What should the Peverells have done?

So we know the story of the three brothers, two of whom death managed to trick. The first brother was given an unbeatable wand, which only served to make him a murder victim, and the second brother was given a stone, which instead of bringing back his dead love interest, only brought back an image of her which drove him mad and into suicide. My question is: What should the two elder brothers have asked for (if both were wiser)? (I don't think the majority of people would be able to resist getting a powerful magic item for themself, so I think we can rule out refusing Death his offer out of mistrust).

I think the First brother who had wished for the wand should've kept his mouth shut. Who would boast about an unbeatable wand? He had thought he would be able to stop anyone from getting the wand by simply using it. Looks like he was wrong
The second brother's problem has always stunned me. Harry hadn't had the same problem. What had made his wife go mad that hadn't done the same for James, Sirius, Lupin and Lily?

One of them could have asked for something that would make them wiser, I don't know what though. A book that can answer any question?

the should have been more clear in their requests
like the first brother should have asked for an unbeatable wand that only he could have power over, or something like that
and the second brother should have asked for something that brought people back exactly the way they were when they we're the happiest.

the should have been more clear in their requests
like the first brother should have asked for an unbeatable wand that only he could have power over, or something like that
and the second brother should have asked for something that brought people back exactly the way they were when they we're the happiest.

I definately think therein lies the down fall of the first two Peverells. They had to be more specific and be able to cover their tracks. Boasting about the wand certainly didnt do the first one any favours though!! He should have kept shtum!

Agreed. I liked synnth's evaluation that the first brother should have asked Death that the wand remain exclusively loyal to him. In that way, no one else would covet it. To prevent people from murdering him for the wand, he could have asked another person to test it only to find it's not loyal to them. Otherwise, I agree with Igen that he should have kept his trap shut.

One of them could have asked for something that would make them wiser, I don't know what though. A book that can answer any question?

I agree, a book with the answers to death would be appropriate. Maybe a looking glass that let you see the world beyond.

As we all know by now (I hope we do, anyway, its been out for a while) Harry is descended from the youngest Peverell brother, who outwitted death and took Deaths own invisibility cloak. Marvollo Gaunt claims to be descended from the Peverells, and his ring would bolster that claim.

BUT.

The Peverell brother who took the Resurrection Stone, the Gaunt family heirloom, is said to have killed himself. Whether or not you take the story word for word, it would seem that death, by ones own hands or by anothers, would follow soon after the use of the Resurrection Stone. The Brother would be unlikely to be married (if he was pining after a dead girl) or to have children (again, pining after a dead girl) so we have to assume that the Peverell who created/received the Resurrection Stone left no heirs.

This leads us to one of the most supreme ironies in the whole series.

The way I see it, the relic would have lay where its dead owner let it drop for many years. One day, someone happens upon the house, finds it, and uses it to bolster their claims of pure blood.

This would mean that Slytherin (who left a means to kill all of the non pure bloods) the Gaunts, and Voldemort, their supposed ancestry is really a lie.

Well I don't think that it means it's a lie, it could have been left to someone else, like a niece or nephew, but to me it also means that Harry is also a descendant of Slytherin as well if the Peverll bothers where part of that line.

Well I don't think that it means it's a lie, it could have been left to someone else, like a niece or nephew, but to me it also means that Harry is also a descendant of Slytherin as well if the Peverll bothers where part of that line.What? No, I'm saying that Slytherin never was descended from the Peverells.

Gaunt never claims that he is related to the Peverells:
...he was showing Ogden the ugly, black-stoned ring he was wearing on his middle finger, waving it before Ogden's eyes. "See this? See this? Know what it is? Know where it came from? Centuries it's been in our family, that's how far back we go, and pure-blood all the way!"
He implies that he is related to the Peverells, but the ring could have been a gift, or have been stolen, etc. It does not necessarily mean he is related.

However, for further debate on this, perhaps you would enjoy this thread:

Harry was related to Voldemort - The Peverell connection (http://cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=108082&highlight=peverell)

Notice I'm the last poster there. I made the theory there, but no-one replied, so i brought it here.

we know what the peverell stone on the slytherin ring represented. but it's not clear to me that everyone that came in possession of the ring knew the true significance of the stone. that would presuppose knowledge of the hallows. i find it improbable that, had slytherin known about the hallow, he wouldn't somehow communicate that knowledge to his descendants. it still leaves the question of why slytherin chose the particular stone - was it just the fact that it had belonged to an ancestor?

There's nothing that says that the ring was of Slytherins creation. It was Slytherins locket that was an heirloom.

thewbacca you're right, i confused the gaunts' various ancestry claims. i still think it strange that somehow the stone's significance was lost to some of the ring's owners.

Well I don't think that it means it's a lie, it could have been left to someone else, like a niece or nephew, but to me it also means that Harry is also a descendant of Slytherin as well if the Peverll bothers where part of that line.

No, it doesn't mean this since the Peverells came first.


