The Marauders: Group Character Analysis

Heroes don't do that. Mistakes and wrong choices everyone makes. I am a supporter of one such man who was a DE, who took the Prophecy to Voldemort knowing full well that a baby and a family would be killed. I call him a Hero because of not what he did as a DE but because of what he tried to do to remove the dirt attached to him for his acts as a DE.

I would disagree. I would say that heroes are no longer heroes when they do that. But they can certainly be heroes before hand. Perhaps you are familiar with the story of Star Wars, where the man known throughout the gallaxy as the "hero with no fear" for many years went on to become "the Villain with no mercy" (Anakin/Darth Vader). So this does occur in literature and in essence it sounds like what JKR was intending to do with Peter. She is the one who called him a hero who would betray his friends, the three other heroes.

If Peter loses his early hero status merely because he later became a villain, then a person like Regulus, can have no hero status attached to their name merely because they had villain attached at some point. I don't see it that way. I think a person's actions can define them at any one time.

Is there any canon proof that Snape was also in the conspiracy to kill the Potters? Peter and Voldemort yes; Snape, I don't think so.

If Snape had not turned over the prophecy to Voldemort, the Potters would not have been targeted and killed. Snape conspired with Voldemort to kill the child that could defeat him in the prophecy - that turned out to be Harry Potter. ;)


I agree completely with this character assessment: that's how Rowling presents Peter in canon, to my mind.

Which is why I can't buy her statements about his ever having been a hero. At all. ;) I don't buy it. :) People just don't turn from being heroes into cowards overnight. You can't lay your life on the line for a cause one week and then be prepared to sell out your closest friends the next.

Anakin turned to Darth Vader and did it in 2 hours (betraying and then killing all of his closest friends - the Jedi in the temple) after 23 years of being a hero - so you know in literature, this sort of thing can happen. I don't know if I would agree to call either Vader or Peter "cowards" for doing what they did, because it did take bravery to betray; but it was certainly dastardly and vile behavior on both their parts, imo.

I'm guessing by the lack of response no one missed me at all. :lol:

Lily, who "knows" Snape would become a DE some 2 years later and James and Sirius who have moved with Peter for more than 10 years could not see through him, is indicative of their arrogance that Peter was incapable of being a DE. That's how it looks to me IMO.

I don't see how that is arrogance. In regards to Snape, Lily saw the signs in front of her face that he wanted to be a Death Eater. He was associating himself with the Dark Arts and calling others Mudbloods. Peter, as far as canon indicates, demonstrated nothing nearly as obvious. He was secretive enough to fool everyone, including Dumbledore.

There was plenty of reason for them to trust Peter, IMO. James and Sirius were best friends with Peter for ten years. Peter accepted Remus even though he was a werewolf and was willing to be an unregistered Animagus for him. Sirius and James knew that and likely saw him as a good person.

I really can't look at trusting someone as arrogance. How can a person have friendships without trust? I have known someone for fifteen years, but would it be arrogant of me to say that I could never consider her to be a person willing to kill my family and me? It isn't arrogance to trust someone.

If Lily and James spent their time worrying about who could be a spy they would have waste more time. They could have started to distrust each other and others such as Sirius and Dumbledore. What good would that have been for them? I would be really surprised if Lily and James started investigating their friends rather than worrying about their lives. They didn't have the time to worry about such matters - they knew that Voldemort was after them, and who is going to sit down and have a chat about who to trust?


Yes canon through Remus says that James thought it the height of dishonour to distrust (or mistrust?) his friends. And yet, canon also shows that James and Lily went ahead and made the switch without Remus's knowledge

If Lily and James were going to make someone Secret Keeper, why would they worry about telling their friend first? It would be more logical for them to make someone Secret Keeper and then tell the Secret Keeper to inform someone of their location.

and with information from Sirius that he and Remus thought each other as the spy, James agreeing to the switch without telling Remus, shows that he aslo agreed with Sirius about the identity of the spy and traitor IMO.


That is not supported in canon. It never says that Sirius told them that he did not trust Remus. So I see no reason to believe that James agreed with Sirius' suspicions.

All the more reason IMO, that Peter should have never been chosen as SK.

Why? Because he wasn't intelligent? I would find it disappointing if Lily and James and Sirius thought that Peter's lack of intelligence was a more important indication of his true allegiance rather than his loyalty that he demonstrated.

But I do feel that James and Sirius were arrogant enough to think that they were right simply because they felt they had all the answers. It shows when they don't take Dumbeldore into confidence and also decide without proper checking that one (Remus) could be the traitor and the other (Peter) is not IMO.

Of course they weren't going to properly check their friends about whether or not they were traitors. They were best friends with them, how could they assume that of them? That's like saying that if someone would tell Harry that someone was traitor to him that he should start to check Ron and Hermione. Furthermore, they had no time. They had their experiences to rely on.

This was almost tantamount ot that IMO. James and Lily did not even have their wands, so confident they were in a man, who they made SK without checking IMO. They were not betrayed after they checked and double checked and took the best possible steps; they were betrayed after decided that Peter was the best, even when they had Dumbledore's warning. I cannot but feel it was arrogance on part of James and Sirius and that Lily too was fooled and did not check Peter, Sirius, Remus or Dumbeldore properly.

That's an indication of how much they trusted their best friend. The trio were stuck in Shell Cottage, but they didn't investigate Bill or have their wands on them all the time because they rightly believed they were safe within Bill and Fleur's place. And the trio were an even more dangerous time! I don't understand why Lily and James should be an exception if the trio are not looked down upon for what they did.

Is there any canon proof that Snape was also in the conspiracy to kill the Potters? Peter and Voldemort yes; Snape, I don't think so.


I don't blame Snape for what happened to the Potters, but he has far more to blame than Sirius or the Potters do, IMO. He was fully aware that by delivering the prophecy a family and infant would be murdered. He felt remorse over it later, that's given. But he has far more to blame for what happened to the Potters than Sirius who had no idea what would happen to the Potters by asking them to make Peter Secret Keeper.

Even so, if Snape is excused for his remorse, why isn't Sirius? :huh: He showed plenty of remorse.

Yes canon through Remus says that James thought it the height of dishonour to distrust (or mistrust?) his friends. And yet, canon also shows that James and Lily went ahead and made the switch without Remus's knowledge and with information from Sirius that he and Remus thought each other as the spy, James agreeing to the switch without telling Remus, shows that he aslo agreed with Sirius about the identity of the spy and traitor IMO.

Hmm I never thought of it like that.But to be fair that would only be true if Sirius had confided in James about his suspician of Remus.Which we don't know if he did.

I would disagree. I would say that heroes are no longer heroes when they do that. But they can certainly be heroes before hand. Perhaps you are familiar with the story of Star Wars, where the man known throughout the gallaxy as the "hero with no fear" for many years went on to become "the Villain with no mercy" (Anakin/Darth Vader). So this does occur in literature and in essence it sounds like what JKR was intending to do with Peter. She is the one who called him a hero who would betray his friends, the three other heroes.

There is also the case of Benedict Arnold in history. He actually was a hero on the Colonists side to begin with. Then Brutus in Roman history. John Paul Jones from the British aspect would be seen as a traitor. Betrayals of this sort is all to real in real life never mind fiction.

I'm guessing by the lack of response no one missed me at all. :lol:

Hey, I missed ya. :huggles: I enjoy your well-reasoned posts, and I pretty much agree with you on this issue, I think. :)

I really can't look at trusting someone as arrogance. How can a person have friendships without trust? I have known someone for fifteen years, but would it be arrogant of me to say that I could never consider her to be a person willing to kill my family and me? It isn't arrogance to trust someone.

I agree with this. :tu:

Why? Because he wasn't intelligent? I would find it disappointing if Lily and James and Sirius thought that Peter's lack of intelligence was a more important indication of his true allegiance rather than his loyalty that he demonstrated.

Actually, it makes no sense to me that you would trust a person who wasn't very bright with such a vitally important mission, i.e. saving your life. :wow: In such circumstances, I would choose only the best to be my Secret Keeper, surely. :whistle:

Which brings us back to the Marauders' relationship with Peter: he must have given them the impression that he was rock-solid and reliable. Given his devotion to them over the years, that would not be a hard thing to do. :cool: And I don't think the Marauders (and Lily) should be blamed for the deviousness which he obviously was able to conceal from a great many people.

Even so, if Snape is excused for his remorse, why isn't Sirius? :huh: He showed plenty of remorse.

Indeed. Sirius showed agonising remorse over James and Lily's deaths. :upset: And, really, he wasn't to blame, IMO. But who wouldn't say to themselves, 'how could I not have known? How could I not have guessed? Why couldn't I see Peter for what he really was?' :upset:

I would disagree. I would say that heroes are no longer heroes when they do that. But they can certainly be heroes before hand. Perhaps you are familiar with the story of Star Wars, where the man known throughout the gallaxy as the "hero with no fear" for many years went on to become "the Villain with no mercy" (Anakin/Darth Vader). So this does occur in literature and in essence it sounds like what JKR was intending to do with Peter. She is the one who called him a hero who would betray his friends, the three other heroes.

I don't know about the story of Star Wars. :D

Was this Darth Vader a coward like Peter, who cried to Sirius when he was captured in POA? Who lived like rat for 12 years, cowardly and unable to face his crimes?

Peter as a Hero is so unbelievable to me; I don't know why JKR said what she did (was this interview before or after DH?) but it is not believable at all and I really cannot find stuff in the books to say Peter of all people was a Hero!

"I, a spy for Voldemort? When did I sneak around people who were stronger and more powerful than myself? But you Peter - I'll never understand why I didn't see you were the spy from the start. You always liked big friends who'd look after you, didn't you? It used to be us...me and Remus... and James..."

..."Because you never did anything for anyone unless you could see what was in it for you.

.."You'd want to be quite sure he was the biggest bully in the playground before you went back to him, wouldn't you?"bold mine

This says it all IMO.

If Peter loses his early hero status merely because he later became a villain, then a person like Regulus, can have no hero status attached to their name merely because they had villain attached at some point. I don't see it that way. I think a person's actions can define them at any one time.


I think Regulus was very much a Hero. It is not the mistakes people make, but what they do when they have realised they've made a mistake that counts IMO. Snape and Regulus were DEs, but they realised their mistake and worked hard until they died against the DEs. When they evolve as a person, when they change how can they not be called a Hero. It is like calling a now healthy man diseased, because he had falllen seriously ill some 10 years ago. :D

Anakin turned to Darth Vader and did it in 2 hours (betraying and then killing all of his closest friends - the Jedi in the temple) after 23 years of being a hero - so you know in literature, this sort of thing can happen. I don't know if I would agree to call either Vader or Peter "cowards" for doing what they did, because it did take bravery to betray; but it was certainly dastardly and vile behavior on both their parts, imo.

I don't know the story, but this man sounds like a DL; a Voldemort type more than the Peter type. There is a lot of difference between the 2 I think. Peter was a coward and it is my opinion that he was always one, he did not develop that character trait suddenly. Voldemort was a coward too, but in facing his emotions and himself, not like Peter, who betrays his close friends, while Voldemort in the DOM, took care to take Bellatrix away; he understood and acknowledged her loyalty and affection, but Peter took the love of his friends and used them and the he conveniently disposed of them when he could use them to further his interests IMO.

I really can't look at trusting someone as arrogance. How can a person have friendships without trust? I have known someone for fifteen years, but would it be arrogant of me to say that I could never consider her to be a person willing to kill my family and me? It isn't arrogance to trust someone.

But that is the question. Did James and Sirius have the friendship with Peter that they had with each other? I don't think so. If Sirius could say that they thought Peter was a weak, talentless thing in POA, I am sure they thought the same of him before as well, when they were young.

Friendship IMO is nothing but trust, but did James and Sirius trust Peter or did they think him incapable of being a DE? They are 2 completely different things IMO.

I don;t think they trusted Peter. James told Dumbedlore that Sirius would rather die than betray him (POA) but there isn't anything like that about Peter. The official reason we have from Sirius is that they thought Peter was too weak to even think of being a DE, so he'd be the perfect SK, because Vodlemort would never in his wildest dreams think that James and Co. would ever entrust such a job to Poor Peter. (LOL this name seems to fit everyone other than Snape)

But what they failed to take into account and because of which I call this a very poorly planned thing where the Potters showed total negligence and arrogance IMO, is that even if Peter was a true friend, with Sirius, Peter, Remus and the Potters all in hiding, Voldemort would surely go after the weakest link in the chain. That was Peter IMO.

He could capture Peter and get the information if Peter was the SK, or he could get information wbout the identity of the SK; both dangerous to the Potters. And yet this does not seem to have struck them at all.

Even so, if Snape is excused for his remorse, why isn't Sirius? :huh: He showed plenty of remorse.

He showed plenty of remorse for James. For Snape this is what he had to say.

".....You see, Sirius here played a trick on him which nearly killed him, a trick that involved me..."

Black made a derisive noise.

"It served him right," he sneered. "Sneaking around, trying to find out what we were up to.... hoping he could get us expelled..." bold mine

Hmm I never thought of it like that.But to be fair that would only be true if Sirius had confided in James about his suspician of Remus.Which we don't know if he did.

I think Sirius would have. The decision to accept the suggetion of a change of SK belonged to James and Lily, not Sirius. Sirius of course influenced them with his arguments and persuaded them to change. Why should he lie to his dearest and best friend who had taken him into his home when Sirius had run away at age 16 and who loved him enough to save Snape so that Remus and Sirius would not get into trouble?

There is no reason for Sirius to lie to James about his suspicions and I think he did share them with James and Lily, and that was how he persuaded them, because they agreed too IMO.

Remus was not closer to Sirius than James, especially at a time when he was suspecting Remus to be a traitor. I am sure he would have shared his suspicion with James.

The entire post is my opinion only.

..."Because you never did anything for anyone unless you could see what was in it for you.

.."You'd want to be quite sure he was the biggest bully in the playground before you went back to him, wouldn't you?"[/fieldset]bold mine

This is a bitter, furious Sirius in 1993. He's had 12 years in order to reflect on Peter's treachery and how it is that Peter was able to fool them all. As others keep saying in this thread, it is not necessarily fair to take his intense anger and bitterness at Peter in the Shack as wholly indicative of how he used to feel about Peter.

If we don't believe that the Marauders felt genuine affection for Peter once upon a time -- and he for them -- then we have a very thin, unconvincing storyline, apart from anything else.

But that is the question. Did James and Sirius have the friendship with Peter that they had with each other? I don't think so. If Sirius could say that they thought Peter was a weak, talentless thing in POA, I am sure they thought the same of him before as well, when they were young.

Well, we know that James and Sirius were as close as brothers and that the Marauders good-humouredly teased Peter about not being too bright, in SWM. And SWM reveals Peter to have an unpleasant side to his character, the 'avidness' with which he watches James and Sirius target Snape but we'd better keep Snape away from this thread because he's not the subject of it .

But surely there is more to Peter than that.

Friendship IMO is nothing but trust, but did James and Sirius trust Peter or did they think him incapable of being a DE? They are 2 completely different things IMO.

Sure, but you don't trust someone with your life unless you really trust them, IMO,

I don't think they trusted Peter. James told Dumbedlore that Sirius would rather die than betray him (POA) but there isn't anything like that about Peter. The official reason we have from Sirius is that they thought Peter was too weak to even think of being a DE, so he'd be the perfect SK, because Vodlemort would never in his wildest dreams think that James and Co. would ever entrust such a job to Poor Peter.

No, Sirius says that is what he thinks, that Peter was a "weak, talentless thing". We cannot necessarily assume that's what James and Lily thought. I can't believe that Sirius presented his reasons to James and Lily for making Peter SK in such harsh terms back in 1981. Again, it is Sirius's rage and hatred colouring his words here. As I say, he's had 12 years to brood on the depth of Peter's treachery, so no wonder he uses such vicious language -- one can hardly blame him.

Also, I cannot agree that James and Lily didn't trust Peter. The decision to make him SK makes no sense otherwise. And Lily's letter to Sirius refers only to Peter in warm terms. Leaving aside Lily's weird taste in nicknames (Tuney?? Wormy?? :whistle:) I think we are meant to see in her letter a warm reference to Peter and his friendship with her and James.

But what they failed to take into account and because of which I call this a very poorly planned thing where the Potters showed total negligence and arrogance IMO, is that even if Peter was a true friend, with Sirius, Peter, Remus and the Potters all in hiding, Voldemort would surely go after the weakest link in the chain. That was Peter IMO.

I do think it is really harsh to say that James and Lily were arrogant and negligent for trusting Peter. It's like saying it was their fault they were murdered and with all due respect I honestly cannot accept that argument. :shrug: Sorry. :sigh:

Sirius says that he never understood why he did not see through Peter. That to me was an admission of Sirius's lack of understanding of a boy who was their best friend. In the long years in Azkaban, Sirius probably realised that Peter was always like this. But I really do believe that Sirius and James thought so little of him, of his capability as a wizard that they never tried to understand him, know him as he was really. Had they done that, they would not have made this mistake. But I believe that they never tried to know their friend, because then I am sure they would have known that he was not a friend at all.

When they did not know a person properly IMO, how could they entrust such a job to him? And they made a weak, talentless person SK. They should have gone for the best protection when they had a DL on their heels. They should not have used a "friend" whom they knew was not capable enough, just because he was a friend. That is not the way a SK for something so serious should be chosen I feel.

That was why I called their actions negligent and arrogance, an action for which not only they, but also Harry paid dearly IMO.

But you Peter - I'll never understand why I didn't see you were the spy from the start. POA

Sirius is angry in the Shack, but I am sure he is not speaking in a rage all the time; for his comments about Snape too, were made in the shack and so was his apology to Remus among other things IMO.

In my previous post I have said why James and Lily too were not careful enough.

The entire post is my opinion only.

I think Sirius would have. The decision to accept the suggetion of a change of SK belonged to James and Lily, not Sirius. Sirius of course influenced them with his arguments and persuaded them to change. Why should he lie to his dearest and best friend who had taken him into his home when Sirius had run away at age 16 and who loved him enough to save Snape so that Remus and Sirius would not get into trouble?

There is no reason for Sirius to lie to James about his suspicions and I think he did share them with James and Lily, and that was how he persuaded them, because they agreed too IMO.

Remus was not closer to Sirius than James, especially at a time when he was suspecting Remus to be a traitor. I am sure he would have shared his suspicion with James.

It would seem strange for Sirius to not voice his opinion,especially when it was a matter of the Potters safety.I suppose I just hate to think of James not trusting Remus(even though I don't really like James).What you say make sense,the thing is I can see a slight possibility in James suspecting Remus but not Lily.You have raised an interseting point though.
I do agree with you about Remus not being as close to Sirius.I always got the impression he was closer to James.

Anakin turned to Darth Vader and did it in 2 hours (betraying and then killing all of his closest friends - the Jedi in the temple) after 23 years of being a hero - so you know in literature, this sort of thing can happen. I don't know if I would agree to call either Vader or Peter "cowards" for doing what they did, because it did take bravery to betray; but it was certainly dastardly and vile behavior on both their parts, imo.
In no way can Peter Pettigrew's fall be compared to that of Anakin Skywalker. The latter fell to the Dark Side. The Dark Side in the galaxy far, far away has little in common with that of the Potterverse: it is an evil power, almost a sentient being. It kind of has a mind of its own. By its very nature, the Dark Side twists people. In a sense, it's a brainwashing device; once people experience it and the power it gives them, they want more, and the more they use it, the more they want it. It is not something you see every day - usual corruption, greediness, cowardice, etc. It's something much bigger and more sinister. Anakin fell victim to this horror because he was a Force-user and he let powerful emotions guide him, thus making himself vulnerable to the corruption.

There's no such Dark Side in the Potterverse. Peter made his choice consciously, deliberately. He might have been guided by fear or, more probably, ambitions, but the choice was his. Anakin was manipulated and tricked by the Dark Side, even if it had been his own powerful negative emotions which had helped him go down that path.

