

skalors1
May 15th, 2007, 4:57 am
Frankie, the rune you are referring to is also known as Sigel. If you remember back to my first post, this is an extremely difficult subject. I brought this to peoples attentions to discuss what this might mean. I don't think the meaning of Harry's scar is as important a fact as whether or not it really is a rune. Because if it is a rune that became visible when the magic was evoked, then we have a million other questions to answer.

Bscorp
May 15th, 2007, 5:10 am
just to make things clear- a rune is a symbol. Not a stone ( as I misjudged for a bit ) So I think (correct me if I'm wrong skalors1) what we're exploring is the idea that Harry's scar is a the image of a rune and that his mother placed this on him by her death- or maybe even before(?)

Elhaz: This Rune is a two-edged sword, and can bode danger for anyone other than an experienced or gifted Vitki, or Rune Mage. One should not try to grasp this sword, but to become one with it. Brains, not brawn, will serve you well in problems faced at this time. This Rune generally does not signify persons, but rather divine or spiritual beings and/or forces. It can foretell an awakening of craft and cunning in the individual.

It is special because it was Lily who could do this and no one else from her experience in charms and and it may imply that she has some greater knowledge beyond just "charm" and "cheek." Perhaps she was a "Rune Mage"? No one else's son would have been privy to this kind of magic because it came from Lily. She obviously knew something that no one else did.

I like the idea of runes symbols changing meaning when inverted and I wonder if we can correlate that to the backfired AK spell and/ or to the whole Hanged man concept in general.

Perhaps it would be nice to list the symbols and what each on e means both straight and inverted?

Frankie62446
May 15th, 2007, 5:21 am
I get that Lily being skiled at Charms is very important to this theory, but wasn't she exceptional at Potions as well? Just throwing that out there.
A very good source for Runes can be found here (http://www.sunnyway.com/runes/meanings.html). It has their meanings and inverted meanings.

Bscorp
May 15th, 2007, 5:22 am
BTW
A Bind Rune is the combination of two symbols in a mirrored form. (Hello! Mirror of Erised?) The symbol on the binding of the book features prominently on the Bloomsbury web page for the book- so yeah I'd say it's a huge clue.

See the symbol (http://www.bloomsbury.com/harrypotter/) here.

then there's the quote from Hermine ;

"I mistranslated 'ehwaz,'" said Hermione furiously. "It means 'partnership,' not 'defense,' I mixed it up with 'eihwaz.'" (OotP pg. 715/631)"

skalors1
May 15th, 2007, 5:54 am
Generally, you have the right idea. I guess my theory in regards to Harry are two-fold. The first is that Lily placed that rune on Harry or the Rune was the product of the protection Lily placed on Harry and the magic Voldemort was casting.

To break this out more. Lets break away from the conventional thinking about Harry's scar and how it relates to Voldemort.

Dumbledore explains that to create a hocrux, the wizard must put some of himself, or soul, into a killing spell. The soul he transfers obviously is his and he puts it into the intended victim. Then what happens is speculation, but I believe that by killing the person, it uses some of that persons life force to secure the soul fragment into an object.

Now we know Lily protected Harry, whether intentionally or not, by sacrificing herself for him. This may or may not have happened had it been another witch, but for purposes of our analysis, let us assume that it woud not have happened. I don't think she was cognizant of her abilities.

So when Voldemort cast the killing curse into Harry, it would follow logic to assume that his soul fragment went into Harry before the killing curse hit. When the curse finally hit, a rune of protection, Eiwhaz, formed on Harry's head and burned itself in and the magic rebounded the curse back to Voldemort.

Now, the point of this analysis is to determine whether any witch or wizard could have created that rune or if somehow Lily had the ability to perform rune magic.

Frankie, that rune page is not for bind runes. I have not looked for any online, but I will find a good page for you.

Defyeverything
May 15th, 2007, 7:34 am
skalors1 I was very Confused with what it was your theory was and what it was you were trying to say. It was only after reading the post others have made that I got the general sense of what this is all about. I don’t understand why you started this topic if like you said:
Let me first go on to say that I can't really give an answer to any questions about the meaning because while I may be able to identify the runes present in the rune bind, I am definately unable to intepret what reversals are present and their implications. Also, I have been stumped as to whether or not the line through the top are the following: is-i or isa, lagu or tyr. I bend towards lagu because if you study the symbol on the book closely it appears that the top left portion of the triangle is not complete and there is a minor gap there. However, the underlying theme for the rune bind on the spine of the cover involves life and the preservation of it.
Every time I read one of your posts I feel like you think you're twice as smart than the rest of us and can't bother to explain yourself or how you came to know this knowledge as a fact. You've just stated that you have not looke online for anything about bind runes so I'd love to know what book you read from. I think you're thoughts are unorganized and the way you express yourself and your ideas need to be work on in order for people to understand you better.

Bscorp
May 15th, 2007, 8:08 am
After doing some reading I am pretty convinced the rune symbol on the spine is that of "the new order" which is similar to the one found on the US dollar bill. It's masonic in it's root, but I would't be surprised if Rowling overlapped some symbology from different sources.

Here's on sights take on it.

It's an "all-seeing" eye inside a triangle, the symbol for divinity. Looks a lot like our Septology Symbol, doesn't it? Especially the "glowing" version on the Bloomsbury site.

Is the "all-seeing" eye a reference to a "seer", like Trelawney, who predicted this whole thing, and may have one more important prophecy left in her to divulge? Or does this refer to Harry, who is "seeing" through the eyes of Voldemort? Remember in Order of the Phoenix when Tonks asks Harry if he has any "seer" blood in him?

In addition, there is a slogan in Latin below these images on the dollar bill, "NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM", which means, "a new order has begun." (link) (http://www.beyondhogwarts.com/harry-potter/articles/the-mysterious-septology-symbol.html)

It is also similar to the ancient symbol for Alchemy.

Harry's scar may be more closely linked to Runes than the book symbol- but again Rowling draws from a lot of different wells.

I do like the idea that Harry's scar is a rune symbol though, this is a new twist on the "Harry as a horcrux" theory. I had always wondered why the AK would even cause a scar at all and if it wasn't due more to Lily's protection than the AK itself.

padfoot_101
May 15th, 2007, 3:01 pm
Im sure I saw a suggestion earlier in this thread that sugested that Lily could of had a profession in runes. Didnt JKR say she couldn't go into the jobs of Harry's parents because it would give something away?

skalors1
May 15th, 2007, 4:16 pm
A few things.

First, Defyeverything, I stated in my first post that I took 4 years of college courses on Ancient Symbols and Writing. That is where my knowledge comes from.

Bscorp, the study and use of runes is considered divinity. That is why reading runes when they are casted is a form of fortune telling.

Also, I have given thought to the fact that the symbol on the spine of the book are alchemy symbols. Delta is the symbol for fire in not only Ancient Rune Magic but also for alchemy. The circle with the line could be an apparatus for making potions. This could also have several meanings. The first could reference the daunting task of creating the philosophers stone where in the end, the alchemist comes to the understanding that he or she has had the knowledge all along or it could reference potion making in general. We know that JK has said that Harry has amassed more knowledge than he thinks. We shall see.

To comment on Padfoot, she did say something similar to that but I am not quite sure on the wording.

Also Defyeverything, I have never once inferred that I am more intelligent than any one else. I may know more about this subject, but the point of this post was to get people thinking about the idea and learning more themselves. If you would have read my first post you would know that I explained that not only is this a very complicated subject, but that I also was having a difficult time with it.

I also told you that I did not have the time in a day or in a week to explain everything that I know on the subject. There is simply to much stuff out there. To many languages, theories etc. Also, everyone seems to be more interested in seeing what the runes mean than actually discussing what their presence means; a topic I find much more interesting.

BScorp, to touch on your all-seeing eye idea, I must admit that it seems plausible, but if you take a look at the circle inside of the symbol, it is not centered. This is important. I am glad that you posted that page on the symbol; I have never seen it before and it very well may make things more clearer because it reminds me of something I learned my senior year. I am going to go to the bookstore during lunch and take a look at a few things. When I am done, I will let EVERYONE know what book I looked at and what I learned.

If you are looking to do something yourself while you wait, take a look at how the symbol was drawn, from start to finish, because it is extremely relevant!

HedwigOwl
May 15th, 2007, 6:28 pm
I never heard that anywhere. I am reading through JK's interviews now to verify.

I am going to comment on a few points (I had to recollect my memory): The first is in regards to JK saying having lily's eyes is important. Here is a quote from JK during an interview with CBBC Newsground in 2000.

"Now, can I ask you: are there any special wizarding powers in your world that depend on the wizard using their eyes to do something? Bit like..."
"Why do you want to know this?"
"I just vaguely wondered."
"Why?"
"Well because everyone always goes on about how Harry's got Lily Potter's eyes."
"Aren't you smart? There is something, maybe, coming about that. I'm going to say no more, very clever."

As to Madeline saying that the shape of Harry's scar was not important, JK said in a world book online chat that "The shape is not the most significant thing about Harry's scar." Which, again, coincides with my theory and even my thoughts on the matter. The meaning is not necessarily as important as what it implies.

PunkRockGirl, actually, JK says in an interview that Harry's worst weakness is shown with the fact that he wears glasses. I always interpreted this as meaning that Harry cannot see clearly without assistance.

Interesting quote from JKR, thanks, I missed that one.

About the glasses, I believe JKR has said they represent Harry's vulnerability.
She's thrilled with Stephen Fry's taped version of the books, outraged that an Italian dust jacket shows Harry minus his glasses. "Don't they understand that they are the clue to his vulnerability?"

Bscorp - A while back, I found a lengthy description on alchemical interpretation on one of the other forums about the symbol. If I can manage to find it, I'll post a link. By the way, I also thought about the "all seeing eye" similarity, but I couldn't make an HP connection that satisfied me.

ErodedCarpet
May 15th, 2007, 7:08 pm
I find the discussion about the ruins to be interesting. However, I feel as if I am missing something. Skalors1, I find your presentation of your theory somewhat elusive. You have stated that the “the meaning of these runes is not nearly as important than their existence and what it implies”. Could you please elaborate on this? Please explain why their existence is important and what it implies to you. Without your clarification I find it hard to grasp your theory.

I see others have brought some info into the mix, but I am interested in what was your original thought that prompted your theory.


btw saw this, might be a movie link to the image
http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=105205

skalors1
May 15th, 2007, 9:20 pm
I will address your questions kind of out of order. The first is in reference to the movie link that shows the image in the background. JK has always said that there was one thing that made it into the movie that would play a part in the end of the series. However, I don't know if that symbol was in the book. Anyways, if you ever refer to "New Age" books on magic, you will find those symbols everywhere with runes inscribed around them.

In regards to my theory I will build it by referring to a previous post of mine in this thread which states:

..I guess my theory in regards to Harry are two-fold. The first is that Lily placed that rune on Harry or the Rune was the product of the protection Lily placed on Harry and the magic Voldemort was casting.

To break this out more. Lets break away from the conventional thinking about Harry's scar and how it relates to Voldemort.

Dumbledore explains that to create a hocrux, the wizard must put some of himself, or soul, into a killing spell. The soul he transfers obviously is his and he puts it into the intended victim. Then what happens is speculation, but I believe that by killing the person, it uses some of that persons life force to secure the soul fragment into an object.

Now we know Lily protected Harry, whether intentionally or not, by sacrificing herself for him. This may or may not have happened had it been another witch, but for purposes of our analysis, let us assume that it woud not have happened. I don't think she was cognizant of her abilities.

So when Voldemort cast the killing curse into Harry, it would follow logic to assume that his soul fragment went into Harry before the killing curse hit. When the curse finally hit, a rune of protection, Eiwhaz, formed on Harry's head and burned itself in and the magic rebounded the curse back to Voldemort.

...

What does this mean exactly? If this were true, and no other witch could have protected Harry the way Lily did, then it would mean that Lily has a power that normal witches and wizards don't have. In fact, it would probably allow Harry (and Lily) to perform wandless magic or even enhance spells to their advantages.

Some proof of this lies in Harry's scar. If the spell Lily cast on Harry was one of protection, then the scar on Harry's forehead is absolutely, 100%, correct.

You may then ask "why is there a connection between Harry and Voldemort?" The answer is more simple than you may think, and it was inferred in my earlier post. Even if part of Voldemorts powers were part of the spell as a whole, the protection would only rebound that which would harm Harry. This would mean that the Hocrux part of the spell made it to Harry but could never be completed because to create a hocrux requires a persons death to complete the magic. This is why the Harry is a Hocrux theory is far off the mark, because to give the hocrux magic life, it requires death.

Some more proof of his ability to perform wandless magic, which supports my rune theory, was his ability to cast the "Lumos" spell in TOOTP. The rune for light, or torch derives from the Anglo-Friesian-Germanic Rune: Kauno and the Viking Rune(s): Kaunaz, Kaun.

Now, lets take a look at what we know right now.

First, Lilys' and Jame's profession is important to the storyline. We know this because JK won't comment on them. We also know that Voldemort did not want to kill Lily which means she was important. Maybe she was important in the way Ollivander was. Third, Harry has performed wandless magic and we know that Lily's protection was performed without using a wand. Lily was also exceptional at charms and JK has said that charms is the addition of properties to something (which was the magical function of runes). Also, lastly, the one question never raised by anyone in any of the books has been Harry's eyes, just statements regarding them.

We also know that Voldemort is connected to Harry and is able to posses him from great distances. This also means that Harry can do something similar to Voldemort. Now, there is a lot of conjecture with what exactly Harry's abilities would be; no one really knows. However, lets assume that to increase the potency of a spell or to use wandless magic with runes it requires thinking of a rune or a runebind as you cast it. So if lily was casting a happy charm on someone, she would think of the corresponding rune bind and increase her spell performance. This also implies that she would be able to cast such a spell without use of a wand.

The ability to use the magical properties of a rune or a combination of a rune without a wand would "focus" the magic.

I will talk more on it in a bit, I have to get going.

Frankie62446
May 15th, 2007, 9:44 pm
Dumbledore explains that to create a hocrux, the wizard must put some of himself, or soul, into a killing spell. The soul he transfers obviously is his and he puts it into the intended victim. Then what happens is speculation, but I believe that by killing the person, it uses some of that persons life force to secure the soul fragment into an object.....
So when Voldemort cast the killing curse into Harry, it would follow logic to assume that his soul fragment went into Harry before the killing curse hit. When the curse finally hit, a rune of protection, Eiwhaz, formed on Harry's head and burned itself in and the magic rebounded the curse back to Voldemort.

Actually, I think I remember Dumbledore saying that killing someone "broke your soul into pieces," at which point you would make a Horcrux. The creation of the Horcrux would go something like:
1) kill the victim,
2) Harness a piece of your broken soul,
3) Insert the bit of your soul into the object you wish to create a Horcrux out of.
So it would be impossible for a fragment of Voldemort's soul to go into Harry before the killing curse was cast, because he would need to have killed Harry prior to making him a horcrux. Because Dumbledore thought Voldemort intended to make his last Horcrux with Harry's death, I think it safe to assume that he had the would-be Horcrux on him at the time. This implies that it could still be in the ruins of the house at Godric's Hollow.

Now we know Lily protected Harry, whether intentionally or not, by sacrificing herself for him. This may or may not have happened had it been another witch, but for purposes of our analysis, let us assume that it woud not have happened. I don't think she was cognizant of her abilities.
I both agree and disagree. I also think that Lily wasn't really thinking about what she was doing; I believe she was acting out of instinct, to save her son. Therefore; it would not have mattered if Lily was proficient in Runes or not, she would not have known what she was doing. How could she put a Rune on Harry if she didn't know what she was doing? Surely Dumbledore or Voldemort, who both knew of the "ancient magic" that kept Harry alive, would realize Harry's scar is a Rune? I do think that there are Rune connections here... but not exactly the way you put it.


What does this mean exactly? If this were true, and no other witch could have protected Harry the way Lily did, then it would mean that Lily has a power that normal witches and wizards don't have. In fact, it would probably allow Harry (and Lily) to perform wandless magic or even enhance spells to their advantages.
For this to be true, we would need concrete proof that Lily was proficient in Runes. We have proof that she was skilled in Charms and in Potions, but not Runes.


Some more proof of his ability to perform wandless magic, which supports my rune theory, was his ability to cast the "Lumos" spell in TOOTP. The rune for light, or torch derives from the Anglo-Friesian-Germanic Rune: Kauno and the Viking Rune(s): Kaunaz, Kaun.
I thought this situation might come up. I just always assumed that Harry's wand lit up because it was "a few inches from his right hand".

skalors1
May 15th, 2007, 10:23 pm
Frankie,

First, I don't remember Dumbledore explaining anything about Hocruxes beyond that Voldemort was fragmenting his soul. However, if that were true, you are forgetting the rest of Dumbledores explanation which happened prior to any discussion regarding Hocruxes. He explained to Harry in Chamber that Voldemort unintentionally transferred power to Harry. I think he had to put a little bit of himself into a spell to complete a hocrux. There is a purpose why Voldemort waited for important deaths to create Hocruxes; he thought there was more power to them. If what you say is correct, then there would be no way to explain Dumbledores explanation about his unintentional transfer of power.

You forget that Harry's connection to Voldemort changed when he came to full power. Nonetheless, Harry possesed many of Voldemorts qualities long before any real mental connection was made.

Secondly, why would Lily be unable to cast a protection spell on Harry even if it was unintentional? I don't really think that it was, but I embrace bad facts to support my theory.

Lets assume that all the rune means is that Lily's special form of power came from the earth (green eyes). Rune Magic is from the earth. Now, lets assume that when she died, her only thought was to protect Harry (which I am sure it was). The spell she placed on Harry would still yield the same results.

Lastly, there is not much more known about Harry performing wandless magic. We know that it was important because of Harry's reaction. It may be that he was close enough when he evoked the magic that his wand channeled it for him. However, my gut tells me no.

Btw, Runes and Potions throughout history have been very closely linked.

Frankie62446
May 16th, 2007, 1:52 am
It was the Slughorn memory with Tom Riddle that said killing rips the soul apart.
By an act of evil... the supreme act of evil. By committing murder. Killing rips the soul apart. The wizard intent on making a Horcrux would use the damage to his advantage. He would encase the torn portion -
Bold mine. You see - if Voldemort intended to make a Horcrux out of Harry's death, then it wouldn't work at all because Harry didn't die.

skalors1
May 16th, 2007, 3:23 am
Frankie, I...umm...think you misinterpreted the purpose behind this post. I did not say that the Hocrux failed to work because of the protection on Harry. I believe I actually said this about the spells failure,

"This is why the Harry is a Hocrux theory is far off the mark, because to give the hocrux magic life, it requires death."

Now, what was actually being inferred in the post is a thought that Voldemort had to put a little of his own power into the spell. I think this fact is VERY obvious; just look at the powers Harry has. Whether or not this had to do with the Hocrux Magic or simply the power needed to cast the AK, I think the result is the same. Something not deadly to Harry slipped through his protection and remains there.

Also, Dumbledore explained Hocruxes in much more detail than Slughorn did. In fact, the only reason Dumbledore wanted Slughorns memory was to find out what exactly Voldemort wanted to know, and that was about the effects of splitting his soul more than once. Yet we know nothing about how the magic works and we also know nothing about the magic behind the AK. In fact, evidence suggests that everything about the magic involves transferring something of yourself into the spell.

Chaps
May 16th, 2007, 4:57 am
I feel like you said a whole lot of nothing with that explanation.

skalors1
May 16th, 2007, 5:28 am
Chaps, read the previous posts. I do not restate everything that has already been mentioned. If you have a specific question about something then feel free to ask. This whole concept is very simple.

The funny thing is that I went through a very similar debate before book 6 about the prophecy and so far I have been right about that.

The whole point is that this theory ties a lot of things together and has factual support all throughout the books. Most of what is going to happen has been foreshadowed. The issue of runes has been one of the biggest things that no one has ever even touched on; that is because it is a very difficult concept to grasp and once you do, it becomes very simple.

ErodedCarpet
May 16th, 2007, 2:27 pm
I thank you for the building of your explanation from your previous post. However, I am sorry to say it has not seemed to help me understand exactly what you are going for yet. I can see what you have built up, what I am failing to see is your foundation.

I have read all the previous post’s, so you need not re post them. If you would be as kind as to write a generic description perhaps that would help. Just a few sentences on what your theory is and what it implies. I understand you feel it is highly complex. However, most complicated ideas from Relativity to Quantum Mechanics can be broken down into a short definition. So I would be willing to assume your’s can be as well, not the full explanation, just a highlighted definition. Short and simple for those of us failing to see your origin.


You posted earlier in the topic that you feared you “may ruin a good book for a lot of people.” Perhaps, you have been unintentionally vague because of that. So far I have failed to grasp what would be the cause of your worry. I am glad to see I am not the only one having difficulty seeing where/what your going for.

skalors1
May 16th, 2007, 4:31 pm
I will try to break it down in a few sentences.

Harry's scar is a rune. It implies that a different type of magic was used in Harry's protection (which we know).

We know that JK said that the shape of Harry's scar is not the MOST significant thing about it. People have always assumed that the significant thing about it was the connection between him and Voldemort. Maybe that is also just part of the explanation.

What if the most significant thing about Harry's scar is that it is a rune. What if the protection placed on Harry by his mother involved the use of a rune or some form of rune magic and was completed by Dumbledore when he saw the rune? He had to have been able to deduce the meaning it represented when he looked at it. How would he know that if this was the first time this had happened?

Maybe Lily's profession involved Runes or imbuing objects with magic. We know there was a reason why Voldemort gave her an opportunity to live. Maybe she had a skill no other witch or wizard possesed

I would say that Harry's scar is Sowilo. It has many meanings besides defense and victory. Nonetheless, "Sowilo is well known as a victory symbol, it can also be used as a force of attack. It is a positive force, because it is the natural power of the sun. Spiritually, Sowilo symbolizes clear vision, and the victories of light over darkness, good over evil. It admonishes one to use the powers of good to vanquish evil."

Now, lets look at how this connects to the possible Rune on the spine of the cover. I will be honest, it appears to be a bind rune or some form of bind rune magic (I don't know much about the latter). We also know that JK made it a point to show us how it was drawn.

Mages of old used to believe that writing runes and tracing designs in pentagrams in a specific direction at a specific start point would yield different results for each object. For example, a blue (I don't remember its converse color but it has one) circle starting at the bottom most portion of the circle and drawn clockwise would yield a different result than if it were drawn counter-clockwise. The same can be said about the delta symbol (I don't remember the colors associated with it), which can be represented by fire.

The same can be said about the drawing of runes. When runes are reversed, twisted or overlap, they have different meanings/power. Rune magic was considered the natural magic on the earth and the runes concetrated that power with the intent of the person using them. It was even said that a person could wield their power through thought. Druids for example.

In the Harry Potter books, treasure hunters had to be proficient with runes to understand old curses etc. However, it has never been suggested that people still have the ability to evoke magic in a rune.

What this means on an overall can be taken 2 different ways. The first is that Harry's scar is a symbol of what he is destined to do and that the rune on the spine of the book is a rune protecting something or someone.

The second is that Harry and Lily have a magical power that allows them either to wield rune power or a form of power derived from runes (maybe natural magic) and control, or focus, it with their eyes and that Harry's scar is residual of the protection placed on him that repeled Voldemorts killing curse.

Other things can be deduced from this theory as well. One of which is why Voldemort transferred power to Harry.

Bscorp
May 16th, 2007, 5:27 pm
I like your ideas Skalor, thanks for restating them. I think you might have been a bit too cautious in the first presentation. You're not really giving anything away at all. This is merely a new twist on the interpretation of the scar and it's meaning- and it's great.

The mention of how the power of a rune changes with the direction that it is drawn calls to my mind the directions Harry read in The Prince's Advanced Potions manual. The correct way to make some potions relies on the correct direction of a stir- from clockwise to counterclockwise and the correct number. This seems to imply that some of the magic Rowling used in the potion making techniques is similar to the precise drawing of runes.

I like it, I like a lot. :)

skalors1
May 16th, 2007, 6:25 pm
I don't know if I was being cautious necessarily, I think I was trying to promote others to learn something about runes and their uses. Maybe go to the book store and pick up a new age magic book just to enhance their ideas.

I could have given a completely thorough explanation on most of the stuff, though I would have had to have done some research, but people would have taken what I said as fact and based their theories on the information I provided to them; I didn't want that. This is not a black and white subject.

One of the things that I have been trying to sort through is whether or not this is a composition of alchemic symbols or of rune symbols. Most of my time has been looking at the former. I would bet money that the symbol on the spine is one of the two. JK didn't put Hermione into runes for nothing.

Also, earlier in the post someone had mentioned that we have no proof that Lily was proficient, or not proficient, in Runes. I don't think that really matters. We know her grandparents were muggles (more likely squibs) and the family had a history of magic. If this was a skill that had been passed down, it would be a safe assumption that there were other resources like books, notes etc. in the family. It could have been a knowledge that was passed down to all members of the family whether magical or not in order to preserve it.

ErodedCarpet
May 16th, 2007, 6:55 pm
I think after your last reply I have a better picture. I think it was how I read what you presented that was throwing me. They way I took you initial post’s was that you had a theory, researched and applied it, and had made a discovery from it. I was looking for the pay off, i.e. what it was you found that would ruin the book for some readers.

It looks to me now that you have an idea for a theory and are now flushing out its practicality. With that in hand things make a bit more sense to me.

Thanks

With all the previous in mind I would like to ask a new question. That you have touched on a bit already.

Since Rowling’s has said the “I chose the lightning bolt because it was the most plausible shape for a distinctive scar”. Does that not imply that it was an arbitrary choice? Therefore, any resemblance that we might find between his scar and any current rune shapes are coincidental at best?

Hermaryne
May 16th, 2007, 7:40 pm
I will try to break it down in a few sentences.

Harry's scar is a rune. It implies that a different type of magic was used in Harry's protection (which we know).

What if the most significant thing about Harry's scar is that it is a rune. What if the protection placed on Harry by his mother involved the use of a rune or some form of rune magic and was completed by Dumbledore when he saw the rune? He had to have been able to deduce the meaning it represented when he looked at it. How would he know that if this was the first time this had happened?