The Peverell brother who took the Resurrection Stone, the Gaunt family heirloom, is said to have killed himself. Whether or not you take the story word for word, it would seem that death, by ones own hands or by anothers, would follow soon after the use of the Resurrection Stone. The Brother would be unlikely to be married (if he was pining after a dead girl) or to have children (again, pining after a dead girl) so we have to assume that the Peverell who created/received the Resurrection Stone left no heirs.


I assumed that the 3 brothers were older but I do like the idea that the Gaunts were not necessarily related to the Peverells but just happpened to have had the ring the centuries.

I assumed that the 3 brothers were older but I do like the idea that the Gaunts were not necessarily related to the Peverells but just happpened to have had the ring the centuries. Even if they were older I provided reasons that Indicate he lived alone and had no heirs.

I like your theory, thewbacca, but I think JKR has already disproven it:
Renee: From reading about the original owners of the deathly hallows, the peverell brothers, i’m wondering if harry and voldermort are distantly related voldermorts grandfather ended up with the resurrection stone ring?

J.K. Rowling: Yes, Harry and Voldemort are distantly related through the Peverells.I do agree with you about Cadmus, though: I don't think he would have had any heirs. Ergo, the stone would've needed to pass down either through Antioch or Ignotus's heirs — and if the latter, it simply diverged from the cloak somewhere in the family tree through the centuries (the sooner it diverged, the less relation between Harry and Voldemort).

Good thread. :tu:

Actually, I don't think that meant anything. The story didn't say what he did with the Stone before he killed himself, so it could have been anything. We don't know for sure that he didn't give to Ignotus, the brother who had the Invisibility Cloak, who gave it to one of his other descendents (NOT Harry's, the one to whom he gave the IC.) That still would have let it go down to the Guants if it kept getting passed on. Plus, they had Slytherin's locket, that we know for sure. There's no proof that the locket wasn't directly passed down from Slytherin himself to the Guants, so we have to assume that they really are descendants. Nice theory, though.

i also think that the gaunts being slytherin's descendants makes for a better/simpler plotline. marvolo gaunt was proud to be in slytherin's bloodline, but there are plenty of indications that many magical people wouldn't consider that a positive.

i hate to be nitpicking like an annoying dilletant, but plotwise/logicwise the stone presents a problem. i can see how the wand and the cloak can be decoupled from their hallow properties. wands and cloaks being common artifacts of magical technology, these two wouldn't need the hallows backstory to become legendary. they had their own, super-enhanced properties. but the stone is a unique (as far as we know) magical artifact. furthermore, its magical properties are subjective. like the mirror of erised, the stone's magic depends on the subject. much more than a wand or a cloak, the stone would have to be "explained" as it was passed down, and could this be done without touching on the hallows as the peverells supposedly made them? it is also being set on a ring that according to the quote mrsleepyhead posted, could be seen as ugly - so one can suppose it wasn't the ring's beauty that attracted attention.

...This would mean that Slytherin (who left a means to kill all of the non pure bloods)...

thewbacca, i assume you're referring to the basilisk. we know slytherin had some qualities that were not very nice, but isn't this overreaching? far as i can tell, nowhere in the books it is suggested that slytherin was promoting genocide, not even riddle tried to place such intentions on slytherin.

It is still possible that Cadmus Peverell was really the original posessor of the Resurrection Stone and an ancestor of Salazar Slytherin.

After all, the only "account" we have of the Stone is the "Tale of the Three Brothers", and this tale has a few elements that embellish the truth; like the fact that it was Death who created the items, not the Peverell brothers.

So, maybe what happened is the following: Cadmus Peverell was married, had a child, but his wife died early. So he made the stone to bring her back; whether for himself or because he thought the child needed a mother is up for speculation. But he realized that his wife didn't truly come back; so maybe when the child was mature enough, Cadmus killed himself to be truly with his wife.

The child could have reproduced, and eventually one of the decendants could have been Salazar Slytherin.

This plot could even be deepened. Maybe Cadmus' child asked him why he didn't remarry, and Cadmus might have said that blood is important, and he wanted the child's mother to come back, because the blood connection was there. And later, when the child would have reproduced, he/she might have passed similar values to their own offspring; thereby planting ideas about importance of wizarding blood in Salazar Slytherin.

No, that wouldn't work as:

"To his amazement and delight, the figure of the girl he had once hoped to marry, before her untimely death, appeared at once before him."

And there is the possibilty that they were both descended from the eldest and youngest brother. The second brother may not have had an heir. For all we know Salazar Slytherin could have taken a descended of the three brothers for a wife or that possibly Godric Gryfindor was the great great grandchild's cousin of... so on so forth. And back in those days you had larger families. No doubt they are all linked up. I wouldn't be suprised, seeing as James was pure blooded, that Harry was descent of all the house founders (except of course Rowena Ravenclaw).

We can only assume that the three brothers were quite some time before the 4 founders, say a couple of hundred years or so. In that time it's quite possible that the Peverells joined and connected into many other wizarding families, as the pure blood families were far more plentiful.

No, that wouldn't work as:

"To his amazement and delight, the figure of the girl he had once hoped to marry, before her untimely death, appeared at once before him."