Peter as a Hero is so unbelievable to me; I don't know why JKR said what she did (was this interview before or after DH?) but it is not believable at all and I really cannot find stuff in the books to say Peter of all people was a Hero!
I think this is the case when JKR's words shouldn't be taken that seriously. I don't think she carefully ponders and weighs her every single word during interviews. I bet she doesn't expect that every "Hmm" coming from her will be analyzed to death.
I don't know the story, but this man sounds like a DL; a Voldemort type more than the Peter type.
Actually, the story of Anakin is very much similar to that of Snape. Both characters' follies led to their loved ones being murdered, both had to give up their lives to redeem themselves.
But that is the question. Did James and Sirius have the friendship with Peter that they had with each other? I don't think so. If Sirius could say that they thought Peter was a weak, talentless thing in POA, I am sure they thought the same of him before as well, when they were young.
For those who consider extra information coming from JKR's canon, here's her opinion on this subject:

Pettigrew, who they, in a slightly patronizing way, James and Sirius at least, who they allowed to hang round with them, it turned out that he was a better wizard than they knew. Turned out he was better at hiding secrets than they knew.

Took it from Accio Quote, the Leaky Cauldron and Mugglenet interview.

In this case my opinion coincides with JKR's. They were simply letting Peter hang around with them. Actually, they had no choice. He was their dormmate at school, and if they had chosen to disregard his friendship, he'd have been a lot of trouble for them, being privy to many of their secrets. So they had to include him in their company.

But what they failed to take into account and because of which I call this a very poorly planned thing where the Potters showed total negligence and arrogance IMO, is that even if Peter was a true friend, with Sirius, Peter, Remus and the Potters all in hiding, Voldemort would surely go after the weakest link in the chain. That was Peter IMO.

He could capture Peter and get the information if Peter was the SK, or he could get information wbout the identity of the SK; both dangerous to the Potters. And yet this does not seem to have struck them at all.
:tu: Exactly.

I do think it is really harsh to say that James and Lily were arrogant and negligent for trusting Peter. It's like saying it was their fault they were murdered and with all due respect I honestly cannot accept that argument.I would have to agree - blaming Lily and James is equivalent to blaming the victims for being killed. While it is true that James and Lily went along with Sirius' plan to use Peter, I do not hold them accountable at all for their fate. As for Sirius, I think it's easy to blame him, because we have the benefit of hindsight. If Rowling says that Sirius (and James) did not know how good Peter was as a wizard, nor how good he was at keeping secrets, then this indicates to me that Sirius couldn't have known what Peter was capable of. Sirius clearly underestimates Peter, but this opinion is presumably based on what Sirius has observed of Peter during the time they were together. Now one may say that perhaps Sirius should have suspected that Peter was a better wizard because he became an animagus, which is very difficult magic. And to some extent, I'd have to agree. But Sirius was likely thinking of Peter's ability to fight using magic when he thought of the idea for Peter to become SK, since he reasoned that Voldemort would believe the person who would offer the greatest fighting threat to him was the SK. Perhaps it was a bit arrogant of him to assume that Peter's magical ability was subpar. He may not have been completely blameless - it's apparent that Sirius feels guilty about the plan he came up with, which he voices in PoA. But he was only doing what he thought best at the time with the information and observations he had available to him.

When/where did JKR say that Peter had been a hero?

Now one may say that perhaps Sirius should have suspected that Peter was a better wizard because he became an animagus, which is very difficult magic. And to some extent, I'd have to agree.

But JKR covered that as well in POA: "Peter needed needed all the help he could get from James and Sirius" (speaking about them becoming Animagi). So Sirius would not have considered Peter finally achieving it, requiring so much assistance indicative of his being a 'better wizard' in my judgment.

I would have to agree - blaming Lily and James is equivalent to blaming the victims for being killed. While it is true that James and Lily went along with Sirius' plan to use Peter, I do not hold them accountable at all for their fate.

I respectfully disagree with you. While it was Sirius's plan, it was James and Lily who accepted responsibilty by listening to Sirius and disregarding Dumbledore IMO.

Sirius, James and Lily together took a decision that was not based on proof that Remus was a DE and was based on premise. They also ignored Dumbedlore's warning that someone very close to them was working for Voldemort. I do think they were careless, simply because they could not believe that Peter had what it took to be a DE.

As for Sirius, I think it's easy to blame him, because we have the benefit of hindsight. If Rowling says that Sirius (and James) did not know how good Peter was as a wizard, nor how good he was at keeping secrets, then this indicates to me that Sirius couldn't have known what Peter was capable of.

They were living together for 10 years and for 7 years sharing the same dorm and being together day and night for 10 months in a year.

Even if we are to assume that Peter was so clever that he managed to conceal his true character from the others, James and Sirius knew he was not very talented. He did not even know the characteristics of a werewolf in the SWM (in their DADA OWL).

And when they were considering the SK, should they have gone to Dumbedlore who had offered or stayed with Sirius if they (I feel they did) doubt Remus. But they did neither. They chose a man who was weak magically and who would not have been able to stand strong against a possible attack like Sirius or Remus IMO.

That I feel does show that James, Sirius and Lily chose wrongly.

I respectfully disagree with you. While it was Sirius's plan, it was James and Lily who accepted responsibilty by listening to Sirius and disregarding Dumbledore IMO.

So you hold them accountable; what does that mean for you in terms of the story? You think JKR was trying to show that Snape, Peter and Voldemort are all less guilty of conspiring to murder and then Voldemort less culpable for murdering the Potters? Or that she wanted us to feel that the Potters were arrogant and stupid and show that arrogant and stupid people deserve to die?

I don't think it was James and Lily's fault at all. They weren't doing the wrong thing by trusting Pettigrew, at least to their knowledge. He was their friend and deserved to be trusted. Voldemort, Snape, and Wormtail are the only ones to blame for it IMO. Especially Voldemort and Peter. James, Lily, and Sirius were just doing what they thought was the smartest thing, and it didn't work out like they had expected. You can't blame them for that.

James, Lily, and Sirius were just doing what they thought was the smartest thing, and it didn't work out like they had expected.

Well, as it turned out, it certainly wasn't the smartest thing. :whistle:

And if their motive for choosing Peter was because they didn't think he was the smartest thing, then I have no idea why they would have chosen him at all. :shrug:

But I really don't think that's why they chose him. They thought he was trustworthy and the safest bet.

And I don't regard a fatally wrong judgement call as a moral failure on James and Lily's part, and I don't regard them as arrogant because Peter was able to fool them and everyone else.

I mean, people in danger just don't behave like that. They don't play Russian Roulette with their lives and the life of their baby boy.

Well, as it turned out, it certainly wasn't the smartest thing. :whistle:

And if their motive for choosing Peter was because they didn't think he was the smartest thing, then I have no idea why they would have chosen him at all. :shrug:

But I really don't think that's why they chose him. They thought he was trustworthy and the safest bet.

And I don't regard a fatally wrong judgement call as a moral failure on James and Lily's part, and I don't regard them as arrogant because Peter was able to fool them and everyone else.

I mean, people in danger just don't behave like that. They don't play Russian Roulette with their lives and the life of their baby boy.But they didn't know that choosing Peter wouldn't be the smartest thing, so they can hardly be blamed, can they? I don't think they chose him because he wasn't the smartest thing. They chose him since he wasn't their best friend, and therefore not as obvious of a choice as Sirius was. Voldemort would have suspected Sirius in a second. They also thought he was trustworthy. If they hadn't, they wouldn't have trusted him.

They didn't think they were doing anything risky at all. Peter surprised them all by betraying them. You can't blame them for trusting someone who was their friend, because they didn't know he would be working for Voldemort. All IMO of course. :)

But they didn't know that choosing Peter wouldn't be the smartest thing, so they can hardly be blamed, can they?

I'm not blaming them. Each of my recent posts in this thread has made it clear I'm not blaming them! :relax:

I don't think they chose him because he wasn't the smartest thing.

That's what I said. ;)

They chose him since he wasn't their best friend, and therefore not as obvious of a choice as Sirius was. Voldemort would have suspected Sirius in a second. They also thought he was trustworthy. If they hadn't, they wouldn't have trusted him.

Well, now, there's a reason for choosing Peter that I do find convincing. He was close to them, but not as close as Sirius was to James. And I agree with you ... they trusted him, therefore they chose him.

But they didn't know that choosing Peter wouldn't be the smartest thing, so they can hardly be blamed, can they? I don't think they chose him because he wasn't the smartest thing. They chose him since he wasn't their best friend, and therefore not as obvious of a choice as Sirius was. Voldemort would have suspected Sirius in a second. They also thought he was trustworthy. If they hadn't, they wouldn't have trusted him.This makes sense to me as well, since Sirius explains his plan as being aimed to bluff Voldemort into going after the wrong person (ie Sirius) instead of the right one (Peter). It was well-known that Sirius was like a brother to James, so it makes sense that word would have reached Voldemort's ears of this relationship, not necessarily from Wormtail either. I imagine Sirius and James must have fought side by side together in the Order as well, which would further strengthen the idea that Sirius and James were very close (while Remus was off with the werewolves and Peter...perhaps he remained behind the fighting lines?). So since they believed Remus to be the traitor, they had Peter be the bluff and Sirius be the "bait", so to speak, or the obvious choice.

So you hold them accountable; what does that mean for you in terms of the story? You think JKR was trying to show that Snape, Peter and Voldemort are all less guilty of conspiring to murder and then Voldemort less culpable for murdering the Potters? Or that she wanted us to feel that the Potters were arrogant and stupid and show that arrogant and stupid people deserve to die?

There is a lot of mention about choices and that actions have repercussions. James and Lily chose to accept Sirius's suggestion knowing there was a traitor close to them. They thought that traitor to be Remus. How did they come to that conclusion?

Remus also thought Sirius was the spy. Perhaps Remus suspected Sirius because of his family and Sirius suspected Remus because he was a werewolf IMO.

James took Sirius's side, because Dumbledore apparently suspected Sirius (POA). But James assured him that Sirius would rather die than betray him IMO.

He never said anything like that about Remus. The switch shows that the Potters also thought the traitor to be Remus. How did they conclude that?

On Sirius's words? Or because they suspected Remus themselves?

This makes sense to me as well, since Sirius explains his plan as being aimed to bluff Voldemort into going after the wrong person (ie Sirius) instead of the right one (Peter).

Peter was hiding, Sirius was hiding (POA) and the Potters were in hiding and Remus did not know; Voldemort would go after any one of them, and break them and get the information. Sirius, if caught may have shown Voldemort who the SK was (legilimency) and Peter would hardly be a match for Voldemort IMO.

The reasoning behind their action is what is baffling. If Voldemort went first after Peter, because he was the weakest, he would have known straight away what the secret was IMO.

Peter was hiding, Sirius was hiding (POA) and the Potters were in hiding and Remus did not know; Voldemort would go after any one of them, and break them and get the information. Sirius, if caught may have shown Voldemort who the SK was (legilimency) and Peter would hardly be a match for Voldemort IMO.

The reasoning behind their action is what is baffling. If Voldemort went first after Peter, because he was the weakest, he would have known straight away what the secret was IMO.That wasn't their logic though. They never took the fact that Peter was weaker into account, IMO. Only the fact that Sirius was James' best friend and that was a well-known fact, so of course Voldemort would suspect him first of all. Peter was their friend but not as close to them as Sirius was. He wasn't as obvious of a choice as Sirius was. He could still be suspected by Voldemort to be the Secret Keeper, but they didn't have a whole lot of options at this point.

There is a lot of mention about choices and that actions have repercussions. James and Lily chose to accept Sirius's suggestion knowing there was a traitor close to them. They thought that traitor to be Remus. How did they come to that conclusion?

Remus also thought Sirius was the spy. Perhaps Remus suspected Sirius because of his family and Sirius suspected Remus because he was a werewolf IMO.

James took Sirius's side, because Dumbledore apparently suspected Sirius (POA). But James assured him that Sirius would rather die than betray him IMO.

He never said anything like that about Remus. The switch shows that the Potters also thought the traitor to be Remus. How did they conclude that?

On Sirius's words? Or because they suspected Remus themselves?

Did you mean those questions for me? We have discussed this before. You reached the conclusion that James and Lily believed Remus was a spy. In my opinion James and Lily never reached that conclusion - they didn't believe that Remus was the spy. James would have felt it the height of dishonor to distrust any of his friends (as Remus himself tells us) and I feel Lily was with him on that.

So since they believed Remus to be the traitor, they had Peter be the bluff and Sirius be the "bait", so to speak, or the obvious choice.

Just out of curiosity do you also believe James suspected Remus too?I'm only asking because I'm unsure of whether he was trusted or not now.

As for Peter I always assumed it was because he was such an unlikely choice.The dark side knew because he took the information to them himself(also if I remember correctly he had been passing information to them).If he hadn't done this,what were the chances that the dark side would have know Peter was the secret keeper?

Getting back to what was said about how close the marauders were,remember the order picture?Remus is not with Sirius or the potters(infact even sirius was standing near the potters).This may be insignificant but I thought I'd mention it anyway

Just out of curiosity do you also believe James suspected Remus too?I'm only asking because I'm unsure of whether he was trusted or not now.I think I was a bit inattentive when I wrote "they" instead of "Sirius" - it's hard to say. I think there a couple of possibilities.

1) Sirius conveyed his suspicions of Remus to James*, who eventually agreed
2) Sirius conveyed his suspicions of Remus to James, who did not agree, but felt that Peter was a better choice to use
3) Sirius did not convey his suspicions of Remus to James, but just discussed why Peter was the best choice, and James agreed

I would like to think that James didn't suspect Remus, and that Sirius kept his suspicions to himself, but it's hard to say for certain. At least, I don't recall anything in canon at the moment which would indicate one scenario or another (but that doesn't mean there could be something I'm forgetting about!).

*Of course, Lily was just as much a part of the decision as James, so in saying "James", I'm tacitly including Lily here. It's just that she would have to defer on James' judgment about the personalities and trustworthiness of the Marauders since James knew them better and for a longer period of time. I imagine she must have been friends with them too after she and James got married though.

There is a lot of mention about choices and that actions have repercussions. James and Lily chose to accept Sirius's suggestion knowing there was a traitor close to them. They thought that traitor to be Remus. How did they come to that conclusion?

Remus also thought Sirius was the spy. Perhaps Remus suspected Sirius because of his family and Sirius suspected Remus because he was a werewolf IMO.

James took Sirius's side, because Dumbledore apparently suspected Sirius (POA). But James assured him that Sirius would rather die than betray him IMO.

He never said anything like that about Remus. The switch shows that the Potters also thought the traitor to be Remus. How did they conclude that?

On Sirius's words? Or because they suspected Remus themselves?



Peter was hiding, Sirius was hiding (POA) and the Potters were in hiding and Remus did not know; Voldemort would go after any one of them, and break them and get the information. Sirius, if caught may have shown Voldemort who the SK was (legilimency) and Peter would hardly be a match for Voldemort IMO.

The reasoning behind their action is what is baffling. If Voldemort went first after Peter, because he was the weakest, he would have known straight away what the secret was IMO.

The problem with this line of reasoning is that all of this can only be determined through the benefit of hindsight. It's very easy to be harsh and judgmental and say it was a bad decision when you know the end result. James and Lily did not have the benefit of knowing what the end result would be when they made this decision. You're looking at the situation from the angle of what did happen, which was something that none of them could have predicted. We have to look at it from the angle of what they knew and believed at that point in time - as well as what they did not know and could not know.

As you pointed out, Sirius says in POA that he would never understand why he didn't figure out that Pettigrew was the spy. At that point, he's had 12 years to think about it and figure it all out. As the saying goes, hindsight is 20/20. Knowing what Pettigrew did removed the blinders of friendship and Sirius was able to see him for what he was. Before Pettigrew betrayed them, Sirius did not see him for what he was - and neither did anyone else. Sirius blamed himself for not figuring it out, but the fact was, none of them were psychic - or seers. Pettigrew fooled his friends and everyone else.

So let's look at it from the angle of what was known and believed at that point in time.

James trusted all of his friends and did not believe any of them would betray him - this includes Lily by extension. When Dumbledore told him that he believed someone close to the Potters was spying for Voldemort, James stood up for his friends - specifically Sirius. And note - Dumbledore's suspicions were not specific to anyone. He knew that someone close to them was passing information, but he had no way of knowing who it was. That's why he offered to be secret keeper himself - there was no way to know who the spy was. But James felt that would be a betrayal to his friends and could not bring himself to even consider the possibility that one of them would betray him. We see Harry put in a very similar position in DH - faced with the knowledge that someone had to have told Voldemort Harry was being moved that night, Harry has to decide who to trust and he decides that he's going to trust everyone there because they have all been there for him.

This is what was going through James' mind, IMO. Faced with the same situation - knowing that someone is passing information to Voldemort - James could not bring himself to believe that one of his friends would betray him any more than Harry could bring himself to believe that any of the people who had put themselves in danger to get him to the Burrow safely would have betrayed him.

But we do have a missing piece of information. For some reason, Sirius thought that Lupin was the spy. POA is very clear on this - it specifically says that Sirius believed Lupin was the spy and chose not to tell Lupin about the switch because of that. There is no mention of James ever suspecting Lupin of being the spy. We don't know why, but Sirius became suspicious of Lupin and decided not to tell Lupin about the switch. Logically, that would most likely be due to the information that Dumbledore was receiving being skewed to make it appear that Lupin was the spy, but we can only speculate about that at this point because Jo has never revealed why Sirius began to suspect Lupin. The only thing we know for sure is that it was Sirius who was suspicious - not James.

So we are presented with a picture of James trusting all three of his friends with his life and refusing to believe that any of them would ever betray him. Sirius was not quite as trusting as James, but for some reason suspected Lupin. Pettigrew fooled everyone because he was a lot more clever than they gave him credit for. And it's important to understand Pettigrew's character here as well. Pettigrew is a sycophant. His true views and beliefs remain a mystery because he chose to parrot the views and beliefs of others rather than be his own person. In school, he attached himself to the Marauders and parroted their views and beliefs. When he became a spy, he continued to do that so they would not suspect him - all the while parroting Voldemort's views and beliefs when he was among the Death Eaters. Pettigrew was going to behave according to the views and beliefs of whoever he was with.

That's why none of them ever suspected him. He put on a convincing act and they all believed he shared their beliefs and values. They all believed he was their friend and cared for them as much as they cared about him. They all believed that Pettigrew would die rather than betray any of them - just as they would have done for him. None of them ever knew who Pettigrew really was or what he really believed because he chose to parrot their views and beliefs. He wasn't going around openly practicing the Dark Arts and becoming famous for it. He wasn't defending others using the Dark Arts as just a laugh. He wasn't going around calling muggleborns "filthy mudbloods" or openly planning to join the Death Eaters. Pettigrew worked in secret and kept his true opinions to himself - choosing to parrot the opinions of the people around him instead. None of them every truly knew him, but it wasn't until after he had betrayed them that anyone could have figured that out. And, at that point, only Sirius knew the truth because he was the only person alive - apart from Pettigrew - who knew they had switched secret keepers at the last minute.

Which brings us to the plan to make the switch. We know it was a decision made at the last minute. We know that, even before the charm was performed, James and Lily stayed in their house and did not go anywhere because they knew Voldemort was after Harry. As such, it would have come down to Sirius and/or Pettigrew to tell others about the plan - such as Lupin or Dumbledore. James was not in the position to share information. That's not something you can put in an owl after all - it would defeat the purpose. And we know that - for some unknown reason - Sirius began to suspect that Lupin was the spy.

With the information they had at the time, it was a brilliant plan - but it did hinge upon James being right about his friends - specifically Pettigrew. But the plan itself was brilliant. The idea was to make it appear that Sirius was the secret keeper - and they felt everyone would believe anyway because Sirius was the obvious choice. Sirius was going to be very obvious about it so Voldemort would be looking for him. With what they knew at that time, Pettigrew would never have been in danger because they planned to make sure Voldemort believed Sirius was the secret keeper. The same applied to Lupin. It did hinge upon Pettigrew being loyal, but at that point in time, they had no way to know that Pettigrew was not loyal.

The fact that they cared about Pettigrew had nothing to do with his intelligence or talent as a wizard. They didn't need him to be a powerful, intelligent wizard - they needed him to be a loyal friend who cared about them as much as they cared about him. They needed him to keep a secret - you don't have to be powerful to keep a secret. You just have to keep your mouth shut.