I would say that Harry's scar is Sowilo. It has many meanings besides defense and victory. Nonetheless, "Sowilo is well known as a victory symbol, it can also be used as a force of attack. It is a positive force, because it is the natural power of the sun. Spiritually, Sowilo symbolizes clear vision, and the victories of light over darkness, good over evil. It admonishes one to use the powers of good to vanquish evil."



So your theory is essentially that Harry's scar is a rune, and that it was given to him by Lily? My biggest problem is that this contradicts all of the canon which states that the scar was given to Harry by Voldemort, thus marking Harry as "an equal". As Dumbledore states in OotP, "Voldemort gave you the scar that has proven both blessing and curse."

The symbol on the spine could be any number of things: a rune, alchemical symbol, horcrux symbol, what have you. I've searched a number of forums and could get lost in all of the plausible theories. I agree that runes will probably play a part- like you said, Hermione hasn't studied them for nothing. Also, JKR had that fun little easter egg on her website (Ancient Runes Made Easy), check it our if you haven't already. Even so, I wouldn't think that any specific rune would have enough signifigance to tie up the whole series. She might do all kinds of research on complicated 'magicks' and mythologies yet she always breaks things down to essential values that everyone can easily understand. There was one theory for the spine symbol that I really liked for its simplicity: carving the sybmol into stone represents the wand movements for the horcrux spell. You could see how this might work as the circle within the triangle represents the soul within the body, the intersecting line might then be used to divide the soul.

We'll all know for certain in 65 days!

AnnaSofia
May 16th, 2007, 9:41 pm
Very interesting your theories skalors1, i really liked.
A long time ago when i was searching about Harrys scar i found these and i really liked them:

X. Sowelu: Shaped like a single vertical bolt of
lightening.

/
--
/

Normal: What you are striving to be, you already are.
This is the time for recharging and regenerating
yourself. You may have to retreat from pressing
situations, but make it a retreat in strength, not
weakness. Let the Sun illuminate the secrets you hid
even from yourself. Always remember however, that by
yourself you can do nothing. Only when you rely on the
Divine can you accomplish anything of greatness.

and

The rune Sowelu is the sixteenth rune in the Elder Futhark. It is the rune of wholeness and life forces. It is also the rune of the sun's energy. At first blush, this may sound like a unlikely combination, but it isn't really. Let's take a look and you will see what I mean.

In the mythological symbolism of the ancient Norse, the sun is shown as a wheel or a shield. Let's look at the idea of Sowelu as a wheel first. In our sixth column, we discussed Raido, the rune of the cosmic journey - our journey to knowledge of the Self. One of the things we said about Raido was that it can be represented by the cosmic wagon. Well, Sowelu is represented by the cosmic wheel. It is the wheels which bear the weight and provide the momentum for the journey to the Self. Just as a wagon cannot easily be moved without wheels, we cannot travel the path to the Self without the will to take the trip.

So, Sowelu represents the divine will to strive toward full knowledge of the Self. We have also previously discussed Tiwaz, the rune of the spiritual warrior. Sowelu and Tiwaz are related because Sowelu represents the will, or drive, the spiritual warrior needs to achieve the quest. Remember, the quest of the spiritual warrior is the full knowledge and attainment of the Self. You may also remember, we said that the Nordic idea of honor spoke of the concept of right action. The spiritual warrior gains knowledge of the Self through adherence to natural law and right action. Sowelu represents the will, or if you choose, the inspiration for the warrior's quest.

But, there is more to the sun. So it is with Sowelu. In ancient time, the sun was used by seafarers to navigate the open seas. In the same way, Sowelu can serve as a "spiritual navigational aid" to direct us on our individual, personal trip to full knowledge of the Self. Just as the sailor can navigate seas and travel from country to country following the sun, the spiritual sailor can travel the spiritual realm with the guidance of Sowelu, touching on the spiritual, emotional, and mundane realms with assurance validated by faith and experience.

The sun can warm us and give us a comfortable, peaceful feeling of contentment. On the spiritual level, Sowelu does the same. When I was in grade school, one of my favorite things to do in the early summer was to lie out on the grass of a meadow - usually on the top of a hill - and take in the sun with my friends. We would feel its warmth. It gave us a feeling of contentment. It was like being injected with nature's tonic. It burned off the last of the cold and forbidding winter, and left us a comforting warmth which promised the joyous summer of life to come.

Finally, the sun provides light. Things which were hidden in the cold darkness of the night become readily apparent in the bright sun of daylight. So it is with Sowelu. If you are going through troubled times and draw Sowelu in a position of decision - such as the center rune in a three rune spread - you may find it is spotlighting a trait or action which you should look at in the bright light of the spiritual day.

At the beginning of this column we said the sun was represented by a wheel and a shield. That's the final aspect of Sowelu we want to look at in this issue - the shield. Just as the warrior used his shield to protect himself from harm, the spiritual warrior uses the protection provided by Sowelu to ward off spiritual threats.

So, we've seen that the rune of wholeness doesn't so much say we've obtained the Self, as it shows us the way, gives us the will and well-being to persevere in our quest, and help us with the knowledge of the right action and the Self to more safely make the trip. That's a lot. When Sowelu appears in a spread, we should sit up and take notice because something important is happening.

I really think that Harrys scar is rune symbol and Jo didn't let Hermione to learn runes for nothing. There must be a significant reason. Once again, Hermione will show how helpful she will be for Harry in his last adventure.

skalors1
May 16th, 2007, 9:51 pm
Eroded Carpet, in that quote, if you are referring to what sites are saying about her Houston 2001 article I have 2 things to say to that. First, view the article here :

http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2001/0301-houston-thomas.html

It says nothing about her saying that in that article. However, in her complete quote it says:

"As you know, the scar has certain powers, and it gives Harry warnings. I can't say more than that, but there is more to say."

We haven't heard everything about his scar.

Hermaryne, the quote you used from Dumbledore isn't exactly clear is it? What I mean is that Voldemort had cast the AK to kill Harry which in effect evoked magic that left the scar on Harry's forehead. What caused the scar? Was it Voldemort, the curse or the protection? I think that it was all three.

Let's think of it this way. I have a rock and you have a brand new shield. My rock is enormous and if it hit you, you would die. I throw the rock at you, you raise your shield, the rock hits it and leaves an enormous dent. You look up at me and say, "You dented my shield." To which I say, "no, the rock did." Technically, we are both right. You used the shield to block a rock I threw and it left a mark. What if the rock had not been repelled by the shield or had not hit it at all?

Now, as for your interpretation on the rune on the spine of the cover, I think you have the absolute right idea. In fact, that was what I did not want to bring up during this discussion. However, I will give you a more in depth view on the symbols and the direction they were written to prove the theory.

I don't think it is as simple as saying the soul is within the body because of the last part of the rune.

The triangle stands for the triune. In religious connotations, it stands for the trinity or three-in-one. In magical terms it stands for the equality ones self; the triangle is equal on all sides. It can also represent the desire to achieve such equalities. The rune is drawn by starting in the left hand corner of the symbol.

The circle represents, as was mentioned earlier, on a basic level a soul; but to expand that thought it means the perpetuity of the soul in what is known, believe it or not, as the wheel of time in the past.

Now notice something about the 2 symbols, and even about the line through them, they aren't symmetrical. This is important because each side of a triune represents a part of oneself (spiritually, mentally or physically).

There is no specific way to draw the circle in any of the books I have looked at.

The line is especially important; on a basic level it represents division, but the way it was written suggests something a little but more. I remember 2 of the four meanings to the significance behind the way a line is drawn. The first is if it drawn from the top down (being vertical) then it represents a division in self, however, if it is written starting from the bottom it has spiritual connotations.

Again, what does this mean? I still think it goes back to the significance of runes in the series. I don't think that this is it. I think that runes may be significant in spell creation and in their casting.

If you peruse a book in the new age section about spell creation, this information is there. I suggest you look at rune books there too. There is more to this.

Hermaryne
May 16th, 2007, 11:45 pm
Hermaryne, the quote you used from Dumbledore isn't exactly clear is it? What I mean is that Voldemort had cast the AK to kill Harry which in effect evoked magic that left the scar on Harry's forehead. What caused the scar? Was it Voldemort, the curse or the protection? I think that it was all three.


To me, Dumbledore was quite clear. Voldemort gave Harry the scar which marked him as an equal. Lily sacrificed herself for Harry thus giving him a blood protection. If we start considering that it was Lily's mark, or that the scar contains the protection, rather than the blood, than it becomes somewhat convoluted. If we take Dumbledore's word then there are some interesting implications. Could Harry's scar contain a piece of Voldemort's soul? Also, what is the signifigance of Harry's blood in Voldemort's body? If we take your 'Harry's scar is Lily's runic symbol protection', then what might be the implication? We all know that Harry has the power that Voldemort knows not. We know that this power is love. How does your theory play into this in such a way that is so key to the resolution?

ErodedCarpet
May 17th, 2007, 12:16 am
Only have a bit of time tonight, will add more in the morning.

The quote I am talking about is here http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2001/0301-houston-bolger.htm

In full is says,

Q: What is the meaning behind Harry's lightning bolt scar?

A: There are some things I can tell you about it and some things I can't. I wanted him to be physically marked by what he has been through. It was an outward expression of what he has been through inside.

I gave him a scar and in a prominent place so other people would recognize him. It is almost like being the chosen one, or the cursed one, in a sense. Someone tried to kill him; that's how he got it.

I chose the lightning bolt because it was the most plausible shape for a distinctive scar. As you know, the scar has certain powers, and it gives Harry warnings. I can't say more than that, but there is more to say.

skalors1
May 17th, 2007, 4:10 am
That is the what I don't get about everyone saying that Harry's scar can contain Voldemorts soul. It simply can't happen. Voldemort gave him the scar by attacking him. If he had killed Lily and left Harry he would not have had that scar. If he would have let Lily live and not kill Harry he would not have the scar. Hence, the protection put on him by Lily is the ONLY reason Harry has a scar. It is residual of the spell.

The scar reacts to the connection between himself and Voldemort. Voldemort passed powers to Harry when he attacked him as we found out by Dumbledore. He didn't transfer his soul. It is IMPOSSIBLE for Harry, or his scar, to be a Hocrux. Given all we know of Hocruxes, it could not have happened; he didn't die. When Voldemort was hit by the rebounded curse, the portion of soul that was within him was destroyed unless you don't believe Dumbledore and his 4 remaining Hocrux theory. I don't think Dumbledore would have ever overlooked the fact that Harry or his scar was a Hocrux without hinting to that fact.

I think some additional evidence is that Voldemort is unable to reside within Harry without great pain.

Btw, that interview was in 2001. That same year she also said that Harry would see the end of the school year. In 06 she said that she laid out Harry's plans for the last book. The point is that her story does have variations.

Btw, that interview was in 2001. That same year she also said that Harry would see the end of the school year. In 06 she said that she laid out Harry's plans for the last book. The point is that her story does have variations.

ErodedCarpet
May 17th, 2007, 2:36 pm
That is the what I don't get about everyone saying that Harry's scar can contain Voldemorts soul. It simply can't happen. Voldemort gave him the scar by attacking him. If he had killed Lily and left Harry he would not have had that scar. If he would have let Lily live and not kill Harry he would not have the scar. Hence, the protection put on him by Lily is the ONLY reason Harry has a scar. It is residual of the spell.

The scar reacts to the connection between himself and Voldemort. Voldemort passed powers to Harry when he attacked him as we found out by Dumbledore. He didn't transfer his soul. It is IMPOSSIBLE for Harry, or his scar, to be a Hocrux. Given all we know of Hocruxes, it could not have happened; he didn't die. When Voldemort was hit by the rebounded curse, the portion of soul that was within him was destroyed unless you don't believe Dumbledore and his 4 remaining Hocrux theory. I don't think Dumbledore would have ever overlooked the fact that Harry or his scar was a Hocrux without hinting to that fact.

I think some additional evidence is that Voldemort is unable to reside within Harry without great pain.

Btw, that interview was in 2001. That same year she also said that Harry would see the end of the school year. In 06 she said that she laid out Harry's plans for the last book. The point is that her story does have variations.

Btw, that interview was in 2001. That same year she also said that Harry would see the end of the school year. In 06 she said that she laid out Harry's plans for the last book. The point is that her story does have variations.



I fully agree that the story can vary, it’s the authors right to allow her story to change and evolve. However, I think it does show that when she originally thought of the scar that she did not pick its shape based on any know rune associations.

That does not eliminate the possibility that she later decided to us it as a rune symbol. She may have chosen that as Lily’s field of specialty along with charms. Then altered the scars original purpose. But, I would imagine that her symbols would be based on her own definitions.


Could you provide the link to the interview where she said “Harry would see the end of the school year”. I would like to see it in its full context.

Doesn’t Hagrid also state that Harry’s scar is the result of being touched by an evil curse? With Dumbledore and Hagrid both indicating the scar was from Voldemort doesn’t that seal the idea of where he got it?

Also When I read the following from JKR’s site it seems to me she is indicating that Voldemort anointed Harry with his scar.

“In effect, the prophecy gave Voldemort the choice of two candidates for his possible nemesis. In choosing which boy to murder, he was also (without realising it) choosing which boy to anoint as the Chosen One – to give him tools no other wizard possessed – the scar and the ability it conferred, a magical window into Voldemort's mind.

So what would have happened if Voldemort had decided that the pure-blood, not the half-blood, was the bigger threat? What would have happened if he had attacked Neville instead? Harry wonders this during the course of 'Half-Blood Prince' and concludes, rightly, that the answer hinges on whether or not one of Neville's parents would have been able, or prepared, to die for their son in the way that Lily died for Harry. If they hadn't, Neville would have been killed outright. Had Frank or Alice thrown themselves in front of Neville, however, the killing curse would have rebounded just as it did in Harry's case, and Neville would have been the one who survived with the lightning scar. What would this have meant? Would a Neville bearing the lightning scar have been as successful at evading Voldemort as Harry has been? Would Neville have had the qualities that have enabled Harry to remain strong and sane throughout all of his many ordeals? Although Dumbledore does not say as much, he does not believe so: he believes Voldemort did indeed choose the boy most likely to be able to topple him, for Harry's survival has not depended wholly or even mainly upon his scar.”

The bold areas I enhanced, they seem particularly important.

Shannah
May 17th, 2007, 5:40 pm
I really enjoy this discussion and am very interested in ancient runes, I have to admit that the first thing that ran through my head when I first saw the symbol was that it looked like the soarting hat with the sword in it. I aam very curious at to why rather than a full circle with a line through it, it is drawn as two half circles separated by a line drawn from the bottom up.

skalors1
May 17th, 2007, 6:05 pm
I will respond later tonight. I just don't have a lot of time right now.

Frankie62446
May 17th, 2007, 6:38 pm
I really enjoy this discussion and am very interested in ancient runes, I have to admit that the first thing that ran through my head when I first saw the symbol was that it looked like the soarting hat with the sword in it. I aam very curious at to why rather than a full circle with a line through it, it is drawn as two half circles separated by a line drawn from the bottom up.

Yes, I noticed this as well. When watching the symbol being drawn on Scholastic, it is clear that first the triangle is drawn, then a half of a circle, the other half (though the two half don't really touch) and then a line drawn down the middle.

Hermaryne
May 17th, 2007, 6:59 pm
Btw, that interview was in 2001. That same year she also said that Harry would see the end of the school year. In 06 she said that she laid out Harry's plans for the last book. The point is that her story does have variations.

JKR has stated repeatedly that while the story has had minor adjustments, the plot as a whole was laid out before she wrote Book 1. Here's a quote from July '05.

"As I think you can see from Half Blood Prince, these books have been plotted for such a long time, and for six books now, that they're leading in a certain direction... Y'know I've laid my clues and I've laid my plot and now I have to follow through with it."

Again, though I agree that we'll be seeing Runes in DH, I'm not convinced that it will be in the same way as you state. It seems more likely that we'll see Hermione's knowlege come into play when we're on the horcrux hunt. I'm curious about which house the Runes are associated with and what Voldemort might have known about their magical properties. JKR used Ancient Runes to symbolize magical creatures and I'm wondering how this might come into play. Like Eroded Carpet said, she bases her symbols on her own definitions.

BelleGreenfield
May 17th, 2007, 10:20 pm
I really like this thread as well. Very thought provoking! So thank you for posting it.

One thing I wanted to add was that earlier you mentioned how the line shows division. Could this have something to do with when Dumbledore performs that odd bit of magic and says "in essence divided?" with the two snakes? Likewise could the prophecy looking orb with the two (two headed?) snake(s) in it have something to do with that?

I feel like we're all dancing around some big revelation/discovery. This is an exciting thread!

Frankie62446
May 18th, 2007, 2:19 am
Essence divided.... great idea! I had never thought of that! But then we'd have to know more about what the circle symbolizes, so we could know what it is dividing.

Rainman1955
May 18th, 2007, 12:20 pm
It has been a couple of years since I lasted posted on this forum. I agree that ancient runes will have impact in final book, in fact the US Cover Art may have Harry wearing a ancient rune amulet belonging to Lily.

After reading this thread, I believe that the symbol on the UK Children Art Cover is for the wand motion for creating a horcrux.

BelleGreenfield
May 18th, 2007, 6:00 pm
Essence divided.... great idea! I had never thought of that! But then we'd have to know more about what the circle symbolizes, so we could know what it is dividing.Didn't someone say earlier that the circle represented the soul. I think I'm more convinced than ever that this could be some sort of horcrux symbol. A divided (line) soul (circle) inside an object (triangle) uh why didn't we see this before? It seems so simple.

Can someone post the quote where Dumbledore talks about "in essence divided"? I'd like to see the whole thing and I don't have my book with me right now.

HedwigOwl
May 18th, 2007, 8:30 pm
I fully agree that the story can vary, it’s the authors right to allow her story to change and evolve. However, I think it does show that when she originally thought of the scar that she did not pick its shape based on any know rune associations.

That does not eliminate the possibility that she later decided to us it as a rune symbol. She may have chosen that as Lily’s field of specialty along with charms. Then altered the scars original purpose. But, I would imagine that her symbols would be based on her own definitions.

Agreed. Here are three quotes from JKR over the years about the scar, they seem to support your view.


Q. What is the meaning behind Harry's lightning bolt scar?
A. There are some things I can tell you about it, and some things I can't. I wanted him to be physically marked by what he has been through. It was an outward expression of what he has been through inside. I gave him a scar in a prominent place so other people would recognize him. It is almost like being the chosen one or the cursed one, in a sense. Someone tried to kill him; that's how he got it. I chose the lightning bolt because it was the most plausible shape for a distinctive scar. As you know, the scar has certain powers, and it gives Harry warnings. I can't say more than that, but there is more to say.


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!


In effect, the prophecy gave Voldemort the choice of two candidates for his possible nemesis. In choosing which boy to murder, he was also (without realising it) choosing which boy to anoint as the Chosen One – to give him tools no other wizard possessed – the scar and the ability it conferred, a magical window into Voldemort's mind.

Thought
May 18th, 2007, 9:23 pm
To provide general information (but not so much to provide my own theory)

Might I suggest a (not so) quick reference to the two primary historical sources for modern knowledge of runes?

The historian Tacitus (circa 56-117 C.E.) is the earliest mention of them (to my knowledge); in describing the German people in his "Germania" (the Anthony Birely translation being particularly good, both in its translation and in the notes) he notes (in section 10 of his work) that the Germans were avid users of runes (though some translations refer to these as lots). The actual use of runes, however, was for divination, not for casting spells (runes were tossed, three were picked up and read, and the priest would determine if it was an accurate reading or not, and unfortunately that is about all Tacitus tells us).

The Poetic Edda, however, gives us much more information, though this comes from the 13th century C.E. (I would recommend the Lee Hollander translation, as he attempted quite successfully to preserve the poetry of the work). Specifically, in the poem known as the Havamal (sayings of Har, which is to say, Odin), there is a section that is known as the Runic poem for its information on this very topic. However, it should be noted that in this Odin never identifies which runes are used for which effects. However, I have tried to reproduce those runic charms that seem to be most relevant to this Harry Potter discussion (bolding mine) (translation taken from the following site: http://web.telia.com/~u85906673/asar/havamal/havamal.html):

146. Those songs I know, which nor sons of men
nor queen in a king's court knows;
the first is Help which will bring thee help
in all woes and in sorrow and strife.

147. A second I know, which the son of men
must sing, who would heal the sick.

148. A third I know: if sore need should come
of a spell to stay my foes;
when I sing that song, which shall blunt their swords,
nor their weapons nor staves can wound.

149. A fourth I know: if men make fast
in chains the joints of my limbs,
when I sing that song which shall set me free,
spring the fetters from hands and feet.

150. A fifth I know: when I see, by foes shot,
speeding a shaft through the host,
flies it never so strongly I still can stay it,
if I get but a glimpse of its flight.

151. A sixth I know: when some thane would harm me
in runes on a moist tree's root,
on his head alone shall light the ills
of the curse that he called upon mine.

152. A seventh I know: if I see a hall
high o'er the bench-mates blazing,
flame it ne'er so fiercely I still can save it, --
I know how to sing that song.

...

157. A twelfth I know: if I see in a tree
a corpse from a halter hanging,
such spells I write, and paint in runes,
that the being descends and speaks.

158. A thirteenth I know: if the new-born son
of a warrior I sprinkle with water,
that youth will not fail when he fares to war,
never slain show he bow before sword.

Of particular importance, I would say, is #12. The 7th book is called Deathly Hallows, which is a possible metaphor for a hanging. That particular runic charm would allow the caster to speak with the dead (like, say, Harry's mother or Dumbledore, to name two likely candidates). Also of significance might be the 13th. Harry is the son of a warrior (James and Lily thrice defied voldemort, making them combatants), and he has yet to fail when he "fares to war."

Additionally, as it has been mentioned before, the lightning scar could be seen as the sig/sigel. Sig(e), however, is very curious in that it means victory as well as sun (that is, the word Sig means victory, not necessarily the rune). Sigmund means victory minded, Siegfried being victory friend, etc. It is convenient, then, that Harry's scar literally spells out the fact that he was victorious against Voldemort the first go around.

Anywho, hope this information is interesting and useful for the discussion.

Just a poetic Thought

ID824
May 19th, 2007, 5:24 am
Very interesting theory indeed. Long...but interesting.

mimubulusmim
May 19th, 2007, 3:53 pm
Hello everyone-

This is my first post-

I remember the Civil Defense symbol from when I was a kid. It was a Cold War thing. The idea was that everyone should be prepared for the unthinkable. I'm thinking JKR is using it simply in the context of Voldy's return.
Here is a link to a web site of posters and the CD symbol clearly visible.

http://www.civildefensemuseum.com/artgal/artgallery.html
http://www.civildefensemuseum.com/

http://www.civildefensemuseum.com/artgal/cdweek1956sm.jpg
http://www.civildefensemuseum.com/artgal/tnyoucan.jpg
http://www.civildefensemuseum.com/artgal/farmfalltn.jpg

moondust
May 19th, 2007, 7:30 pm
This is such a great topic!! There are several things I'd like to comment on / discuss. First:

in regards to JK saying having lily's eyes is important. Here is a quote from JK during an interview with CBBC Newsground in 2000.

"Now, can I ask you: are there any special wizarding powers in your world that depend on the wizard using their eyes to do something? Bit like..."
"Why do you want to know this?"
"I just vaguely wondered."
"Why?"
"Well because everyone always goes on about how Harry's got Lily Potter's eyes."
"Aren't you smart? There is something, maybe, coming about that. I'm going to say no more, very clever."

As to Madeline saying that the shape of Harry's scar was not important, JK said in a world book online chat that "The shape is not the most significant thing about Harry's scar." Which, again, coincides with my theory and even my thoughts on the matter. The meaning is not necessarily as important as what it implies.

PunkRockGirl, actually, JK says in an interview that Harry's worst weakness is shown with the fact that he wears glasses. I always interpreted this as meaning that Harry cannot see clearly without assistance.

Ok, so Harry will be able to use his eyes to do magic... but, the way I interpret this is that I think wearing glasses is a weakness because maybe he will not be able to do magic THRU the glass in his glasses - maybe he will have to take his glasses off to do the magic, at which point he won't be able to see as clearly, so it will be more difficult to "point" his eyes at the right place to perform the magic. Thoughts? I'm sure this theory/opinion has been given before in the threads!

Also, Skalors1 - I absolutely loved your eloquent comparison of your theory to someone throwing a rock at another person holding a shield. Both the rock-thrower and the rock itself caused the dent in the shield, and the shield protected the holder. The rock would be the curse by Voldemort, the shield is Lily's magical protection of Harry.

Skalors1 - I do not understand why you say that something has to DEAD to be a horcrux. I do not know why this has to be true. You have to kill someone to tear your soul apart and thus impart it in a horcrux. But the horcrux item itself does not have to be the person that has been killed. I suppose you can kill someone and then make them a horcrux, but the horcrux can be a living thing as well (e.g. the snake Nagini!). The horcrux can be a living person or thing I believe.

Rainmann1955 and Skalors1,that is an excellent point that the way the rune/symbol on the spine of the book is drawn has got to be important. I think this is something that is especially important, and I think it is specifically being pointed out to us.... notice how the official HP website now has a game for us to learn how to draw and cast spells? The game teaches us exactly how to draw them - where to start making the motion with our wands (well, our computer mouse, but we can all pretend it's a wand).

AnnaSofia - I liked how you are pointing out the sun and it's connections to the story. The sun, as we all know, is made of plasma, which is a combination of ions and electrons (postively and negatively charged particles, which together in the plasma exhibit a quasi-neutral charge and collective behavior -- this is a loose definition of a plasma). Lightning itself is also plasma. The AK curse and many other spells cast bolts of light/lightning (plasma). Just something I noticed.

Another thing regarding the triangle in the spine rune - it could also represent the trio - Harry, Ron and Hermione. Collective behavior (friendship and plasma definition) and triangle and lightning-bolt shaped scar (rune and plasma and collective behavior and spell and Voldemort... etc.).