And like I said, maybe this account is faulty on that point. Maybe Cadmus Peverell was married with the woman, and the woman died after their first child was born.
Just like the Peverell Brothers becoming travelling brothers who tricked Death, a man who lost his wife might have become a man who lost his bride.

But that's just a theory.

I'm confused, I thought the Peverells were after the time of Slytherin and the school founders?

I'm confused, I thought the Peverells were after the time of Slytherin and the school founders?

If we accept that the Gaunts are descendants of Slytherin and a Peverell brother, then the Peverells must have lived before Slytherin. Because otherwise, since Harry is a descendant of the Peverells as well, the Gaunts could not have been the last descendants of Slytherin; the Potters would have been too.

Not necessarily. Perhaps Marvolo's mother was a descendent of Slytherin.

Anyway, the names of the Peverells sound more modern then those of the founders. I'm guessing they lived about 500 years ago.

That is not the only option. The man could have been pining for his dead love (not wife, because he did not marry) who died in childbirth.

Well, Marvolo wore *** ring, and he died after he left Azkaban, and then his son wore it and he was murdered by Riddle...maybe Marvolo's father stole it. He killed whoever had it before? If Death claims whoever has the ring, just like with the wand. Maybe it's unlucky as well?

That is not the only option. The man could have been pining for his dead love (not wife, because he did not marry) who died in childbirth."....once hoped to marry...." Back then, if he had loved her, and she was pregnant with his child, a shotgun (or, in this case, wandpoint) wedding would ensue.

The Peverell brother who took the Resurrection Stone, the Gaunt family heirloom, is said to have killed himself. Whether or not you take the story word for word, it would seem that death, by ones own hands or by anothers, would follow soon after the use of the Resurrection Stone.

as Xenophilius Lovegood says, the tale of the 3 brothers is
a fairy tale, fiction. (well, so is Harry Potter :relax: , but, one
thing at a time.)

that i can remember, what we have to go on is the wild-eyed
Marvolo Gaunt's words, "centuries it's been in our family".

i can't imagine that Voldemort's grandpa never turned his
wrist (and the stone) 3 times, to cause a resurrection effect.
but, maybe you have to hold it in your hand, on your finger
is not enough. just drinking beer or talking with his hands
or something, it would turn the stone 3 times.

i think the story of the 3 brothers contains a warning
similar to the one Dumbledore gave Harry about the
Mirror of Areced - enjoy it for a little while, then let
it go. a wiser witch or wizard could use the Resurrection
Stone the way Dumbledore uses the paintings of old
head-masters, as a way to convene with dead relatives
and to get their opinions on ... who knows what ...
whether a scarf matches a dress, maybe.

"....once hoped to marry...." Back then, if he had loved her, and she was pregnant with his child, a shotgun (or, in this case, wandpoint) wedding would ensue.

That may be true, but that is awfully presumptious to say because they were not married they did not have kids.

Anyway, couldnt this be his second wife? First wife had a kid, then died, and the lady in the story is the second (and greater) love. The point is that there are many possibilities that do include a heir being born.

I suspect that the only relevant tie from the fable to reality is that the three brothers were Peverells, and each had an item. Doubtless they did not meet Death, Death did not give them the three items, so the specific stories are in doubt as well. That a brother used the stone in such a way could be pure romantic fantasy.

I'm also reasonably sure that the Peverells came well after Salazar Slytherin, and one of their descendants married into the Slytherin line, bringing with it the Ring. In small part because I cannot see Ignotus's headstone being legible after more than a thousand years--and traces of the Founders themselves seem to have vanished. Did Harry run across Godric's grave? In a village that bore his name, you would think it to have been clearly marked.

The first was combative, so he should've asked for a spell that would win any duel, kind of like an unblockable spell. Maybe that has it's faults, but no one is going to kill him for that information, since then that info will die.

The second brother who was arrogant and wanted to humiliate death and wanted to see his loved one again, should've asked for the power to bring back the dead and let them belong in the world once again.

the should have been more clear in their requests
like the first brother should have asked for an unbeatable wand that only he could have power over, or something like that
and the second brother should have asked for something that brought people back exactly the way they were when they we're the happiest.

Well, the first brother would have needed to make sure that he included that information in his boast, then. His biggest problem really was that he told people about this extraordinary wand, which made people want it for themselves. If he'd have just kept his mouth shut, no one would have known that the wand was anything special. Maybe he should have asked Death for a smidgen of discretion. :p As for brother number 2, I agree with what you said, but I'm not sure that Death could have granted that request, since Jo has said that magic can't bring people back from the dead. So maybe he should have asked for a way to make peace with his loss instead.

The second brother's problem has always stunned me. Harry hadn't had the same problem. What had made his wife go mad that hadn't done the same for James, Sirius, Lupin and Lily?
But remember, Harry brought his loved ones back for what, about half an hour? The second brother tried to live with his lost love over a long period of time (I was thinking months, at least) and over time realized that the situation was impossible. The duration of time is the key here, not to mention that Harry was expecting to die anyway, so bringing Lily, James, et al back was more like getting an early welcome into the afterlife for him as opposed to trying to bring them back to his world for long term.