The fact that they cared about Pettigrew had nothing to do with his intelligence or talent as a wizard. They didn't need him to be a powerful, intelligent wizard - they needed him to be a loyal friend who cared about them as much as they cared about him. They needed him to keep a secret - you don't have to be powerful to keep a secret. You just have to keep your mouth shut.

I agree with your entire statement I merely cut it for spatial reasons. I would add that for me, the distrust that Sirius and Remus had for one another was explained sufficiently. Sirius and Remus trusted Dumbledore completely - and I think James and Lily trusted him too - just not as completely. I believe based on the stories they had heard about him, they didn't lose faith in him, but felt that his plans might include sharing information with other operatives that they were not aware of (actually we know this was true; he had "spies", including Snape at some point, within Voldemort's fold.)

So while James and Lily saw the possibility of information getting out beyond their circle of friends; Sirius and Remus, who could only very rarely visit them, didn't likely believe this. So Sirius and Remus figured that if Dumbledore and the 5 friends were the only people who knew the movements of the Potters, then one of those 5 people were passing information to Voldemort. Both of them felt Peter, considered by all (including Dumbledore) to be the least talented, would be the last person Voldemort would approach. They discounted the Potters of course as well as Dumbledore. That left each other - So Remus suspected it was likely Sirius and Sirius suspected it was likely Remus who was passing the information.

But note something else. They merely suspected it, but not to the degree where they actually captured the other person, tied them up and forced them to confess via torture or what have you; nor did they go to Dumbledore and demand a posse of Order members be gathered to bring down their friend the spy. It was merely a suspicion not "certainty" with which they indicated they considered the other might be the spy - and that was only due to the process of elimination. Still, they had been good friends for a long time and knew one another well, and that kept their thoughts at the level of suspicion because what they suspected was to both of them, a nearly impossible conclusion. As it turned out, they were both correct and the culprit was Peter. Therein lies another potential problem JKR was able to care for; Sirius and Remus, able to freely move about why the Potters were sequestered were concentrated on one another as suspects and that in itself would be a reason they paid less attention to Peter.

The small discrepancy is of course Dumbledore, who suspected everyone I would imagine, and yet rather than act on his own suspicions, he offered himself as secret keeper. I kind of doubt JKR was trying to make Dumbledore vindictive in this situation ("if the Potters don't want me as SK, then I wash my hands of the matter.") So if he wasn't vindictive, then one would believe he would still attempt to ferret out the spy among those he suspected. We don't have information so it cannot be a plot hole; and it may simply be that Dumbledore wasn't so narrow visioned and rather than suspecting only the Potter's friends, he had a very large number of possible suspects. His covert attempts to check them all out could indeed take time and that might be the easy explanation of why he never got around to Peter. Meanwhile he would have no idea that the Potters had heard stories about him and might have some doubts about his manner of dealing with things.

Nonetheless, it seems probable that even with their doubt, the Potters would have assumed Sirius (who had no such doubts about Dumbledore) would have shared the idea to "switch" with Dumbledore and Lupin. Sirius of course would not share the information with Lupin - but it is very likely that he would have shared the information with Dumbledore, which makes me feel that he simply had not time to do so between organizing his own hiding place and checking on Peter. Lupin, who would have also been going in hiding (from the time Sirius was made secret keeper) was likely simply in hiding and out of the picture for the most part. He may have even been away on assignment as a part of his hiding because Dumbledore was fully aware of his circumstances - that would explain his absense on the evening when the Potters were killed.

Pettigrew fooled everyone because he was a lot more clever than they gave him credit for. And it's important to understand Pettigrew's character here as well. Pettigrew is a sycophant. His true views and beliefs remain a mystery because he chose to parrot the views and beliefs of others rather than be his own person.I agree. Peter's ability to keep his cards close to the table, so to speak, allowed his allegiance to Voldemort to remain hidden from his friends. Also, the fact that I think he was a little more far removed from the friendship than the others may have contributed to his ability to keep things under wraps. I agree that his being a sycophant gave him the ability to mimic the views of James and Sirius (specifically), which provided the perfect cover for him.
But note something else. They merely suspected it, but not to the degree where they actually captured the other person, tied them up and forced them to confess via torture or what have you; nor did they go to Dumbledore and demand a posse of Order members be gathered to bring down their friend the spy.This is a very good point. This indicates to me that although there were suspicions, nobody suspect anybody strongly enough to take action. I believe that both Sirius and Remus did not want to suspect one another at all - because if you can't trust your friends, who can you trust? This is kind of demonstrated to me via Remus in PoA: he is very quick to accept Sirius' account of things, and to believe his eyes when he saw Peter on the Map. He put things together rather quickly and realizes that Sirius is innocent, without asking too many questions. This indicates that he was very reluctant to believe that Sirius was a murderer. I'd bet it would have been similar with Sirius if their roles had been reversed.

I believe that both Sirius and Remus did not want to suspect one another at all - because if you can't trust your friends, who can you trust?

I before believed the main cause of distrust was the dark times.Someone mentioned(I think it was sirius),that it was a time when you didn't know who too trust,people had the imperious cure used on them.It was generally a time when people were extra cautious even when it came to people who were close to them.

I before believed the main cause of distrust was the dark times.Someone mentioned(I think it was sirius),that it was a time when you didn't know who too trust,people had the imperious cure used on them.It was generally a time when people were extra cautious even when it came to people who were close to them.

If that were all there was to it, then why not suspect Peter? Dumbledore? Kingsley? Hesia? There was more to it than mere "dark times". They distrusted one another, imo, due to the process of elimination and their trust in Dumbledore. But only to the extent to where it was a suspicion and not a certainty.

There was more to it than mere "dark times".I agree there was probably more to it, but I think "dark times" and an air of distrust permeating the wizarding world played a significant role.

The problem with this line of reasoning is that all of this can only be determined through the benefit of hindsight. It's very easy to be harsh and judgmental and say it was a bad decision when you know the end result.

I respectfully disagree with you. I really don't think James, Sirius or Lily could call it "in hindsight". I really think they were careless and arrogant in the belief they were right instead of being cautious IMO.

1) The Potters knew Voldemort was after them. They were in hiding for quite sometime. They went under the Fidelus one week before they were killed.

2) Dumbledore warned them that someone very close to them was a traitor. That could mean anyone who was close to them starting from Dumbledore himself who brought them the news, the 3 friends and any person in the Order whom the Potters thought were very close to them, or even Bathilda Bagshot who visited with the Potters regularly.

3) The moment Dumbledore came with a warning, James and Lily should have heeded it. I also think they did; they took his warning seriously.

4) In POA there is mention that James told a worried Dumbledore that he was sure that Sirius would never ever betray him; that he would die before he did.

5) Sirius and Remus suspected each other as the spy. Sirius apologises to Remus and Remus also asks Sirius for an apology.

6) Sirius was closest to James; at the time of the murder of the Potters, Sirius was closer to James than Remus, because he thought Remus was the traitor.

7) Dumbledore offered to be SK.

8) The Potters disregarded him and went ahead with Sirius, because James was sure he would never betray them.

9) At the time of the Fidelus with Sirius as SK, only the 3 Marauders, the Potters and Dumbledore were aware of both the secret and the identity of the SK.

10) My first question :: What did James and Lily do about sealing their home to the traitor? How did they do that? Only if they found out the traitor could they act against him. When Sirius became SK, did James and Lily decide they had shut the SK out?

11) Once James and Lily were under the Fidelus with Sirius as SK, they were very, very safe. No one apart from the closest friends and Dumbledore knew that they had even gone under the Fidelus.

12) And yet they made the switch.

13) So they thought one among the persons who knew the secret was the traitor and while they trusted Sirius and knew that Voldemort would never come to their home as long as Sirius was the SK, the traitor could take Harry to Voldemort; the Fidelus would not prevent that.

14) Sirius suspected Remus to be the traitor. Which means he was not as close to Remus as he was to James whom he wanted to protect desperately and for whom he was willing to die.

15) Remus also thought Sirius was the SK and he probably told James who may have refused to believe it (and hence Remus's statement in DH)

16) Since Sirius thought Remus was a DE, he would have naturally shared this with James and Lily; there is no reason why he should not; if he did not, then he too becomes culpable IMO.

17) Sirius was able to persuade James and Lily and it was because they agreed with his suspicion that they went ahead and made the switch. James probably believed Sirius and took his side against Remus, for Remus too, because he was a good friend would have told James of his suspicions (otherwise Remus too, becomes culpable). James may have reacted to Remus as he did to Dumbeldore and that was why Remus said that James thought it the height of dishonour to distrust his friends.

18) Once Sirius became the SK there would have been no need to make the switch. Sirius could have just gone to another part of the world or just stayed with the Potters themselves and everything would have been fine.

19) Dumbledore and Remus did not know. So Dumbledore could be suspected or Remus. In POA, we learn it was Remus who was thought to be the traitor.

---------------------

1) What did Sirius, James and Lily do to track and flush out the traitor before they placed themselves under the Fidelus?

2) ON what basis did they suspect Remus?

3) Knowing Peter was not a wizard equal to them, how did they choose him?

4) Why did they not tell Dumbledore?

These are not things in hindsight. In the presence of great danger they must have tried to protect themselves properly, not because they "knew" and they "were sure" that one was a traitor and one was not IMO.

That the Potters never checked those who would be aware of their secret when they knew one of those persons who was in the secret was a DE and could betray them does not speak well of them IMO.

They went on assumptions and suspected one friend and trusted another randomly without basis. That was what killed them in the end. Their wrong choices and their wrong judgement IMO.

The entire post is my opinion only.

I respectfully disagree with you. I really don't think James, Sirius or Lily could call it "in hindsight". I really think they were careless and arrogant in the belief they were right instead of being cautious IMO.

In that case, JKR's idea of a "hero" would be deeply flawed would it not? Harry's parents; the careless, and arrogantly foolish individuals that got themselves killed and left Harry an orphan ~ true heroes.

Doesn't quite fit, doea it? In my opinion, your guess as to what happened is not what JKR had in mind. In addition you have a lot of contradictions in your list. One being the Potters taking the matter seriously together with the fact that they acted carelessly and arrogant, which is far from taking something seriously, imo. There are many more, but I don't think it would be productive to point them out; suffice it to say I would have to respectfully disagree with your view and conclusions.

In addition you have a lot of contradictions in your list. One being the Potters taking the matter seriously together with the fact that they acted carelessly and arrogant, which is far from taking something seriously, imo. There are many more, but I don't think it would be productive to point them out; suffice it to say I would have to respectfully disagree with your view and conclusions.

They took the whole matter seriously; but then set their plans on an assumption was what I was trying to say. They did heed Dumbelore's warning, but what did they do about it? They simply went on Sirius's suspicions? Or did they suspect Dumbedlore as the traitor? Then how did Sirius allow Hagrid, Dumbeldore's representative to take Harry away?

They suspected Remus. ON what basis? Why? These are questions there are no answers to, because Sirius says that he persuaded them to change SK and they did. (POA)

That meant they were persuaded and believed Sirius. Sirius suspected Remus. So James and Lily did too? For that is the logical conclusion. Why should they change SK otherwise? They were safe under the Fidelus and Sirius could vanish better than Peter.

That was what I meant when I said they took Dumbledore's warning, but did not check properly.

The entire post is my opnion only.

They suspected Remus. ON what basis? Why? These are questions there are no answers to, because Sirius says that he persuaded them to change SK and they did. (POA)
James and Lily did not suspect Remus imo - it is not written in canon at all. This is pure speculation. In fact, the opposite is written when it says James would have considered it the height of dishonor to mistrust his friends. Remus did not have to come up in the conversation of the switch at all imo. They chose Peter because they thought he would be the least likely target amoung their closest friends, not because they mistrusted another imo. Why does Remus have to come into that conversation at all? He doesn't imo, so I don't think Sirius would have even brought up the mistrust to James.

That meant they were persuaded and believed Sirius. Sirius suspected Remus. So James and Lily did too? For that is the logical conclusion. Why should they change SK otherwise? They were safe under the Fidelus and Sirius could vanish better than Peter.
That is not the logical conclusion imo. I agree with WWB when he says that Lily and James both had minds of their own. Also, we don't know if Sirius ever expressed his doubts about Remus to Lily and James. Sirius just thought that it might be safer for them to pick a close friend Voldemort would not even think of going after.

They took the whole matter seriously; but then set their plans on an assumption was what I was trying to say. They did heed Dumbelore's warning, but what did they do about it? They simply went on Sirius's suspicions? Or did they suspect Dumbedlore as the traitor? Then how did Sirius allow Hagrid, Dumbeldore's representative to take Harry away?

I feel Sirius trusted Dumbledore. I do not believe that James/Lily and Sirius were joined at the hip. We have canon evidence that is not the case, for example: Sirius had no intention of saving Snape after the werewolf prank - yet James went and saved him anyway. That shows James had a mind of his own, imo. James wanted to date Lily, but she said no at first. That shows she has no mind of her own, imo. These people are all shown to be independent thinking individuals in my judgment. Therefore, just because James and Lily may have had doubts about Dumbledore does not mean Sirius would have doubts also. He may have thought Bathelda was a crazy woman because he never spoke to her, whereas, James and Lily did, so they would have a different perspective. Do you see what I mean?

In sum, I personally do not agree with the assumption that James, Lily and Sirius thought absolutely alike.


They suspected Remus. ON what basis? Why? These are questions there are no answers to, because Sirius says that he persuaded them to change SK and they did. (POA) That meant they were persuaded and believed Sirius.

The idea that the Potters suspected Remus because Sirius persuaded them that he was the spy is not canon, imo. You are correct he persuaded them to change SK from himself to Peter, but that has nothing to do with Remus, imo. Thus, I cannot answer the question you posed as to why they suspected Remus, because I do not believe they suspected Remus.

Sirius suspected Remus. So James and Lily did too? For that is the logical conclusion.

I would disagree it is the logical conclusion. Why do you feel it is?

Why should they change SK otherwise? They were safe under the Fidelus and Sirius could vanish better than Peter.

According to Sirius, it had nothing to do with trusting Sirius, Remus or Peter; the only reason he gave us was that he felt Voldemort would approach Sirius or Remus first at the time.

That was what I meant when I said they took Dumbledore's warning, but did not check properly.

Imo, the Potter’s trusted their friends, so they would have no reason to check them out. Dumbledore was purportedly checking - trying to flush out the spy, and the Marauders believed he was wise enough to do so. Perhaps Dumbledore was calling in people one by one and giving them Veritaserum – but whatever he was doing, that he didn’t start with Sirius, Remus and Peter likely indicates that he trusted them the most also, imo.

If that were all there was to it, then why not suspect Peter? Dumbledore? Kingsley? Hesia? There was more to it than mere "dark times". They distrusted one another, imo, due to the process of elimination and their trust in Dumbledore. But only to the extent to where it was a suspicion and not a certainty.

I said before.I didn't say it was the sole reason,just a something to be noted.

With regard to Remus being suspected as the traitor by James,alot of people refer to Remus's quote(That distrusting his friends was a dishonour) ,but it still begs the question,if James didn't distrust Remus then why was he the only one of the marauders who was excluded from the plan?You can't help ut ask.

I respectfully disagree with you. I really don't think James, Sirius or Lily could call it "in hindsight". I really think they were careless and arrogant in the belief they were right instead of being cautious IMO.They were arrogant in trusting their friends? What evidence was there that Peter was going to try to betray them? And if you can't trust your friends, then who is there to trust? James and Lily definitely were not arrogant at all IMO.

I still only see the whole fiasco as Voldemort and Peter's fault. Lily and James were not being arrogant by placing their trust in Pettigrew. In hindsight they might realize they made the wrong decision, but at the time they had no way of knowing what was right and what was wrong. I would have done the exact same thing if it were me. :)

Nonetheless, it seems probable that even with their doubt, the Potters would have assumed Sirius (who had no such doubts about Dumbledore) would have shared the idea to "switch" with Dumbledore and Lupin. Sirius of course would not share the information with Lupin - but it is very likely that he would have shared the information with Dumbledore, which makes me feel that he simply had not time to do so between organizing his own hiding place and checking on Peter. Lupin, who would have also been going in hiding (from the time Sirius was made secret keeper) was likely simply in hiding and out of the picture for the most part. He may have even been away on assignment as a part of his hiding because Dumbledore was fully aware of his circumstances - that would explain his absense on the evening when the Potters were killed.

I agree with your entire post as well - I decided to cut to save space too. :)

You bring up an excellent point here though. James and Lily were given reason to doubt Dumbledore before he tried to warn them that someone close to them was spying on them. Bathilda Bagshot had told Lily about Dumbledore's involvement with Grindelwald in his youth. Lily found it hard to believe, but Bathilda certainly had proof of her claims with pictures and letters showing Dumbledore in a very bad light. So it makes sense that they would have doubts about Dumbledore when he came to them with the claim that one of their friends might be betraying them.

As far as we are shown in the text, Sirius and Lupin did not have any such doubts about Dumbledore at that point in time. It can be argued that Sirius might have come to have doubts by OOTP because of the whole thing with Snape, but up through GOF, Sirius showed absolute faith in Dumbledore. So, again, it makes sense that they would have taken Dumbledore's warning more seriously than James and Lily did. They both ruled out Pettigrew because none of them believed that Voldemort would go after Pettigrew as a spy. So they looked to each other and were suspicious. I think it's likely that they may have wondered if the Imperius curse was being used and were watching each other closely during all that.

I agree that this was a clever way for Jo to present that because being suspicious of each other did serve to distract them from Pettigrew. James and Lily having doubts about Dumbledore because of his past ties it all together nicely, IMO.

I agree. Peter's ability to keep his cards close to the table, so to speak, allowed his allegiance to Voldemort to remain hidden from his friends. Also, the fact that I think he was a little more far removed from the friendship than the others may have contributed to his ability to keep things under wraps. I agree that his being a sycophant gave him the ability to mimic the views of James and Sirius (specifically), which provided the perfect cover for him.

Exactly. :agree: We also have a good example of this with Crouch Jr. in GOF. He wasn't a sycophant to the same level as Pettigrew, but he made an excellent choice for an undercover agent because he was able to mimic Moody's behavior and views perfectly. He was very careful not to do anything that would make Dumbledore suspicious up to the very end. That's why he was successful in getting Harry where he needed him to be so he would be transported to the graveyard. Nobody suspected him because he put on such a good act. It wasn't until he made a mistake - after Harry had returned from the graveyard - that Dumbledore realized he wasn't Moody.

Pettigrew would have been doing the same thing, IMO. He would have been very careful in how he behaved around his friends. He could chalk up his depression to being upset over people dying - as Lily speculated in her letter to Sirius. But Pettigrew showed himself to be a lot more clever than anyone gave him credit for. He gave the performance his all - even when he was hiding in rat form. ;)

This is a very good point. This indicates to me that although there were suspicions, nobody suspect anybody strongly enough to take action. I believe that both Sirius and Remus did not want to suspect one another at all - because if you can't trust your friends, who can you trust? This is kind of demonstrated to me via Remus in PoA: he is very quick to accept Sirius' account of things, and to believe his eyes when he saw Peter on the Map. He put things together rather quickly and realizes that Sirius is innocent, without asking too many questions. This indicates that he was very reluctant to believe that Sirius was a murderer. I'd bet it would have been similar with Sirius if their roles had been reversed.

I agree. As I said above, I think it's likely that they each suspected the other might have been put on the Imperius curse - in the event that Dumbledore turned out to be right that someone close to them was spying. I don't think they ever truly thought the other would betray them. Even when it appeared that Sirius had and Lupin was very hurt and angry, he still couldn't bring himself to completely turn on Sirius and betray the confidences he knew - such as the fact that Sirius was an unregistered animagus. If Lupin had truly believed Sirius was a threat, he would have reported that, IMO. Even with the overwhelming evidence against Sirius, Lupin still had hope that there had been a mistake and Sirius was innocent. And he was rewarded for that because it turned out that he was right - Sirius was innocent all along.

I respectfully disagree with you. I really don't think James, Sirius or Lily could call it "in hindsight". I really think they were careless and arrogant in the belief they were right instead of being cautious IMO.

It can only be viewed as careless and arrogant with the benefit of hindsight though. The fact remains that the Potters had reason to doubt Dumbledore and no reason to doubt any of their friends. We have to look at what they knew at the time - not what actually happened as a result.