Also something to consider is Ron's connection to Egypt. Maybe the triangle represents the pyramids. (See the will Harry go to Egypt thread) The ancient Egyptians were very interested in achieving immortality (like Voldemort) and the pyramids were a path to immortality for them. (not my theory - from the other thread) Maybe the runic magic will be linked to Ron's knowledge of ancient Egypt and Hermione's knowledge of runes. Both Hermione and Ron could be a big help to Harry in this sense. And Ron's knowledge could also impress Hermione :)

Harry_Potter31
May 19th, 2007, 9:10 pm
Generally, you have the right idea. I guess my theory in regards to Harry are two-fold. The first is that Lily placed that rune on Harry or the Rune was the product of the protection Lily placed on Harry and the magic Voldemort was casting.

To break this out more. Lets break away from the conventional thinking about Harry's scar and how it relates to Voldemort.

Dumbledore explains that to create a hocrux, the wizard must put some of himself, or soul, into a killing spell. The soul he transfers obviously is his and he puts it into the intended victim. Then what happens is speculation, but I believe that by killing the person, it uses some of that persons life force to secure the soul fragment into an object.

Now we know Lily protected Harry, whether intentionally or not, by sacrificing herself for him. This may or may not have happened had it been another witch, but for purposes of our analysis, let us assume that it woud not have happened. I don't think she was cognizant of her abilities.

So when Voldemort cast the killing curse into Harry, it would follow logic to assume that his soul fragment went into Harry before the killing curse hit. When the curse finally hit, a rune of protection, Eiwhaz, formed on Harry's head and burned itself in and the magic rebounded the curse back to Voldemort.

Now, the point of this analysis is to determine whether any witch or wizard could have created that rune or if somehow Lily had the ability to perform rune magic.

Frankie, that rune page is not for bind runes. I have not looked for any online, but I will find a good page for you.

You know the more I think about this the more I understand it , it's simple to make the Eiwhaz rune into a Lightning bolt , and I was also wondering was it possible if Lily was very good at Ancient runes also as well as charms to perform rune magic so when Voldemort cast the Killing curse into Harry she put all her powers into the Rune Eiwhaz that his soul fragment and her powers went into Harry before the curse hit and when the curse finally hit a rune of Protection, Eiwhaz , formed on Harry's head in a shape of the Lightning bolt and bruned itself in and the magic rebounded the curse back to Voldemort , like she used the self -sacrifice charm and the Eiwhaz rune at the same time to put her powers into Harry just in time to save him from the Killing curse and in doing so Harry would have Lily's brilliant Green eyes but need glasses to see clearly , and be good to get at least an E in charms , Transfiguration , etc. and have an O in DADA , and be talented in Quidditch like his dad and looks like his dad was something that he was born with before the Killing Curse hit him and it was like he was a little spitting image of her Husband that she loved so much so she used all of her powers into using the self-sacrificing charm and the Eiwhaz rune to save Harry and I think that's what Hermione might do in book 7 to help Harry win the fight against Voldemort. Well I'll read book 7 to find out the symbol in the spine .

I can't wait to see how JKR will solve this in book 7 .

IgoRetla
May 19th, 2007, 9:28 pm
Hello everyone-

This is my first post-

I remember the Civil Defense symbol from when I was a kid. It was a Cold War thing. The idea was that everyone should be prepared for the unthinkable. I'm thinking JKR is using it simply in the context of Voldy's return.
Here is a link to a web site of posters and the CD symbol clearly visible.

http://www.civildefensemuseum.com/artgal/farmfalltn.jpg

Brilliant! Unmistakably the same symbol! Now, where did Civil Defense draw the symbol from?

sunset03
May 20th, 2007, 4:46 am
So from what people are saying, LILY gave Harry the scar and not Voldemort when it really comes down to it?

JediBeldarine
May 20th, 2007, 5:29 am
So from what people are saying, LILY gave Harry the scar and not Voldemort when it really comes down to it?

From what I understand (which is not much), the answer would be yes and no.

The reason the scar is there is because of both Lily's runic protection on Harry AND because of Voldy's attempt to kill him. If one of the two events mentioned didn't happen, there wouldn't be a scar. If Lily hadn't protected Harry, Harry would be dead (no scar). If Voldy hadn't tried to kill Harry, Lily's protection wouldn't have formed the scar on its own and thus... no scar. So it is necessary for both events to happen for the scar to be created.

But, yes, Lily had to be involved in some way.

Hello everyone-

This is my first post-

I remember the Civil Defense symbol from when I was a kid. It was a Cold War thing. The idea was that everyone should be prepared for the unthinkable. I'm thinking JKR is using it simply in the context of Voldy's return.
Here is a link to a web site of posters and the CD symbol clearly visible.


Sorry for the double post... but I forgot I wanted to say something about this.

I did a little research on it and when I looked closer I noticed that the shape inside the triangle isn't a circle... It's the letters "CD" denoting the civil defense concept. The international symbol is essentially the triangle inside the circle, which is opposite of what Rowling did with her symbol on the UK cover. The triangle denotes the three-step civil defense philosophy (preparation, response, recovery).

What I find interesting is that the triangle inside a circle is an internationally recognized "protective sign" (kind of like the Red Cross).

Anyway, while I like the whole concept of "be prepared for the worst," the symbolism of it being a "protective sign" and the fact that they share similarities, I see this meaning a bit more. I guess the reasons are that there are just as many differences as similarities. There is no circle around the triangle (which is the true logo of the CD, the CD is just added later). While the circle inside the triangle doesn't appear to be uniform (the hemisphere on the left seems to be larger than on the right), there is a definitive line separating the two halves which extends to the top of the triangle -- that imagery doesn't appear in the CD logo... and finally, while it almost looks like the circle forms the letters C and D the CD logo is clearly a CD formation...

Just my two cents :)

Jen

Alyssa_L
May 20th, 2007, 6:11 am
This is a great theory and very possible. Since I don't believe Harry is a horcrux I am forced to believe the second theory. I really like this. The thing is, I don't believe Lily cast any intentional spells that night. Maybe only certain people in the wizarding world can perform runic magic, and the combination of her sacrifice and her magic placed the ancient ruin on him as a mark that he was protected. After all, we all know Avada Kedavra leaves no mark, so what left it? I think this is good speculation. I don't think Lily intended for this to happen, but maybe she knew her extra powers would save him. I don't know. I do believe though that Dumbledore wasn't
completely wrong and that it did have something to do with love. If Lily had placed the runic magic on him and stepped away while Voldemort attempted to kill him it would have had no effect. I also think, if this is true, that the extraordinary colory of Lily and Harry's eyes were amark of the ability to do runic magis. In SS/PS Hagrid says Harry's name was probably on the Hogwarts list since he was born. How in the world would they know he was a wizard before he performed magic... unless he had a certain feature like brilliant green eyes that meant he could.

momeve
May 20th, 2007, 6:16 am
You know, for the past few days I have seen this thread and had no inclination to read it figuring it was no big deal. I was so wrong! This is very interesing and for me, bring together some points I have always thought as extemely significant:
that Hermione studies ancient runes is no accident and I knew we would see why in #7.
the quote mentioned re: a wizard using his eyes to perform a certain spell- when I first read this months ago, I felt it would turn out to be one of the greatest clues to the final book that we had seen. I even said as much in another thread but never seemed to get anyone else as interested.
I firmly believe Voldemort offered to spare Lily because of her knowledge on a subject that he desired to know more about.
JKR's statement that Hay knows more than he realizes- I have thought he has some type of power we hadn't been shown yet.
Very anxious to keep reading more of this! Good job!

Alyssa_L
May 20th, 2007, 6:25 am
You know, for the past few days I have seen this thread and had no inclination to read it figuring it was no big deal. I was so wrong! This is very interesing and for me, bring together some points I have always thought as extemely significant:
that Hermione studies ancient runes is no accident and I knew we would see why in #7.
the quote mentioned re: a wizard using his eyes to perform a certain spell- when I first read this months ago, I felt it would turn out to be one of the greatest clues to the final book that we had seen. I even said as much in another thread but never seemed to get anyone else as interested.
I firmly believe Voldemort offered to spare Lily because of her knowledge on a subject that he desired to know more about.
JKR's statement that Hay knows more than he realizes- I have thought he has some type of power we hadn't been shown yet.
Very anxious to keep reading more of this! Good job!


I did the same thing. I finally was like... I'll read it. I am so glad I did.

Where did this quote come from? I had never heard this said before and it seems very signifigant to many theories including this one. Some wizard will use their eyes to perform a certain spell? I think there is quite the likelihood that it is Harry performing a runic spell... maybe to defeat Voldemort!!!!!!!

He has a magic Voldemort doesn't know! It's in the prophecy!

This would also go with him sparing Lily. He would want to know more about this magic! Okay! I am really pumped about this theory now. Why bother to make Hermione study runes if there was no purpose behind it. Now I want to know what the symbol on the spine is!

Pearl84
May 20th, 2007, 10:46 am
Hi skalors1,

Yesterday I read your theory for the first time and I was astounded. Not only did your theory seem plausible to me, you also gave me a new and interesting field of research, namely that of Runes. I was very sleepy, but I stayed up because I wanted to read the thread. So thanks a lot for sharing!

Let me first say that I understand your hesitation to share too much. If this theory indeeds hits the core of the plot, I wouldn't want to know too much. I must confess that I read spoilers about HPB before I first read it and I was very unhappy with it, though I think it is the greatest in the series thus far.

* while composing this reply, I have read quite some stories about runes, Odin and mythology. The whole background about alchemy and the Scandinavian folklore is great, it fits within an ancient tradition that is also very spiritual. Can you tell me what your interests are?

About the theory itself (+ what others shared (I read the thread and will just refer to the ideas that were brought up since I am too lazy to search back and find the exact author and quote, unless I think it is really important)) Anyway, thanks for all your shared information!

I was really amazed when I read about the symbol on the cover of DH (possibly) being the trail of the Horcrux-spell. Fantastic! A certain form (triangle, square) around a no-form or 'formless form' (circle) indeed symbolises embodied or encapsulated life or life-force, such as a piece of soul.

There was however something I noticed about the symbol. On zooming in, I got the idea that the circle in the symbol is nothing else then... the ancient symbol of Ouroboros! Does someone have any idea what this might mean for the story, besides the obvious meaning of ressurection, periodicity-in-eternity and wisdom?

Frankie62446
May 20th, 2007, 2:34 pm
As far I can see, the symbol of Ouroboros is a simple circle. Ouroboros is often referred to as the "tail swallower". It does seem to represent redemption and rebirth, but I can't see how the symbol on the spine is the symbol of Ouroboros when the one on the spine has a line through it.

Pearl84
May 20th, 2007, 4:47 pm
If you look closer, Frankie, you see that the circle has a small irregularity. I just looked again and after a second thought, I am convinced that the symbol is a ouroboros in a divided triangle or a divided triangle over a ouroboros.

HedwigOwl
May 21st, 2007, 2:29 am
As far I can see, the symbol of Ouroboros is a simple circle. Ouroboros is often referred to as the "tail swallower". It does seem to represent redemption and rebirth, but I can't see how the symbol on the spine is the symbol of Ouroboros when the one on the spine has a line through it.

Agreed. And furthermore, the drawing of the symbol on the publisher's website draws 2 semicircles, not a continuous circle, and actually leaves room for the dissecting line.

momeve
May 21st, 2007, 3:15 am
The quote about the eyes is from a 2000 interview with something Newsround. In it the interviewer asks JKR if there is something coming about a wizard using his eyes for a spell. Jo asks why do you ask? Then the woman answers "Well, we keep hearing about how Harry has Lily's eyes" Then JKR says she is smart and "very clever". When i've posted about this before on the Significance of HArry's eyes thread some have speculated it had to do with Slughorn seeing Lily when looking at Harry and therefore giving up the memory but the question was specific to a wizard using their eyes for a spell so I don't think that applies. I found it on accio-quote and will try to find it again.
The argument I have heard about these more elaborate theories is that these books are first and foremost a children's series. Yet, clearly JKR realizes she has a massive adult audience. I don't have any problem in thiinking she has written in "layers" and although she will explain things in a manner understood to children, there is certainly alot more to entertain her adult audience. Just my take on the books

Alyssa_L
May 21st, 2007, 4:36 am
The quote about the eyes is from a 2000 interview with something Newsround. In it the interviewer asks JKR if there is something coming about a wizard using his eyes for a spell. Jo asks why do you ask? Then the woman answers "Well, we keep hearing about how Harry has Lily's eyes" Then JKR says she is smart and "very clever". When i've posted about this before on the Significance of HArry's eyes thread some have speculated it had to do with Slughorn seeing Lily when looking at Harry and therefore giving up the memory but the question was specific to a wizard using their eyes for a spell so I don't think that applies. I found it on accio-quote and will try to find it again.
The argument I have heard about these more elaborate theories is that these books are first and foremost a children's series. Yet, clearly JKR realizes she has a massive adult audience. I don't have any problem in thiinking she has written in "layers" and although she will explain things in a manner understood to children, there is certainly alot more to entertain her adult audience. Just my take on the books

This is the way I've always felt about the books. Jo will make sure it's explained well enough for children to understand, but it will be a concept that interests all age grups. That's the precise reason there are people on this forum from my age (13) to 50 or 60. Jo is great at what she does!

skalors1
May 21st, 2007, 11:30 pm
I have been quite busy for the past 5 days. Sorry I haven't gotten back sooner.

I must say that I am most impressed with how you folks have run away with this post. I feel that it is a very interesting topic and that the easiest way for a person to grasp the concept is to learn about it themselves. There is plenty more information that has not been discussed thus far.

I always found it interesting that the JK has expanded on her books more as the years went on. I really believe that she started writing the stories for adults and children at book 3 or 4. Many people say that JK has had her plot set in stone since day one. Yet, does that really mean that she can't change the story? Absolutely not, it just means that certain events will still occur.

Lets look at an example. If JK has it in her plot that Harry must kill Voldemort, does changing the way Voldemort was killed change the plot? I don't think so. She has changed the fate of 3 characters which doesn't change the plot. I guess what frustrates me is that every person is clinging to theories that logically are an impossibility while many logical theories are dismissed because they want it to be something else.

I have always felt that this was a very simple, logical and plausible theory when looked at. I am back for a while so if you guys have any other comments or questions, let me know.

RiddleIsOurKing
May 22nd, 2007, 11:59 am
According to my source (who has several published works about runes) the symbol on the spine is not a rune, in fact she says it is not even rune like.

It is a magical composite symbol.

I took this hint and went from there and found some very interesting things which actually tie in with some others theories about what the "Deathly Hallows" actually is.


But... I consider my new theory so plausible that I'm not going to post anything here because I believe I've already ruined the book for myself. If you would like to know about what I have found out though you can contact me privately on AIM or through PM.

Pearl84
May 22nd, 2007, 3:53 pm
I guess what frustrates me is that every person is clinging to theories that logically are an impossibility while many logical theories are dismissed because they want it to be something else.

I have always felt that this was a very simple, logical and plausible theory when looked at. I am back for a while so if you guys have any other comments or questions, let me know.

Hi Skalors,

Of course we are looking at the story from our own frame of reference and in accordance with that frame, ideas get their logical or illogical value. You have a 4 year study of runes behind you and some theory might be completely obvious for you, but not to others.

I hope you don't take this as an offence, I would really like to learn more about the background of your theory on Harry's scar and the meaning behind the runes. Now I also have a study besides my other interests so I have to focus my attention (you probably too). But mythology and magic, symbolism, mysticism and religion do touch the edges of my study, so I am still eager to learn more about it. So I hope you can guide us in the process of discussing this theory and searching for information that is valuable and coherent with it.

Maybe you can give us some keywords so we can search, or give us valuable sources like book titles or webpages. And I'd like to know what kind of logical theories are dismissed according to you.

Thanks in advance,

Johan.

RiddleIsOurKing
May 22nd, 2007, 4:16 pm
> Message submitted using an on-site form by
> (form.mail@aswynn.co.uk) on Sun, 20, May, 2007 at 22:00:16,CEST
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> website form: Onsite Contact Form
> Sender_Name: Joao Stinson
> Sender_Email: threeesixxxmafia@aim.com
> Message_About: possible runes and what it would mean.
> Message_Body: I know this is not what you do but I can't find any
> information on it. I was wondering if the symbol on the spine of the 7th
> Harry Potter cover artwork was an ancient rune and if so what could its
> true or known definition be? Here is a link, thanks for any insight.


No it's not a rune and not even rune like, it's a composite magical symbol
of a triangle and a circle.

Freya

Thought
May 22nd, 2007, 4:42 pm
According to my source (who has several published works about runes) the symbol on the spine is not a rune, in fact she says it is not even rune like.

It is a magical composite symbol.

Well, considering that your source has published several works about runes (I am curious, is this historical/archeological work on runes or something else?), it might be worth pointing out that Rowling has show quite the ability to make things up but little inclination to go into deep research for the Harry Potter books. That is, whatever the symbol means, I doubt one will need to have "published [several] works about runes" in order to figure it out. The same would most likely go for "magic." It is unlikely that the symbol will relate to any modern "magic" concept (perhaps it might be an ancient magic or alchemical symbol, there are certainly one that might have been a basis for this design, but none that are exact), since such would require a fair bit of specialized knowledge. And, let us not forget, Rowling has generally stayed away from any religion (do wizards even have religion?) The closest we have is Christmas, Halloween, and Easter holidays.

Of course, this is just going off of Rowlings behavior as far as it can be judged from what one finds in the books. She could include elements that require a fair bit of research, but I am inclined to believe that complex runic or magic knowledge is just overthinking the problem.

On a more simpler note, it has been proposed that the four Hogwart's houses correspond to the four classical elements (Gryffinder=Fire, Slytherin=water, Hufflepuff=earth, and Ravenclaw=air). Curiously, the symbols of these four elements are all quite similar, being either a triangle or a bisected triangle. Indeed, one could claim that all four symbols (though it requires rotating) are present in that symbol on the spine. It could be as simple as the unity of the houses (not that I personally believe this, but the symbol, alas, has many possible and very legitimate interpretations).

Occam’s razor, I would venture, is a good test for these sorts of theories.

RiddleIsOurKing
May 22nd, 2007, 4:46 pm
I think it's also obvious that Jo does use historical things in the books and plays off them to create her stories as well.

Anyway, I'm not going to post my theory here because like I said above after what I read yesterday it seems to correspond with what some have suggested what the Deathly Hallows means.

I listen to mugglecast as well and they don't seem to put together Deathly Hallows and this symbol, because if you have read what I've read, then you could see how they are so related.

Like I said, I don't want to get in trouble here on the boards for posting too much information, I might be completely wrong but I might be right on the head and don't want to spoil it.

Actually I hope i'm wrong because I feel like I've ruined the book for myself. =(


But listen to mugglecast this coming Sunday, if they read my email and the links and information I sent to them in the rebuttal, I would think they might bring up this theory. But then again they get so many emails, they might just skim over mine without reading it. But all the same... I will say this though, my theory has more to do with what is happening on the US cover than the UK cover, even though the symbol is on the UK cover... anyways, I'm about to say too much. =)

momeve
May 22nd, 2007, 7:24 pm
I just wanted to touch on a comment made about Lily not doing any rune magic- Imo, this thread explains the fact that I have felt Lily was doing something other than standing and waiting to be killed. First, we have, from Voldemort's statements about James, a longer time frame than the second it would take to fire off an AK. There is quite a bit of damage to the house, James had previously come in contact with Voldemort and was an accomplished wizard himself. Because of all this, I feel V and James battled for a bit, perhaps at least 3 or 4 minutes. What would Lily have been doing? We don't know if they knew about the prophecy but if we assume they didn't, they would think Voldemort was there for them and not necessarily the baby. I think it was even said somewhere that he wasn't known for killing children. Yet I would bet Lily would fear for Harry's life anyway or at the very least, his safety if they were killed. Also, i have read someone's speculation that there would have been some kind of barrier like what we were shown in HBP, put up when V entered to keep any help out. Either way, I think Lily had a bit of time and used her unknown job knowledge to place a protection on Harry.

Pearl84
May 22nd, 2007, 8:06 pm
There is also the highly probable assumption of some other character being in the house at the same time, however, this is getting off-topic... It does indeed, again, raise the question why the house was devastated... sorry, this is far off-topic , back to the subject.

Alyssa_L
May 22nd, 2007, 10:44 pm
According to my source (who has several published works about runes) the symbol on the spine is not a rune, in fact she says it is not even rune like.

It is a magical composite symbol.

I took this hint and went from there and found some very interesting things which actually tie in with some others theories about what the "Deathly Hallows" actually is.


But... I consider my new theory so plausible that I'm not going to post anything here because I believe I've already ruined the book for myself. If you would like to know about what I have found out though you can contact me privately on AIM or through PM.


Oh no! I'm given a conundrum here. I want to look into this so I can say I know, and because I'm really, really curious. I just don't want to ruin it for myself! Ahhh descsions! -pulls out hair-

skalors1
May 22nd, 2007, 10:58 pm
For those of you interested, here is the conversation between me and Riddle. I post this because I don't think he has uncovered anything but it would be interesting discussion to build off of this.

Also, it has always been my belief that when JK uses the word hallows that she is referring to treasure. In legends the word "hallows" has been to represent particularly important and powerful objects. It has also been known to represent treasure a.k.a. the Four Hallows of Ireland, The Thirteen Hallows of Britain.

Therefore, to me, the title of the book has always meant Deadly Treasures (Treasured by LV, Deadly to others)



Quote:
Originally Posted by skalors1
Riddle, the symbol you are referring to is known as a magic circle. The symbol on the spine of the book looks nothing like a magic circle. Also, for a magic circle to work, it also requires power words or runes to be drawn inside of it.




Quote:
Originally Posted by RiddleIsOurKing
She's not a friend, it was just some woman who runs a website and I'm not sure all her books are about runes but she seems to declare herself a witch of some sort from the skimming I did on her website, I just emailed her and sent her a link to the cover and asked her if it was a rune.

I'm wasn't trying to discredit your theory but because of your theory I ended up doing my own research. I guess I'll tell you a little more of my theory.

A lot of people thought that the Deathly Hallows might be "Spirits" coming back to help or to hurt Harry. All Hallows Eve, all of this, was many people's theory.

I looked up magical composite symbols and found a couple of references that said a circle within the triangle (no mention of the line though, I admit) what a symbol or hieroglyphic placed on a wand to invocate the spirits of the dead and the one who is in possession of the wand can control them.

It is my belief that Voldemort kidnapped Olivander to force him to create this wand so that he could add these spirits (or Deathly Hallows) to his army, because he would be in control of them.

I think those are the shadows we see on the U.S. art work of the book and I believe that Voldemort and Harry are reaching out for the wand that controls them.

Whatever you want to call the symbol, a rune, a magical composite symbol, I think from the title of the book, from what we have read in the books, and from what the definitions of what these symbols COULD mean, add up quite well.

I'm not saying everyone will agree with this theory but it almost seems so plausible to me that I don't want to put it out there, because if it were to happen then I think it would kinda be a bummer for some people.


Quote:
Originally Posted by skalors1
The triangle is a triune, which your friend involved with runes will inform you that it derives from ancient egyptian runes. The circle can be named many things, but they all mean the same thing. The line symbolizes division, when it is drawn upwards it has spiritual connotations a.k.a. division of the soul.

All of those are runes. Harry's scar may derive from anglo-saxon runes, but the symbol on the spine does not. Also, most importantly, pay attention to how the patterns are drawn. Though I only have knowledge from college courses, I would assume spell writing books and high magician books (both derived from ancient egypt) will have this information.

Btw, this has all been posted in that thread.

If you seem to think it means something else, then by all means let me know; I am interested in the theory.

Also, there have been about 40 books in total written about ancient runes. I would like to know who your friend is; to my knowledge, there is not one author who has written more than one book.

Pansy
May 22nd, 2007, 11:39 pm
Forgive me if someone has already asked for this, but...

However, it has been a theory of mine since I started reading the first book (which I admit wasn’t until I was a freshman in college and that proves significant) and has been reinforced by almost every Harry Potter book since then (and the second Harry Potter movie but I will leave you folks to figure that out). Also, to my surprise, it has been something that no one has caught on to in all of this time despite the numerous hints that have been in the books. Or if they have, they have kept it quiet like I have done.

Are you saying that each book (presumably the UK version) has a symbol on it that leads up to what is going to happen? You say this theory has been reinforce dby almost eveyr HP book, how exactly? Can you expand on that a little more - i.e. what was the symbol, and what did it mean to you for that particular book?


The shape of Harry’s scar is what tipped me off. It is more than a scar and more than a connection between Voldemort and Harry. It is an ancient rune.

. . .

*Note: I will not discuss the meaning of the symbol on the spine of the cover. However, be forewarned that the meaning of the symbol on the spine is not as important as are its implications.

I'm confused, are you saying each symbol on the spine of each book has tipped you off to the implications of that book and the last book? Or just gave you an idea for a theory?


I have 4 years of study on this topic and I had a rough time with the Rune on the spine. I was more excited when it confirmed other theories I have (which I certainly will not post here because they are spoilers). Sorry I waited so long to post this, but I figured you guys needed something *ahem* NEW to debate.

Not asking you to post spoilers, but could you say show us the symbol on the spine of book 5 and tell us how it confirmed your theory for that book? Unless of course I've completely mis-understood your thoughts. ;)

Personally - I think a publishing company would have little to no knowledge of the underlying themes of a book to use a symbol for each to help predict the end of the series? But I find it interesting that you say each of your theories are confirmed.

Thanks in advance - if these questions make sense.

RiddleIsOurKing
May 22nd, 2007, 11:46 pm
Um, I don't think you are allowed to publically post Private messages, thats the reason they are called private messages....

I just appreciate people not doing that, but I've already notified the staff. Not sure if it's against the rules but that's **.

skalors1
May 22nd, 2007, 11:47 pm
Pansy, most everything has been explained in the thread. I don't think I could do this thread justice by paraphrasing everything. Besides, it would take a VERY long time. Sorry:(

Riddle,

First, private messages belong to the people to whom they were sent/received. Second, there was nothing malicious in posting the thread. I assumed that you did not want the thread posted because you feared a spoiler. After hearing your theory, I determined that it wasn't a spoiler and felt that someone else may benefit from the post.