1) The Potters knew Voldemort was after them. They were in hiding for quite sometime. They went under the Fidelus one week before they were killed.

2) Dumbledore warned them that someone very close to them was a traitor. That could mean anyone who was close to them starting from Dumbledore himself who brought them the news, the 3 friends and any person in the Order whom the Potters thought were very close to them, or even Bathilda Bagshot who visited with the Potters regularly.

3) The moment Dumbledore came with a warning, James and Lily should have heeded it. I also think they did; they took his warning seriously.

That is where you stray from what is shown in canon. As I said above, the fact remains that James and Lily had reason to doubt Dumbledore and not take his warning seriously because of what Bathilda Bagshot told them about his involvement with Grindelwald. And she had proof of that which made Dumbledore look very bad because he had been plotting with Grindelwald to essentially do exactly what Voldemort was trying to do.

Canon is quite clear that James and Lily never suspected Sirius, Lupin, or Pettigrew. Sirius and Lupin suspected each other, but James and Lily were positive that none of their friends would betray them. From what we are shown, James and Lily had complete faith in their friends and doubted Dumbledore because of his past with Grindelwald.

4) In POA there is mention that James told a worried Dumbledore that he was sure that Sirius would never ever betray him; that he would die before he did.

5) Sirius and Remus suspected each other as the spy. Sirius apologises to Remus and Remus also asks Sirius for an apology.

Agreed. Though, I would again point out that this goes towards showing that James had doubts about Dumbledore - he trusted his friends implicitly, but he had been given reason to doubt Dumbledore.

6) Sirius was closest to James; at the time of the murder of the Potters, Sirius was closer to James than Remus, because he thought Remus was the traitor.

7) Dumbledore offered to be SK.

8) The Potters disregarded him and went ahead with Sirius, because James was sure he would never betray them.

9) At the time of the Fidelus with Sirius as SK, only the 3 Marauders, the Potters and Dumbledore were aware of both the secret and the identity of the SK.

You're close here - but the only people who knew the identity of the secret keeper were James, Lily, Sirius, and Pettigrew. Sirius chose not to tell Lupin because he had become suspicious. He probably planned on telling Dumbledore about the switch but the Potters were attacked before he could - though that is debatable because James and Lily had doubts about Dumbledore. It is likely that the Potters did not want Dumbledore to know about the switch at all.

10) My first question :: What did James and Lily do about sealing their home to the traitor? How did they do that? Only if they found out the traitor could they act against him. When Sirius became SK, did James and Lily decide they had shut the SK out?

James and Lily did not believe that there was a traitor among them - they trusted their friends implicitly - so they did not do anything apart from putting the Fidelius Charm in place and switching secret keepers without telling anyone.

Sirius was never the secret keeper by the way - they switched to Pettigrew at the last minute.

11) Once James and Lily were under the Fidelus with Sirius as SK, they were very, very safe. No one apart from the closest friends and Dumbledore knew that they had even gone under the Fidelus.

12) And yet they made the switch.

13) So they thought one among the persons who knew the secret was the traitor and while they trusted Sirius and knew that Voldemort would never come to their home as long as Sirius was the SK, the traitor could take Harry to Voldemort; the Fidelus would not prevent that.

This is incorrect. As I said above, Sirius was never made secret keeper. That was the original plan, but it was changed and they made Pettigrew secret keeper instead without telling anyone. The idea was for Sirius to pretend that he was the secret keeper to draw Voldemort's attention to him. In order for the switch to work, everyone had to believe that Sirius was the secret keeper. But he was never made secret keeper. Pettigrew was the secret keeper the whole time.

So this whole line of reasoning is invalid. James and Lily never believed there was a traitor among their friends. They trusted their friends implicitly. It was Dumbledore that they doubted because they had learned about his past with Grindelwald from Bathilda Bagshot.

14) Sirius suspected Remus to be the traitor. Which means he was not as close to Remus as he was to James whom he wanted to protect desperately and for whom he was willing to die.

15) Remus also thought Sirius was the SK and he probably told James who may have refused to believe it (and hence Remus's statement in DH)

I'm not sure where you're getting that from. Sirius and Lupin were suspicious of each other, but we don't know why that was or how it came about. Considering that it was possible that either one of them could have been put under the Imperius curse, that doesn't mean they were not close friends. It simply means that something happened to cause suspicion and they were more cautious overall. They may have presented their individual suspicions to James - and they may not have - we simply do not know. But we do know that James and Lily never suspected any of their friends - they trusted them implicitly. It was Dumbledore that they doubted.

16) Since Sirius thought Remus was a DE, he would have naturally shared this with James and Lily; there is no reason why he should not; if he did not, then he too becomes culpable IMO.

If Sirius suspected that Lupin had been put under the Imperius curse, he would not have suspected him of being a Death Eater. They each suspected the other of passing information to Voldemort, but we don't know if either of them ever went to James about it and the possibility of the Imperius curse being used has to be considered as well. All we know for sure is that James never suspected any of his friends and trusted them implicitly.

17) Sirius was able to persuade James and Lily and it was because they agreed with his suspicion that they went ahead and made the switch. James probably believed Sirius and took his side against Remus, for Remus too, because he was a good friend would have told James of his suspicions (otherwise Remus too, becomes culpable). James may have reacted to Remus as he did to Dumbeldore and that was why Remus said that James thought it the height of dishonour to distrust his friends.

18) Once Sirius became the SK there would have been no need to make the switch. Sirius could have just gone to another part of the world or just stayed with the Potters themselves and everything would have been fine.

19) Dumbledore and Remus did not know. So Dumbledore could be suspected or Remus. In POA, we learn it was Remus who was thought to be the traitor.

Again, this is incorrect because Sirius was never made the secret keeper. James and Lily never suspected any of their friends of betraying them. Sirius and Lupin had suspicions about each other, but it is not stated in canon whether or not either of them spoke to James about it.

The plan was to make Voldemort believe that Sirius was the secret keeper even though it was actually Pettigrew. This was not done because Dumbledore claimed that someone close to the Potters was spying on them. It was done to try and prevent Voldemort from getting to the real secret keeper. Sirius came up with that plan because he realized that he was the obvious choice for secret keeper and felt that Voldemort would think that as well. None of them believed that Voldemort would ever think Pettigrew was made secret keeper or even approach him.

And the fact that the Potters had been given reason to doubt Dumbledore is also a factor there. It is very likely that they did not want Dumbledore to know who their secret keeper was because of those doubts.

---------------------

1) What did Sirius, James and Lily do to track and flush out the traitor before they placed themselves under the Fidelus?

James and Lily did not do anything because they did not believe that there was a traitor. Sirius was probably keeping a close eye on Lupin - and vice versa - which served to distract them from Pettigrew.

2) ON what basis did they suspect Remus?

James and Lily never suspected Lupin of anything. Sirius was suspicious, but the reason for that remains an unanswered question at this point. However, it is most likely that Sirius came to suspect Lupin was the spy on the basis of the information that Dumbledore was receiving being skewed to make it appear that Lupin was the one passing information to Voldemort.

3) Knowing Peter was not a wizard equal to them, how did they choose him?

Because friendship has nothing to do with power and ability. They trusted Pettigrew implicitly because he was their friend and they cared about him and they believed he cared about them in return. They would have given their lives to protect Pettigrew and believed he would do the same for them. You don't have to be powerful to be a secret keeper - you have to be loyal. They chose Pettigrew because they believed he was loyal.

4) Why did they not tell Dumbledore?

Because they had been given reason to have doubts in Dumbledore due to the discovery of his past with Grindelwald.

These are not things in hindsight. In the presence of great danger they must have tried to protect themselves properly, not because they "knew" and they "were sure" that one was a traitor and one was not IMO.

That is all in hindsight. The Potters did not suspect any of their friends of being a traitor - they didn't have any reason to. Sirius had some suspicion towards Lupin, but he was wrong about that and it served to distract him from Pettigrew.

The fact remains that the Potters could not have done any more than they did with the information they had and what they believed at that point in time. They had been given reason to doubt Dumbledore, but they had not been given any reason to doubt their friends. They trusted their friends implicitly. It was a mistake to trust Pettigrew, but it was not careless or arrogant because they had not been given any reason not to trust Pettigrew.

That the Potters never checked those who would be aware of their secret when they knew one of those persons who was in the secret was a DE and could betray them does not speak well of them IMO.

Again, they did not know that - they could only know that with the benefit of hindsight. Canon is quite clear on that fact. The Potters did not believe that any of their friends was a Death Eater. And even Sirius' suspicions towards Lupin were not strong enough to say that he thought that either. He was suspicious enough to be more cautious and not tell Lupin about the switch, but not suspicious to the point of confrontation or turning Lupin in to anyone.

Again, it all comes down to hindsight. It's very easy to be judgmental when you know that Pettigrew betrayed them. But looking at it from the angle of what James and Lily knew and believed at that point in time, they were not careless at all. They did everything they could to protect themselves. They could not know that Pettigrew would betray them and they had no reason to think that he would - or that Sirius or Lupin would. They had been given reason to doubt Dumbledore because of his past with Grindelwald.

That's part of the tragedy of all that. Dumbledore's mistakes in his youth played a part because it caused the Potters to have doubts in him.

They went on assumptions and suspected one friend and trusted another randomly without basis. That was what killed them in the end. Their wrong choices and their wrong judgement IMO.

Assumptions and speculation were all they had to go on. Even Dumbledore was only going on assumption and speculation. They had no concrete information. They had no reason to believe that any of their friends would betray them. Again, it is very important to remember that James and Lily never suspected Lupin. They trusted all of their friends implicitly - Sirius, Lupin, and Pettigrew. It was Dumbledore that they doubted - not their friends.

They were wrong about Pettigrew, but they had no way of knowing that. Nobody could have known that without the benefit of hindsight - even Dumbledore could not know. James and Lily firmly believed that all of their friends were trustworthy and made their choices accordingly. Had Pettigrew been the loyal friend they believed him to be, then Sirius' plan would have worked brilliantly. It comes down to the fact that Pettigrew fooled everyone. James and Lily were not careless or arrogant. They simply made a mistake because they were fooled by someone they thought was their friend. Pettigrew fooled everyone - including Dumbledore.

Hey, I missed ya. :huggles: I enjoy your well-reasoned posts, and I pretty much agree with you on this issue, I think. :)

:huggles: Awww.

Actually, it makes no sense to me that you would trust a person who wasn't very bright with such a vitally important mission, i.e. saving your life. :wow: In such circumstances, I would choose only the best to be my Secret Keeper, surely. :whistle:

I think I was trying to say that Lily and James saw Peter as an acceptable Secret Keeper because they believed him to be loyal. There were some steps they took as precautions. We know Peter was in hiding. He also could have turned into a rat if he heard Voldemort break in the house. It's not as if he was parading in the middle of London.

Which brings us back to the Marauders' relationship with Peter: he must have given them the impression that he was rock-solid and reliable. Given his devotion to them over the years, that would not be a hard thing to do. :cool: And I don't think the Marauders (and Lily) should be blamed for the deviousness which he obviously was able to conceal from a great many people.

Exactly. They had no idea that they would be betrayed. Did Julius Caesar know that he would be betrayed by Brutus? People sometimes have darker aspects of themselves hidden from others.

Indeed. Sirius showed agonising remorse over James and Lily's deaths. :upset: And, really, he wasn't to blame, IMO. But who wouldn't say to themselves, 'how could I not have known? How could I not have guessed? Why couldn't I see Peter for what he really was?' :upset:

I can understand why Sirius feels that way, definitely. I just don't think he should be blamed, ever. He showed so much remorse (:upset:) and I don't see how Snape would be forgiven and Sirius wouldn't.

But that is the question. Did James and Sirius have the friendship with Peter that they had with each other? I don't think so. If Sirius could say that they thought Peter was a weak, talentless thing in POA, I am sure they thought the same of him before as well, when they were young.

But Sirius most likely said that due to his bitterness. Peter definitely wasn't as close as James and Sirius were, but I don't think there's anything to disprove the idea that they were close friends. If they weren't then James wouldn't have agreed to trust him and Sirius wouldn't have trusted him in the first place.

Friendship IMO is nothing but trust, but did James and Sirius trust Peter or did they think him incapable of being a DE? They are 2 completely different things IMO.

How are they so different? They trusted him to not sway onto the dark side. They trusted him with their lives because they were fooled into thinking he was a good person. He was trusted about keeping Remus' condition a secret and being an unregistered animagus.

I don;t think they trusted Peter. James told Dumbedlore that Sirius would rather die than betray him (POA) but there isn't anything like that about Peter. The official reason we have from Sirius is that they thought Peter was too weak to even think of being a DE, so he'd be the perfect SK, because Vodlemort would never in his wildest dreams think that James and Co. would ever entrust such a job to Poor Peter. (LOL this name seems to fit everyone other than Snape)

Just because it isn't said doesn't mean that's the case. Sirius only expressed HIS belief and that was after twelve years of being stuck in Azkaban. Sirius' belief before being imprisoned could have been that he didn't think Voldemort would fathom Lily and James trusting Peter rather than Sirius because Sirius was closer.

But what they failed to take into account and because of which I call this a very poorly planned thing where the Potters showed total negligence and arrogance IMO, is that even if Peter was a true friend, with Sirius, Peter, Remus and the Potters all in hiding, Voldemort would surely go after the weakest link in the chain. That was Peter IMO.

He could capture Peter and get the information if Peter was the SK, or he could get information wbout the identity of the SK; both dangerous to the Potters. And yet this does not seem to have struck them at all.

But as I said earlier, there were precautions. He was in hiding and Sirius checked up on him to make sure he was safe. So, yes, it did occur to them.

He showed plenty of remorse for James. For Snape this is what he had to say.

".....You see, Sirius here played a trick on him which nearly killed him, a trick that involved me..."

Black made a derisive noise.

"It served him right," he sneered. "Sneaking around, trying to find out what we were up to.... hoping he could get us expelled..." bold mine

But that isn't what I'm talking about. I said that Snape had a lot more blame on him for he knew that by telling Voldemort the prophecy a family would be murdered. No, he didn't know who it was, but that doesn't change anything. I'm not trying to make a Sirius vs. Snape fight, but my point is that I don't see how Sirius is blamed more than Snape. Sirius had no idea that his decisions would cost him his best friends. Snape had no idea that his decision would cost him Lily. They both showed plenty of remorse over it and I don't blame them for what happened to Lily and James.

Sirius says that he never understood why he did not see through Peter. That to me was an admission of Sirius's lack of understanding of a boy who was their best friend. In the long years in Azkaban, Sirius probably realised that Peter was always like this. But I really do believe that Sirius and James thought so little of him, of his capability as a wizard that they never tried to understand him, know him as he was really. Had they done that, they would not have made this mistake. But I believe that they never tried to know their friend, because then I am sure they would have known that he was not a friend at all.

What canon is there that they seriously thought of him as an incompetent person? It isn't their fault either that they had no idea Peter was never truly loyal to him. I think it's really unfair to blame the victims for the betrayal. :no: This happens all the time in real life, unfortunately. As a person who has been through betrayal by best friends, I do not see why a victim should be blamed for what the traitor did.

When they did not know a person properly IMO, how could they entrust such a job to him? And they made a weak, talentless person SK. They should have gone for the best protection when they had a DL on their heels. They should not have used a "friend" whom they knew was not capable enough, just because he was a friend. That is not the way a SK for something so serious should be chosen I feel.

But who says they thought they didn't know him properly? They knew him for ten years. They shared a dorm with him and spent nights with Remus as unregistered animagi. And it has never been said in canon that James agreed to that idea that Peter was "talentless."

That was why I called their actions negligent and arrogance, an action for which not only they, but also Harry paid dearly IMO.

I cannot agree, ever, that the victims should be blamed for what happened to themselves and Harry. They never asked to be murdered. I can never agree with this idea because that puts blame on the people who had no idea what they were getting into. Lily and James did agree to have Peter as Secret Keeper, but why? Just for fun? No, they chose him because they thought that by trusting him with the secret they would be safe. That is evident by their behavior in Godric's Hollow when they had no wands on them. They cared about Peter and I do not see any reason why they should be blamed when they thought their decision would mean their safety.

In this case my opinion coincides with JKR's. They were simply letting Peter hang around with them. Actually, they had no choice. He was their dormmate at school, and if they had chosen to disregard his friendship, he'd have been a lot of trouble for them, being privy to many of their secrets. So they had to include him in their company.

That doesn't change the fact that there were clear signs that they cared about him. If they only included him just because, why did Sirius say they were willing to die for him? If Lily was worried about Peter's behavior in her letter, wouldn't James have been as well? I am not arguing against JKR, but I think there are signs that they did care about him.

I respectfully disagree with you. While it was Sirius's plan, it was James and Lily who accepted responsibilty by listening to Sirius and disregarding Dumbledore IMO.

Yes, they did disregard Dumbledore's words. Just like how Harry disregarded Remus' words in Deathly Hallows. Why isn't Harry considered arrogant, too? :huh: Because he was right? I doubt people like Kingsley were nearly as close to Harry as Peter was to Lily and James. Going along the theory, shouldn't Harry be considered even more arrogant for trusting someone he didn't know too well?

Sirius, James and Lily together took a decision that was not based on proof that Remus was a DE and was based on premise.

But as I have said before, there is no canon that supports that.

They were living together for 10 years and for 7 years sharing the same dorm and being together day and night for 10 months in a year.

[quote]Even if we are to assume that Peter was so clever that he managed to conceal his true character from the others, James and Sirius knew he was not very talented. He did not even know the characteristics of a werewolf in the SWM (in their DADA OWL).

But that is true. Peter DID conceal his true character. Sirius admitted that he never realized that about Peter in the Shrieking Shack. JKR said that James and Sirius had no idea he was that good at keeping secrets. His betrayal came as a surprise, IMO.

That I feel does show that James, Sirius and Lily chose wrongly.

I don't think it was the smartest decision and I don't deny that it was the wrong decision. I do not agree, however, that they should ever be blamed or that it is their fault that they died and Harry was left as an orphan.

Just out of curiosity do you also believe James suspected Remus too?I'm only asking because I'm unsure of whether he was trusted or not now.

I know you aren't asking me, but I wanted to answer. :lol:

I don't think James ever was suspicious of Sirius. Why? Because Remus himself said that James would have considered it the height of dishonor to not trust a friend. That goes against what is being speculated, IMO.

They suspected Remus. ON what basis? Why? These are questions there are no answers to, because Sirius says that he persuaded them to change SK and they did. (POA)

That meant they were persuaded and believed Sirius. Sirius suspected Remus. So James and Lily did too? For that is the logical conclusion. Why should they change SK otherwise? They were safe under the Fidelus and Sirius could vanish better than Peter.

That was what I meant when I said they took Dumbledore's warning, but did not check properly.

The entire post is my opnion only.

That isn't in canon. Sirius ONLY said that he didn't trust Remus. Nothing was ever said that James and Lily felt the same way. I'm sorry, but I do not see the logic behind this. IMO, it is pure speculation, one that is actually contradicted by what is in the books.

:huggles: Awww.
I think I was trying to say that Lily and James saw Peter as an acceptable Secret Keeper because they believed him to be loyal. There were some steps they took as precautions. We know Peter was in hiding. He also could have turned into a rat if he heard Voldemort break in the house. It's not as if he was parading in the middle of London.

Exactly. They had no idea that they would be betrayed. Did Julius Caesar know that he would be betrayed by Brutus? People sometimes have darker aspects of themselves hidden from others.

I can understand why Sirius feels that way, definitely. I just don't think he should be blamed, ever. He showed so much remorse (:upset:) and I don't see how Snape would be forgiven and Sirius wouldn't.

But Sirius most likely said that due to his bitterness. Peter definitely wasn't as close as James and Sirius were, but I don't think there's anything to disprove the idea that they were close friends. If they weren't then James wouldn't have agreed to trust him and Sirius wouldn't have trusted him in the first place.

How are they so different? They trusted him to not sway onto the dark side. They trusted him with their lives because they were fooled into thinking he was a good person. He was trusted about keeping Remus' condition a secret and being an unregistered animagus.

Just because it isn't said doesn't mean that's the case. Sirius only expressed HIS belief and that was after twelve years of being stuck in Azkaban. Sirius' belief before being imprisoned could have been that he didn't think Voldemort would fathom Lily and James trusting Peter rather than Sirius because Sirius was closer.
But as I said earlier, there were precautions. He was in hiding and Sirius checked up on him to make sure he was safe. So, yes, it did occur to them.

But that isn't what I'm talking about. I said that Snape had a lot more blame on him for he knew that by telling Voldemort the prophecy a family would be murdered. No, he didn't know who it was, but that doesn't change anything. I'm not trying to make a Sirius vs. Snape fight, but my point is that I don't see how Sirius is blamed more than Snape. Sirius had no idea that his decisions would cost him his best friends. Snape had no idea that his decision would cost him Lily. They both showed plenty of remorse over it and I don't blame them for what happened to Lily and James.

What canon is there that they seriously thought of him as an incompetent person? It isn't their fault either that they had no idea Peter was never truly loyal to him. I think it's really unfair to blame the victims for the betrayal. :no: This happens all the time in real life, unfortunately. As a person who has been through betrayal by best friends, I do not see why a victim should be blamed for what the traitor did.

But who says they thought they didn't know him properly? They knew him for ten years. They shared a dorm with him and spent nights with Remus as unregistered animagi. And it has never been said in canon that James agreed to that idea that Peter was "talentless."

I cannot agree, ever, that the victims should be blamed for what happened to themselves and Harry. They never asked to be murdered. I can never agree with this idea because that puts blame on the people who had no idea what they were getting into. Lily and James did agree to have Peter as Secret Keeper, but why? Just for fun? No, they chose him because they thought that by trusting him with the secret they would be safe. That is evident by their behavior in Godric's Hollow when they had no wands on them. They cared about Peter and I do not see any reason why they should be blamed when they thought their decision would mean their safety.

That doesn't change the fact that there were clear signs that they cared about him. If they only included him just because, why did Sirius say they were willing to die for him? If Lily was worried about Peter's behavior in her letter, wouldn't James have been as well? I am not arguing against JKR, but I think there are signs that they did care about him.

Yes, they did disregard Dumbledore's words. Just like how Harry disregarded Remus' words in Deathly Hallows. Why isn't Harry considered arrogant, too? :huh: Because he was right? I doubt people like Kingsley were nearly as close to Harry as Peter was to Lily and James. Going along the theory, shouldn't Harry be considered even more arrogant for trusting someone he didn't know too well?

But as I have said before, there is no canon that supports that.

[QUOTE]They were living together for 10 years and for 7 years sharing the same dorm and being together day and night for 10 months in a year.

But that is true. Peter DID conceal his true character. Sirius admitted that he never realized that about Peter in the Shrieking Shack. JKR said that James and Sirius had no idea he was that good at keeping secrets. His betrayal came as a surprise, IMO.

I don't think it was the smartest decision and I don't deny that it was the wrong decision. I do not agree, however, that they should ever be blamed or that it is their fault that they died and Harry was left as an orphan.

I know you aren't asking me, but I wanted to answer. :lol:

I don't think James ever was suspicious of Sirius. Why? Because Remus himself said that James would have considered it the height of dishonor to not trust a friend. That goes against what is being speculated, IMO.

That isn't in canon. Sirius ONLY said that he didn't trust Remus. Nothing was ever said that James and Lily felt the same way. I'm sorry, but I do not see the logic behind this. IMO, it is pure speculation, one that is actually contradicted by what is in the books.

I have to agree with you wholeheartedly. Blame cannot be assigned to the victims of a crime, Voldemart was the perpertrator amd Peter and Snape were accomplices before the fact. If Snape had not told Voldemort about the prophect and Peter had not betrayed their hideout they would not of been killed as they were. IMO

I know you aren't asking me, but I wanted to answer. :lol:

I don't think James ever was suspicious of Sirius. Why? Because Remus himself said that James would have considered it the height of dishonor to not trust a friend. That goes against what is being speculated, IMO.

No problem :lol:

You meant was never suspicious of Remus right?(I think its safe to say he never suspected Sirius)

I didn't think it before either but I can't get that one question out of my head now,if James never suspected Remus,why was he not included on the plan?

I didn't think it before either but I can't get that one question out of my head now,if James never suspected Remus,why was he not included on the plan?I think it could have been because James and Lily were convinced that Peter was a better choice, so there was no need to include him - especially given the last-minute nature of the decision. So in this way, if they agreed Peter was the better choice, there may not have been any reason for Sirius to mention his suspicions of Remus to James. I get the feeling that Sirius wouldn't have wanted to tell James about suspecting Remus (and that Sirius was reluctant to suspect Remus).

No problem :lol:

You meant was never suspicious of Remus right?(I think its safe to say he never suspected Sirius)

I didn't think it before either but I can't get that one question out of my head now,if James never suspected Remus,why was he not included on the plan?

My impression was that Lily and James felt that Sirius would tell Remus about the plan to switch when/if he saw them. Note that James and Lily could not contact anyone and no one was contacting them after the SK was put in place.

My impression was that Lily and James felt that Sirius would tell Remus about the plan to switch when/if he saw them. Note that James and Lily could not contact anyone and no one was contacting them after the SK was put in place.

Just out of interest, how on earth does that work? What if Dumbledore or another member of the Order needed to give them urgent information? :huh: Lily and James were hermetically sealed in, so to speak, with no means of communication? That doesn't sound awfully safe to me! :shrug: Sorry for what is a rather off-topic question but I am really not understanding the magic in operation here. How, practically, does that work? :hmm:

My own view on the matter overall, as to whether Lily and James were somehow to 'blame' for their own murders, for having trusted Peter, is the same as Meesha1971's and yours, by the way. :cool:

Just out of interest, how on earth does that work?Here's a thread on the Fidelius Charm (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=108283) that may help answer your questions. :) To tell you the truth, I often find myself wondering about the way it works.

Also a side note about Peter: I think that although he may have been allowed to hang around with the marauders in the beginning, I don't think this precludes him becoming friends with them later on. I think his relationship with the others must have grown stronger as they continued to hang around with each other, even though I do agree that Peter was never quite as close as the others were to each other (especially Sirius and James).

Just out of interest, how on earth does that work? What if Dumbledore or another member of the Order needed to give them urgent information? :huh: Lily and James were hermetically sealed in, so to speak, with no means of communication? That doesn't sound awfully safe to me! :shrug: Sorry for what is a rather off-topic question but I am really not understanding the magic in operation here. How, practically, does that work? :hmm:

I am not sure what you mean. Dumbledore suggested the idea of a secret keeper - so it was the plan for them to be heretically sealed in beginning that week. If Dumbledore had a message he wished to give them, he'd simply tell Sirius and he could relay it.

I am not sure what you mean. Dumbledore suggested the idea of a secret keeper - so it was the plan for them to be heretically sealed in beginning that week. If Dumbledore had a message he wished to give them, he'd simply tell Sirius and he could relay it.

Oh, OK.

Here's a thread on the Fidelius Charm (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=108283) that may help answer your questions. :) To tell you the truth, I often find myself wondering about the way it works.

Remus, thanks. :tu:

Also a side note about Peter: I think that although he may have been allowed to hang around with the marauders in the beginning, I don't think this precludes him becoming friends with them later on. I think his relationship with the others must have grown stronger as they continued to hang around with each other, even though I do agree that Peter was never quite as close as the others were to each other (especially Sirius and James).

That is how I read Peter's relationships with the other Marauders, based on what relatively little we have in canon. :tu:

I get the feeling that Sirius wouldn't have wanted to tell James about suspecting Remus (and that Sirius was reluctant to suspect Remus).

Fair point,he might not have mentioned Remus and just stressed on peter being the better choice.

My impression was that Lily and James felt that Sirius would tell Remus about the plan to switch when/if he saw them. .

Yeah that would make sense,I suppose if anyone did mention Remus,Sirius just pushed the suggestion to the side anyway.

I suppose what I was thinking is why James and Lily didn't make an issue of telling Remus even if Sirius wasn't in favour of it(for obvious reasons),but then again it was a last minute change.


Also a side note about Peter: I think that although he may have been allowed to hang around with the marauders in the beginning, I don't think this precludes him becoming friends with them later on. I think his relationship with the others must have grown stronger as they continued to hang around with each other, even though I do agree that Peter was never quite as close as the others were to each other (especially Sirius and James).

Someone mentioned how Peter probably wheedles himself in to James and Lilys lives ,and was at the time was very close to them(as part of his plan),considering the order picture where he's the only one standing with the Potters.

James and Lily did not suspect Remus imo - it is not written in canon at all. This is pure speculation.

Perhaps, it was not written in canon, but that Remus was not told about the switch, is canon and I think it can be interpreted this way too.

In fact, the opposite is written when it says James would have considered it the height of dishonor to mistrust his friends.

I really think this comment was for Sirius, more than Remus or Peter and I have not found anything ion canon to convince me otherwise. :)

I feel Sirius trusted Dumbledore.

Me too. Else, I think he would not have let Hagrid take Harry away.

In sum, I personally do not agree with the assumption that James, Lily and Sirius thought absolutely alike.

I am slightly in doubt here. While I do agree with you that James, Sirius and Lily were all independent and had a mind of their own, I also think that they would take each others concerns and warnings seriously. They were very close and they had a lot of affection towards each other. If James, Lily or Sirius would say something so serious about a traitor, I really don;t think the others would disregard it IMO.

I would disagree it is the logical conclusion. Why do you feel it is?

I think it is because I just cannot believe that Sirius who was closer to James than Remus who he thought was a traitor at that time, would not tell James about his suspicions. If he did not, then he was correct in saying that he was responsible for the Potters deaths, for he did not see it fit to warn them IMO.

The same goes for Remus. As s friend, and that too, to James, who had done so much for him, I think it would be Remus's duty as a friend to tell him his suspicions. Dumbeldore suspected someone close to the Potters. We come to know in POA that Remus and Sirius suspected each other. I think both of them would have told James. If they did not, then they too are culpable and really they are pathetic friends, because they don't tell James who saved their lives (the werewolf incident) and was also their dear friend that they suspected one man to be the traitor, and allowed everything to happen on their own IMO.

When Remus told James of his suspicions, I think James told Remus that he could never suspect Sirius (hence Remus's comments to Harry) and James wa persuaded by Sirius to change.

While the reasons are not stated in canon explicitly, with what we know, I don't think it is an unreasonable assumption to make. Sirius and Remus suspect each other; James is persuaded by Sirius and switches; Remus does not know. I think it is reasonable to assume that James would have known that Sirius and Remus suspected each other and through their actions, I also think the logical conclusion is that James agreed with Sirius, because he made the switch without Remus's knowledge IMO.

They were arrogant in trusting their friends?

I think so, when one of them could have been a DE.

What evidence was there that Peter was going to try to betray them?

Dumbledore's warning. He told them that someone close to them was passing information about their whereabouts and that the best way to stay safe was the Fidelus charm and also offered to be SK IMO.

I It can only be viewed as careless and arrogant with the benefit of hindsight though. The fact remains that the Potters had reason to doubt Dumbledore and no reason to doubt any of their friends. We have to look at what they knew at the time - not what actually happened as a result.

That is where you stray from what is shown in canon. As I said above, the fact remains that James and Lily had reason to doubt Dumbledore and not take his warning seriously because of what Bathilda Bagshot told them about his involvement with Grindelwald. And she had proof of that which made Dumbledore look very bad because he had been plotting with Grindelwald to essentially do exactly what Voldemort was trying to do.

I understand; but then James would not have gibven his invisibility cloak to a man he did not trust, and more importantly, Sirius would not have allowed Dumbeldore's representative (Hagrid) to take Harry.

If James and Lily did not trust DUmbledore, Sirius would have surely taken Harry and run, for he was the one who came first to Godric's Hollow.

Instead he hands over Harry to Hagrid, totally desolate. I am sure they trusted Dumbeldore; for even Bathilda could have told them only about Dumbeldore's and GG's friendship, not that Dumbeldore was plotting to take over the world with him, because one, she would not have known, and two, Dumbledore defeated Grindelwald. No one could say he was dark, for he had defeated the darkest Lord until Voldemort came on the scene IMO.

Canon is quite clear that James and Lily never suspected Sirius, Lupin, or Pettigrew. Sirius and Lupin suspected each other, but James and Lily were positive that none of their friends would betray them.

I respectfully disagree with this. If Sirius and Remus suspected each other; suspected each other to kill the Pottes and Harry, they would have conveyed that to James?

If they did not, then I am afraid they share the blame with Peter, Snape and Voldemort for the Potters deaths.

Personally I am sure they did tell James, both of them; Remus's suspicion IMO was met with "I think it's dishonourable to distrust Sirius; Sirius was able to persuade them to make the switch without Remus' knowledge and I conclude James agreed Remus could be the spy IMO.

You're close here - but the only people who knew the identity of the secret keeper were James, Lily, Sirius, and Pettigrew. Sirius chose not to tell Lupin because he had become suspicious.

Sirius could not tell Remus about the Secret; only Peter could and Sirius had placed Peter in hiding; so there was no plan IMO to tell Remus and Remus himself says it in POA, with Sirius agreeing to it.

Remus says that they would not have told him, because they thought he was the traitor and then Sirius apologises to Remus. (POA)

Sirius was never the secret keeper by the way - they switched to Pettigrew at the last minute.

If Sirius was never SK, then he would have never been caught and tried. When Sirius was made SK, Dumbeldore and Remus knew both the secret and the identuity of the SK; when the switch was made, both did not know; that was why they could not and did not testify for Sirius and Sirius ended up in Azkaban. I think Sirius was the SK first and then they switched to Peter.

But that isn't what I'm talking about. I said that Snape had a lot more blame on him for he knew that by telling Voldemort the prophecy a family would be murdered. No, he didn't know who it was, but that doesn't change anything. I'm not trying to make a Sirius vs. Snape fight, but my point is that I don't see how Sirius is blamed more than Snape. Sirius had no idea that his decisions would cost him his best friends. Snape had no idea that his decision would cost him Lily. They both showed plenty of remorse over it and I don't blame them for what happened to Lily and James.

I don't think Sirius is blamed more than Snape; I feel Sirius, James and Lily were careless in a situation they should have been very, very cautious.

The entire post is my opinion only.

Perhaps, it was not written in canon, but that Remus was not told about the switch, is canon and I think it can be interpreted this way too.
How exactly were James and Lily themselves supposed to tell Remus of the switch? An owl would have been too risky imo.

I think it is because I just cannot believe that Sirius who was closer to James than Remus who he thought was a traitor at that time, would not tell James about his suspicions. If he did not, then he was correct in saying that he was responsible for the Potters deaths, for he did not see it fit to warn them IMO.
Maybe Sirius didn't tell James because he knew how James would react if he suggested he didn't trust Remus. Why would Sirius need to warn them about Remus if they were making Peter the secret keeper?

Dumbledore's warning. He told them that someone close to them was passing information about their whereabouts and that the best way to stay safe was the Fidelus charm and also offered to be SK IMO.
They had good reasons not to make Dumbledore secret keeper imo. They had been hearing a lot about his past in the months before the decision should have been made. Making Dumbledore SK would have been foolish imo, and even more careless. The impression I got of the marauders was that they were all as close as, if not closer, than Harry, Ron, and Hermione. (Yes, Sirius made fun of Peter in SWM, but Ron made fun of Hermione all the time.) I think to James, thinking Peter as the spy, would have been the same as Harry suspecting Ron or Hermione to be the spy. It's hard to comprehend imo.

If they did not, then I am afraid they share the blame with Peter, Snape and Voldemort for the Potters deaths.
I don't believe in blaming victims. Snape knew he would be sentencing a family to death when he handed over the prophecy, Voldemort obviously wanted to kill them, but Sirius, Lily, and James were trying to save their family as best they could. They should not be blamed for mistakes imo (that were not careless imo); I think those who actively made the choice to kill cannot possibly be less than or equal to blame than the victims.

How exactly were James and Lily themselves supposed to tell Remus of the switch? An owl would have been too risky imo.Maybe Sirius didn't tell James because he knew how James would react if he suggested he didn't trust Remus. Why would Sirius need to warn them about Remus if they were making Peter the secret keeper?


It is canon that Remus did not know because he was thought to be the traitor. This comes in POA.

They had good reasons not to make Dumbledore secret keeper imo. They had been hearing a lot about his past in the months before the decision should have been made.

And yet Sirius hands over Harry to Hagrid, who was there on behalf of Dumbledore, whom they did not trust? I somehow cannot believe that.

I don't believe in blaming victims.

The fact I am calling them on their mistakes does not take away the culpability from Voldemort, Snape (ETA :: though indirectly) or Peter.

I am only saying that James, Lily and Sirius too in a way were culpable because they did not go about this in the proper manner, and refused to consider Dumbeldore's advise in a life and death situation IMO.

http://static.desktopnexus.com/wallpapers/12426-bigthumbnail.jpg

The fluffy bunny commands you all with its imperious stare to to take a deep breath and calm down!

No problem :lol:

You meant was never suspicious of Remus right?(I think its safe to say he never suspected Sirius)

I didn't think it before either but I can't get that one question out of my head now,if James never suspected Remus,why was he not included on the plan?

Because Sirius chose not to tell him about the plan. That was confirmed in POA. Sirius thought Lupin was the spy so he did not tell him about the plan. Whether or not James was aware of that or if he agreed with it if he was has not been addressed in canon.

My impression was that Lily and James felt that Sirius would tell Remus about the plan to switch when/if he saw them. Note that James and Lily could not contact anyone and no one was contacting them after the SK was put in place.

Well, the Fidelius Charm wouldn't have prevented them from contacting anyone. We see in OOTP that Ron and Hermione - as well as Sirius, Arthur, and Molly - were able to send and receive owls while they were staying at #12 Grimmauld Place and it was hidden with the Fidelius Charm as well.

However, they did need to be cautious in what they said when they did contact anyone. Owls could be intercepted, the floo network could be monitored, etc... So they were limited in what they could do in that regard. And they couldn't reveal the secret themselves and they really wouldn't have been able to talk about it with anyone unless that person actually came to their house to speak with them in person.

Perhaps, it was not written in canon, but that Remus was not told about the switch, is canon and I think it can be interpreted this way too.

It is canon that Sirius chose not to tell Lupin about the switch because Sirius suspected Lupin was the spy. James was not part of that - Lupin says himself in DH that James would have considered it the height of dishonor not to trust his friends. So we do know that it was only Sirius who suspected Lupin and he made the choice not to tell Lupin about the plan. Whether or not he discussed that decision with James remains a mystery, but given the fact that James refused to believe that any of his friends would betray him, it seems unlikely that he did.

Another point that needs to be cleared up here - Lupin was not suspicious of Sirius prior to the Potters being killed. In POA, Lupin asked Sirius to forgive him for believing that he had betrayed James and Lily - he was talking about after the fact when Sirius was arrested. Everyone believed that Sirius had been the spy because they all thought that Sirius had been the Potters' secret keeper.

I really think this comment was for Sirius, more than Remus or Peter and I have not found anything ion canon to convince me otherwise. :)

Again, canon is very specific and clear on that point - Lupin said "friends" - not Sirius - not one friend - friends in the pleural. He was talking about all three of them. James trusted all of his friends implicitly.

I am slightly in doubt here. While I do agree with you that James, Sirius and Lily were all independent and had a mind of their own, I also think that they would take each others concerns and warnings seriously. They were very close and they had a lot of affection towards each other. If James, Lily or Sirius would say something so serious about a traitor, I really don;t think the others would disregard it IMO.

That doesn't mean they would automatically agree about everything though. Disagreeing with each other is not disregarding anything. It's taking it into consideration and deciding that Sirius was wrong. The same as they decided Dumbledore was wrong. James and Lily did not disregard anything - they simply did not agree with it because they trusted their friends implicitly. They had no reason not to trust their friends. Again, canon is very clear on this. Sirius was the only one who thought Lupin was the spy. James trusted all of his friends. We don't know whether or not Sirius discussed that with James or not, but even if he did, it is clear that they would not have agreed about that.

I think it is because I just cannot believe that Sirius who was closer to James than Remus who he thought was a traitor at that time, would not tell James about his suspicions. If he did not, then he was correct in saying that he was responsible for the Potters deaths, for he did not see it fit to warn them IMO.