RiddleIsOurKing
May 23rd, 2007, 12:00 am
Okay well good luck in this thread I won't be visiting it anymore, I don't appreciate that, you didn't ask which is rude.

I guess they don't teach you manners in that school of yours?


And for your information you are not the end all be all of what is considered anything in any genre, just so you know.

Pansy
May 23rd, 2007, 12:02 am
Pansy, most everything has been explained in the thread. I don't think I could do this thread justice by paraphrasing everything. Besides, it would take a VERY long time. Sorry:(



Please clarify one thing (and I did read through the pages of this thread before posting, and am throughly confused by your initial post, which is why I'm asking):

Are you saying that each symbol had a specific reference to the theme of that specific book, or as a whole have been leading up to your theory for the end?

Secondly, what about the US publications? Do they reference these runes or symbols anywhere?

Hermaryne
May 23rd, 2007, 3:35 am
I assumed that you did not want the thread posted because you feared a spoiler. After hearing your theory, I determined that it wasn't a spoiler and felt that someone else may benefit from the post.

Well it can be subjective whether or not a theory is revelatory enough to be considered a spoiler. I actually like RiddleIsOurKing's ideas and wouldn't be surprised if the book goes in a similar direction.

Is there more to your theory and what impact it may have on the story? If I accept that Harry's scar is a rune as you describe, I still don't understand how this affects the plot. We already know that Lily's sacrifice provided Harry's protection. How does the scar/rune influence the final outcome?

Pearl84
May 23rd, 2007, 11:15 am
Okay well good luck in this thread I won't be visiting it anymore, I don't appreciate that, you didn't ask which is rude.

I guess they don't teach you manners in that school of yours?


I am not here to discuss whether or not it is ethical to post private messages, but please let's keep the peace on this thread.

Skalors, the first theory I read about the meaning of Deathly Hallows is that they refer to Voldemorts horcruxes. Maybe it's the difference in language (I'm from the Netherlands), but I never quite understood why deathly is so difficult to understand. If I would translate it in dutch and re-translate it, it would come close to dead-ish or dead-alike. Now these two re-translations cover very well the meaning of horcruxes, because they are seemingly dead objects, but have a piece of living soul contained in it.

If the symbol of the spine is indeed the wand movement for making a horcrux, could a reverse movement be the spell to destroy one? I believe that, to make a horcrux, one has to begin in the middle of the base, turn to the right and go around the triangle, when returning at the base one goes further to draw the circle and upon returning at the base, draw the division line upward. Or one could start at the top, going left or right and upon returning at the top, draw the division line downward and then draw the circle...

Anyway, I think that rune magic, being wandless magic, will indeed be the core of the plotline of book 7.

Besides, I have found a nice booklist on runes and rune magic, you can see it on this site: Esoteric Runic Bibliography (http://ariadne.uio.no/runenews/bibl-eso.htm)

Oh yeah, for all of you looking for an extensive and free online booksource on various mythological, religous, esoteric matters and much much more, check this page: Internet Sacred texts Archive (http://www.sacred-texts.com/)

Oceania
May 23rd, 2007, 1:27 pm
I am finding this an interesting thread, albeit a very frustrating one.

First, (and this is just my opinion), I think that if you have an idea, and say as much, you should just post it. No more vague clues. No more beating around the bush. Just post the idea. And if you believe your idea to be so correct as to be a possible "spoiler", then just use the spoiler tags. That way, the people who want to look can, and those that would prefer not to, don't have to see what you have written. Vague allusions to ideas and theories, without clearly stating said ideas and theories, are somewhat counter productive to discussion (and extremely frustrating to the reader). Although I applaud the idea of doing research for ones self, the purveyor of the originating idea should give us a clear and concise line questioning to work with (in other words, a complete and solid idea or theory to branch from). Of course that is only how I personally feel about this issue of "I have this great idea, it has to do with symbols, but I'm not going to share because I've figured it all out and it's a spoiler". Just frustrating as all get out.

That being said, I do think runes, ancient magicks (Norse, Pagan, Drudic, Egyptian, Roman, etc.) and some of the correlating symbols that go with such, will play a role in the final book. I like the idea that Harry's scar is possibly a runic symbol. I like the possibilities that have been give thus far in the thread (which I have read most of). Though it has been mentioned by the thread starter (skalors1) that the actual rune symbol is not the biggest or most important part of the idea---the most important part is that it's a rune at all. I am still not clear on why, if Harry's scar is indeed a rune (regardless of it's specific symbol or meaning) what impact that will have on the story. So---completely disregarding symbolism and specifics, and only taking into account that it is a rune---what does that mean to the story in your estimation, skalors1? What is (in your opinion) the meaning of having runes play a big part in the story?

I like the idea that Harry's scar was caused by both Voldemort AND Lily. That it wouldn't have been created if both were not present to play their specific roles in the creation of it. It seems pretty logical---a sound thought process. However, the idea that Harry had to die in order for Voldemort to make a horcrux, I think is erroneous. Anyone can die, and a horcrux can be made from anyone's death. So technically, Voldemort could have begun his horcrux spell with the deaths of Lily and James. (He may have intended to finish the spell with Harry, but his plan was thwarted). My point though, is that he could have made a complete horcrux with James or Lily. He didn't, but he could have.

Also, I don't believe that all theories concerning Harry being a horcrux should be shot down just yet; according to our information, Nagini is a horcrux, and she is quite alive. So there may be a way yet for JKR to explain how Harry (or his scar) is a horcrux. She is the author after all. I am not saying I necessarily prescribe to Harry being a horcrux; I am just saying it is a possibility I am not quite ready to rule out. For me, it's as possible as anything else.

I agree with many of the posters in stating that Hermione "didn't take Ancient Runes for nothing". I especially believe this because of the specifics she/JKR gave in talking about Ehwaz vs. Eihwaz. To me that is a little too specific for a subject to never be brought up again.

Finally, I think this whole conglomeration of ideas (once they became clear, that is) is a promising line of inquiry. Although, I am almost certain we have delved too deeply, probably right past the actual answer. I doubt JKR is going to bring in a highly complicated system of ancient (and debateable) runes and their various meanings in order to weave a tangled web of events at Godric's Hollow. If she does bring in runes ( a good possibility) she will do it in a simple conscise way, that everyone will be able to understand.

Good thread :) (Would be even better we were all just up front about our ideas)

Pearl84
May 23rd, 2007, 2:11 pm
Hi Oceania,

Anyone can die, and a horcrux can be made from anyone's death.

Don't forgot the fact that Dumbledore mentioned that Voldemort wanted to save his horcrux-making for special deaths, so Harry's. Besides, I think it is logical Voldemort wanted to wait until after he killed all persons necessary (Lily being an unnecessary murder) to create his horcrux. Of course he failed, because the curse reflected...

Bscorp
May 23rd, 2007, 2:33 pm
Besides, I have found a nice booklist on runes and rune magic, you can see it on this site: Esoteric Runic Bibliography (http://ariadne.uio.no/runenews/bibl-eso.htm)

Oh yeah, for all of you looking for an extensive and free online booksource on various mythological, religous, esoteric matters and much much more, check this page: Internet Sacred texts Archive (http://www.sacred-texts.com/)

These are great links. Thanks for posting them!

Thought
May 23rd, 2007, 4:13 pm
First, Oceania, excellent post. Though, I would claim there is no need for a spoiler tag; unless one has read the book, even an accurate theory isn't a spoiler. For example, it is most likely correct that Voldemort will be defeated, yet that can hardly be considered a spoiler since we don't know how (or when, or why, or with what... indeed, most of us are reading book 7 to find out how it ends, not to find out if it ends).

Although, I am almost certain we have delved too deeply, probably right past the actual answer. I doubt JKR is going to bring in a highly complicated system of ancient (and debateable) runes and their various meanings in order to weave a tangled web of events at Godric's Hollow. If she does bring in runes ( a good possibility) she will do it in a simple conscise way, that everyone will be able to understand.

Couldn't agree more. However, I am curious; in your post, you separated pagan magic from Roman magic. Historically speaking, these were one in the same (pagan being the Latin term for those who lived in the country, and thus were some of the last to convert to Christianity, therefore lending their name to the old Roman religions). Perhaps you are referencing the modern resurgence of paganism? Or was this a slight slip and you meant the same thing with Pagan and Roman magic? (personally, I would be endlessly amused if Voldemort underwent a taurobolium, or that it is revealed that he had, but somehow that seems a little too out of taste for a children's book for Rowling to include).

On a quick note about Runic Wandless Magic, it should be noted that some runic spells do require a wand (as indicated in the Havamal). The spell might be carved onto a wand and waved over the subject. Additionally, Norse myths use the kenning "death-wand" or "battle-wand," etc, which reference a sword. It would be interesting if, indeed, Harry or someone performed "wandless" magic, but with a sword (Godric's sword, perhaps?) instead of the more traditional wands.

Since there seem to be a fair bit of modern magic knowledge in this thread, I am curious if anyone has looked for a reference to the symbol on the cover in Tarot Cards. We already have two strong (and maybe three total) references over the last three booked (The Hanged Man in Goblet of Fire, The Tower in HBP, and the Chariot could work for OotP with a bit of a stretch). I know next to nothing about Tarots (or, to be honest, modern magic), but given the association of these in past books perhaps it might be a useful lane of inquiry for the Cover Symbol as well.

Just a magical Thought

Hermaryne
May 23rd, 2007, 4:38 pm
(personally, I would be endlessly amused if Voldemort underwent a taurobolium, or that it is revealed that he had, but somehow that seems a little too out of taste for a children's book for Rowling to include).

On a quick note about Runic Wandless Magic, it should be noted that some runic spells do require a wand (as indicated in the Havamal). The spell might be carved onto a wand and waved over the subject. Additionally, Norse myths use the kenning "death-wand" or "battle-wand," etc, which reference a sword. It would be interesting if, indeed, Harry or someone performed "wandless" magic, but with a sword (Godric's sword, perhaps?) instead of the more traditional wands.


Just a magical Thought

Now we're getting somewhere! I have no idea what these terms mean, but I'm looking forward to the reasearch. (Also thanks to Pearl84 for the magical links). The speculation is all part of the fun and is something I'll miss after the DH release.

I've done some cursory study on Alchemy in HP and feel it might have a role in the end. Most posters talk about a "chemical marriage" being key to the resolution, this would tie in with either the Lovers Tarot card, or maybe Temperance or The Aeon. I'll try to post more when I can sort things out.

Frankie62446
May 23rd, 2007, 5:02 pm
Although, I am almost certain we have delved too deeply, probably right past the actual answer. I doubt JKR is going to bring in a highly complicated system of ancient (and debateable) runes and their various meanings in order to weave a tangled web of events at Godric's Hollow. If she does bring in runes ( a good possibility) she will do it in a simple conscise way, that everyone will be able to understand.

I could not agree more. We seem to all be overlooking the fact that this symbol may be just another one of JK's creations.

I would also like to know how everyone thinks that this rune connection will tie into the future. We think we know how it may have been significant in the past (Godric's Hollow), but I am most curious to find out it will effect the fate of Harry (if at all).

YourAuntMarge
May 23rd, 2007, 5:45 pm
But didn't JKR say in an interview that the actual shape of the scar wasn't the most significant thing about it?

I'm not sure I believe the colour of the eyes thing or the runes theory - the colour of the eyes thing can't be so crucial to the story else why would JKR have cast Dan Ratcliffe (who has blue eyes) in the film

ErodedCarpet
May 23rd, 2007, 6:29 pm
I am finding this an interesting thread, albeit a very frustrating one.

First, (and this is just my opinion), I think that if you have an idea, and say as much, you should just post it. No more vague clues. No more beating around the bush. Just post the idea. And if you believe your idea to be so correct as to be a possible "spoiler", then just use the spoiler tags. That way, the people who want to look can, and those that would prefer not to, don't have to see what you have written. Vague allusions to ideas and theories, without clearly stating said ideas and theories, are somewhat counter productive to discussion (and extremely frustrating to the reader). Although I applaud the idea of doing research for ones self, the purveyor of the originating idea should give us a clear and concise line questioning to work with (in other words, a complete and solid idea or theory to branch from). Of course that is only how I personally feel about this issue of "I have this great idea, it has to do with symbols, but I'm not going to share because I've figured it all out and it's a spoiler". Just frustrating as all get out.

That being said, I do think runes, ancient magicks (Norse, Pagan, Drudic, Egyptian, Roman, etc.) and some of the correlating symbols that go with such, will play a role in the final book. I like the idea that Harry's scar is possibly a runic symbol. I like the possibilities that have been give thus far in the thread (which I have read most of). Though it has been mentioned by the thread starter (skalors1) that the actual rune symbol is not the biggest or most important part of the idea---the most important part is that it's a rune at all. I am still not clear on why, if Harry's scar is indeed a rune (regardless of it's specific symbol or meaning) what impact that will have on the story. So---completely disregarding symbolism and specifics, and only taking into account that it is a rune---what does that mean to the story in your estimation, skalors1? What is (in your opinion) the meaning of having runes play a big part in the story?

I like the idea that Harry's scar was caused by both Voldemort AND Lily. That it wouldn't have been created if both were not present to play their specific roles in the creation of it. It seems pretty logical---a sound thought process. However, the idea that Harry had to die in order for Voldemort to make a horcrux, I think is erroneous. Anyone can die, and a horcrux can be made from anyone's death. So technically, Voldemort could have begun his horcrux spell with the deaths of Lily and James. (He may have intended to finish the spell with Harry, but his plan was thwarted). My point though, is that he could have made a complete horcrux with James or Lily. He didn't, but he could have.

Also, I don't believe that all theories concerning Harry being a horcrux should be shot down just yet; according to our information, Nagini is a horcrux, and she is quite alive. So there may be a way yet for JKR to explain how Harry (or his scar) is a horcrux. She is the author after all. I am not saying I necessarily prescribe to Harry being a horcrux; I am just saying it is a possibility I am not quite ready to rule out. For me, it's as possible as anything else.

I agree with many of the posters in stating that Hermione "didn't take Ancient Runes for nothing". I especially believe this because of the specifics she/JKR gave in talking about Ehwaz vs. Eihwaz. To me that is a little too specific for a subject to never be brought up again.

Finally, I think this whole conglomeration of ideas (once they became clear, that is) is a promising line of inquiry. Although, I am almost certain we have delved too deeply, probably right past the actual answer. I doubt JKR is going to bring in a highly complicated system of ancient (and debateable) runes and their various meanings in order to weave a tangled web of events at Godric's Hollow. If she does bring in runes ( a good possibility) she will do it in a simple conscise way, that everyone will be able to understand.

Good thread :) (Would be even better we were all just up front about our ideas)

Amen! Very well said. I fully agree with “up front about our ideas”. My initial foray into this thread was severely thwarted by the vagueness in which it started.

I also agree that if Rowling’s wishes to use runes as a part of her story, it most likely would be in a far simpler manner than many have suggested.

I am wondering if Harry’s scar is a rune. Would it be believable that Hermione having stared at Harry’s scar for 6 books now, never mentioned it looked like a rune?

Pearl84
May 23rd, 2007, 7:30 pm
I am wondering if Harry’s scar is a rune. Would it be believable that Hermione having stared at Harry’s scar for 6 books now, never mentioned it looked like a rune?

I think we should give Skalors the credit for starting this thread and Harry's scar being a rune is part of his theory - doubting this will ruin the thread I fear.

Looking beyond the obvious is nothing strange and, I believe, rather human, so the idea that Hermione never connected runes with the scar is possible. Besides, if it really is a rune and a part of the Great Plot, JK would of course never mention it before it was time to reveal it.

Maybe it is effective to discuss some main points of this discussion and set up some assumptions, so we can speculate about that? I'd love to hear your ideas!

Hermaryne,

The speculation is all part of the fun and is something I'll miss after the DH release.

I totally agree :cool:

Thought
May 23rd, 2007, 8:56 pm
Harry's scar being a rune is part of his theory - doubting this will ruin the thread I fear.

Perhaps I misread his intent, but I was under the impression that the application of runic knowledge to the series was far more important to his theory than Harry's scar. The possible runic shape of it being more of a catalyst for thinking rather than the end result.

Looking beyond the obvious is nothing strange and, I believe, rather human, so the idea that Hermione never connected runes with the scar is possible.

And let us not forget that Hermione only learned about runes in her third year. She had two years to think that Harry's scar was nothing more than a scar. Presumably, his scar can't look too much like a rune or others would have noticed by now.

It might also be nothing more than that Harry's scar is a hint to the reader and isn't actually important to the plot. Sort of like in old westerns where the good guys would always wear white hats and the bad guys would always wear black. Sig, the rune, is the same as the word for victory.

Though, speaking of runes, might the myth of Odin obtaining the runes be a valid means of inquiry? He hung himself for nine days from the World Tree, essentially dying, before the runes were revealed to him. Early on Tom Riddle went to Little Hangleton (where the Hanged Man pub is) to kill his father; might this be an indication that this is when he first learned (or used) runes? (or, perhaps, at some point Voldemort underwent a similar ceremony in order to learn such things).

alyssareiner
May 23rd, 2007, 9:06 pm
it would definetnly be a twist and give hermione a chance to use her expertice to help out. maybe even an excuse to go back to hogwarts...

Pearl84
May 23rd, 2007, 9:48 pm
Perhaps I misread his intent, but I was under the impression that the application of runic knowledge to the series was far more important to his theory than Harry's scar. The possible runic shape of it being more of a catalyst for thinking rather than the end result.


You are right and I'd like to restate my thoughts, namely that I think that certain assumptions need to be hold on to in order for this thread to stay alive. Skalor brought in some ideas and they form the fundament of the topic I think and I expressed the caution to hold on to that, but that was too protective... It comes from my experience with discussions that run loose with people that do not stick to the primary assumptions and the red line of a theory or conversation.

She had two years to think that Harry's scar was nothing more than a scar. Presumably, his scar can't look too much like a rune or others would have noticed by now.


I guess we'll keep a difference in opinion here :)

skalors1
May 23rd, 2007, 10:50 pm
I have a few points to address here. First, I think this has turned into a great conversation. Thank you all for your input.

I guess since we all, for the most part, have more solid knowledge of what is being considered here I would like to toss out some more of my thoughts.

The first is in reference to someone saying that JK would not impose some highly complex rune theory in the series. I must say that I totally agree with this. I have said from the start that the meaning of the rune on Harry's forehead is irrelevant. Also, the meaning on the spine of the book, while not irrelevant especially if you look at it from a possibility of being the magic symbol to create a hocrus, is not necessairly vital to this theory.

What is vital is whether or not they are actually runes of some sort. I say this because it hints towards magic not yet revealed in her books. We have seen warning signs about the use of runes in magic, especially when speaking of Bills work for gringotts. Ron had said that he needed knowedge of runes to counter old curses in pyramids etc. Hermione learning runes is not by accident.

This tells us one crucial thing. Runes had a serious presence in the use of magic. Now, whether that is true today is the the purpose behind this thread.

I heard a suggestion a little while ago in this thread about the sword being important to this type of magic and I really liked that idea. We know that the sword is very old. Maybe Harry, using his mothers powers, in combination with the sword will enable Harry to us some exceptional form of magic.

Hermaryne
May 23rd, 2007, 11:06 pm
A quick search on the HP Lexicon reminded me of some things I'd forgotten about. Hermione's Runes books are as follows:

Ancient Runes Made Easy
Magical Hieroglyphs and Logograms
Spellman's Syllabary
Advanced Rune Translation

It seems that Runes in Potterverse are associated with language more than anything else. I was reminded of Dumbledore in The Cave, "seeing and touching things that Harry didn't understand". DD was able to deduce instructions from the cave walls; my guess is that he was using Runic language.

Also, I found this link from JKR's website. Does anyone have an idea what the seven could be?
hp-lexicon.org/about/sources/jkr.com/jkr-com-trans-runes.html

ErodedCarpet
May 24th, 2007, 12:10 am
I think we should give Skalors the credit for starting this thread and Harry's scar being a rune is part of his theory - doubting this will ruin the thread I fear.

Looking beyond the obvious is nothing strange and, I believe, rather human, so the idea that Hermione never connected runes with the scar is possible. Besides, if it really is a rune and a part of the Great Plot, JK would of course never mention it before it was time to reveal it.

Maybe it is effective to discuss some main points of this discussion and set up some assumptions, so we can speculate about that? I'd love to hear your ideas!

Hermaryne,





I totally agree :cool:

My apologies I failed to see the previous insinuation that one could not differ from the original authors view. I personally find that debating a topic helps to flesh out problems or open new doors within a theory. I tend to find it hard to value the merits of an idea if I fail to acknowledge any faults it may have.

However, I would hate to distract you or anyone from the topic at hand. So I will refrain from participating in this topic. Forgive my intrusion into conversation.

flimseycauldron
May 24th, 2007, 12:32 am
My apologies I failed to see the previous insinuation that one could not differ from the original authors view. I personally find that debating a topic helps to flesh out problems or open new doors within a theory. I tend to find it hard to value the merits of an idea if I fail to acknowledge any faults it may have.

However, I would hate to distract you or anyone from the topic at hand. So I will refrain from participating in this topic. Forgive my intrusion into conversation.

I totally agree with you. Theories must be questioned and fleshed out otherwise you end up going in circles. The thing to remember about threads like this is that several people can hold a conversation with one another, around the main topic and as long as mods think your thoughts are a natural progression of the original topic then that is all that matters. ;)

Oh let me edit to say--could all this speculation be off base? I was looking at the symbol again and was thinking....the triangle could represent a tree, the line down the middle represent the rope, and the circle represents a person's head. Could this be another hanged man hint without all the attending rune hoopla?

I haven't read all six pages but I will mention that runes will be important. Does it relate to Harrys scar? Maybe, in an off hand way. I wish I could find the thread that talks about Harry's scar in relation to egyptian mythology. JKR said once, I believe, that it was the location of Harry's scar rather than the shape that is important---like the egyptian third eye?

Ancient Runes Made Easy
Magical Hieroglyphs and Logograms
Spellman's Syllabary
Advanced Rune Translation


It seems that JKR was mixing celtic and egyptian pictoral magic from the quote above. And as to Hermione not recognizing the rune...well DD has never mentioned runes to Harry at all...and if anyone would see the connection it's DD, if it was really there...

Also I would like to say that from the moment I saw the symbol on the cover I thought geometry--not runes. Which would lead to arithmancy--which Hermione is also familiar with.

As to Harry's eye color, forgive me if this has been said, but magic to do with the eyes was heavily featured in OoTP and HBP---legilimency. I think Harry's eyes are more of a symbolic reference to his mother (in the same way that Harry's hair is like his dads.)

Frankie62446
May 24th, 2007, 12:55 am
I've always thought that Harry would be a skilled Legilimens. It seems that to be skilled at legilimency, you have to be able to do the opposite of what you are supposed to do for Occlumency (something that JK said Harry has no natural talent for); that is, you are supposed to be well in-touch with your feelings. I'm sure we can agree that Harry is, indeed, well in-touch with his emotions.
Maybe the color your eyes has something to do with legilimency?
I'm not sure.


Skalors, you say that it is important that the runes are simply there, that what they mean isn't of any importance... but what would be the importance of runes, if not their meaning?

Pearl84
May 24th, 2007, 9:23 am
My apologies I failed to see the previous insinuation that one could not differ from the original authors view. I personally find that debating a topic helps to flesh out problems or open new doors within a theory. I tend to find it hard to value the merits of an idea if I fail to acknowledge any faults it may have.

However, I would hate to distract you or anyone from the topic at hand. So I will refrain from participating in this topic. Forgive my intrusion into conversation.


I totally agree with you. Theories must be questioned and fleshed out otherwise you end up going in circles. The thing to remember about threads like this is that several people can hold a conversation with one another, around the main topic and as long as mods think your thoughts are a natural progression of the original topic then that is all that matters.


I agree with you and that is why I changed my attitude later on when I said:

You are right and I'd like to restate my thoughts, namely that I think that certain assumptions need to be hold on to in order for this thread to stay alive. Skalor brought in some ideas and they form the fundament of the topic I think and I expressed the caution to hold on to that, but that was too protective... It comes from my experience with discussions that run loose with people that do not stick to the primary assumptions and the red line of a theory or conversation.


This:

Oh let me edit to say--could all this speculation be off base?

was why I reacted in this manner, that's all, there's no need to refrain from this topic for you at all.

Thought
May 24th, 2007, 2:54 pm
It seems that Runes in Potterverse are associated with language more than anything else. I was reminded of Dumbledore in The Cave, "seeing and touching things that Harry didn't understand". DD was able to deduce instructions from the cave walls; my guess is that he was using Runic language.

Ah, but many mythological and fictional sources have language as being magic in itself. The Egyptians, for example, performed "magic" by retelling myths. The Book of the Dead is one long spell that (the Egyptians believed) had the power to repell Set, but it was also the creation myth (and a few other myths, if I recall correctly, though it has been years since I read it).

As for Runes being used in magic, I actually just happened to be reading the Pensive chapter of GoF. Dumbledor's Pensive (if not all Pensives) has runes and other characters around its edges (and, apparently, Harry has picked up enough knowledge about Runes to recognize what are and aren't runic). The impression I got from this was that the Runes were part of the Pensive's power (and, I think we might agree, the Pensive is apparently a rather powerful magical artifact if it can hold and "replay" memories). This is a bit of a curious connection; pensive has runes, Harry's scar (which is over his mind) might be runic, some runic spells require the use of eyes (in particular, the runic spell to stop a thrown spear or arror in mid flight, or, in the Potterverse, perhaps spells), Harry's green eyes are important.

It certainly seems like we are onto something with this discussion of runes, symbols, and whatnots, but what and how such knowledge will actually relate is quite the mystery (and, I passively wonder, if runes might be studied in the Department of Mysteries).

flimseycauldron
May 24th, 2007, 3:59 pm
As for Runes being used in magic, I actually just happened to be reading the Pensive chapter of GoF. Dumbledor's Pensive (if not all Pensives) has runes and other characters around its edges (and, apparently, Harry has picked up enough knowledge about Runes to recognize what are and aren't runic). The impression I got from this was that the Runes were part of the Pensive's power (and, I think we might agree, the Pensive is apparently a rather powerful magical artifact if it can hold and "replay" memories). This is a bit of a curious connection; pensive has runes, Harry's scar (which is over his mind) might be runic, some runic spells require the use of eyes (in particular, the runic spell to stop a thrown spear or arror in mid flight, or, in the Potterverse, perhaps spells), Harry's green eyes are important.

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Luna reading runes in the Quibbler upside down on the train? Skalors seems to think (and Skalors can correct me if I'm wrong about this) that Harry's scar may be backwards or upside down or something. However wouldn't it be cool if Luna (or Hermione) could somehow change runes on a pensieve so as to make the person visiting the pensieve interact with the past?

was why I reacted in this manner, that's all, there's no need to refrain from this topic for you at all.

Pearl, I certainly wasn't berating you. (I hope you don't think I was. I certainly shouldn't be throwing stones! :) ) I just wanted to remind Eroded carpet that different tangents of the same topic can be discussed on the same thread. The mods are really good here about keeping the peace and not letting things get out of hand. :)

Hermaryne
May 24th, 2007, 5:57 pm
Ah, but many mythological and fictional sources have language as being magic in itself. The Egyptians, for example, performed "magic" by retelling myths. The Book of the Dead is one long spell that (the Egyptians believed) had the power to repell Set, but it was also the creation myth (and a few other myths, if I recall correctly, though it has been years since I read it).



Yes, that was what I had in mind. I was trying to get a context for Runes and figuring that they related to a magical kind of language. Considering the book titles and Dumbledore's actions in The Cave, it seems that there is an emphasis on translation. I wonder if it's signifigant that there was a symbol (or Rune) relating to blood- that Voldemort knows and used this symbol and how that could factor into things.

Thinking about the how the Runes might empower the Pensieve makes me wonder about the Diary horcrux. Maybe Voldemort used Runic magic to store the memories of his younger self?

I'd forogtten about Luna's upside-down Runes! If we assume that the symbol on the spine is the horcrux spell, then maybe reversing it would unify rather than divide? What might it mean to draw the line from the top down instead of bottom up?

Funny that we've never learned the name of Hogwart's ancient Runes teacher. Apparently many fans have asked JKR about this, though she hasn't answered.

Frankie62446
May 24th, 2007, 6:33 pm
I had never realized that we never knew the Runes teacher's name. Do you have the quote where JK was asked about it?

I had forgotten about Luna's Runes as well! We don't really see her reading them upside down in book 6 though, just book 5. Interesting that this, and Hermione lamenting about how she got her Runes mixed up both occur in book 5 and might be the biggest clues we have to Runes in the series

Hermaryne
May 24th, 2007, 7:03 pm
Frankie, I might have goofed. The Runes teacher was once identified by JKR's notes as Bathsheba Babbling (lol!), but then she blotted out the name. The Lexicon says that BB isn't cannon since it was from an early PoA draft and other things had changed since then. I forgot to copy the address but you can go to the Lexicon link that I posted earlier, and do a search.

flimseycauldron
May 24th, 2007, 7:32 pm
It would be interesting if the ancient runes teacher was none other than DD himself. I mean if McGonagal, the assistant headmistress, can teach transfiguration, why can't DD teach at least one class? Although that would seem to negate Harry's scar as being a rune--because then DD would have definately recognized it imediately.

momeve
May 24th, 2007, 7:38 pm
I found another "hint" in GOF that I think is interesting- Hermione is helping Harry with summoning charms as he is gearing up to fight the dragon. They are in the common room and text reads:.......Harry said, throwing a RUNE DICTIONARY back to Hermione, so he could try again.
Then 2 lines down, Hermione says "Harry, I really think you've got it!"
Just another brick with which to build this theory:)

Hermaryne
May 24th, 2007, 8:28 pm
I found another "hint" in GOF that I think is interesting- Harry said, throwing a RUNE DICTIONARY back to Hermione, so he could try again.
Then 2 lines down, Hermione says "Harry, I really think you've got it!"
Just another brick with which to build this theory:)

Good catch. The dictionary is another reference to language. I was looking at the names of the Arithmancy and Runes teachers. Even if JKR rejected Professor "Babbling", it's still interesting.

Septina Vector= seven + Math (numbers and their directions)

Bathseba= the seventh daughter + babbling (making sounds that have meaning but lacking recognizable words)

If nothing else, you've gotta love the way JK can play with names!

Interesting that Bill has studied these subjects for curse-breaking, yet potential aurors would not. It's probably safe to say that we'll see Hermione code-breaking (and curse-breaking) very soon.

skalors1
May 24th, 2007, 10:42 pm
Frankie, I might have goofed. The Runes teacher was once identified by JKR's notes as Bathsheba Babbling (lol!), but then she blotted out the name. The Lexicon says that BB isn't cannon since it was from an early PoA draft and other things had changed since then. I forgot to copy the address but you can go to the Lexicon link that I posted earlier, and do a search.

It is interesting that you mention this; JK removed a lot from the POA plot because it gave away to much. Maybe the introduction of the runes teacher and subject was part of the removed plot.

It certainly is curious that JK has never mentioned the runes teacher. I am even more perplexed by the fact that I haven't seen the question come up elsewhere.

Pearl84
May 24th, 2007, 11:21 pm
It certainly is curious that JK has never mentioned the runes teacher.

I agree :) JK also said that she got goosebumps by watching POA, because it contained hints of things to happen in the last two books. Nice reason to watch the movie for the 10th time or something ;)

Thinking about the how the Runes might empower the Pensieve makes me wonder about the Diary horcrux. Maybe Voldemort used Runic magic to store the memories of his younger self?


That's an interesting question, Hermaryne!


Jo might have used the name "Babbling" because the runic words have no clear meaning. However, in all ancient languages, it is the sound that matters for magical purposes. So babbling might sound crazy or without meaning, it might as well contain magical power. It reminds me of Dumbledore who says: "Oddment, nitwit, blubber, tweek," or in some other order. Maybe a powerful wizard is capable of injecting words with magical powers by the pitch of sounds.

I also wonder if runic divination relates to Trelawny and the Centaurs, "Mars is bright."

skalors1
May 24th, 2007, 11:28 pm
Here is something I found interesting when reviewing the required book list for Hermione's rune classes.

Spellman's Syllabry:

A syllabary is a set of symbols where each one represents a specific syllable. The title of this books suggests that the words used to cast spells are sometimes represented by sets of symbols other than our usual alphabet. However, since English and Latin are not well suited at all for a syllabary, this book might actually be designed for use with another language or perhaps a separate spellcasting language which is built with sound chunks which have discrete magical meanings. -Thanks Lexicon

It seems that we have been revolving around this topic more than we know.

flimseycauldron
May 25th, 2007, 8:16 am
Jo might have used the name "Babbling" because the runic words have no clear meaning. However, in all ancient languages, it is the sound that matters for magical purposes. So babbling might sound crazy or without meaning, it might as well contain magical power. It reminds me of Dumbledore who says: "Oddment, nitwit, blubber, tweek," or in some other order. Maybe a powerful wizard is capable of injecting words with magical powers by the pitch of sounds.

"It's levi-OH-sa, not levi-oh-SA."

It seems that magic and pronunciation/inflection go hand in hand, no matter what magic you are performing. I have often run across in literature that often times the most powerful magic can only be wrought if you know the true name of a thing. Which runes are, are they not?

On an interesting side note, and ever so slightly off topic, I wonder if there is any correlation to the Tower of Babel. I wonder where Hermione went for her Ancient Runes class?

Pearl84
May 25th, 2007, 5:54 pm
"It's levi-OH-sa, not levi-oh-SA." :lol: :tu:

Brilliant quote to illustrate the example!

skalors1
May 25th, 2007, 6:17 pm
I understand your point, but a syllabry is not learning to pronounce letters, it is used to pronounce symbols. That is why it is required for Runes and not for anything else.

flimseycauldron
May 25th, 2007, 6:36 pm
Indeed, skalors, but when you break things down to their bases what you end up with is language, pure and simple. A syllabry is basically a phonetic dictionary--or a translation dictionary if you will. Sometimes you can say the word-but not spell it. Sometimes you can say AND spell the word but not draw the picture for it. Sometimes you can draw the picture for something but not know the word for it....sometimes there are many words for something but only one way to draw it. Sometimes there are many pictures but only one word...you get what I mean. That's why I believe that magic is something you have to study, runes in particular. And why you have to do/say things just so in magic. The basic premise is not restricted to just runes, was all I was really getting at. :)

Brilliant quote to illustrate the example!

Thanks, Pearl! :)

skalors1
May 25th, 2007, 7:59 pm
Fair enough:) I would agree with you that it applies as a whole.

Pearl84
May 29th, 2007, 11:02 am
I couldn't stand the fact that my attention was floating away from this thread, so I began searching again and I foud some interesting facts.

First, a quote:

The word "RUNE" means "mystery", "to whisper", "secret". They were used as sacred, magical "keys" or "doorways" through which various powers are directed to do the will of the Vitki or Galdramenn for divination, to bind spells, to make talismans, to chant and work magick of all kinds. It was through the Will of the user the powers flowed through. The actual physical sign seems to have little power on its own but in combination with the will of a trained person that any results can be expected.

Basic info, but a certain proof.

Further more, you can make several runes to make a so-called 'runescript', a series of runes that is used for a specific (magical) purpose. The numbers of runes you use may vary, but 3 runes is usual to make a script that is related to the growth or decline of something, 5 runes is usual for all kinds of protection and listen here: 7 runes is typical for love magic...

I also began reading more about Norse/Scandinavian mythology and the etymology of Ginnungagap brought something interesting. Ginnungagap is the primordial chaos, where Niflheim (world of mist) and Muspelheim (fire world) came together to create or form Ymir as material for further creation. Ginnungagap seems to come from the root Ginn, which means magic. Herefrom is derived ginnung, which means spell. But Ginn is a word that has specific religious and spiritual connotations and use, Ginnheiligar would mean as much as 'with holy force/power' and already in the language of runes are present the 'ginna- or ginnurunar' which are powerrunes.

Might this have to do something with Ginny? How far does JKR go with coming up with names that are meaningful to her story? Besides, I can remember that there was a quote in which JKR said that book 7 would reveal her religious side or religious ideas.

I'm off, searching more... :D

negaprion
May 29th, 2007, 8:09 pm
I have only read a portion of this thread, so if I'm repeating something - sorry.

I did look up as many runes as possible - the image on the spine or any of the parts of the image - are not runes. The closest I could find to the symbol were alchemical symbols - the triangle means fire, the circle means gold or sun and there was no straight line.

However, I think they could also be linked to the four tarot suits and the four founders of hogwarts
the triangle is the blade - swords and Gryffindor
the circle is the coin - pentacles and Slytherin (locket)
the line is the staff - wands and Ravenclaw

this leaves the cup and Hufflepuff
the symbol for a vessel or cup is usually an inverted triangle - JKR could have merged it with the blade and just had one triangle.
perhaps the circle is the cup "looking down" on it.

Merging the symbols may indicate that the houses will merge to fight Voldemort or that the horcruxes must merge to be destroyed.

Pearl84
May 29th, 2007, 9:01 pm
An upright triangle may also be a sign of a 'hidden' reality, wheras a downward triangle is one of a 'revealed' reality. In some esoteric schools the two interlaced triangles signify the unmanifest Wisdom and the manifest Wisdom. In this context, I don't think the downward triangle will be revealed until we read it in book 7.

Besides, that the houses will unite is inevitable, you see it in many great epical stories: a twofold battle with twe opposite great armies and two opposite smaller armies. But at the end, the smaller armies decide the faith of the world. Just look at Lord of the Rings, The Matrix, the books by Raymond Feist, I believe this serie will end the same way.

Orlando
May 29th, 2007, 9:33 pm
I was reading the thread and remembered something, so when off to 'copy' , so if I am repeating an idea - sorry.

I read the idea about Harry's scar being a Rune symbol somewhere else, and it has similarities with the Rune 'eihwaz', one of the ones Hermione mentions.
So I have a simpler meaning about the scar (but only because JK says the shape of the scar is not the most important thing) and its meaning.

eihwaz is connected to Yew - which is Voldemort's wand, and it is also connected to Capricorn - Voldemort's zodiac sign. I found this with regards to the Rune:

EIHWAZ UPRIGHT:Survival, strength, reliability, dependability, trustworthiness, enlightenment, endurance, defense, protection, secret or sacred knowledge

EIHWAZ MERKSTAVE: Confusion, destruction, dissatisfaction, weakness, vulnerability, untrustworthyness, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, ignorance.

On a very simple level - does not that sound like Harry & Voldemort?

ANSWERS
May 29th, 2007, 9:46 pm
Symbolism - The Sun

Keywords - Success


This rune is that of the sun, and is represented by pictogram as part of the solar wheel.

Sigil is often connected to the lightning bolt, both by pictographic representation and in contextual meaning as a flash of inspiration or ecstasy.

In either of these images of bright energy there is a forecast of success and creativity in a supportive and uplifting context.

Phonetically only the runic derivation of "Sol" has kept a root meaning intact through the evolution of many years of human language. Other derivations of "Sigel", "Sigil", have undergone evolutionary changes in meaning to become references to signs as in the present day "sigil".

The phonetic connection to "Sowoulo" may be even a bit more tenuous, anthough the sun is referred to as the White Sow even today in Scandinavian countries. Both the words "sol" and "sunna" for the sun in Old Norse languages are feminine in nature as were the cosmic forces represented by the sun which would seem to support this connection between White Sow and "Sowulo".

This rune strengthens the spiritual and psychic powers and abilities, increasing spiritual might. It provides "enlightenment" and success through individual will.

It is a rune of education and understanding, as well as one that seemingly magically changes ice to water, a transformative force. It can represent high achievements, honor and obtained goals.

Sigil is the counterforce to Isa, or the cosmic ice. In this rune the strength of fire and the warming rays of the sun are fully realized. Fire withstands ice. Ice is magically transformed to water. Life begins after the apparent death of winters frost.

Magically, this rune can be invoked to bring success to any venture and particularly to those ventures related to increase, wealth, promotion, accomplishment, and willpower.

This rune can also be invoked in rituals of purification and inspiration, or, to increase enlightenment and insight on a personal or community level.

Any magical work with Sigil should necessarily take into account the season and strength of the sun within that season. Midsummer will therefore bring the greatest strength to workings crafted with this rune.

In divination it can represent any of the following forces.

SIGIL UPRIGHT:Success, goals achieved, honor, justice, life-force, health, power, victory, inspiration, wholeness, elemental force, cleansing fire.

SIGIL MERKSTAVE (Sigil cannot be reversed, but may lie in opposition): False goals, bad counsel, false success, gullibility, loss of goals, destruction, retribution, vanity, wrath of god.

That is the sigil rune

skalors1
May 29th, 2007, 9:52 pm
Negaprion, the runes referenced are not derived from common runes found throughout Europe. If you go back to the study of high magic and spell writing for Egyptian times, you will discover all of those symbols. The triangle is a triune, the circle represents a soul and when a line is drawn from bottom to top it means spiritual division (it actually means division, but drawing it from bottom to top suggests spiritual connotations).

Thought
May 29th, 2007, 11:08 pm
I did look up as many runes as possible - the image on the spine or any of the parts of the image - are not runes. The closest I could find to the symbol were alchemical symbols - the triangle means fire, the circle means gold or sun and there was no straight line.

Actually, a triangle with a (horizontal) line through it is the symbol for either earth or air (depending on if the triangle is upside down or not), while a triangle without a line through it is the symbol for either water or fire (depending on if it is upside down or not). As for the sun, doesn't that symbol require more than just a circle? I thought it was a circle with a dot in the center (which, admittedly, would be hidden or perhaps supplanted by the line).

However, I think they could also be linked to the four tarot suits and the four founders of hogwarts
the triangle is the blade - swords and Gryffindor
the circle is the coin - pentacles and Slytherin (locket)
the line is the staff - wands and Ravenclaw

this leaves the cup and Hufflepuff
the symbol for a vessel or cup is usually an inverted triangle - JKR could have merged it with the blade and just had one triangle.
perhaps the circle is the cup "looking down" on it.

I say, good show. Several posts ago I wondered if there might be a tarot connection (as the card for the Hanged Man and the Tower are both closely represented in books 4 and 6, respectively).

Of course, given the seeming alchemical and tarot significance, it might also mean that the four houses will be further divided (with, alas, Hufflepuff joining slytherin), since the line is dividing (and completing) the four symbols that might represent the four houses (and if we take the alchemical symbols, slytherin and hufflepuff are, strictly speaking, absent).

There are, unfortunately, a great many possible interpretations of this symbol. I would say that there is a good chance that we have hit on (or come close) to the real reason somewhere along the way (if, that is, we assume the symbol has a real world connection), but which theory I cannot say.

Given that, however, it should be remembered by everyone that there is a difference between the same runes or symbols depending on if one is drawing from a purely historical context or a modern religious context. The interpretation will likewise differ depending on the POV.

Skalors1, I must confess that I am no Egyptologist; however I can find neither hide nor hair of Egytpian use of runes (I can find plenty on hieroglyphs, Hieratic, and Demotic, though). By any chance might you be able to recommend a historical text that discusses them?

Pearl84
May 30th, 2007, 8:58 am
Egyptian magic index (http://www.sacred-texts.com/egy/ema/index.htm)

Just take a look at the link of Sacred Texts Archive I posted above, there's plenty of stuff...

As for the sun, doesn't that symbol require more than just a circle?

No, the sun only requires a circle or 'solar disk', hoewever, in some civilizations you might confuse it with the symbol for the moon. In egypt for instance, both moon and sun are represented by a disk, the meaning is in the context.

Another great link for your field-work:

Theosophical Glossary (http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/etgloss/a-adh.htm)

When you look for 'circle', the TG says:

Circle In the description of cosmological symbols, the first figure is a circle: ever-eternal, universal nature, the abstract space of a cosmic hierarchy. The circle itself may be taken as the symbol of this first manifestation, the clean sheet of paper representing abstract space, the Boundless. This circle is in reality boundless, its circumference being ideal, representing the limits of our perceptions of physical or inner space, or the ideal boundary which must be postulated in our conceptions of infinitude.

The second circle, with the central point, represents the First Logos of any hierarchy, the mystic unity symbolized by the inclusive number one, the unitary source from which proceed the creative rays or sevenfold manifestation of the Logos. The point at its center is the symbol of the cosmic germ of generation out of which all later beings emanate or flow, and hence it is the first manifestation.

Considering the circle as a line, it is without beginning or end; progress from any point in it brings us eventually to the same point again without turning back. Thus it is a symbol of cyclic evolution. Eternal motion is essentially circular and vibratory. A circular motion becomes spiral, and this is the cosmic serpent, emblem of cosmic forces, and hence of life on all planes. The egg is another form of the circle or sphere symbol; the chakra or wheel as used in India is another. The circle may be conceived as either one unbroken line, having no parts, or as an infinitude of points -- which shows that zero and infinity are extremes which meet. In the symbol of the circle, spirit and matter are not yet separated; it is spirit-substance. For the problem of squaring the circle, see PI.

CathyWeasley
May 30th, 2007, 10:27 am
If Runes are to be important in DH I don't think you would need such in dpeth knowledge because I don't think JKR has spent 4 years studying ancient runic symbols. Symbolism is rife throughout the books, and we haven't had any explicit runic symbolism to speak of, so I think you could be right in that this is the book in which ancient runes will come to the fore. However as others have said your theory is just a theory not a spoiler - a spoiler is "inside knowledge" so unless JKR, or someone at Bloomsbury or Scholastic has said somerthing about this it's not a spoiler.

skalors1
May 30th, 2007, 3:24 pm
Thought, I will go find the title of the book I looked in at the library sometime later this week. My knowledge on that specific topic comes from books read recently. Also, Bill needs to understand runes for curse breaking in egyptian tombs, that may be a hint for you.

Pedagogue
May 31st, 2007, 3:08 am
Dumbledore explains that to create a hocrux, the wizard must put some of himself, or soul, into a killing spell. The soul he transfers obviously is his and he puts it into the intended victim. Then what happens is speculation, but I believe that by killing the person, it uses some of that persons life force to secure the soul fragment into an object.


I love the way the discussions are picking up in the months before the release of DH! This is another fascinating thread and I have enjoyed reading it, though I admit bits and parts of the theory are rather beyond me. But something did bother me about skalors1's fleshing out of the theory here: where does Dumbledore say, or even suggest, that the wizard must put some of himself, or soul, into a killing spell. The soul he transfers obviously is his and he puts it into the intended victim. If this, indeed, is the case, then obviously Harry is a Horcrux. But that just seems too obvious an answer to the mystery of the connection between Voldemort and Harry, so I don't buy that. What is interesting to me here is this notion that Lily marks Harry with a rune, and what is even more interesting is the speculation that Lily may or may not have known that she marked Harry in such a way.

If I'm wrong about Dumbledore's comments about the creation of a Horcrux (which I think requires intent; that is to say, surely a Horcrux cannot be created by accident), somebody set me straight.

flimseycauldron
May 31st, 2007, 6:07 pm
If I'm wrong about Dumbledore's comments about the creation of a Horcrux (which I think requires intent; that is to say, surely a Horcrux cannot be created by accident), somebody set me straight.

DD says that a horcrux requires a complcated bit of magic. If it is so complicated then it would require concentration, something that would obviously not be present if it was an accident. I've always thought it interesting that the scar may be from his mother. That Voldemort marked him with his powers but the scar is actually a runic warning system provided by his mother....

Pedagogue
May 31st, 2007, 6:14 pm
DD says that a horcrux requires a complcated bit of magic. If it is so complicated then it would require concentration, something that would obviously not be present if it was an accident.

I agree wholeheartedly. I mean, we are talking about a bit of a person's soul, something with which one does not deal with light fingered contempt (shout out to Dumbledore).

I've always thought it interesting that the scar may be from his mother. That Voldemort marked him with his powers but the scar is actually a runic warning system provided by his mother....

I know, it is fascinating, isn't it? I never would have thought about runes having a significant part in the whole of the story, but you know, that's what's fascinating about the series--the symbolism. I love that JKR borrows myths, symbology, legends, and lore from all over the place and reorders them to suit her purposes in creating Harry's world. This is why I think the series will stand the test of time and why the books are so much more than children's books.

2blv2wn
May 31st, 2007, 7:02 pm
I think you may be onto something here. I was judt dpong some searching and came upon this:

http://www.bewitchingways.com/runes/sowulo.htm
Sowulo




Also called Sigil
Letter: S
Old Norse name: Sol
Flower: st. john's wort
Gem: ruby
Number: 1

Another nonreversible rune, Sowulo traditionally indicates the sun. In divination, Sowulo most often indicates victory, or the promise of victory. This is especially true when Sowulo shows up in a result position of a runecast.

Sowulo looks like a lightning bolt, so there is a destructive connotation to this rune. In a runecast, it can indicate a lightning-fast change. However, it is almost always a change for the better.

In readings related to health, Sowulo can signify abundant energy and strength coupled with a positive mental outlook. With other positive runes, querent can be assured of good health, and if illness is already present, querent will be able to recover.

Thought
May 31st, 2007, 8:00 pm
Sowulo traditionally indicates the sun.

Curious, since the rune is more closely connected to Odin (the victory aspect) and Thor (Mjolnir, Thor's hammer, being the embodiment of Lightning and his battle wagon being the thunder). The sun, as an element of the sky, would have a closer connection to Tyr, who shares a common origin with Zeus and Jupiter.

Indeed, I believe Thor and lightning is by far the more significant connection. The defender of Midgarth, after all, died (will die) at Ragnarok facing Jormungund, the Midgarth Serpent, which was itself born from the mating of Loki and a Giant (which, if I recall rightly, was a witch, thereby making Jormungund and his siblings halfbloods). Jormungund's two siblings were Fenris and Hel; wolves do eat the slain (hence, one could call them "death eaters"). Thor, like Harry, had a "head injury." In his case, it was a piece of flint (sometimes depicted as a nail) that had lodged itself in his head, for Harry it was the curse. Thor is often paired with Odin and either Tyr or Frey (depending on location and time period). Odin, being the wisest of the gods, could be seen as similar to Hermione. Tyr was the bravest of the gods (being the only one brave enough to tend to Fenrir and to offer his hand a promise when he was bound); Ron, as a Gryffindor, is brave, and has shown that he is willing to sacrifice himself for his friends.

Further, we might liken Dumbledore to Baldur, who was near invisible but was killed by his trusted brother through the trickery of Loki. The deaths of Dumbledore and Baldur extinguished their particularly useful light from the world.

Furthermore, there is a curiosity in that the triune of Germanic gods could have had a fourth member (Loki) but that Loki eventually betrayed them. Odin, Thor, Tyr, and Loki represent similar qualities to the four Hogwart founders (Odin being wisdom, a Ravenclaw trait, Tyr being bravery, Thor being steadfast and earthen, a Hufflepuff trait, and Loki being ambitious and clever).

And, of course, let us not forget that Odin ruled Valhalla, the hall of the battle slain. Or, in other words, Odin ruled what might well be called a Deathly Hallow.

Though, that may be a bit too much to draw from a lightning shaped scar.

Just a mythological,
Thought

Ania21
May 31st, 2007, 9:46 pm
We know that green eyes in the wizarding world are rare, maybe even as rare as a parselmouth.Sorry for coming so late into discussion and not reading previous pages but... do we?

skalors1
May 31st, 2007, 10:51 pm
Pedagogue, I don't think what I said shows that Harry is a Hocrux at all. In fact, I don't believe it to be true at all. I will explain.

For purposes of this analogy, we must assume that Harry's scar is a rune and it came about because of the protection Lily placed on Harry. That protection prevents HARM from coming to Harry. The key word is harm.

Now, no one knows what magic is behind the AK curse. If we assume that it requires putting a little bit of your power into the spell, which would be a safe assumption (one that I will explain in a bit), then this analogy is very logical.

Step by step with commentary:

Lily dies for Harry when she could have lived. This creates a spell of protection on Harry. The protection prevents harm from coming to him.