It wouldn't have made any difference either way. Sirius was wrong about his suspicions anyway. Lupin was never the spy. Pettigrew was the spy and none of them suspected Pettigrew. The only person affected by Sirius choosing not to tell Lupin about the plan was Sirius because that enabled Pettigrew to frame him.

We don't know whether Sirius discussed his suspicions about Lupin with James, but we do know that it wouldn't have changed anything even if he had because Pettigrew was the spy and none of them suspected Pettigrew. Even if Sirius had discussed it with James, Pettigrew still would have been made secret keeper and he still would have told Voldemort how to get to the Potters. The only possible difference there is that Sirius might not have spent all those years in Azkaban if Lupin had known about the switch.

None of this has anything to do with James and Lily's decision to switch secret keepers. That goes towards how Sirius chose to handle the situation - not James and Lily.

While the reasons are not stated in canon explicitly, with what we know, I don't think it is an unreasonable assumption to make. Sirius and Remus suspect each other; James is persuaded by Sirius and switches; Remus does not know. I think it is reasonable to assume that James would have known that Sirius and Remus suspected each other and through their actions, I also think the logical conclusion is that James agreed with Sirius, because he made the switch without Remus's knowledge IMO.

Again, canon is quite clear on this issue. James never believed that any of his friends would betray him. Sirius may have both gone to James and discussed his suspicions - he may not have. Either way it would make no difference because James would never have agreed with him - he felt it would have been the height of dishonor not to trust his friends.

That is completely irrelevant to the plan to switch secret keepers because they would have done that anyway. The only possible difference there would be the possibility of Lupin being included in the plan. And the only effect that would have had would have been to give Sirius the means to prove that he was innocent. It wouldn't have changed what happened to James and Lily at all because James would have made Pettigrew secret keeper regardless because he trusted all of his friends implicitly.

I think so, when one of them could have been a DE.

Dumbledore's warning. He told them that someone close to them was passing information about their whereabouts and that the best way to stay safe was the Fidelus charm and also offered to be SK IMO.

They had no reason to think that any of their friends was a Death Eater. That's the point. There was no evidence against anyone. Dumbledore had vague suspicions that someone close to the Potters was passing information. He could not say who it was or even if he was right - it was only vague suspicion and speculation. Sirius had vague suspicions about Lupin - most likely due to Dumbledore's suspicions - but they were not strong enough for him to feel it was necessary to confront Lupin or turn him in.

Vague suspicions without any concrete evidence were not enough for James to justify turning against his closest friends - people he had known and cared about for at least 10 years. He had no reason to believe that any of his friends would betray him - neither did Lily. Dumbledore told him that he had suspicions and James disagreed with him because he believed he knew all of his friends better than Dumbledore did.

I understand; but then James would not have gibven his invisibility cloak to a man he did not trust, and more importantly, Sirius would not have allowed Dumbeldore's representative (Hagrid) to take Harry.

Actually, James gave Dumbledore his cloak before Bathilda Bagshot told him and Lily about Dumbledore's past. Lily mentions that in her letter to Sirius - Dumbledore had had James' cloak for a while, but they had just found out about his past. That likely added to James' doubts about Dumbledore and contributed to why he was so edgy about Dumbledore still having his cloak. Learning about Dumbledore's involvement with Grindelwald would have caused him to regret giving Dumbledore his cloak and be suspicious.

I'll address the issue with Sirius below.

If James and Lily did not trust DUmbledore, Sirius would have surely taken Harry and run, for he was the one who came first to Godric's Hollow.

Instead he hands over Harry to Hagrid, totally desolate. I am sure they trusted Dumbeldore; for even Bathilda could have told them only about Dumbeldore's and GG's friendship, not that Dumbeldore was plotting to take over the world with him, because one, she would not have known, and two, Dumbledore defeated Grindelwald. No one could say he was dark, for he had defeated the darkest Lord until Voldemort came on the scene IMO.

Sirius didn't have any doubts about Dumbledore. Again, James and Sirius are different people and were not going to think exactly the same way or agree about everything. Canon shows that James and Lily had doubts about Dumbledore and it also shows that Sirius had complete faith in Dumbledore up through GOF. It wasn't until OOTP - after he found out about Snape and Dumbledore made him stay cooped up all the time - that Sirius had any doubts about Dumbledore.

I respectfully disagree with this. If Sirius and Remus suspected each other; suspected each other to kill the Pottes and Harry, they would have conveyed that to James?

If they did not, then I am afraid they share the blame with Peter, Snape and Voldemort for the Potters deaths.

Personally I am sure they did tell James, both of them; Remus's suspicion IMO was met with "I think it's dishonourable to distrust Sirius; Sirius was able to persuade them to make the switch without Remus' knowledge and I conclude James agreed Remus could be the spy IMO.

As I mentioned above, Lupin was not suspicious of Sirius before the Potters were killed. I looked that up last night to confirm. Like everyone else, Lupin was convinced that Sirius had betrayed James and Lily because - since Sirius chose not to tell him about the plan to switch - he believed that Sirius had been secret keeper. Sirius was suspicious of Lupin for reasons yet to be revealed, but Lupin had no such suspicions.

But - again - whether or not Sirius discussed his suspicions with James is irrelevant because James would never have agreed with him. Again, just because they are friends does not mean they are going to think exactly the same way or agree about everything. Either way, that would have had no effect on what happened to James and Lily. Pettigrew still would have been made secret keeper and he still would have told Voldemort how to get to the Potters. The only possible difference would be that Sirius might not have spent all those years in Azkaban if Lupin had known about the plan.

Sirius could not tell Remus about the Secret; only Peter could and Sirius had placed Peter in hiding; so there was no plan IMO to tell Remus and Remus himself says it in POA, with Sirius agreeing to it.

Remus says that they would not have told him, because they thought he was the traitor and then Sirius apologises to Remus. (POA)

Sirius could not tell Lupin the secret - the Potters' location. However, he could have told Lupin about the plan to switch secret keepers. What Lupin says in POA is that Sirius would not have told him about the plan if he thought he was the spy and Sirius admits that he did and asks for forgiveness for that.

But, again, that has nothing to do with James and Lily's decision. They were not in the position of being able to tell anyone about the plan. That's not something they could mention in an owl or talk about over the floo network. They could only have told Lupin about it if he had come to their house and talked to them in person. Only Sirius and Pettigrew could tell anyone else about the plan. Sirius made the choice not to tell Lupin about it.

If Sirius was never SK, then he would have never been caught and tried. When Sirius was made SK, Dumbeldore and Remus knew both the secret and the identuity of the SK; when the switch was made, both did not know; that was why they could not and did not testify for Sirius and Sirius ended up in Azkaban. I think Sirius was the SK first and then they switched to Peter.

Sirius never got a trial - he told Harry that he was put in Azkaban without a trial in GOF. Sirius was arrested on the basis of what the muggle eyewitnesses said after the confrontation with Pettigrew and Dumbledore provided additional evidence that James had told him that he was going to make Sirius secret keeper. Dumbledore did not know that they switched at the last minute.

Sirius was never made secret keeper. And that is also clearly stated in POA - they decided to switch at the last minute, before the charm was performed (POA pg 365). They made Pettigrew secret keeper instead of Sirius without telling anyone. That way, everyone would believe that Sirius was the secret keeper even though he wasn't and nobody but the four of them would know that Pettigrew was actually the secret keeper. Sirius was using himself as a diversion - he believed Voldemort would come after him so Pettigrew would be safe and Voldemort would never find out the secret because he wouldn't be able to tell him.

The bottom line is that James and Lily did not do anything wrong - they made a mistake, but that does not make them culpable. They took the information they had and acted accordingly. They had no reason to be suspicious of any of their friends. They had been given reason to doubt Dumbledore. They took every precaution possible on the basis of what they knew and believed at that point in time - and then some. They were not careless or arrogant and they did everything they could to protect themselves and Harry.

Well, the Fidelius Charm wouldn't have prevented them from contacting anyone. We see in OOTP that Ron and Hermione - as well as Sirius, Arthur, and Molly - were able to send and receive owls while they were staying at #12 Grimmauld Place and it was hidden with the Fidelius Charm as well.

However, they did need to be cautious in what they said when they did contact anyone. Owls could be intercepted, the floo network could be monitored, etc... So they were limited in what they could do in that regard. And they couldn't reveal the secret themselves and they really wouldn't have been able to talk about it with anyone unless that person actually came to their house to speak with them in person.

I agree; I meant they were not out making house calls and taking in the sun. :lol:. I agree also that they would not send or receive owls or do anything that would give away their location. We know Lupin didn't go to the house becuase he would not have been able to get in and would have known that He'd not been told the truth about the SK situtation. He didn't know any of that. Besides, he was in hiding himself.

It is canon that Sirius chose not to tell Lupin about the switch because Sirius suspected Lupin was the spy. James was not part of that - Lupin says himself in DH that James would have considered it the height of dishonor not to trust his friends. So we do know that it was only Sirius who suspected Lupin and he made the choice not to tell Lupin about the plan. Whether or not he discussed that decision with James remains a mystery, but given the fact that James refused to believe that any of his friends would betray him, it seems unlikely that he did.

I agree; but I also feel it would have been unreasonable for Lupin to say that if James had distrusted him. Think about it: he was trying to convince Harry that James had been too trusting. It would have been awesome for him to have been able to say: "Harry, you are too trusting! Even your father did not trust me, one of his best friends, back in 1981". That would have been much more convincing than telling Harry that his father had been too trusting which only served to anger Harry and continue to emulate his dad and trust everyone. So Remus truly believed what he was saying, imo, and the circumstances prove it.

Another point that needs to be cleared up here - Lupin was not suspicious of Sirius prior to the Potters being killed. In POA, Lupin asked Sirius to forgive him for believing that he had betrayed James and Lily - he was talking about after the fact when Sirius was arrested. Everyone believed that Sirius had been the spy because they all thought that Sirius had been the Potters' secret keeper.

I would disagree only because Remus would have no reason to ask Sirius to forgive him. Everyone thought Sirius was the spy, as you said. Remus was very level headed and would not apologize for believing something that everyone did based on the fact that Peter appeared to be dead. There was nothing for Sirius to forgive Remus for. At the very least, even if Remus did mean that, Sirius would have said there was nothing to forgive him for.

Remus was as intelligent as Sirius and had the same information. He was not as trusting as James either. So I feel he would do the same process of elimination Sirius did in 1981 and suspect that Sirius, among them, had to be the spy.

Again, canon is very specific and clear on that point - Lupin said "friends" - not Sirius - not one friend - friends in the pleural. He was talking about all three of them. James trusted all of his friends implicitly.

I agree. Remus said James was too trusting just like Harry was being. Harry wasn't trusting only Hagrid or only Lupin - he trusted every single person in the room. He was very much like his father in ways - which is exactly what Lupin told him then as he had told him in HBP when Harry referred to him as normal, but just with a little problem. In ways father and son were very much alike, and not just in looks becuase their patronus was the same - their inner animal. That means they had similarities of character. As JKR pointed out, one of James flaws was he was too arrogant at times - what did she say Harry's was? He was too arrogant at times. :lol:. I do think Harry's character was James' tempered by Lily's nature in ways; I feel he was at times less assertive and forthright than James came across - so I think that was the Lily in him. But he was at times, and I imagine Lily was too.

That doesn't mean they would automatically agree about everything though. Disagreeing with each other is not disregarding anything. It's taking it into consideration and deciding that Sirius was wrong. The same as they decided Dumbledore was wrong. James and Lily did not disregard anything - they simply did not agree with it because they trusted their friends implicitly. They had no reason not to trust their friends. Again, canon is very clear on this. Sirius was the only one who thought Lupin was the spy. James trusted all of his friends. We don't know whether or not Sirius discussed that with James or not, but even if he did, it is clear that they would not have agreed about that.

Exactly. As I pointed out, we have an example in canon where James disagreed with Sirius in the werewolf incident. So even if Sirius AND Remus said something to him, James would tell them both that he felt it the height of dishonor to distrust any of his friends. What could they say? :lol:. Lily likely felt the same way; she knew them all well and would be hard pressed to not see them as they had always presented themselves: trusting friends, worried about them. Peter was actually worried - but just not about what they thought.

The bottom line is that James and Lily did not do anything wrong - they made a mistake, but that does not make them culpable. They took the information they had and acted accordingly. They had no reason to be suspicious of any of their friends. They had been given reason to doubt Dumbledore. They took every precaution possible on the basis of what they knew and believed at that point in time - and then some. They were not careless or arrogant and they did everything they could to protect themselves and Harry.

I agree and anyone in the horrible position of being hunted by a killer who has colluded with unknown parties to kill you, can only do the best they can to protect themselves. JKR didn't elucidate on many things, but she called Lily and James brave and heroic for what they did. She never called them careless or arroant or anything else. If she felt they were, I am sure we would have heard about it; instead she speaks reverently of their sacrifice. So in my judgment, that is how it is portrayed - they tried their best to defend themselves against Voldemort and were unsuccessful. The focus of wrongdoing, in my opinoin, rests with Snape, Peter and Voldemort.

Peter's further behavior in placing the blame on Sirius was likely planned with Voldemort beforehand, imo, and that only compounded their overall wrongdoing. Any Death Eaters or ex-Death eaters that knew the truth and didn't disclose it were equally a part of that wrongdoing in my opinion.

For Remus it was of course devastating. However, in one way it was positive in that it forced him to make his way alone in the society he had chosen to live in. I think the past support of his friends helped him endure that on a personal level. He obviously had to travel a lot, perhaps out of England in finding jobs as a professor, but I think it helped to build his character, independence and strength. And of course it made the reunion of the faithful friends all the more significant after all they had endured - and too the reunion of all the friends in the afterworld - which JKR was kind enough to give us a glimpse of in canon. :tu:

Well, the Fidelius Charm wouldn't have prevented them from contacting anyone.

And yet James did not tell Remus IMO.

However, they did need to be cautious in what they said when they did contact anyone. Owls could be intercepted, the floo network could be monitored, etc... So they were limited in what they could do in that regard. And they couldn't reveal the secret themselves and they really wouldn't have been able to talk about it with anyone unless that person actually came to their house to speak with them in person.

Yes, but if James had really wanted to tell Remus, then he could have used Owls or if he felt it was too dangerous, he could have used the Order's way of messaging people. The Patronus. That was safe IMO.

I am afraid I really cannot see anything in canon that Remus was not thought of a spy by James IMO. And I cannot believe that Sirius would not have shared his suspicions with his best friend, espeially when that friend was in danger IMO. I think Sirius was a very good friend and very loyal to James. I also think he would put James above Remus and if he suspected Remus, I am sure he would have told James.

Now James could have either believed Siirus or not; I think he did, because he never communicates the switch in SK with Remus either by owl or Patronus IMO.

Sirius had vague suspicions about Lupin - most likely due to Dumbledore's suspicions - but they were not strong enough for him to feel it was necessary to confront Lupin or turn him in.

I think Dumbledore suspected Sirius; we have that in POA, where James says that Black would rather die than betray him.

Sirius was never made secret keeper.

"So Black was the Potters SK?" whispered Madam Rosemerta.

"Naturally," said Professor McGonagal.

Sirius was the SK, and then the switch was made IMO.

And that is also clearly stated in POA - they decided to switch at the last minute, before the charm was performed (POA pg 365). They made Pettigrew secret keeper instead of Sirius without telling anyone.

This is very interesting. I just checked the books and it is worded strangely IMO.

Peter was the SK for the whole week until he betrayed James or the switch was made after Sirius became SK. The latter seems right to me, because Dumbeldore too knew that Sirius was the SK, as did almost everyone else, including Remus. But the switch was not known to anyone at all.

So I think it was Sirius and then Peter.

And yet James did not tell Remus IMO.
He didn't need to and it would have been too risky anyway imo. He probably trusted Sirius to tell Remus imo.

I am afraid I really cannot see anything in canon that Remus was not thought of a spy by James IMO.
And I'm afraid I can't see anything that says James did think of Remus as the spy. Again, "Would have considered it a great dishonor to mistrust his friends" comes into play imo.

And I cannot believe that Sirius would not have shared his suspicions with his best friend, espeially when that friend was in danger IMO.
Remus had nothing to do with switching to Peter imo. I don't see why he would have to come up in the conversation at all. Remus was never an option for SK imo.

Now James could have either believed Siirus or not; I think he did, because he never communicates the switch in SK with Remus either by owl or Patronus IMO.
It was probably too risky. They didn't want to take any risks imo.


"So Black was the Potters SK?" whispered Madam Rosemerta.

"Naturally," said Professor McGonagal.

Sirius was the SK, and then the switch was made IMO.
Actually this quote comes from McGonagal before she knew that Peter was actually the secret keeper. If this is canon, then it is also canon that Peter was dead and never SK, which is obviously not the case once we get to the shrieking shack and find out the whole truth that McGonagal was not aware of when she said this.

I agree; but I also feel it would have been unreasonable for Lupin to say that if James had distrusted him. Think about it: he was trying to convince Harry that James had been too trusting. It would have been awesome for him to have been able to say: "Harry, you are too trusting! Even your father did not trust me, one of his best friends, back in 1981". That would have been much more convincing than telling Harry that his father had been too trusting which only served to anger Harry and continue to emulate his dad and trust everyone. So Remus truly believed what he was saying, imo, and the circumstances prove it.

I agree with pretty much everything you said so I'm only going to address a couple of things here. :)

I think this is an excellent point. If James had not trusted Lupin or been suspicious of him in any way, then Lupin would have said that to Harry because it would have been a good example for him to use. The fact that he points out that James trusted all of them implicitly and felt it would be dishonorable to do otherwise - from the angle that it was a mistake for him to do so - is proof that James trusted all of his friends implicitly, IMO. He didn't believe any of them would betray him.

I would disagree only because Remus would have no reason to ask Sirius to forgive him. Everyone thought Sirius was the spy, as you said. Remus was very level headed and would not apologize for believing something that everyone did based on the fact that Peter appeared to be dead. There was nothing for Sirius to forgive Remus for. At the very least, even if Remus did mean that, Sirius would have said there was nothing to forgive him for.

Remus was as intelligent as Sirius and had the same information. He was not as trusting as James either. So I feel he would do the same process of elimination Sirius did in 1981 and suspect that Sirius, among them, had to be the spy.

When I read through that again last night it stood out to me that Lupin was asking for forgiveness for believing Sirius was the spy after the fact. When he showed up at the Shrieking Shack that night, he was very specific in how he addressed the situation to Sirius. He didn't say anything about prior suspicions or the spy passing information - he specifically emphasized the fact that he had believed Sirius was the secret keeper and he figured out that they had switched without telling him. That was the focus so it seems most likely that Lupin did not suspect Sirius at the time. That also fits with him telling Harry that he thought he knew Sirius. When the Potters were killed and Sirius was arrested, I think Lupin was shocked.

I think the reason that Sirius began to suspect Lupin was because the information that Dumbledore was receiving was deliberately skewed to make it appear that Lupin specifically was the spy rather than Sirius or Pettigrew. And Lupin's comment about Sirius thinking he was the spy fits with that as well. Lupin very likely heard the same information as Sirius, but since it was most likely skewed to make it appear that the information was coming specifically from him, he would have known immediately that it was a false lead because he knew that he wasn't passing information. And that also fits with Pettigrew's plans - he needed to make sure Lupin was kept out of the loop in order to be able to frame Sirius. I think Pettigrew intended to frame Sirius all along. The only adjustment he had to make to his plans was faking his own death because all the Death Eaters knew that he had been the one to tell Voldemort how to get to the Potters - when Voldemort was defeated that night, he knew the Death Eaters would come after him and kill him.

And yet James did not tell Remus IMO.

Of course he didn't. How was he supposed to do that? He couldn't send something like that in an owl - that would defeat the purpose because owls can be intercepted. He couldn't talk about it via the floo - the floo could be monitored so, again, that would defeat the purpose. And he couldn't use a patronus because he could not guarantee that Lupin would be alone when he received it. The only way that James could have told Lupin anything would have been for Lupin to come to the house so James could tell him in person. And we know that did not happen. It was down to Sirius and/or Pettigrew to tell Lupin because they could go to Lupin and tell him in person where James could not. Sirius made the choice not to tell him.

Yes, but if James had really wanted to tell Remus, then he could have used Owls or if he felt it was too dangerous, he could have used the Order's way of messaging people. The Patronus. That was safe IMO.

Not if there were people with Lupin when he received it. The whole idea was to make everyone believe that Sirius was the secret keeper instead of Pettigrew - and that included the rest of the Order. They didn't want anyone to know about the switch. The only safe way for James to tell Lupin about the plan would have been for Lupin to come to his house so he could tell him in person. And we know that did not happen, as I said above. James had no control over that. Sirius made the choice not to tell Lupin - that is clearly stated in canon. James was not part of that. He trusted all of his friends implicitly.

I am afraid I really cannot see anything in canon that Remus was not thought of a spy by James IMO. And I cannot believe that Sirius would not have shared his suspicions with his best friend, espeially when that friend was in danger IMO. I think Sirius was a very good friend and very loyal to James. I also think he would put James above Remus and if he suspected Remus, I am sure he would have told James.

Now James could have either believed Siirus or not; I think he did, because he never communicates the switch in SK with Remus either by owl or Patronus IMO.

Canon says that James trusted all of his friends implicitly and would have considered it the height of dishonor not to trust them. And that comes directly from Lupin in DH. Canon is clear on the issue. James never suspected any of his friends of being a spy - he did not believe that any of his friends would betray him. James believed that Dumbledore was wrong because he had complete faith in his friends.

We don't know if Sirius said anything to James about his suspicions or not, but even if he did, it wouldn't have mattered. James would not have agreed with him any more than he agreed with Dumbledore. James was positive than none of his friends would betray him. That's what Lupin told Harry in DH - James was wrong about Pettigrew and Lupin thought it would be better for Harry to be less trusting than James was.

I think Dumbledore suspected Sirius; we have that in POA, where James says that Black would rather die than betray him.

Again, canon is clear on this issue. Dumbledore suspected that someone close to the Potters was the spy - he did not know who it was. James told Dumbledore that he was going to use Sirius as secret keeper and Dumbledore advised against it because he believed someone close to James was the spy and, since they did not know who it was, he felt it was too risky for James to use any of his friends. That's why he offered to do it himself rather than suggesting Lupin or Pettigrew. Dumbledore didn't know who it was so his answer was to be suspicious of all of them. Dumbledore's response would have been the same if James had said he was going to use Lupin or Pettigrew. As far as Dumbledore knew at that point, any one of them could have been the spy so he didn't want James to use any of them as secret keeper. James was adamant about using Sirius as secret keeper at that point - it wasn't until just before the charm was performed that he changed his mind. That's the only reason Sirius was mentioned specifically.

"So Black was the Potters SK?" whispered Madam Rosemerta.

"Naturally," said Professor McGonagal.

Sirius was the SK, and then the switch was made IMO.

This is very interesting. I just checked the books and it is worded strangely IMO.

Peter was the SK for the whole week until he betrayed James or the switch was made after Sirius became SK. The latter seems right to me, because Dumbeldore too knew that Sirius was the SK, as did almost everyone else, including Remus. But the switch was not known to anyone at all.

So I think it was Sirius and then Peter.

McGonagall didn't know about the switch - neither did Dumbledore. Nobody did. That was the whole point of their plan - to make everyone believe that Sirius was the secret keeper. That conversation in POA occurs before they find out the truth. At that point in time, everyone believed that Sirius was secret keeper because James had told Dumbledore that he was going to use Sirius for his secret keeper and was adamant about doing so. The only reason they thought it was Sirius was the fact that James had said that to Dumbledore. That was the only evidence against Sirius - the fact that James had been so determined to use Sirius as secret keeper and told Dumbledore that he was going to do so. It was all hearsay because that's all they had.

Sirius was never made secret keeper. Before the charm was performed, he convinced James to use Pettigrew instead. Sirius was specific when he told Harry what happened - he does not say that he convinced James to change secret keepers - he says that he convinced James to use Pettigrew instead. They performed the charm - made Pettigrew secret keeper - the Potters were killed barely a week later.

The only thing that Fudge, McGonagall, Dumbledore - or anyone else - knew was the date the charm was performed and that James had told Dumbledore he was going to use Sirius as secret keeper. The rest was all assumptions made on the basis of that and the statements taken from the muggle eyewitnesses when Pettigrew faked his death. They were all wrong because none of them knew that Sirius convinced James to use Pettigrew instead just before the charm was performed.

Yes, but if James had really wanted to tell Remus, then he could have used Owls or if he felt it was too dangerous, he could have used the Order's way of messaging people. The Patronus. That was safe IMO.


It's entirely possible that Remus was on a mission at that point. The Potters were under the Fidelius for only about a week before Voldemort struck. I doubt that the Marauders were able to socialise as often as they used to in school. Even Sirius sent James and Lily letters instead of paying them a visit because he was busy fighting evil. So I don't think that James refraining from informing Remus ASAP was a sign of mistrust.

It's entirely possible that Remus was on a mission at that point. The Potters were under the Fidelius for only about a week before Voldemort struck. I doubt that the Marauders were able to socialise as often as they used to in school. Even Sirius sent James and Lily letters instead of paying them a visit because he was busy fighting evil. So I don't think that James refraining from informing Remus ASAP was a sign of mistrust.

That's a very good point. We know that Dumbledore asked Lupin to try and get werewolves on their side in HBP. It's very likely that Lupin was asked to do that the first time around as well.

And the fact that all of this went down so quickly is another factor as well. Voldemort showed up and killed them barely a week after the charm had been performed. They believed they were safe under the Fidelius so they wouldn't have been in any rush - they thought they would have plenty of time to tell whoever needed to know.

When I read through that again last night it stood out to me that Lupin was asking for forgiveness for believing Sirius was the spy after the fact. When he showed up at the Shrieking Shack that night, he was very specific in how he addressed the situation to Sirius. He didn't say anything about prior suspicions or the spy passing information - he specifically emphasized the fact that he had believed Sirius was the secret keeper and he figured out that they had switched without telling him. That was the focus so it seems most likely that Lupin did not suspect Sirius at the time. That also fits with him telling Harry that he thought he knew Sirius. When the Potters were killed and Sirius was arrested, I think Lupin was shocked.

I think the reason that Sirius began to suspect Lupin was because the information that Dumbledore was receiving was deliberately skewed to make it appear that Lupin specifically was the spy rather than Sirius or Pettigrew. And Lupin's comment about Sirius thinking he was the spy fits with that as well. Lupin very likely heard the same information as Sirius, but since it was most likely skewed to make it appear that the information was coming specifically from him, he would have known immediately that it was a false lead because he knew that he wasn't passing information. And that also fits with Pettigrew's plans - he needed to make sure Lupin was kept out of the loop in order to be able to frame Sirius. I think Pettigrew intended to frame Sirius all along. The only adjustment he had to make to his plans was faking his own death because all the Death Eaters knew that he had been the one to tell Voldemort how to get to the Potters - when Voldemort was defeated that night, he knew the Death Eaters would come after him and kill him.

Very good points too - especially the 'he thought he knew him' bit said to Harry. That still would leave him apologizing for believing it after the fact though, which seems terrifically odd to me. Especially in light of JKR having Sirius grin when he accepted the apology because that spoke to me of him having a 'revelation' in that moment. I mean as if he saw the irony of it all with Lupin's need to apologize to him as well. Otherwise, I would have just expected a basic 'of course' or 'pfft' type response, but not the grin, written to make me feel like he was recognizing something. There would be nothing to recognize if it only pertained to after the fact; everyone had believed that based on the evidence. You know what I mean? But admittedly, it could be read both ways. Too I think Lupin's mentality was more like Sirius' in that respect; he wasn't as trusting as James, imo. Remus said Harry reminded him of James - not James and himself back then - and I realize it is something he might not say under your interpretation too - but it may have caused him to say it to Harry in a more understanding manner than he did if it were true...

I have always thought of Peter as the kind of person who would agree to a plan at the time it is proposed to him and agree to follow it through. At the time he agreed to it he would probably mean wholeheartedly to do his part and mean it. This would account for him being considered a "hero" in the past. I can just see him agreeing to do something dangerous and then through no fault on his part the plan suceeds. Peter to me is the type of person who "justifies" to himself what he does. He is always acting for the greater good, but his own greater good comes first. A person like that can fool people easily because the first person they fool is themselves. When the plan was proposed to him he probably thought "I can/will do this." Then the days started ticking by and he's thinking "how can I explain this to Voldemort, how can I get past this?" Then I can see him thinking, "This plan is stupid, it's bound to fail. it's better to save my life than all of us die." Then he would go to Voldemort and tell him what in his own mind he had no choice but to do. This scenario is my own take on Peter's motivation, it is my own opinion only.

It's entirely possible that Remus was on a mission at that point. The Potters were under the Fidelius for only about a week before Voldemort struck. I doubt that the Marauders were able to socialise as often as they used to in school. Even Sirius sent James and Lily letters instead of paying them a visit because he was busy fighting evil. So I don't think that James refraining from informing Remus ASAP was a sign of mistrust.

I think everything depends on "Did Sirius tell James about his suspicion?" And if he did, then everything depends on what James did with the information. Did he treat it as it should have, because Dumbledore had already told him about a traitor and now Sirius was bringing news that he suspected Remus to be a traitor?

James knew of a traitor in the Order close to him, is canon. He defended Sirius to Dumbledore is also canon. Meesha raises an interesting point that Remus did not suspect Sirius to be the spy before the Potters died. In POA it is worded in such a way, that it could go either way.

"And you will in turn forgive me for believing you were the spy"

So either only Remus was suspected or Remus and Sirius suspected each other.

If Remus did not suspect Sirius, but Sirius suspected Remus, then did Sirius tell James of his suspicion? He must have. Otherwise his concern itself may be called into question, and I don't think that's true. Sirius loved James more than he did his brother. So I think he must have told James. And then persuaded James to either change SK or make the switch from Sirius to Peter instead of Remus.

Now how did James view this is the question. Was he concerned about Sirius’s information that it was Remus who was the traitor? Or did he just brush it away, even though Dumbledore had warned him of a traitor and told him to go under the Fidelus charm. James took Dumbledore's warning seriously, because he did decide and go under the Fidelus. But did he take Sirius’s warning seriously or did he feel come what may he should always trust his friends, even when one very close friend told him of his suspicions about another friend?

And Sirius was someone James loved as a brother too. So did James take Sirius's suspicion in the proper manner?

If he did, then James and Lily also accepted and agreed with Sirius and so they made the switch and Remus did not know. If James and Lily did not take Sirius's suspicions seriously then I do think they were very, very careless of their lives and of Harry’s IMO.

The entire post is my opinion only.

I think everything depends on "Did Sirius tell James about his suspicion?" And if he did, then everything depends on what James did with the information. Did he treat it as it should have, because Dumbledore had already told him about a traitor and now Sirius was bringing news that he suspected Remus to be a traitor?

James knew of a traitor in the Order close to him, is canon. He defended Sirius to Dumbledore is also canon. Meesha raises an interesting point that Remus did not suspect Sirius to be the spy before the Potters died. In POA it is worded in such a way, that it could go either way.

"And you will in turn forgive me for believing you were the spy"

So either only Remus was suspected or Remus and Sirius suspected each other.

If Remus did not suspect Sirius, but Sirius suspected Remus, then did Sirius tell James of his suspicion? He must have. Otherwise his concern itself may be called into question, and I don't think that's true. Sirius loved James more than he did his brother. So I think he must have told James. And then persuaded James to either change SK or make the switch from Sirius to Peter instead of Remus.

Now how did James view this is the question. Was he concerned about Sirius’s information that it was Remus who was the traitor? Or did he just brush it away, even though Dumbledore had warned him of a traitor and told him to go under the Fidelus charm. James took Dumbledore's warning seriously, because he did decide and go under the Fidelus. But did he take Sirius’s warning seriously or did he feel come what may he should always trust his friends, even when one very close friend told him of his suspicions about another friend?

And Sirius was someone James loved as a brother too. So did James take Sirius's suspicion in the proper manner?

If he did, then James and Lily also accepted and agreed with Sirius and so they made the switch and Remus did not know. If James and Lily did not take Sirius's suspicions seriously then I do think they were very, very careless of their lives and of Harry’s IMO.

The entire post is my opinion only.

In my opinion we do not have enough information to make a judgement for or against. There simply is not enough in canon to decide. What we know for sure is Snape heard the prophecy and went to Voldemort, thus starting the entire chain of events. Peter was made SK and went to Voldemort with the Potter's whereabouts, Voldemort killed them. Juggling what information about what Jame and Lily did or not do is futile IMO, we don't know. And in my opinion James and Lily should have ben able to shout from a mountain top where they lived and have been free from fear. LV and his DE's including Snape and Peter were the criminals and they alone are to blame for the deaths of James and Lily. IMO to say that they were careless or arrogant with their safety is beside the point, they did not invite LV into their home to kill them. They are the innocents, the blame for their deaths lies elsewhere, with Voldemaort, Peter and Snape. This post is my opinion only.

In my opinion we do not have enough information to make a judgement for or against. There simply is not enough in canon to decide. What we know for sure is Snape heard the prophecy and went to Voldemort, thus starting the entire chain of events. Peter was made SK and went to Voldemort with the Potter's whereabouts, Voldemort killed them. Juggling what information about what Jame and Lily did or not do is futile IMO, we don't know. And in my opinion James and Lily should have ben able to shout from a mountain top where they lived and have been free from fear. LV and his DE's including Snape and Peter were the criminals and they alone are to blame for the deaths of James and Lily. IMO to say that they were careless or arrogant with their safety is beside the point, they did not invite LV into their home to kill them. They are the innocents, the blame for their deaths lies elsewhere, with Voldemaort, Peter and Snape. This post is my opinion only.I agree with that. While in retrospect of course changing to Peter wasn't a good move, but how on earth were they supposed to know? You can't say they were careless and arrogant because they should have suspected Peter as the traitor, not Remus. How were they supposed to know? The blame for me as well lies with the ones who intentionally brought around their deaths, which are Snape, Peter, and especially Voldemort as he was the one who killed them.

eliza101::
But we do have canon IMO. We have canon that Remus was suspected as a spy, that Dumbeldore came to know of a traitor in the Order who was close to the Potters and warned then right away and that James defended Black to Dumbeldore. All this is canon.

That a switch was made is also canon and that Remus did not know of the switch is also canon. Sirius suspected Remus as the spy is also canon.

Did Sirius tell James? He must have, otherwise he is not close to James as he claims IMO.

James and Lily made the switch without Remus knowing about it. Did they do that, because they agreed with Sirius or James refused to believe any of his friends could be a spy, but went ahead and did the switch anyway, and Remus was not told for some reason IMO.

This is how canon reads. That is why I felt for the reasons I have given above that James and lily agreed with Sirius and suspected Remus; but even that IMO was wrong.

James and Lily should have checked everyone and should have known they were not a traitor before choosing the SK. Which IMO they did not do. They either blindly suspected Remus or they refused to suspect anyone at all IMO.

Both in times of war, when they and their baby could be killed was equal to neglect and carelessness IMO.

The entire post is my opinion only.

James and Lily should have checked everyone and should have known they were not a traitor before choosing the SK. Which IMO they did not do. They either blindly suspected Remus or they refused to suspect anyone at all IMO.

Both in times of war, when they and their baby could be killed was equal to neglect and carelessness IMO.

Their lives were at risk. They had to make a quick decision. If they had dithered about running background checks on every person they knew before chosing a SK, they could have been killed before they made their decision. Wasn't there only a week between them going into hiding and them getting killed? I think this demonstrates that their death was imminent if they did not go immediately go into hiding. Plus, I thought that Dumbledore was trying to root out the spy. Sometimes, it takes longer than a week to figure out who is the mole.

I simply don't think that James and Lily had the luxury of time to investigate every possible person before selecting a secret keeper. I think they had to make a snap decision and when you have to do that, I think that many people would go with a person who had been their friend through thick and thin for over a decade. I do not think they were neglectful or careless. I think expediency was important, they went with a trusted friend and they had Dumbledore seeking out the spy.

eliza101::Did Sirius tell James? He must have, otherwise he is not close to James as he claims IMO.
Sirius had no reason to tell James of any suspicious. James' safety did not depend on Remus if they made Peter the secret keeper.


James and Lily made the switch without Remus knowing about it. Did they do that, because they agreed with Sirius or James refused to believe any of his friends could be a spy, but went ahead and did the switch anyway, and Remus was not told for some reason IMO.
Or they could have been planning to tell him through Sirius, who of course wouldn't deliver the message if he suspected Remus the spy. James and Lily could not have delivered the message to Remus safely and in that short space of time themselves imo. A patronus would have been too dangerous because someone could have been with Remus at the time and seen imo, and owls are too easily intercepted imo. What other choices did they have? It wasn't worth the risk imo and I don't think it's a lack of trust on Lily and James' part at all.

James and Lily should have checked everyone and should have known they were not a traitor before choosing the SK. Which IMO they did not do. They either blindly suspected Remus or they refused to suspect anyone at all IMO.
How were they supposed to check everyone when they were already in hiding themselves? Dumbledore was looking, but he had no ideas - so Lily and James are expected to do his job but better despite the fact they are in hiding and have been for the past two years?

Both in times of war, when they and their baby could be killed was equal to neglect and carelessness IMO.
I refuse to accept the believe that Lily and James would be careless and neglectful when it came to their lives and Harry's. IMO, if that were the case, they wouldn't have bothered with a secret keeper at all. I agree that Snape, who willingly handed over the prophecy knowing that a baby would die, Peter, who gave away the information to Voldemort, and Voldemort, who killed them, are the only ones to blame, and the only ones at fault here imo.

eliza101::
But we do have canon IMO. We have canon that Remus was suspected as a spy, that Dumbeldore came to know of a traitor in the Order who was close to the Potters and warned then right away and that James defended Black to Dumbeldore. All this is canon.

That a switch was made is also canon and that Remus did not know of the switch is also canon. Sirius suspected Remus as the spy is also canon.

Did Sirius tell James? He must have, otherwise he is not close to James as he claims IMO.

James and Lily made the switch without Remus knowing about it. Did they do that, because they agreed with Sirius or James refused to believe any of his friends could be a spy, but went ahead and did the switch anyway, and Remus was not told for some reason IMO.

This is how canon reads. That is why I felt for the reasons I have given above that James and lily agreed with Sirius and suspected Remus; but even that IMO was wrong.

James and Lily should have checked everyone and should have known they were not a traitor before choosing the SK. Which IMO they did not do. They either blindly suspected Remus or they refused to suspect anyone at all IMO.

Both in times of war, when they and their baby could be killed was equal to neglect and carelessness IMO.

The entire post is my opinion only.

If the suspicion was on Remus or Sirius, that made Peter the ideal choice. He was not suspected. Are far as I can see Peter was thought of as a tragic victim along with James and Lily. No one knew until Sirius saw the picture of Ron and family in the paper that he was alive. I would say that going on the evidence available to the Potters and up until POA one would have to assume they made the logical decision. No one suspected Peter. No one, not before and not after the Potter's deaths thought he was a traitor. There was no evidence. That is canon up to the end of POA, then the big revelation. I certainly did not think reading the first two books that Scabbers was a DE traitor. Juggling what Sirius says and what Remus says when they are in the throes of survivor guilt does not take the onus off Peter, Snape and Voldemort and put it on James and Lily. Perhaps they should have used one of Trelawney's crystal balls to pick the secret keeper, but they didn't, they went with the best plan they could come up with, and IMO it was a good plan. They were betrayed by a friend. IMO that sums it all up. They were betrayed, they were not careless, arrogant or blindly trusting.

James and Lily should have checked everyone and should have known they were not a traitor before choosing the SK. Which IMO they did not do. They either blindly suspected Remus or they refused to suspect anyone at all IMO.

Both in times of war, when they and their baby could be killed was equal to neglect and carelessness IMO.

You keep on saying this and I keep on emphatically disagreeing with you, both from a literary and an ethical POV. :) I don't agree that people who trust a friend should be blamed for their deaths if the friend concerned turns out to be a traitor. :no: I don't take this attitude in real life and therefore I don't apply it to literature either.