Now, we need to think about what we don't know before we go any further. The first, which is mentioned earlier, is what is required to use the AK curse. The second is whether a Hocrux can be created through means of any death of if the AK must be used.

**
Why is that important? Well, if any death is fine, then this analogy doesn't even work, but for some reason I don't think that it is true. First, we assume Dumbledore has killed the Wizard GW in 1945. Whether it was from a spell he cast of the result of the fight, his death was a direct result of his fight with Dumbledore. I don't think Dumbledores soul was naturally split. Obviously, he didn't try and create a Hocrux, but from his explanation, the soul is split when someone is killed. I think what JK doesn't say is as important as what she does say. This topic was never fully discussed.

If the AK curse is required, then it begs the question as to how the soul is split through the death. I think I mis-worded my earlier post in regards as to putting your soul into the the person. What I was implying is that you had to put a little bit of yourself into the spell. I think there is a difference. I will also explain as to why the soul can't go in to the curse.

By putting a little bit of your own power into the spell, you are, in essence, taking something away from you. I believe that this is what causes you soul to split. Now you may be thinking that this cannot happen. However, of everything else, we know this to have had happened. How else would Voldemort have transferred power to Harry? Many people believe that Harry's scar is a Hocrux. If this is the case, why does the scar give Harry extra powers? It is on his forehead. Harry himself can't be a hocrux because as we found out in OOTP, Voldemort cannot reside in Harry because he is full of love. Using logic, one must ask themselves how Harry is connected to Voldemort; the explanations given in other threads do not make sense.

***

Now that I am done digressing, I will continue on. Lets assume that there is something of Voldemorts powers behind the AK curse. Now, assuming that Lily's protection prevents harm from coming to Harry, it would be safe to say that the killing curse rebounded while Voldemorts powers were not because they would not cause Harry harm.

So the curse rebounds, the rune is burned into Harry's skull. At the same instant Voldemorts powers transfer into Harry. Voldemort is still standing there, the killing curse hits him and a bond is forged between Harry and LV. It is simple and clean.

No Hocrux was created because no death occured. Yes, Voldemort killed Lily and James first. However, there are two things one needs to remember when looking at this Hocrux theory. The first is how does someone make a Hocrux for the first time with their first kill? They have not split their soul. They also don't put it in to the person. The second thing is that the Hocrux magic requires death. I believe the Hocrux is made immediately following a death. Not during the death. However, I also think that there is something more to the process during the kill that doesn't involve transferring a soul; the first time one is made there is no split soul to transfer.

BelleGreenfield
May 31st, 2007, 11:07 pm
Here is something I found interesting when reviewing the required book list for Hermione's rune classes.

Spellman's Syllabry:

A syllabary is a set of symbols where each one represents a specific syllable. The title of this books suggests that the words used to cast spells are sometimes represented by sets of symbols other than our usual alphabet. However, since English and Latin are not well suited at all for a syllabary, this book might actually be designed for use with another language or perhaps a separate spellcasting language which is built with sound chunks which have discrete magical meanings. -Thanks Lexicon

It seems that we have been revolving around this topic more than we know.I just read that part and was going to put it up here to see what people thought. Guess I'm a little behind. Still love this thread by the way-very thought provoking.

Pedagogue
May 31st, 2007, 11:53 pm
Pedagogue, I don't think what I said shows that Harry is a Hocrux at all. In fact, I don't believe it to be true at all. I will explain.

:tu: Yay! I look forward to reading your response!

Why is that important? Well, if any death is fine, then this analogy doesn't even work, but for some reason I don't think that it is true. First, we assume Dumbledore has killed the Wizard GW in 1945. Whether it was from a spell he cast of the result of the fight, his death was a direct result of his fight with Dumbledore. I don't think Dumbledores soul was naturally split. Obviously, he didn't try and create a Hocrux, but from his explanation, the soul is split when someone is killed. I think what JK doesn't say is as important as what she does say. This topic was never fully discussed.

I think the canon says (someone correct me if I'm wrong) that Dumbledore defeated the Dark Wizard Grindelwald. This does not necessarily mean that he killed him. Much speculation has been devoted as to whether or not this will have some bearing on DH. I'm not quite sure I see your point here. Dumbledore has always said there are things far worse than death--the going speculation is that Dumbledore may have stripped Grindelwald of his powers and perhaps a teenaged (or older) Tom Riddle sought Grindelwald out as a mentor.

I think I mis-worded my earlier post in regards as to putting your soul into the the person. What I was implying is that you had to put a little bit of yourself into the spell. I think there is a difference. I will also explain as to why the soul can't go in to the curse.

Ahh . . . I see. Yeah, I think you misworded the explanation in your post. I'm following you now.

By putting a little bit of your own power into the spell, you are, in essence, taking something away from you. I believe that this is what causes your soul to split.

Okay, so what is taken away from you is . . . what . . . your essence? Your being? Your existence? And whatever this is is separate from your soul?

Now you may be thinking that this cannot happen. However, of everything else, we know this to have had happened. How else would Voldemort have transferred power to Harry? Many people believe that Harry's scar is a Hocrux. If this is the case, why does the scar give Harry extra powers? It is on his forehead. Harry himself can't be a hocrux because as we found out in OOTP, Voldemort cannot reside in Harry because he is full of love. Using logic, one must ask themselves how Harry is connected to Voldemort; the explanations given in other threads do not make sense.

:tu: Okay, that makes sense. Why wouldn't Voldemort be able to reside in his own Horcrux? Indeed. I'm liking the way you think.


No Hocrux was created because no death occured. Yes, Voldemort killed Lily and James first. However, there are two things one needs to remember when looking at this Hocrux theory. The first is how does someone make a Hocrux for the first time with their first kill? They have not split their soul. They also don't put it in to the person. The second thing is that the Hocrux magic requires death. I believe the Hocrux is made immediately following a death. Not during the death. However, I also think that there is something more to the process during the kill that doesn't involve transferring a soul; the first time one is made there is no split soul to transfer.

Nicely put. I think you're right--there's much more to the making of a Horcrux than we have heretofore seen. This will be significant.

Thanks for the lengthy, thoughful response! I'm subscribing to this thread!:D

Pearl84
May 31st, 2007, 11:54 pm
First, we assume Dumbledore has killed the Wizard GW in 1945.

Indeed an assumption. An interesting question might be: what counts as a murder? If a wizard tortures another person (muggle or wizard) and that person dies from the injuries of that torturing, is it still murder?

I don't think so. I think that the AK curse itself requires a part of the casters soul and here is why. To be able to discern the difference between a straight murder and a death by injuries for instance, the curse itself must have a certain intelligence or consciousness. Or there must be some other consious principle that observes a death and discern whether it is a murder or not. I don't believe both options, but I do believe the first I said, namely that the AK itself requires a soul-part.

Next, I misunderstand these two sentences or they contradict:

I will also explain as to why the soul can't go in to the curse.


By putting a little bit of your own power into the spell, you are, in essence, taking something away from you. I believe that this is what causes you soul to split. Now you may be thinking that this cannot happen. However, of everything else, we know this to have had happened. How else would Voldemort have transferred power to Harry?

First you try to explain why the soul can't go in to the curse and then you tell us that this is what causes the soul to split. I agree with your second thought, because 'How else would Voldemort have transferred power to Harry?'

Lets assume that there is something of Voldemorts powers behind the AK curse.

I wonder why nobody remembers what Dumbledore said to Harry in the cave, namely that magic leaves trails. Because of these trails, he knows Voldemorts style. Magic and the Magician cannot be observed as two seperate things.

Now, assuming that Lily's protection prevents harm from coming to Harry, it would be safe to say that the killing curse rebounded while Voldemorts powers were not because they would not cause Harry harm.

Claire et distincte :tu:

No Hocrux was created because no death occured.

Again, this requires some 'observer' that observes the fact that a murder is/was comitted. What we need to ask is what happens if a wizard 'shoots' an AK in plain air. Is his soul still split? Or does the unknown observer observe that no murder has been comitted? Murdering splits the soul, says Slughorn. Does he mean that the act of using the AK splits the soul or does he mean that actually murdering a person with the AK splits the soul? The first option rules the observer out and makes the story a lot easier, something JK might have though of. Besides, the first option makes possible that it is the act of using the AK that splits the soul, because the AK need a piece of soul and thus any other murder, caused by injury is no direct murder and does not split the soul. We may ask if that last part is logical... If we assume that a murder caused by injury also counts as murder, than we have the observer again.

So the curse rebounds, the rune is burned into Harry's skull. At the same instant Voldemorts powers transfer into Harry. Voldemort is still standing there, the killing curse hits him and a bond is forged between Harry and LV. It is simple and clean.

Again, chapeau. "Seeming complexities confuse, truth is simple."

The first is how does someone make a Hocrux for the first time with their first kill? They have not split their soul.

Ofcourse they have, because murdering splits the soul... How is it possible that you have such good arguments, but sometimes fail to see the obvious? Possibly the human blind spot. No worry, I have it too, together we'll see clearly ;)

I believe the Hocrux is made immediately following a death.

Here we have two options. We know there are two spells, the AK and the spell that transports the piece of soul into the chosen object. Now according to you, there is no timegap between the two. that's possible. But maybe it is possible to murder someone and years later use the second spell to move that soul-piece into a chosen object. I think the second is right. This is backed up by the idea that any murder can be used to create a horcxrux. I believe that Voldemort murdered the Riddles and that it was years later that he learned about horcruxes and used these deaths to create his first horcruxes.

Okay, so what is taken away from you is . . . what . . . your essence? Your being? Your existence? And whatever this is is separate from your soul?


In another topic about the process of making horcruxes, I had a whole discussion about this, it's a good question. Now there are a lot of theories on this globe about the human constitution and here are just a few:

- Materialists say there is only matter, humans only have a physical body.
- Christians say humans have a body and a soul.
- Gnostics belive that humans have a body, a soul and a spirit-spark.
- Boeddhists believe in the 5 Skandha's and various life principles of which humans are composed, but as everything else, humans are devoid of any essence, the buddhanature is 'empty'.
- Hindus believe in a seven-fold constitution of which the most inner principle is our essence, our 'Self' or as they call it, Atma. Hindus believe that our individual essence or Self is the same as the universal Self or Brahman.

Though JK uses body and soul, but I believe that she believes in spirit too. I see it as an 'hidden premise' in her story and as the part of her yet unrevealed religious views (Holy Trinity). So what is taken from you is not not essence, being or existence, because that in the spirit. That is what was left from Voldemort after the AK curse reflected from Harry. The fact that he didn't know what he was, proofs the fact that he knows nothing from conscious life beyond the body and the soul, because he fears it. Only a pure heart shall see God and natural eternal Life.

DobbyStyle
June 1st, 2007, 12:21 am
Ho Folks

Just an question I have regarding all this...How do you know that it was an AK that was used against Harry. Mad Eye Moody in GOF mentions it for sure but he wasn't there at Godrics Hollow was he, so how does he know. Everyone else says it was a curse that hit him but we presume its the AK. I bet there are a lot of killing curses in the wizarding world but the AK is the only one that is unforgivable and unblockable. A thought what if the Horcrux spell is like a two in one type of spell, where it kills the subject, splits the soul and then transports the soul fragment to your chosen object making it a Horcrux.

You must also remember that Voldemort after his abscence came back to Hogwarts to ask Dumbledore for the DADA postition, he was described as molten wax. But when he popped out of Quirells head he was white and snake like. So the physical difference here states that a Horcrux was created, maybe it was Harry or something else I don't know but I can't think of anything else that would have caused the change.

Mind you I love the idea that the scar on his head is a protection symbol. Wicked thread :tu:

flimseycauldron
June 1st, 2007, 12:23 am
I love this thread! I read a post and go "crud, why didn't I see that before?" then I read another post, a contradictory one, and say "crud, why didn't I see that before?"

I like the idea of a little bit of your soul goes into a premeditated murder. Lily's sacrifice prevents harm to Harry (i.e death) but does not prevent that which is not harmful in and of itself (Voldy's powers) But premeditated is the word I think that we should take into account. I think a little piece of your soul goes into any murder which has been planned, not just the AK. (even in the ministry any AK the DE might cast will split their souls because they go in with the intent to do harm) Which makes sense, I think on a psychological level.

Where things fall apart is exactly how a Horcrux is made. I don't think that you can murder people and have the pieces of your soul wonder around forever. I think the split has finite amount of time, if you don't encase the torn piece then it will merge back with the original soul. Maybe there is left a scar where the pieces have rejoined, a weak spot. Making it easier to murder again. Tom Riddle knew of Horcruxes when he went to Slughorn, he had already killed his parents and made his first Horcrux. His real mission in talking to Slughorn was to see if it was possible to make seven horcruxes.

I also like the idea that the scar (if it is a rune indeed) is from Lily, not Voldy. Just because Harry's scar hurts does not mean that it's because of Voldy. Much like pain is a warning system in our bodies so we know when we cut ourselves and don't bleed to death, Harry's scar may serve the same function...a warning.

Pearl84
June 1st, 2007, 12:46 am
How do you know that it was an AK that was used against Harry.

Canon: after M.E. Moody gave the lessons about the Unforgivable Curses, we read that Harry at last knew what happened to his parents. Besides, the movies shows a green flash, which is characteristic for the AK.

I bet there are a lot of killing curses in the wizarding world but the AK is the only one that is unforgivable and unblockable.

It is indeed possible that there are more killing curses, however, I don't see why one murder should be more or less unforgivable than the other. But... I have to make a nuance here, motive does play a role in the forgivability of the murder I think, but it still an unnatural and unharmonious act.

A thought what if the Horcrux spell is like a two in one type of spell, where it kills the subject, splits the soul and then transports the soul fragment to your chosen object making it a Horcrux.


Nice thought, but why then does Slughorn say that: 'there is a spell...' This makes me think that there is a spell, seperate from the AK, that transports the soul-pice to the intended object.

I like the idea of a little bit of your soul goes into a premeditated murder.

That's a good guess, kinda like: 'It's not about the result/effect, but about the motive.'

I think the split has finite amount of time, if you don't encase the torn piece then it will merge back with the original soul.

I really like this idea, because it leaves the possibility for Forgiveness and Mercy, very christian and thus possibly part of JK's set-up.

Tom Riddle knew of Horcruxes when he went to Slughorn, he had already killed his parents and made his first Horcrux. His real mission in talking to Slughorn was to see if it was possible to make seven horcruxes.


I don't think so and we do not know for sure what his true motive was, no canon. We know he murdered his parents and Morfin (because he had the ring), but we do not know whether he already knew how to make horcruxes. I think that was the reason why he went to Slughorn and indeed to know whether it was possible to make seven of them. I guess he actually learned it in the ten years that he was travelling, somewhere in a far, dark country with evil wizards, voodoo-something.

flimseycauldron
June 1st, 2007, 1:30 am
I don't think so and we do not know for sure what his true motive was, no canon. We know he murdered his parents and Morfin (because he had the ring), but we do not know whether he already knew how to make horcruxes. I think that was the reason why he went to Slughorn and indeed to know whether it was possible to make seven of them. I guess he actually learned it in the ten years that he was travelling, somewhere in a far, dark country with evil wizards, voodoo-something.


Hmmm, very true...do we know which murder he used to make the ring horcrux? If it was indeed his grandparents then we can safely assume there is a period of several months where the soul is still split since, according to the lexicon, Tom stopped wearing the ring after he turned it into a horcrux...

If it wasn't his granparents then perhaps we should be looking at another unexplained death that Tom might have used.

skalors1
June 1st, 2007, 3:15 am
Pearl, you have presented me with a lot of topics that need to be addressed and clarified.

I may jump around a bit, but I will remember bits of your post as we go. (I need a course on how to properly use the forum=) )

You said that you were confused by what seemed to you to be contradicting statements. I guess where we are crossing paths is that you are defining what I term as "taking something away from you" as being a soul. I most certainly am not.

This also addresses another point you brought up as well:)

Why can't Voldemort put some of his power into a spell without putting his soul into a spell? I think they are very different things. A soul is what a person is, IMO. Though I am Christian, we will look at this from a secular point of view. If you are a good, kind, person then most would say you have a good heart aka soul. Likewise, if you are downright cruel you have a black heart aka soul. However, if you lift weights no one says you have a strong soul etc. It would follow logic to assume that a persons magical power is not connected to their soul. You have powerful wizards all down the spectrum. The same can be said for being weak as well.

To support this theory we also must step back and think through what Slughorn has said about Hocruxes and LV's first Hocrux creation.

First, Slughorn stated that there is a spell that creates a Hocrux. This probably is performed after a death (the soul needs to be split). Everyone looks at what LV did before he attacked Harry. What we need to look at is creating a Hocrux for the first time. If I remember right, we know that LV's first kill was Morfin. He created a Hocrux out of this murder.

If his first kill ever was when he created a Hocrux, how could he have sent some of his untarnished soul into his victim? That was the point I was trying to make when I said "The first is how does someone make a Hocrux for the first time with their first kill? They have not split their soul." Not that their soul doesn't split, but that it hasn't split prior to their first murder. So in order to cast the first killing curse it would prove impossible to send part of your soul into a person; it is either all or nothing. I do however believe that some part of the person casting the AK is required to make it work, but it isn't the soul.

Consider it flexing ones magical muscles.

Pearl84
June 1st, 2007, 10:09 am
You said that you were confused by what seemed to you to be contradicting statements. I guess where we are crossing paths is that you are defining what I term as "taking something away from you" as being a soul. I most certainly am not.


It became clear to me that we are discussing this point with different, unspoken, assumptions. It showed me I was wrong, but it's very interesting :)

So in order to cast the first killing curse it would prove impossible to send part of your soul into a person; it is either all or nothing. I do however believe that some part of the person casting the AK is required to make it work, but it isn't the soul.


Ahaaa, now I see... Ok, that's a point. My assumption was/is that the act of throwing an AK splits the soul and that piece becomes part of the curse itself, besides other trails of magic.

StarSeeker
June 1st, 2007, 3:01 pm
Wow, this thread is certainly thought-provoking at the very least. The runes, I think, will definitely play a role in the final book - whether crucial to the plot or underlying and symbolic, I'm not sure.

Here we have two options. We know there are two spells, the AK and the spell that transports the piece of soul into the chosen object. Now according to you, there is no timegap between the two. that's possible. But maybe it is possible to murder someone and years later use the second spell to move that soul-piece into a chosen object. I think the second is right. This is backed up by the idea that any murder can be used to create a horcxrux. I believe that Voldemort murdered the Riddles and that it was years later that he learned about horcruxes and used these deaths to create his first horcruxes.

I'll admit it has been a year or so since I read HBP, but what I always thought was that Voldemort's murders up until his using of the Horcrux spell completely shattered his soul. This shattering of the soul was what enabled him use the Horcrux spell. I don't believe that the pieces of the soul have a finite amount of time until they have to be "used", or put into the horcrux. After all, even after all of those murders, a wizard may not choose to create a horcrux.
Also, if I'm reading skalors1's recent posts correctly, than I agree with his interpretation of the AK curse. The curse itself needs a wizard's full control and concentration, and it takes a "piece" or a wizard to do the spell. I don't think that this "piece" is a piece of the soul, however.
This is just my two cents on the whole issue. Correct me if I'm wrong. =)

Pedagogue
June 1st, 2007, 4:44 pm
This notion of whether or not the soul is actually involved in the creation of a Horcrux is the debatable point. I suppose the crudest way of putting it is, does the soul actually have to be involved in its own shattering?

skalors1, you may have missed my response to your very lengthy response earlier, but I pose this question: what is the part of the wizard that goes into the spell, the "piece," as StarSeeker puts it? Is it his essence, his being, his power? Anyone else feel free to weigh in with an answer.

Thought
June 1st, 2007, 5:01 pm
I do however believe that some part of the person casting the AK is required to make it work, but it isn't the soul.

I am curious; do you believe that every magic spell requires some part of the person casting it? For example, when Ron levitated the Troll's club in SS/PS, was he putting something of himself (the same something, that is, that you are referring to) into his spell?

If not, then what specifically makes the AK unique, and why? (personally, I agree that "something" went into the spell, but think that it isn't a wizard’s unique power).

We do know that a person's magic ability behaves in a way similar to a physical substance. Wizard children (especially muggle borns) are described as containing their magic for so long that it eventually explodes in uncontrolled magic use, sparked by extreme emotions (note, after learning to use magic, Harry's only uncontrolled outburst has been aunt Marge, which occurred only after he hadn't been using magic for quite some time). If there can be a buildup like that, then logically there must be a release that relives the build up. Therefore, presumably, there is something in a wizard that gets expended in the use of magic. This, however, cannot actually be part of the wizard’s power; if it were, then transferring one's power would happen every time one cursed anyone. Harry's shield against Snape's legilimen's spell, for example, would have given Harry a bit of Snape's powers. And, if this "something" can be built up, released, and used in spells, is it actually a part of a wizard's power? If this is what transferred Voldemort's power to Harry, couldn't it then be used up like any other "something" that Harry might put into a spell?

As for creating a horcrux, it is important to remember that it is the act of killing that splits the soul, not the AK (there are other ways to kill a person, but only one AK curse; I believe Slughorn was capable of making that distinction). Stabbing Harry with a knife would have most likely split Voldemort's soul just as well. Therefore, the spell for the horcux and the AK must be quite different.

I do, however, like the idea of a soul being able to reintegrate a split bit of a soul after a while. A horcrux would prevent that healing processes, which would explain why Voldemort alone is incapable of redemption (being the only one who has permanently split his soul).

Though, if a soul can't heal like that, then Voldemort's soul must have been a shattered mess when he killed harry (from all those unused shards).

Just a split,
Thought

flimseycauldron
June 1st, 2007, 5:40 pm
As for creating a horcrux, it is important to remember that it is the act of killing that splits the soul, not the AK (there are other ways to kill a person, but only one AK curse; I believe Slughorn was capable of making that distinction). Stabbing Harry with a knife would have most likely split Voldemort's soul just as well. Therefore, the spell for the horcux and the AK must be quite different.

Very good point. I think sometimes it is all too easy to twist things to fit a specific theory so, dragging this,sorta, back to topic, I think that it is important to distinguish runic magic (which takes thought and concentration) and inherent/undefined magic such as love magic, life debt magic, even magic as a gentic trait.

Mmmm..this is why I believe that you mast have the intent to kill or harm in advance. Premeditated---as if just the thought of killing someone weakened your soul and then when you actually commited the act, by AK or some other method, the soul can't take the strain and tears.


I do, however, like the idea of a soul being able to reintegrate a split bit of a soul after a while. A horcrux would prevent that healing processes, which would explain why Voldemort alone is incapable of redemption (being the only one who has permanently split his soul).

I would like to reiterate something on the healing process. I believe that when the soul takes back the broken piece, there is a weak spot there. This is why, after killing people over and over that it becomes easier each time. This would also make Voldemort unredeemable. Eventually, even if his soul was complete by regaining the bits that he didn't used, it would be warped and scarred.We do know that a person's magic ability behaves in a way similar to a physical substance. Wizard children (especially muggle borns) are described as containing their magic for so long that it eventually explodes in uncontrolled magic use, sparked by extreme emotions (note, after learning to use magic, Harry's only uncontrolled outburst has been aunt Marge, which occurred only after he hadn't been using magic for quite some time). If there can be a buildup like that, then logically there must be a release that relives the build up. Therefore, presumably, there is something in a wizard that gets expended in the use of magic. This, however, cannot actually be part of the wizard’s power; if it were, then transferring one's power would happen every time one cursed anyone. Harry's shield against Snape's legilimen's spell, for example, would have given Harry a bit of Snape's powers. And, if this "something" can be built up, released, and used in spells, is it actually a part of a wizard's power? If this is what transferred Voldemort's power to Harry, couldn't it then be used up like any other "something" that Harry might put into a spell?

Pedagogue
June 1st, 2007, 6:37 pm
Premeditated---as if just the thought of killing someone weakened your soul and then when you actually commited the act, by AK or some other method, the soul can't take the strain and tears.

Yes, and this is why I think the whole Harry-as-Horcrux theory misses the mark. Horcruxes cannot, by their very definition, in my opinion, be created by accident.


As for creating a horcrux, it is important to remember that it is the act of killing that splits the soul, not the AK (there are other ways to kill a person, but only one AK curse; I believe Slughorn was capable of making that distinction). Stabbing Harry with a knife would have most likely split Voldemort's soul just as well. Therefore, the spell for the horcux and the AK must be quite different.

Well, I'm not so sure stabbing Harry with a knife is analogous to using the AK. Don't you think there has to be magic behind the splitting of the soul? Perhaps this is a moot point, but I wonder if only wizards and witches, by virtue of having the ability to perform magic, are capable of splitting their souls. Only those who know of Dark Magic, of course, would be able to use the split to their advantage. Hmm . . .

DobbyStyle
June 1st, 2007, 7:38 pm
I don't want to a pain, but everyone here seems to think that an AK was what Voldermort used against Harry, the following shows that this cannot be the case :-

The AK has been used on James Potter, Cedric Diggory, Frank Bryce and Albus Dumbledore (maybe more) NONE of their bodies dissapeared when the AK hit them. THey just fell to the ground dead ( maybe not in Dumbledores case but his body was still there). We have come across rebounding spells before I think in the Duelling Club in COS and from what I can remember is that the curses which were rebounded from Draco and Harry hit Neville and someone else and the curse STILL did what it was supposed to do the rebound did not alter it. When the curse rebounded off Harry and hit Voldermort his body was vanished and he was left as a mean spirit. The AK DOES NOT vanish the body.

Also regarding Harry not being a Horcrux, we meet Voldemort in the pensieve in Dumbledores office asking for the DADA job, he was described as molten wax (probably 10 years before Godrics Hollow). THe next time we see him was at the back of Quirells head (Ten years after Godrics Hollow) he was described as chalk white with glaring red eyes and snake like feature...a wee bit of a difference there. Albus says that he had made five Horcruxs and wanted to make the sixth with Harry's death. That tells us that Voldemort after visiting Albus had made another horcrux and that would be at Godrics Hollow. It could be Harry or maybe the object he took on ly book seven can tell...but he did make one.

So I think Voldemort did not use an AK to kill Harry but an alternative spell which splits the soul with a murder and also captures it for its new home. An AK probably does split the soul what you must ask is:-

1) Does the soul split as many times as you murder or does it split once ?

2) Once the soul is split does is bond back to make one again or does it stay seperate ?

Also you have to remember that Voldemort had a lake full of victims in the cave, probably not all of his murders but he could account for most, which would mean that for every person he kills his soul splits or does it ?

skalors1
June 1st, 2007, 8:11 pm
Dobbystyle,

Not to sound like a naysayer, but you have overlooked some facts that refutes much of your post.

First, I believe we absolutely know that the AK was used on Harry. Re-read POA, especially where Harry is being attacked by dementors. His flashbacks shed much light on that topic. We also have Barty Crouch as Moody telling everyone that Harry survived the AK curse.

Second, Dumbledore has identified the sixth Hocrux created after Harry's attack: Nagini. Of course, Dumbledore may be wrong but we have JK's canon that "when she wants us to know something, she uses Dumbledore or Hermione to tell us." That is why I think Snape is trustworthy as well. However, I am truly on the fence on that topic because there are a lot of holes on both sides.

DobbyStyle
June 1st, 2007, 8:35 pm
The green light Harry saw was the one fired at his mother not him because he hears his mother's scream. If the AK Harry recalls was the one Voldemort finally aimed at him then you would not have heard a scream as his mother was dead.

Mad Eye Moody was not at Godrics Hollow that night so how does he know what curse was used. Noone knows expect maybe Dumbledore, or anyone else at the house (Have you ever heard Dumbledore say that it was the AK that caused the scar, he always says curse) Horcruxes are banned at Hogwarts so the use of them is not common knowledge but unforgivables were in fashion then. The reason I say that the AK was not used is because the curse rebounded off of Harry and did not behave like an AK...Voldemorts body vanished an AK does not do that it leaves the body behind. I am suggesting that maybe he used the Horcrux spell. The only curse we are told about that kills is the Avada Kedavara, which is famed for being an unforgivable and unblockable. But no one has any idea how a Horcrux spell works. The clue we have from Slughorn is that there is a spell, you have to split your soul by commiting a murder. You can murder someone by poisining them too and that will split your soul. The purpose is to capture the split fragment and incase it in your object. All I am saying is that Voldemorts disapearance was not the normal behaviour of the AK so he must have used the Horcrux creating spell (random name) which kills your victim extracts the soul fragment form your body and then you guide it into your object.

The Horcrux spell must be a really powerful one so therefore:-

1) He didn't want any old death for the capture of his soul
2) Split your soul and capturing it in another object must be painful, as it results in the physical changes

It must need a heck of a lot of concentration and power to be carried out. That is why I like your theory that the protection of Lily kicked in as he used the curse, the curse rebounded vanished Voldemort and the power used for the spell transfers to Harry.

Pedagogue
June 1st, 2007, 10:10 pm
.Voldemorts body vanished an AK does not do that it leaves the body behind.

It did? How do we know that? I thought he was ripped from his body. We don't know where the body is or what happened to it. For all we know, a Death Eater could have gone to Godric's Hollow to retrieve and entomb it.



It must need a heck of a lot of concentration and power to be carried out. That is why I like your theory that the protection of Lily kicked in as he used the curse, the curse rebounded vanished Voldemort and the power used for the spell transfers to Harry.

A good point. A nice tie to skalors1's theory here. But I don't know that it vanished him so much as ripped the soul from his body, a body which has yet to be accounted for.

Thought
June 1st, 2007, 10:42 pm
The reason I say that the AK was not used is because the curse rebounded off of Harry and did not behave like an AK...Voldemorts body vanished an AK does not do that it leaves the body behind.

Actually, I would like to point out that we don't know what happened to Voldemort's Body, or James and Lily's for that matter. No one found a trace of it, true, but then again the house had been destroyed (which brings up the question of how Harry survived the destruction of the house). Some might claim that this is proof that it wasn't the AK, as it doesn't leave a trace on those it kills. However, when the curse comes into contact with inanimate objects it does destory them (in OotP after Harry chases Bellatrix upstairs, she fires off the AK but hits a desk, which bursts into flames).

Because of this, I believe that the backlash of the curse radiated out and hit Voldemort, harry's parent's corpses, and the house. That was enough energy to destroy a few bodies, and if it wasn't the collapse could have (and if not that, the ensuing fire that most likely would have occured should have taken care of things). We have no reason to believe that the curse made Voldemort's body disappear and we have reason to believe that it was destroyed in a more mundane manner.

Curiously, I wonder if the horcrux curse would have shown up in a priori incantatum. The AK doesn't repeat, but those killed by it show up. Therefore, I would suspect that while the horcrux spell wouldn't show up, the object that it was placed in would have.

Pearl84
June 1st, 2007, 11:32 pm
Ok, time to go back to the facts:

- According to Slughorn, murdering splits the soul.
- Possible questions: Does only the AK count as 'murdering' or also death by injuries, for instance?

- According to Moody in GoF, a wizard needs to put quite some power behind the AK, or else you only get someone's nose bleeding.
- I think this is so, because you split the soul with that power/energy. Whether or not that soul-piece becomes part of the AK is debatable.

- Slughorn says that 'there is a spell.'
- We may deduce from this that there is a spell, next to the AK, that transports a soul-piece in the intended object/subject. Not to ridiculize someone, but doubting this is IMO irrational.

- We do not know what happened to Voldemorts body at Godrics Hollow.

- In fact, we know very little about what happened that night and that's for a reason.

- Now we may ask ourselves if it's interesting to go to deep in the matter of horcrux-making. I didn't think of it as the most interesting part of Skalors original theory, but of course, opinions may vary.

Pedagogue
June 2nd, 2007, 12:02 am
I may have gotten us sidetracked because I had a problem with the wording in one of skalors1's ealier posts. This wording suggested to me that skalors1 thought Harry was a Horcrux, which I disagreed with. Skalors1 offered a well-reasoned, thoughtful explanation, and in that explanation, I think skalors1 offered more information about the theory of Harry's possible runic mark/protection by his mother. This had to, by necessity in my opinion, include a discussion of how a Horcrux is made. Horcrux making is powerful magic, as is the nature of the protection Lily gave Harry. The two kinds of magic are opposites, diametrically opposed . . . and the fact that sacrifice out of love and protection trumped soul-splitting and death is powerfully symbolic.

Dannay
June 2nd, 2007, 6:19 pm
yah i sorta believe this,
u can even see some 'runes' on dumbledore's robe on the cover of book 1 if u look close.

yah if u look closely at the cover of book number one, u can see some of these 'runes' on dumbledore's robe. =o

squibpott
June 7th, 2007, 7:53 pm
i was on the net looking up the gothic alphabet (don't know why) and there was one letter that caught my eye. It was exactly like the thing that's sitting in the middle of the triangle. It was a letter inbetween h and i. A second H. There's no english equivalent. Of course it also looks like the greek letter phi(p). So it's both a h and a p. Harry Potter!
And there's delta the greek letter d with the triangle symbol.
Together the second gothic h (standing for the circle with the line through it) and the greek d (to stand for the triangle) means that the symbol could mean d.h. = Deathly Hallows. I think it's slightly better than d.p. Hmm. More runes.

Dawa Lhamo
June 14th, 2007, 5:15 am
I must say I'm quite confused. This, for example: The same can be said about the drawing of runes. When runes are reversed, twisted or overlap, they have different meanings/power. Rune magic was considered the natural magic on the earth and the runes concetrated that power with the intent of the person using them. It was even said that a person could wield their power through thought. Druids for example.I get the directionality... like the difference between an Earth-invoking-pentagram and a Fire-invoking-pentagram... But an image of a pentagram has no directionality inherent in it. Until we see a person cast it, there's no way of knowing... so why does it matter? Second, why mention the Druids... in the same breath as runes? It makes it awfully confusing... One of the symbols on the spine of HP:TDH is inside what is known as a Bind Rune. I suppose it's possible. It certainly seems like a magical symbol, nonetheless. I'd have guessed hermetic before runic, myself. This differs greatly from the wiccan rune scripts which have a specific order for different circumstances on runes placed in a specific order dependant on how many runes they desire to use for a specific spell.I can barely understand this sentence. What Wiccan rune scripts are there? You will not find this symbol anywhere online (I don’t think) or in the conventional runic alphabet. This is because it was considered the secret key to the runic code. I am of course referring to the circle inside of the triangle. Therefore, I will tell you what it means. It stands for the Great Mother with her Divine Child, or what we refer to as the “Tree of Life.” Its literal meaning is “One of the.”Well, then, what books can I find it in? Or is this esoteric knowledge only passed down by word of mouth? Do I need to be an initiate to gain this secret?*Note: I will not discuss the meaning of the symbol on the spine of the cover. However, be forewarned that the meaning of the symbol on the spine is not as important as are its implications.
Why not? If it's *the* secret key to *the* runic code, then surely it's important. On the other hand, if it's that secret, then why mention it at all? Aren't they going to come after you for bringing attention to it?My next theory is on the eye color. We know that green eyes in the wizarding world are rare, maybe even as rare as a parselmouth. Do we really know this? Where is this said in canon? Green eyes are recessive in all people... It's rarer than brown, sure... but "rare as a parselmouth" seems a bit of a stretch...Maybe green eye color denotes an ability to use Runic magic.And where does this come from?

As for the rest of the thread, I do think it's plausible. I do think it's possible, on the other hand, for there to be a single curse that both kills and makes a horcrux, rather than two separate spells, the AK and the horcrux-making spell. Just on the evidence of the spell energy being green, I'm not sure we can definitively say it was AK... though it certainly seems more likely. ^_^

Thought
June 14th, 2007, 4:09 pm
I do think it's possible, on the other hand, for there to be a single curse that both kills and makes a horcrux, rather than two separate spells, the AK and the horcrux-making spell. Just on the evidence of the spell energy being green, I'm not sure we can definitively say it was AK... though it certainly seems more likely. ^_^

Oh sure, and I suppose Voldemort’s new wand will have a single noodle from the Flying Spaghetti Monster as its core ;)

But the very few times we are given the color of a spell it has a directly link to a specific spell. Red has always been for the Stunning Spell, Green has always been (that we have seen) the Avada Kadavra, and there is purple which we only see (but, to my knowledge, is never identified) in OotP (a Death Eater fired a few off at Harry's friends, but they could link the effects to the same spell based on its color). Since a pattern has been set, I would say we would need specific evidence to assume that the pattern will not continue.

But on the issue of color, I just realized that both the AK Curse and Harry's Eyes are green. While I doubt there is a story-relevant connection, I would be curious as to if the color of one effected Rowling’s choice for the color of the other.

And on a side note, with the opening of the 3rd Level Wombat on Rowling’s own site, we gain a bit more information on that spine symbol. Specifically, it goes line triangle circle. Not really sure if this means anything, but thought it might be worth pointing out.

skalors1
June 14th, 2007, 8:41 pm
I have been in trial for the past 9 days; I apologize for being an absent father to this post.

I definately will not be able to address everything that has been brought out during my sabbatical but I will address things that have stuck out to me.

Dawa, most of the questions you asked have been answered later in the post. However, one has not. A wiccan rune script is basically laying runes in a specific order depending on how many you have. A rune bind is the overlapping of runes.

Thought, if you got to the bloomsbury (I believe) website and don't skip the intro, you see how the symbol is drawn. If you compare this to the order you put the symbol together in the door, you will find they are reversed. It is a concept that is most interesting if you remember this thread:)

Dawa Lhamo
June 14th, 2007, 9:15 pm
The green light Harry saw was the one fired at his mother not him because he hears his mother's scream. If the AK Harry recalls was the one Voldemort finally aimed at him then you would not have heard a scream as his mother was dead.I didn't catch this one the first time through. But good observation!

Thought
June 14th, 2007, 10:48 pm
Thought, if you got to the bloomsbury (I believe) website and don't skip the intro, you see how the symbol is drawn. If you compare this to the order you put the symbol together in the door, you will find they are reversed. It is a concept that is most interesting if you remember this thread:)

Actually, Bloomsbury goes Triangle-Circle-Line. Unfortunately, I am currently having trouble accessing Rowling's site, but the Mugglenet directions state that the Wombat is accessed by Line-Triangle-Circle, which isn't the reverse. But as mentioned, I can't access the site right now to double check.

Or are the objects even order sensitive? (alas, can't check right now as mentioned before). If they are order sensitive, then I would have to go with Rowlings site's design being more "official" as it were. I would be further curious if the "function" of the symbol on the website is significant.

You called the symbol a binding rune, yes? One might say that creating the symbol on Rowlings website unbound the Wombat. Significant? Probably not, but curious.

clawscall
June 15th, 2007, 12:10 am
So what if it was all something more simple like the triangle represents the Trio, the circle means partnership and the line means defense. Thus: In the partnership of the Trio, Harry will find his defense. I think that the fact that Hermione has already told us the meaning of two runes which are likely candidates for what comprises two of the three runes on the spine seems to help this theory along.

her3me24
June 15th, 2007, 12:35 am
[QUOTE=Pearl84;4542787]Ok, time to go back to the facts:

- According to Slughorn, murdering splits the soul.
- Possible questions: Does only the AK count as 'murdering' or also death by injuries, for instance?


I Agree with you on this, the thing that I think people are missing is you have to commit the murder, then say the encatation. That did not happen here. The AK was used and rebounded because of his mothers protection. So I beleive that because of what Slughorn said about how a horcrux is made, should be a huge marker of how Harry is not a Horcrux.

I also agree that we have never been told what happened to Lilly, James and Voldemorts bodies.....one point....how did Wormtail get Lord Voldemorts wand? He had to have been there shortly after the deaths to collect it. Lily and James are burried somewhere otherwise Harry would not go visit their graves.

clawscall
June 15th, 2007, 12:45 am
[QUOTE=Pearl84;4542787]Ok, time to go back to the facts:

- According to Slughorn, murdering splits the soul.
- Possible questions: Does only the AK count as 'murdering' or also death by injuries, for instance?


I Agree with you on this, the thing that I think people are missing is you have to commit the murder, then say the encatation. That did not happen here. The AK was used and rebounded because of his mothers protection. So I beleive that because of what Slughorn said about how a horcrux is made, should be a huge marker of how Harry is not a Horcrux.

I also agree that we have never been told what happened to Lilly, James and Voldemorts bodies.....one point....how did Wormtail get Lord Voldemorts wand? He had to have been there shortly after the deaths to collect it. Lily and James are burried somewhere otherwise Harry would not go visit their graves.

Except that Voldemort had just committed two murders: James and Lily so what's to say that he couldn't have created a horcrux, accidentally, from one of those murders.

meesha1971
June 15th, 2007, 5:36 am
Pedagogue, I don't think what I said shows that Harry is a Hocrux at all. In fact, I don't believe it to be true at all. I will explain.

Well, to be honest, your posts are very confusing overall. I've read all 9 pages of this thread and I still have no idea what your theory is. You've said a lot, but revealed nothing in terms of what your theory is or what you're trying to prove with all of this. It just doesn't make much sense.

I will address a few things though - specifically the errors and contradictions to canon - as I see them.

For purposes of this analogy, we must assume that Harry's scar is a rune and it came about because of the protection Lily placed on Harry. That protection prevents HARM from coming to Harry. The key word is harm.

First rule - never assume anything. Jo has publicly stated that it is not the shape of Harry's scar that is significant. The location of the scar is more significant than anything else, but overall, the scar is just a representation that he was attacked as a baby. It makes him noticeable - causes him to stand out and be easily recognized. Ironically, Harry's scar was something that he liked about his appearance until he discovered he was a wizard. Since then, he has come to hate having the scar because it easily identifies him and people tend to look at his scar instead of seeing him for who he is.

Next, you are mistaken about Lily's protection. That protection did not prevent harm from coming to Harry. Lily's sacrifice protected Harry from being harmed by Voldemort - nothing and no one else was included in that protection. It was specific to Voldemort. That is why Dumbledore felt it necessary to give Harry a second protection - the charm he placed around Privet Dr. Lily's protection would not have prevented the Death Eaters from hurting Harry or killing him. Lily's protection did not prevent Dudley from beating him up or his aunt and uncle abusing him. It did not prevent Fake!Moody from putting him under the Imperius curse. It did not prevent Malfoy from hitting him with several spells in COS during the dueling club. Lily's protection only protected Harry from Voldemort.

Now, we need to think about what we don't know before we go any further. The first, which is mentioned earlier, is what is required to use the AK curse. The second is whether a Hocrux can be created through means of any death of if the AK must be used.

**
Why is that important? Well, if any death is fine, then this analogy doesn't even work, but for some reason I don't think that it is true. First, we assume Dumbledore has killed the Wizard GW in 1945. Whether it was from a spell he cast of the result of the fight, his death was a direct result of his fight with Dumbledore. I don't think Dumbledores soul was naturally split. Obviously, he didn't try and create a Hocrux, but from his explanation, the soul is split when someone is killed. I think what JK doesn't say is as important as what she does say. This topic was never fully discussed.

The answer to this question is in HBP - provided by Slughorn. Murder tears the soul. The method used to commit murder is irrelevant. If you stab someone with a knife, shoot them with a gun, fire off Avada Kedavra, or even if you put the full body bind on someone and drop them in a lake so they drown - whatever method you choose to commit murder, the end result will be the same. Murder tears the soul.

Slughorn does not mentioned Avada Kedavra at all. That's one way to commit murder, but it is not the only way. The full body bind could be used to commit murder, Sectumsempra could be used, the leg locker curse, stunning, etc... What tears the soul is murder. That is not to be confused with self defense. Murder is a conscious decision to take a life regardless of the consequences.

That's as far as I'm going with that because that contradiction to canon nullifies the rest of the speculation, IMO. Personally, I don't believe Voldemort's spell ever hit Harry. I think Lily's protection shielded him and the curse was rebounded by that shield. I believe Harry's forehead was cut from the impact of the curse rebounding - not the curse itself.

A few other things I've noted over the past 9 pages -

Wandless magic is not all that significant. Anyone can do wandless magic and there are some canon examples of that. The animagus transformation does not require a wand. Sirius was able to do that even while he was in Azkaban - no wand necessary. Apparition does not require a wand. Legillimency and Occlumency can be done without a wand. Jo has said that a wand is necessary for focus and control. But anyone can do wandless magic and we have seen that in the books. It's not significant.

The color of Harry's eyes is not important. Jo has never said that and it is not stated anywhere that green eyes are rare. What is significant is the fact that Harry has Lily's eyes - not what color they are. That plot point was played out with Slughorn in HBP. The fact that Harry had Lily's eyes caused Slughorn to treat him differently because Lily was his favorite - it was also part of what finally convinced Slughorn to give Harry that memory.

That's all I can address at the moment without a better understanding of what your theory is. I am curious about the symbol on the DH cover since you claim to know what it is. I didn't see any clarification on that yet and I don't have the time to do extensive research on runes with nothing but a vague reference about the "tree of life" to go on. Could you please be a little more specific regarding what you think that symbol is? Thanks.

skalors1
June 15th, 2007, 6:15 pm
meesahe1971, I will profer a more detailed response to your post later tonight or tomorrow when I am not on break at work, but I have a few topics to briefly touch on now; your post is not based on any sort of "true" canon and you have failed to deduce, and mis-quoted, much of what has been said in this post to sustain your own arguments.

However, with all of that aside, I am going to comment on Harry's eyes. I will destroy the rest later:)

This is a quote from cBBc newground during an interview with JKR.

Now, can I ask you: are there any special wizarding powers in your world that depend on the wizard using their eyes to do something? Bit like ...
Why do you want to know this?
I just vaguely wondered.
Why?
Well because everyone always goes on about how Harry's got Lily Potter's eyes.
Aren’t you smart? There is something, maybe, coming about that. I’m going to say no more, very clever.


This suggests that there is some sort of power in connection with eyes and their color. Now, I never usually do this because I like to infer meanings to people rather than spelling them out, but it seems to me that you need me to hold your hand through this; therefore I will.

Voldemort gave Lily a chance to live as is evidenced by several quotes from JKR.

"If Lily had stood aside and let Voldemort kill Harry, she would have been allowed to live. She had a very clear choice and very consciously lay down her life."

"Why didn't James's death didn't protect Lily and Harry? "Because [Lily] could have lived and chose to die. James was going to be killed anyway." James "wasn't given a choice [whereas Lily] could have saved herself." "

Now, the real question is why did Voldemort give Lily an opportunity to live? She was a half-blood, she was mother to his mortal enemy:) and she opposed him throughout his reign (Please don't make me pull out the "Lily was never a deatheater quote please:) ). It is obvious that she was important in some way.

That statement can be evidenced by this quote from a WBUR interview in 1999.

"We will find out the significant information about Harry’s mother in two parts: books 5 and 7. Both are "very important in what Harry ends up having to do."

I do not think it is necessary to point out that significant information.

The fact is is that all evidence points to the fact that having Lily's eyes is far more important than you make it out to be. The point JK is trying to make by referring to Harry's eyes as having Lily's eyes is that Lily understood the significance. Harry does not yet.

My 15 minutes are up, I will post more later. Also, this post may be confusing because I just pounded it out.

Also, I suggest you actually heed your disclaimer and do what it says:)

BelleGreenfield
June 15th, 2007, 6:43 pm
...Where things fall apart is exactly how a Horcrux is made. I don't think that you can murder people and have the pieces of your soul wonder around forever. I think the split has finite amount of time, if you don't encase the torn piece then it will merge back with the original soul. Maybe there is left a scar where the pieces have rejoined, a weak spot. Making it easier to murder again. Tom Riddle knew of Horcruxes when he went to Slughorn, he had already killed his parents and made his first Horcrux. His real mission in talking to Slughorn was to see if it was possible to make seven horcruxes. Bolding mine
I most definitely and wholeheartedly agree. Thats why I don't think he could have waited years to make a horcrux. I think it has to be done very close to the murder or at the same time. Spot on. And yes, with Slughorn he was only asking about the number it was possible to make.

Hermaryne
June 15th, 2007, 6:50 pm
Voldemort gave Lily a chance to live as is evidenced by several quotes from JKR.

The fact is is that all evidence points to the fact that having Lily's eyes is far more important than you make it out to be. The point JK is trying to make by referring to Harry's eyes as having Lily's eyes is that Lily understood the significance. Harry does not yet.



Hmmm... I agree with Meesha1971 on this one and I'm glad that someone finally brought it up. What happened with Slughorn was highly significant, and possibly ties in with the reason Voldemort let Lily live. I believe there's a simple explantion that ties it all up, though it is not related to this thread.

Re the Symbol on the Spine: the Wombat nixed my theory! I liked the idea that it might be the wand movements for the horcrux spell, but then JKR went and turned the symbol into a paperweight. She also changed the order of the Bloomsbury drawing which negates the line dividing the soul. At this point I'm thinking that the symbol is related to Alchemy but I don't know how exactly. Perhaps the object around Harry's neck (US cover) is the same symbol?

BelleGreenfield
June 15th, 2007, 7:01 pm
I don't want to a pain, but everyone here seems to think that an AK was what Voldermort used against Harry, the following shows that this cannot be the case :-

The AK has been used on James Potter, Cedric Diggory, Frank Bryce and Albus Dumbledore (maybe more) NONE of their bodies dissapeared when the AK hit them. THey just fell to the ground dead ( maybe not in Dumbledores case but his body was still there). We have come across rebounding spells before I think in the Duelling Club in COS and from what I can remember is that the curses which were rebounded from Draco and Harry hit Neville and someone else and the curse STILL did what it was supposed to do the rebound did not alter it. When the curse rebounded off Harry and hit Voldermort his body was vanished and he was left as a mean spirit. The AK DOES NOT vanish the body. I agree that it does not vanish the body, but we still know very little about what happened that night. Here's how I see it. The body he had at the time did die and had to be "disposed of" at the scene of the crime. This could also explain why so many people truly believed he was dead and were so reluctant to believe he could come back. However Voldemort's soul did not leave this earth, boud by the horcruxes, one of which... was activated? awakend? and as it had no body it had to float around as a spirit type apparition. Anyway, that's just my 2 cents.

errin
June 15th, 2007, 7:11 pm
This is a quote from cBBc newground during an interview with JKR.

Now, can I ask you: are there any special wizarding powers in your world that depend on the wizard using their eyes to do something? Bit like ...
Why do you want to know this?
I just vaguely wondered.
Why?
Well because everyone always goes on about how Harry's got Lily Potter's eyes.
Aren’t you smart? There is something, maybe, coming about that. I’m going to say no more, very clever.


This suggests that there is some sort of power in connection with eyes and their color.

I dont think this quote suggested eye color is important at all. It says using eyes is important to do specific type(s) of magic (which we have evidence of through occlumency), but I don't think green eyed wizards would do better or different kinds of occlumency than say a brown-eyed wizard. It just seems irrelevant. It goes against the whole pure-blood vs half-blood, lineage/color/appearance really shouldn't dictate how powerful a witch or wizard should be.

I'm not taking a side, I just don't think this effectively "destroyed" meesha's theory. I think there is a possibility of color symbolism, but not a pre-determined power based on eye color. I think his having "lily's eyes" pertains to how he percieves the world and also allows him to connect with those who had connected with his mother. Since eyes are "doors to the soul" i think it connects his soul more to his mother's (she was caring, stood up to bullies, very intuitive, and never thought twice in sacrificing herself for ones she loved).




I liked the idea that it might be the wand movements for the horcrux spell, but then JKR went and turned the symbol into a paperweight.

I agree with the wand movements thing but i dont understand the paperweight comment. Am I missing something?

BelleGreenfield
June 15th, 2007, 7:24 pm
I may have gotten us sidetracked because I had a problem with the wording in one of skalors1's ealier posts. This wording suggested to me that skalors1 thought Harry was a Horcrux, which I disagreed with. Skalors1 offered a well-reasoned, thoughtful explanation, and in that explanation, I think skalors1 offered more information about the theory of Harry's possible runic mark/protection by his mother. This had to, by necessity in my opinion, include a discussion of how a Horcrux is made. Horcrux making is powerful magic, as is the nature of the protection Lily gave Harry. The two kinds of magic are opposites, diametrically opposedOh, right, runes...
. . . and the fact that sacrifice out of love and protection trumped soul-splitting and death is powerfully symbolic.Well said! I love that!!!

delphin
June 15th, 2007, 7:44 pm
Actually, Bloomsbury goes Triangle-Circle-Line. Unfortunately, I am currently having trouble accessing Rowling's site, but the Mugglenet directions state that the Wombat is accessed by Line-Triangle-Circle, which isn't the reverse. But as mentioned, I can't access the site right now to double check.

Or are the objects even order sensitive? (alas, can't check right now as mentioned before). If they are order sensitive, then I would have to go with Rowlings site's design being more "official" as it were. I would be further curious if the "function" of the symbol on the website is significant.

You called the symbol a binding rune, yes? One might say that creating the symbol on Rowlings website unbound the Wombat. Significant? Probably not, but curious.


Well, when I took the test I just fiddled around with the pieces, and for me it went together line, circle, triangle. I've gone back several times just for the fun of it and put it together the same way each time...

ahh, my spelling is terrible, and the errors never show til after it's posted! sorry :)

Hermaryne
June 15th, 2007, 7:55 pm
agree with the wand movements thing but i dont understand the paperweight comment. Am I missing something?

Just thinking that JKR wouldn't have us playing with horcrux spells on her website. (Also, the order has changed: triangle, line, circle instead of triangle, circle, line. The original drawing made it seem possible that the wand movements were for the soul within the body being divided by the line). The paperweight changes things. Maybe we will see the symbol as something that could be worn or carried around for protection.

Edit: Delphin used a different order. Oh well, what do I know?!

skalors1
June 15th, 2007, 8:11 pm
Herm, the order on the website goes line, circle and triangle. The order it is drawn out as triangle, circle and line. I just looked. I don't know where everyone else is looking but give me a link if I am wrong please:)

Also Herm, I don't think by reversing the order in the room affects the theory at all about the symbol being the movements for the Hocrux. I agree it was weird that she turned it into a paperweight, but with that she could be throwing a red-herring to the readers. She is known to do that.

If you think about the symbole being the wand movements for making a Hocrux, it could stand logically that if you perform the spell movement in reverse order it could negate the Hocrux. I always thought of Dumbledores injury as being from other curses placed to protect a hocrux, not from the object itself.

Hermaryne
June 15th, 2007, 8:27 pm
If you think about the symbole being the wand movements for making a Hocrux, it could stand logically that if you perform the spell movement in reverse order it could negate the Hocrux. I always thought of Dumbledores injury as being from other curses placed to protect a hocrux, not from the object itself.

I do like this idea very much. Pure speculation at this point but I think it's very good. Maybe this in combination with Harry committing the opposite of murder, an act of love or ultimate sacrifice?...

Pearl84
June 15th, 2007, 10:29 pm
First rule - never assume anything.

Building any system of beliefs begins with assuming/assumptions.

Also, I suggest you actually heed your disclaimer and do what it says

Lol, good one ;)

I always thought of Dumbledores injury as being from other curses placed to protect a hocrux, not from the object itself.

I believe that Dumbledore tells Harry that his injury does come from a terrible curse that was put on the horcrux. I'll check it out ...[looking 2 secs]... ok, Dumbledore does says that there was a nasty curse on the ring, but that could have been a defense, as well as something else. I am inclined to follow your argument Skalors, since 1) it was the defence of the fake locket that was terrible too and 2) the Basilisk as defence of the diary horcrux was bad too, but Harry could destroy it with its fang.

arwen57
June 15th, 2007, 11:59 pm
my goodness! i just finished reading this whole thread, and what a long time it took! this is the best thread i have ever read. skalors1, you are very clear and i appreciate how you have continued to elucidate your thoughts throughout this whole process. i know absolutely nothing about runes, but i think your ideas are amazing and make me want to investigate more. i hadn't seen the symbol being drawn on the bloomsbury site before. the fact that they are drawn specifically in that way and that the wombat was accessed in reverse seems like very good evidence that they might be the spell motions for creating a horcrux and that reversing them might be required to detroy a horcrux, although harry did destroy one without that. i have often wondered what exactly the students are learning when they are learning a spell. we only ever read about them saying words, but there must be more to it. the only time we see a motion described for a spell is for wingardium leviosa, i believe. the fact that wand motions have been mentioned but not focused on could be a clue that they will be more important in book 7.
i also wanted to say something about horcrux creation. someone else mentioned this briefly somewhere above. it must be the case that a horcrux does not need to be created at the moment when a murder is committed, but can be created at a later date. this is shown by the fact that tom is wearing the ring in slughorn's memory so has already killed his grandparents and father (the presumed murder for the creation of the 1st horcrux), but dumbledore states that voldemort would not have wanted to keep wearing the ring after turning it into a horcrux and so then hid it in the gaunt house. unless we are mistaken about the murder used to create his first horcrux, some amount of time did pass between the two events.

also, skalors, do you propose that harry is going to realize an ability to use runic magic in book 7? if so, how do propose that he will have time to develop that ability in a way that will help, while also managing to find and destroy the rest of the horcruxes, settle up things with snape and fight LV? i really like your theories, i would just like to know how you think they might further the story line.

also, i agree that dumbledore's hand was withered by a curse protecting the horcrux from detection or being moved, and not actually from detroying the horcrux itself. dubmledore's hand is withered, but he is wearing the ring when he picks harry up at the dursley's. we don't know at this point if the ring is still a horcrux or not.

Emerald63
June 16th, 2007, 3:15 am
I read the first page of this thread fully. Then I skimmed the next six pages. Unfortunately, I don't have the time I need to read all ten pages thoroughly. However, one big piece of confusion I think can be cleared up quite easily...

Harry's scar may derive from anglo-saxon runes, but the symbol on the spine does not... The triangle is a triune, which your friend involved with runes will inform you that it derives from ancient egyptian runes.skalors1, you use the term "rune" quite loosely as compared to most laymen. It seems you use it to refer to many sorts of symbols. For all concerned, yourself included, rune with a small "r" can indeed refer in general to symbols, letters, hieroglyphs, etc. However, Rune with capital "R," and as written and read either way by laymen, refers specifically to several symbolic writing systems native to the Nordic and Germanic peoples. The oldest known complete version is the Elder Futhark and there is also a Younger Futhark which is a later, somewhat smaller set of symbols. The Futharks originally were not an alphabet as we understand it. The use of them to write in the conventional sense was a later addition to their original use as a means of divination and creating magic effects. Other Futharks developed later as Nordic/Germanic languages spread and the symbols began to be used as a true writing system. The evolution of the languages they were used for required additional symbols to match new sounds and reworked concepts.


...just to make things clear- a rune is a symbol.
Individual Runes are much more than what we consider letters and they are not, technically, the same as the symbols that represent them. The "Rune" is the particular concept that lies behind the symbol. The symbol itself is called a Runestave. The Norse believed that Odin (Wodin in Germanic tongues) did not invent them - he underwent a magical rite of passage in order to retrieve knowledge of them and pass that on to humans. (BTW, Odin was the patron god of many things, including but not limited to magick.) The Runes themselves, and the concepts they represent, are an inherent part of Creation, above and beyond what the Norse gods did with Creation once it existed. As a part of the very basic stuff of the universe, they have tremendous magical powers. This is true whether they are understood and used by humans or not. Harnessing those powers is why Odin gave the Rune concepts and Runestave forms to humans. Only those dedicated to becoming highly schooled in their use, the Skalds, the poets/lore keepers/magicians, ever knew the true extent of their meaning or how to properly combine them to achieve the desired ends.

Not a stone...
The English word "staff," and its plural, "staves," comes from the same roots as words for "wood." Its application in Runestaves is telling, because wood was the earliest and most common medium for creating Runestave magical formulae. Carving and painting on stone also happened, but there is evidence to suggest the majority of Runestaves used for divination or as protective amulets were in wood.


Your continuing description, skalors1, of the spine symbol on the DH cover as a rune is not accurate in the more typical use of the word. It is a symbol, one with numerous connotations in numerous symbolic systems, but it is not a Rune as most of your readers are likely using the word. I also have no clue what you mean by the term "wiccan rune." Wicca is a modern Pagan denomination said to be based on ancient practices. Its basic tenets and purported links to the past were first made available to the greater public by the Englishman Gerald Gardner in 1951. However, since very little specific magical knowledge definitively traceable to the ancient peoples of Europe remains, it is likely much of what Gardner wrote stems from the Occult Revival of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. There is said to be an ancient "Witches' alphabet" which you may be referring to, but I have never heard it referred to as a set of runes, nor have I ever heard of any particular set of symbols claimed by or used by Wiccans.

The general tenets of all neo-Pagan denominations are based on what we do know from ancient times, but also include modern interpretations of this scant knowledge, as well as additional beliefs likely not held in ancient times. I myself am Pagan and have been for over 20 years. Therefore, I know of what I speak.


It is unlikely that the symbol will relate to any modern "magic" concept (perhaps it might be an ancient magic or alchemical symbol, there are certainly one that might have been a basis for this design, but none that are exact)Modern ceremonial magickians - those who practice highly ritualized magick, i.e. harnessing spiritual energy, as opposed to stage magicians who perform slight-of-hand - do indeed use ancient symbols of this sort regularly.


Also, there have been about 40 books in total written about ancient runes. I would like to know who your friend is; to my knowledge, there is not one author who has written more than one book.I'm not sure where you got this information, or exactly what you're referring to as runes here, but just one author, Edred Thorsson, has written over two dozen books on Norse Runes. I've read two of them, Futhark: A Handbook of Rune Magic and Runelore: A Handbook of Esoteric Runology. Some Rune theories I posted in "Shamanism and the HBP Connection v2 (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=81078)," including ones on Harry's scar and Hermione's O.W.L. mix-up, are based on his work. I personally am uneasy at some of the associations he seems to have had in the past, as discussed here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Flowers), but his knowledge of Runes, their history, and meaning, is beyond reproach and may well be the most in depth of any living person today. Additionally, those concerned with Thorsson's associations should understand that, despite what individuals do for good or ill with magick, magick itself is neither good nor evil. How it's used, i.e. the user's intent, is what is either for good or for ill.

I do wish I had more time to read this thread thoroughly. The basic ideas are intriguing, even though I don't feel there's any immediate connection between the DH symbol and the Runes referenced throughout the books. Both are symbolic but have little relation to one another outside of HP. Always good to see, though, that folks are doing some deep thinking. :tu:

Dawa Lhamo
June 16th, 2007, 4:25 am
Oh, Emerald63, you just said *everything* I wanted to say and more. ^_^ :clap: Thank you!

I must admit, I was particularly stymied by the "wiccan rune script".... the only thing I could think of was maybe the Theban alphabet, which isn't Wiccan or Runic, but is a script popular with some Wiccans. ^_^ (Some Wiccans use the Runes, too, but I don't know that I'd call any Runes Wiccan... it seems a personal choice, rather than a religious tenet, in any case. I don't know a particular "Wiccan" way of laying out Runes, either.) ^_^

meesha1971
June 16th, 2007, 8:06 am
Hmmm... I agree with Meesha1971 on this one and I'm glad that someone finally brought it up. What happened with Slughorn was highly significant, and possibly ties in with the reason Voldemort let Lily live. I believe there's a simple explantion that ties it all up, though it is not related to this thread.

I dont think this quote suggested eye color is important at all. It says using eyes is important to do specific type(s) of magic (which we have evidence of through occlumency), but I don't think green eyed wizards would do better or different kinds of occlumency than say a brown-eyed wizard. It just seems irrelevant. It goes against the whole pure-blood vs half-blood, lineage/color/appearance really shouldn't dictate how powerful a witch or wizard should be.

I'm not taking a side, I just don't think this effectively "destroyed" meesha's theory. I think there is a possibility of color symbolism, but not a pre-determined power based on eye color. I think his having "lily's eyes" pertains to how he percieves the world and also allows him to connect with those who had connected with his mother. Since eyes are "doors to the soul" i think it connects his soul more to his mother's (she was caring, stood up to bullies, very intuitive, and never thought twice in sacrificing herself for ones she loved).

Thank you both. :)

That quote doesn't suggest anything about eye color - nor have I seen anything in the books or stated by Jo that suggests eye color is important - or that green eyes are rare. Nor does it confirm that there is anything significant in Harry having Lily's eyes in terms of magical ability or spells. Jo saying that there might be something - maybe - about that later doesn't really confirm anything. And it is consistent with the interaction with Slughorn. The fact that Harry had Lily's eyes had a huge effect on how Slughorn treated him and, in the end, was what swayed Slughorn to finally give Harry that memory.

Just thinking that JKR wouldn't have us playing with horcrux spells on her website. (Also, the order has changed: triangle, line, circle instead of triangle, circle, line.

That is odd. When I first took the test, I put it together triangle, circle, line. When I went back just now it was triangle, line, circle. That is very odd. Of course it could just be a glitch on the site. I know people have had various problems with it - the fly not turning into a key, etc...

But, I agree. That symbol probably doesn't have anything to do with Horcruxes. I don't think Jo would have us playing around with such Dark Magic on her website either. :)

Emerald63 - thank you so much for that explanation. That makes sense. Do you have an idea for what the symbol on the spine is?

Pearl84
June 16th, 2007, 10:22 pm
Emerald, thanks for your sharing :)

I find it very interesting that you wrote about Gardner, since I have to read a book about New Religious Movements (NRMs) for my study and am close to the chapter about neo-Paganism, where the writer talks about Gardner too.

It is nice to have some more indepth information. There are some posts of Skalors in which he explains that the symbol on the spine of DH is/might be an Egyptian rune/symbol. I have posted a link [Egyptian Magick, by E. A. Wallis Budge on Internet Sacred Texts Archive (http://www.sacred-texts.com/egy/ema/index.htm)] about Egyptian magick in one of the previous pages and it does indeed look closely like it. The most closely related part I could find was at the bottom of 'Magical Stones or Amulets'. But like others and yourself have said: the symbol is open to many interpretations; which is - of course - the power of symbols.

I'll read your pieces on the links you send...

Emerald63
June 16th, 2007, 11:49 pm
Emerald63 - thank you so much for that explanation. That makes sense. Do you have an idea for what the symbol on the spine is?You're welcome!

Actually, I had to ask others about that symbol myself, which is how I came across this thread! :lol:

I've read several things about it being from alchemy, of which I have only a rudimentary knowledge, but the explanation that struck me most was in the thread for the recent MNet editorial (http://www.mugglenet.com/editorials/editorials/edit-hpboy1301.shtml) on JKR's possible reference to chakras in the books. There's an image at the website ( www.SacredCenters.com) the editorial references, though you have to scroll down to get to it. It shows a person sitting cross-legged, hands on knees, with his/her spine illuminated and surrounded by the outline of a lotus blossom. The person is meditating in the so-called lotus position, and the illuminated spine represents the flow of energy along the chakra points which are tied together there. The person's shape is a triangle, the illuminated spine is the straight line, and the lotus is the circle. It's very evocative of the symbol on the book cover. (This vertical two-way flow of spiritual/life energy is also what's represented by the various cultural versions of a World Tree, or a Tree of Life.)

I just looked at the cover image again, and I'm struck by how the left side of the circle seems of slightly smaller diameter than the right side, which actually makes it look quite a bit like the British civil defense posters someone showed here. Why Jo would authorize that as part of the cover art, though, eludes me. (I've not read the accompanying posts, only seen the C.D. images.)

Another thing I just caught was that if you look at just the triangle with the straight line, it's reminiscent of a very simple, ancient level used in building. A small, triangular wooden frame had a weighted cord (like a pendulum) suspended from its apex and the exact center of the base is marked. If the base of the frame is on a level surface, the cord will hang exactly verticle due to gravity's pull, just above the marked middle. (The weight at the bottom is called a plumb bob, hence the term "plumb" for something that is level.) It's very important in building, especially in huge ancient stone buildings, that all the parts are level. Otherwise there's a big risk of the structure collapsing, especially during an earthquake. Really, some of the methods the ancients used to engineer their buildings are not only highly accurate, they are very simple. Due to the engineering connection with the triangle portion, I now wonder if there isn't some Masonic connection to the cover image. Also, a compass (like a math class compass) that's used to form circles during construction. (Even when not building with circles, they can be useful as the basis for creating other regular geometric forms.) As the two sides of the triangle look like one of these instruments (which is another Masonic symbol), the circle would represent the result of using the implied instrument. There are some ties between alchemy and the Masons (mostly through the Rosicrucian movement, I think), and it's been clearly shown Jo has used a ton of alchemical symbolism in the books.

I was confused by skalors1's mention of a "rune" (aka symbol) for the ancient Great Mother. I know of no one symbol ever used by the widely dispersed paleolithic, or even the more travelled neolithic, peoples to represent this common spiritual concept. The only abstract artistic references to females I am familiar with are the very modern looking statuettes from the Cyclades Islands of Greece (hence the term "Cycladic" art), some of which you can see here (http://www.ou.edu/finearts/art/ahi4913/aegeanhtml/cyscl6.html). However, it's not known if these figurines represented goddesses or Cycladic women. There are many images of female bodies from the early Stone Age, the so-called "Venus" figures, that are believed to represent a Mother Goddess or a basic concept such as fertility. The most famous is the Venus of Willendorf (http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:saQz0eO1boYMRM:www.arthistory.upenn.e du/smr04/101910/Slide6.jpg), which, while stylized, is by no means as abstract as the Cycladic figures. However, there is one possible tie I know of (which is far from all there is to know on the subject!) that skalors1 may be referring to. At times, an inverted triangle with a verticle line through it was used as an abstract image of female genitalia. As all varieties of fertility were of manifest importance to the uncertain lives of the ancients, the generative organs had great symbolic meaning and power. Some of this emphasis has come down to us through later, even more stylized images, ones that are nothing more than geometric shapes to those who are not familiar with their origins. Because they come from images originally used in reproductive magick, they still often reference highly symbolic and powerful concepts.

However... the triangle in the cover image is not inverted. So, to me, it's much more reminiscent of the seated chakra meditator, a Masonic image, or an entirely abstract concept, such as the number 3 and all its magickal connotations. Geometric symbols for such magickal concepts were, and are, quite common. For example the modern neo-Pagan pentacle, the five pointed star within a circle. It represents the four elements of creation - fire, air, earth, and water - along with the fifth element, Spirit, joined in a unifying, eternal, all-encompassing circle. Many cultures - and sub-cultures, such as the alchemists and Masons - developed such simplified symbols.


Emerald, thanks for your sharing :)

I find it very interesting that you wrote about Gardner, since I have to read a book about New Religious Movements (NRMs) for my study and am close to the chapter about neo-Paganism, where the writer talks about Gardner too.You're welcome! And... we're being taught in schools now? :cool: :tu: Is this a college level course? That wouldn't surprise me quite as much, but I'm still pleased. :) As the neo-Pagan movement is incredibly diverse, with few traditions (i.e. denominations) having any national or regional unifying body, I'm wondering what your text book will have to say. There are coalitions of Pagans, so they can network and exchange ideas, but for the most part they're not set up to determine or promulgate set doctrines. And it's very hard to pin down a short list of why a majority of Pagans have been called to their particular spiritual path. You might check to see if your school (if it's public and/or large) has a student Pagan coalition. They'd be happy to look over your text and make sure the authors don't need a reality check. :lol:

I hope you like the Rune pieces I wrote. Some are actually like essays, but a lot of what was included was in discussion format so you'll probably have to dig to get all of it. Also, the subject is sooo complex it can be incredibly difficult to write about without just going ahead and writing a basic text before you try to talk about anything in particular. :rolleyes: Add to that the fact that the same Runes change Runestaves, meaning, phonetic value, and magical purpose over time - and even within the same time and culture! - and you've got yourself a real tangle of thoughts to sort out!!

Harrysahorcrux
June 17th, 2007, 3:11 am
wow... i read some of the posts on the first page (actually, most of them), but only skimmed through tthe last page... VERY CONFUSING!!!
but it's interesting... i havent tried to take the WOMBAT, but i'll do that soon.

and i agree that there were extra curses placed on the ring horcrux, and that may be why dd was injured.

but it's VERY confusing, and i'll have to try to find the time to look up everything about runes and whatnot one of these days... :hmm:

pottermaina
June 17th, 2007, 3:51 am
i did enjoy reading your theory! =]

I do, in fact think the shape of Harry's scar is important. I'm sorta getting mixed feelings about, the color of Lily's eyes..

They might just very well be important.

Pearl84
June 17th, 2007, 5:11 pm
They'd be happy to look over your text and make sure the authors don't need a reality check. :lol:

I bet they are, but I believe a scientist in the Ivory Tower of Science has such a panoramic view on reality that he's sure he won't need one. Storm it like the Bastille!

Also, the subject is sooo complex...

"Seeming complexities confuse, truth is simple."

This is the type of reasoning that sets up a wall between 'us' and 'them', between those-who-know and those-who-don't-know and is exactly how so-called scientists build their tower of infallible knowledge. Though I admit that knowledge is related to long studying the principles and history of your field of interest, I despise the idea that the number of facts adds knowledge to our ignorance. Let us first study, like the german philosopher Kant did, the 'science of the limits of our knowledge' and refrain from climbing the 'Tower' and say with Helena Blavatsky:

Let us, however, leave these profitless and empty speculations, which, though they seem to fill our hearts with a glow of enthusiasm and to enlarge our mental and spiritual grasp, do but in reality cause a factitious stimulation, and blind us more and more to our ignorance not only of the world we inhabit, but even of the infinitude contained within ourselves. – The Secret Doctrine, vol. II, 703

I have taken a look at the discussions, they're quite long so I'll have to take some time to absorb it. It's very interesting and I'm curious for the rest. The University I attend (it's Dutch) has almost 18.000 students and I don't know whether there is a Pagan-coalition there - I will inform tomorrow.

ANSWERS
June 18th, 2007, 1:36 am
There are runes on the side DD's cloak on the back of PS OR SS.

HP_and_Kiwi
June 18th, 2007, 2:42 am
BTW
A Bind Rune is the combination of two symbols in a mirrored form. (Hello! Mirror of Erised?) The symbol on the binding of the book features prominently on the Bloomsbury web page for the book- so yeah I'd say it's a huge clue.
[/I]
Mirrored form of two symbols, so could that be something like two people in the Morror of Erised? Perhaps Harry and Voldy? The Mirror could show Harry where something important (Horcrux) is, because it did that in the 1st book, with Voldemort there, too. In the first book and in the last book, Harry and Voldemort looking into the Mirror of Erised and it gives away where something, probably a Horcrux is? And the mirror thing might be showing the reverse.. like Harry and Voldy's roles reversed? Am I crazy?

Bscorp
June 18th, 2007, 3:29 am
Thanks for all the feedback Emerald63! I always enjoy reading your posts and essays! I certainly don't know much about Runes at all- so I appreciate the clarification. :) This has turned out to be quite a thread.

HPKatina
June 18th, 2007, 3:47 am
I think that your idea is absolutely fascinating!

Although, I must say I have my own assumptions that perhaps Lily's love for Harry sort of combined them in a way. I realise that sounds confusing so I will delve deeper.

Perhaps while, saving Harry her love saved him from death. Now consider that perhaps Lily sort of. . .melded together with Harry. Giving Harry the same eyes as his mother.

I think perhaps Lily, litterally, lives within Harry.

But this is a whole new theory completely, and of course I could be totally wrong!

Dawa Lhamo
June 18th, 2007, 4:17 am
There's an image at the website ( www.SacredCenters.com) the editorial references, though you have to scroll down to get to it. It shows a person sitting cross-legged, hands on knees, with his/her spine illuminated and surrounded by the outline of a lotus blossom. The person is meditating in the so-called lotus position, and the illuminated spine represents the flow of energy along the chakra points which are tied together there. The person's shape is a triangle, the illuminated spine is the straight line, and the lotus is the circle. It's very evocative of the symbol on the book cover. (This vertical two-way flow of spiritual/life energy is also what's represented by the various cultural versions of a World Tree, or a Tree of Life.)I can see that... Hmm, interesting. Being an amateur thangka painter, I can see that shape (in various permutations, too) reflected in the composition of many sacred figures (thangka painting is precise and formulaic)... interesting. I'll go check out your link. Another thing I just caught was that if you look at just the triangle with the straight line, it's reminiscent of a very simple, ancient level used in building. ....Due to the engineering connection with the triangle portion, I now wonder if there isn't some Masonic connection to the cover image. Also, a compass (like a math class compass) that's used to form circles during construction. (Even when not building with circles, they can be useful as the basis for creating other regular geometric forms.) As the two sides of the triangle look like one of these instruments (which is another Masonic symbol), the circle would represent the result of using the implied instrument. There are some ties between alchemy and the Masons (mostly through the Rosicrucian movement, I think), and it's been clearly shown Jo has used a ton of alchemical symbolism in the books.I can see that as well. In fact, that one fits more, I think, with the general feel and tone of the books, which is much more European and Hermetic than Eastern. ^_^And... we're being taught in schools now? :cool: :tu: Is this a college level course? That wouldn't surprise me quite as much, but I'm still pleased. :) Absolutely... at least at the college level. I've had a few classes now, one "Miracles, Marvels, and Magic" where Drawing Down the Moon was recommended reading, and a "Senior Seminar: Women and Contemporary Religion" class that had a chapter in one of our texts on Neo-Paganism (I did my research paper on it)... and then another class that I took for fun "Cults, Sects, and New Religious Movements" where we read part of Triumph of the Moon.

IchLiebeGeorge
June 18th, 2007, 7:48 am
This is a thought I just had pop in while another idea about the symbol was spinning through my mind: There was also the division between Hufflepuff and the other houses of Hogwarts back then. Whereas Gryffindor wanted the brave, Slytherin the pure, and Ravenclaw the intelligent, Hufflepuff wanted all of the willing. I could see G, S, and R as the triangle, with H holding the group together.

I haven't thought about the line yet, besides my usual, "It's got to be love and hate!" or my other favorite of tolerance vs. intolerance.

This was just something that came in and I'd thought it'd be nice if it was kicked around for a sec.