Perhaps we should take a step backwards and ask why JKR wrote this particular plotline in the way she did. I can't believe that part of her intent was to portray James and Lily as foolish and negligent when it came to their safety and that of their child's, and I think that should be borne in mind. :)

You might say that she should have written this plotline better and I might very well agree with you. :whistle: But I highly doubt that Harry thought his parents were to blame for their own deaths. :huh:

Very good points too - especially the 'he thought he knew him' bit said to Harry. That still would leave him apologizing for believing it after the fact though, which seems terrifically odd to me. Especially in light of JKR having Sirius grin when he accepted the apology because that spoke to me of him having a 'revelation' in that moment. I mean as if he saw the irony of it all with Lupin's need to apologize to him as well. Otherwise, I would have just expected a basic 'of course' or 'pfft' type response, but not the grin, written to make me feel like he was recognizing something. There would be nothing to recognize if it only pertained to after the fact; everyone had believed that based on the evidence. You know what I mean? But admittedly, it could be read both ways. Too I think Lupin's mentality was more like Sirius' in that respect; he wasn't as trusting as James, imo. Remus said Harry reminded him of James - not James and himself back then - and I realize it is something he might not say under your interpretation too - but it may have caused him to say it to Harry in a more understanding manner than he did if it were true...

I agree that Lupin and Sirius were never as trusting as James. They had different backgrounds and looked at things differently. Sirius had grown up in a family full of dark witches and wizards - he had seen too much to blindly trust anyone. Lupin grew up with the stigmatism of being a werewolf and that affected how he saw things - he expected people to judge him for being a werewolf and that gave him a somewhat callous view of human nature. Even as a teenager, he full expected his friends to abandon him if they found out he was a werewolf and was surprised and gratified that they didn't.

But that is a big difference between Lupin and Sirius. Where Sirius recognized the temptation of the dark arts and how the dark arts could be used to control people, Lupin recognized that people often fear what they don't understand. That gives each of them a different perspective on the issue. Sirius would be more likely to suspect someone of being a spy because of his background - Lupin would be more likely to accept that people would be suspicious of him because he was a werewolf. Sirius looked to external forces - Lupin looked for people to judge him because of his condition.

Lupin's statement that he thought he had known Sirius shows that he was shocked and surprised when he was told that Sirius was the spy - he would not have believed it prior to James and Lily dying, IMO. He didn't want to believe it even after they died, but he couldn't refute the evidence because there were things that he did not know. The exchange between Sirius and Lupin in the shack seems fairly straightforward to me. Lupin has realized that Sirius didn't tell him about the switch because he thought he was the spy and Sirius knows that Lupin believed him to be the spy after James and Lily died because the evidence was against him. They both ask for forgiveness because - with the benefit of hindsight - they both realized that they should have figured out the truth sooner because they knew each other better than that.

I agree with that. While in retrospect of course changing to Peter wasn't a good move, but how on earth were they supposed to know? You can't say they were careless and arrogant because they should have suspected Peter as the traitor, not Remus. How were they supposed to know? The blame for me as well lies with the ones who intentionally brought around their deaths, which are Snape, Peter, and especially Voldemort as he was the one who killed them.

Exactly. :agree:

eliza101::
But we do have canon IMO. We have canon that Remus was suspected as a spy, that Dumbeldore came to know of a traitor in the Order who was close to the Potters and warned then right away and that James defended Black to Dumbeldore. All this is canon.

That's not quite accurate. As has been pointed out many times before, canon only tells us that Sirius suspected Lupin of being the spy. We don't know why or if James was even aware of it - Sirius made the decision not to tell Lupin about the switch and Lupin knew that. Likewise, canon only tells us that Dumbledore suspected that there was a spy close to the Potters. He had no way of knowing if his suspicions were correct or who the spy could be if they were.

Canon also tells us that James would have considered it the height of dishonor not to trust his friends so we know that James did not suspect Lupin of being the spy any more than he did Sirius or Pettigrew. James and Lily trusted all of their friends implicitly. They had no reason not to trust their friends. Vague suspicions with no concrete evidence is not enough to turn your back on over 10 years of friendship.

That a switch was made is also canon and that Remus did not know of the switch is also canon. Sirius suspected Remus as the spy is also canon.

Did Sirius tell James? He must have, otherwise he is not close to James as he claims IMO.

Sirius may have told James - he may not have told James. They were still close friends either way. Friends don't always tell each other everything - how many times did Harry find out that Hermione knew something, but chose not to tell him about it until later? That doesn't change the fact that they were close friends - Hermione had reasons for not telling him those things. Regardless, even if Sirius did tell him, we know that James would never have agreed because he trusted all of his friends implicitly.

They were close friends, but they did not agree about everything or even look at every situation the same way. They were still different people. Again, we see this with the trio time and time again. Harry and Ron never trusted Snape - Hermione did not agree with them. Hermione believed that the Firebolt had probably been jinxed to hurt Harry - Ron and Harry did not agree with her. Harry was sure that Malfoy had been made a Death Eater - Ron and Hermione did not agree with him. Harry was sure that one of the Horcruxes was hidden at Hogwarts - Hermione did not agree with him.

This holds true for all friendships. People are not going to agree on everything all of the time no matter how close they are as friends. The fact that Sirius became suspicious of Lupin does not tell us what James thought about it because they did not agree about everything. Lupin tells us what James believed - he would have considered it the height of dishonor to mistrust his friends. So we do know that James never believed that any of his friends would betray him.

James and Lily made the switch without Remus knowing about it. Did they do that, because they agreed with Sirius or James refused to believe any of his friends could be a spy, but went ahead and did the switch anyway, and Remus was not told for some reason IMO.

Sirius made the decision not to tell Lupin about the switch - that is clearly stated in POA. We know that James would never have agreed with Sirius - he did not believe that any of his friends would betray him like that. From what we are shown in canon, Sirius made the decision not to tell Lupin unilaterally. He knew James as well as Lupin did so he would have known that James would never agree to keeping Lupin out of the loop because he considered it the height of dishonor to mistrust his friends.

This is how canon reads. That is why I felt for the reasons I have given above that James and lily agreed with Sirius and suspected Remus; but even that IMO was wrong.

James and Lily should have checked everyone and should have known they were not a traitor before choosing the SK. Which IMO they did not do. They either blindly suspected Remus or they refused to suspect anyone at all IMO.

Both in times of war, when they and their baby could be killed was equal to neglect and carelessness IMO.

The entire post is my opinion only.

What exactly were they supposed to check out? These are their childhood friends. James has known Sirius, Lupin, and Pettigrew since their first year at Hogwarts and Lily got to know them through James. They essentially grew up together and were best friends for over 10 years. There was nothing for James to check out that he knew of. He knew about their families and backgrounds already because he grew up with them. He believed that none of them would betray him because they had proven themselves to him over and over again - even Pettigrew. They had kept each others secrets, defended each other, and protected each other for over 10 years.

James had no viable reason to believe that any of his friends would betray him. Dumbledore's vague suspicions would not have convinced him because Dumbledore did not know Sirius, Lupin, and Pettigrew the way that he did - he had not grown up with them and been best friends with them for over 10 years. Without solid, concrete evidence that one of them had betrayed him, James was not going to believe Dumbledore - he had no reason to. And he was given reason to doubt Dumbledore when he learned of Dumbledore's past with Grindelwald.

That is the tragedy of all this. James trusted his friends implicitly and believed that he knew them inside and out. And he was right about Lupin and Sirius - the three of them were the true Marauders. Pettigrew fooled all of them and everyone was taken by surprise to learn that he was the traitor. James and Lily had no way of knowing that Pettigrew would do that and there was no way for them to find out. James and Lily did all that they could do - and then some - to protect themselves and Harry. There was nothing else that they could have done without knowing for sure that Pettigrew had betrayed them. It was not arrogance, neglect, or carelessness - it was betrayal by someone they believed to be loyal to them. Someone they cared about and would have given their lives to protect if the situation had been reversed. James and Lily had no viable reason not to trust their friends because there was no concrete evidence that any of their friends had done anything wrong.

Again, you have to look at the situation from the angle of what they knew and believed at that time. They didn't have the benefit of hindsight. It's very easy to make snap judgments when you know that Pettigrew was the spy and have concrete evidence of that after the fact. That judgment cannot be made without knowing that Pettigrew was the spy for sure and having concrete evidence against him. They simply did not have that. Dumbledore's vague suspicions were not enough to justify them turning on their friends.

I agree that Lupin and Sirius were never as trusting as James. They had different backgrounds and looked at things differently. Sirius had grown up in a family full of dark witches and wizards - he had seen too much to blindly trust anyone. Lupin grew up with the stigmatism of being a werewolf and that affected how he saw things - he expected people to judge him for being a werewolf and that gave him a somewhat callous view of human nature. Even as a teenager, he full expected his friends to abandon him if they found out he was a werewolf and was surprised and gratified that they didn't.

But that is a big difference between Lupin and Sirius. Where Sirius recognized the temptation of the dark arts and how the dark arts could be used to control people, Lupin recognized that people often fear what they don't understand. That gives each of them a different perspective on the issue. Sirius would be more likely to suspect someone of being a spy because of his background - Lupin would be more likely to accept that people would be suspicious of him because he was a werewolf. Sirius looked to external forces - Lupin looked for people to judge him because of his condition.

Lupin's statement that he thought he had known Sirius shows that he was shocked and surprised when he was told that Sirius was the spy - he would not have believed it prior to James and Lily dying, IMO. He didn't want to believe it even after they died, but he couldn't refute the evidence because there were things that he did not know. The exchange between Sirius and Lupin in the shack seems fairly straightforward to me. Lupin has realized that Sirius didn't tell him about the switch because he thought he was the spy and Sirius knows that Lupin believed him to be the spy after James and Lily died because the evidence was against him. They both ask for forgiveness because - with the benefit of hindsight - they both realized that they should have figured out the truth sooner because they knew each other better than that.

Well you make a good argument and I could accept that interpretation. I would still be at a loss to explain Sirius' wry smile upon Remus asking forgiveness, but I imagine one could find a good explanation under your interpretation as well. But this is actually not that integral to the story, so I would just accept both alternatives as a good possibility. I actually like both, so either way it came out would not matter to me. :tu:

Where Sirius recognized the temptation of the dark arts and how the dark arts could be used to control people, Lupin recognized that people often fear what they don't understand. That gives each of them a different perspective on the issue. Sirius would be more likely to suspect someone of being a spy because of his background - Lupin would be more likely to accept that people would be suspicious of him because he was a werewolf. Sirius looked to external forces - Lupin looked for people to judge him because of his condition.As a general statement, I agree completely with this observation about Sirius and Lupin. Both come from different points of view due to each of them having different demons to face, so to speak. The fact that Sirius' family was almost exclusively pro-Voldemort definitely would have caused him to see first-hand what evil truly was. It would definitely have shown him how the Dark Arts could corrupt people. With Remus, I also agree that his being a werewolf and the treatment he received because of that would color his perceptions and influence his point of view heavily. With James, I also agree that he would be the most trusting of the three. This could have had to do with his family experience: since he had a very loving family, he may have been brought up to be more trusting. Or it could have been inherent in his personality. I'm not sure.

Well you make a good argument and I could accept that interpretation. I would still be at a loss to explain Sirius' wry smile upon Remus asking forgiveness, but I imagine one could find a good explanation under your interpretation as well. But this is actually not that integral to the story, so I would just accept both alternatives as a good possibility. I actually like both, so either way it came out would not matter to me. :tu:

I knew I forgot something there - catching up after missing a few days is hard work! Sirius smiled because he felt that there was nothing to forgive. It was his own fault that Lupin believed he was the spy after James and Lily died because he had been suspicious of Lupin and chose not to tell him about the switch. Pettigrew had done a good job in fooling all of them and his plan to frame Sirius went off without a flaw - leaving overwhelming evidence against Sirius with 50 muggle eyewitnesses, his own finger laying there, and everyone believing that Sirius had been secret keeper. He couldn't fault Lupin for believing all that evidence - particularly when he had enabled that to happen by choosing not to tell Lupin about the switch in the first place.

And it was a heartwarming moment for both of them. Lupin had suffered in all that as well - James dying, believing Pettigrew was dead, and believing that Sirius had betrayed them. He had been alone and friendless for those 12 years. So this is a big moment for them - reunited and knowing that they were both wrong - I think it made the bond of friendship between them even stronger. So there's happiness in that as well because they aren't alone anymore. They've still got each other as friends.

As a general statement, I agree completely with this observation about Sirius and Lupin. Both come from different points of view due to each of them having different demons to face, so to speak. The fact that Sirius' family was almost exclusively pro-Voldemort definitely would have caused him to see first-hand what evil truly was. It would definitely have shown him how the Dark Arts could corrupt people. With Remus, I also agree that his being a werewolf and the treatment he received because of that would color his perceptions and influence his point of view heavily. With James, I also agree that he would be the most trusting of the three. This could have had to do with his family experience: since he had a very loving family, he may have been brought up to be more trusting. Or it could have been inherent in his personality. I'm not sure.

I agree. James had a much more stable background in coming from a loving family. He never had to worry about money and his parents were good, generous people. They doted on James - spoiling him, but also instilling that same goodness and generosity in him. They set a good example for him in that regard as well - particularly with taking Sirius into their home in spite of his family's reputation. James was obviously the more trusting of the three, IMO and I think that was something instilled in him by his parents because they appear to have been very trusting people as well.

I knew I forgot something there - catching up after missing a few days is hard work! Sirius smiled because he felt that there was nothing to forgive. It was his own fault that Lupin believed he was the spy after James and Lily died because he had been suspicious of Lupin and chose not to tell him about the switch. Pettigrew had done a good job in fooling all of them and his plan to frame Sirius went off without a flaw - leaving overwhelming evidence against Sirius with 50 muggle eyewitnesses, his own finger laying there, and everyone believing that Sirius had been secret keeper. He couldn't fault Lupin for believing all that evidence - particularly when he had enabled that to happen by choosing not to tell Lupin about the switch in the first place.

I know how it is. But see, I told you there would be a good explanation for it under your theory. :lol:. I accept it as a strong possiblity too, and that actually makes a lot of sense. I will have to think on it more though, because generally things I have established in my mind bear on other interpretations as well. So the issue may rise again in another light. Nonetheless, I accept both your and my interpretations fully as alternative explanations ~ as I say, I like them both very much as lining up with canon and feel that either is completely possible.

And it was a heartwarming moment for both of them. Lupin had suffered in all that as well - James dying, believing Pettigrew was dead, and believing that Sirius had betrayed them. He had been alone and friendless for those 12 years. So this is a big moment for them - reunited and knowing that they were both wrong - I think it made the bond of friendship between them even stronger. So there's happiness in that as well because they aren't alone anymore. They've still got each other as friends.

I agree. My perspective was a little different because I have such a strong background in werewolf tales that impacts me a lot. So I saw this, but I saw something more as well. While it did remind me of other friendship tales in lore, it had a completely kind of new twist to it in that the werewolf aspect was completely ignored here (in the literature itself). I must admit, I had to take my hat off to JKR for that one because it was pretty much a novel idea. By the time the lycan topic arose again, we were onto a different scenario, but that previous reunion scene set a foundation for the rest that would not let you forget that Sirius hadn't greeted the 'werewolf'.

Maybe that makes no sense to everyone; but even in revelation tales like this (where the werewolf has not been confirmed for the reader) there is always some clue in the meeting of friends when a werewolf is involved, that has you looking back and saying 'oh - that is what was meant' once the revelation is had. But not here. Perhaps JKR didn't do it on purpose; but even if it was just a stroke of luck, it came from within her and I gotta admire that. How easy it would have been for her to pull the strings of sadness for Remus by having his friend believed him a spy because he was a werewolf. However, she didn't do it. It would have also been classic for Sirius to call him 'Moony' in that moment, but she didn't do that either. So for me it was pretty wicked in terms of lore.

I agree. James had a much more stable background in coming from a loving family. He never had to worry about money and his parents were good, generous people. They doted on James - spoiling him, but also instilling that same goodness and generosity in him. They set a good example for him in that regard as well - particularly with taking Sirius into their home in spite of his family's reputation. James was obviously the more trusting of the three, IMO and I think that was something instilled in him by his parents because they appear to have been very trusting people as well.

That is how I see it as well. And too, I feel Harry had the trait passed on because he had no reason to be so trusting based on his young life. If anything, the Dursleys would have turned him off of trust altogether, imo.

If the suspicion was on Remus or Sirius, that made Peter the ideal choice. He was not suspected. Are far as I can see Peter was thought of as a tragic victim along with James and Lily. No one knew until Sirius saw the picture of Ron and family in the paper that he was alive. I would say that going on the evidence available to the Potters and up until POA one would have to assume they made the logical decision. No one suspected Peter. No one, not before and not after the Potter's deaths thought he was a traitor. There was no evidence. That is canon up to the end of POA, then the big revelation. I certainly did not think reading the first two books that Scabbers was a DE traitor. Juggling what Sirius says and what Remus says when they are in the throes of survivor guilt does not take the onus off Peter, Snape and Voldemort and put it on James and Lily. Perhaps they should have used one of Trelawney's crystal balls to pick the secret keeper, but they didn't, they went with the best plan they could come up with, and IMO it was a good plan. They were betrayed by a friend. IMO that sums it all up. They were betrayed, they were not careless, arrogant or blindly trusting.

You keep on saying this and I keep on emphatically disagreeing with you, both from a literary and an ethical POV. :) I don't agree that people who trust a friend should be blamed for their deaths if the friend concerned turns out to be a traitor. :no: I don't take this attitude in real life and therefore I don't apply it to literature either.

Were all the Marauders really close friends? At the time when the Fidelus Charm was cast?

There was James and Sirius, Remus and Peter.

James and Sirius were practically brothers and loved each other very much and were always together.

"you could not see one without the other and they were the ringleaders of their group." POA (not the exact words)

So James and Sirius were more than close IMO. Added to that Sirius ran away from his home when he was 16 and bunked with James, whose parents took care of him and accepted him. Not to mention the werewolf incident where James risked his life to save Snape so that Sirius and Remus would not have been kissed or died IMO.

So Sirius was not just a friend, he was also almost a brother IMO. Remus and Peter are not as close as James and Sirius. Peter is referred to as a tag-along, while I think Remus was closer to James and Sirius than Peter.

They joined the Order, and James and Lily married and had Harry. Some time after Harry was born, perhaps moths after he was born, Dumbledore realises there is a spy in the Order and still later he comes to know that Voldemort was after the Potters (from Snape IMO) and he had chosen Harry as the child of the Prophecy.

Some time in this period Sirius had also started suspecting Remus.

The question I asked before, I ask again. Did Sirius tell James about the traitor? When Dumbledore had already warned about the same traitor as someone very close to the Potters, who was passing information about them.

If Sirius told James, as I think he did, coupled with Dumbledore's warning, how did James react.

I think there are only 2 ways of looking at this.

One Sirius told James about Remus.

Two Sirius did not tell James about Remus.

Taking point no.2 first, if Sirius did not tell James about his suspicions of Remus, then he was IMO doing a great disservice to his friend and I would also think that Sirius was not that good a friend to James as I think he is. That is why I think Sirius would have told James about Remus. To Sirius, James was the closer friend and he thought Remus was the DE. Why should he spare Remus to James? When James's and his family's life was in danger?

Assuming Sirius told James about Remus, what do you think James should have done, when Dumbledore had also warned him about the traitor?

(It was also because James took Dumbledore's warning seriously that he planned to go under the Fidelus)

Most have said that James trusted his friends.

I am only asking, trusted under what context?

The fact James was going under the Fidelus meant that he agreed with Dumbledore that, one, there was a traitor, and two, he should protect himself and his family against him (the traitor).

Once he went under the Fidelus, James would become inaccessible to the traitor. That was the reason he went under the Fidelus, so that the DE could not betray them to Voldemort.

Who did James think was the traitor?

The other person who did not know about the switch was Dumbledore or Bathilda who used to visit them. If James thought Dumbledore was the traitor, then how did Sirius allow Hagrid who told Sirius that he was there on Dumbledore's orders to take Harry to the Dursleys (POA)?

But Sirius allows that, so I presume Dumbledore was not thought of as the traitor.

The Potters were well hidden already. James and Lily were in hiding, which meant that they were not accessible to everyone. They went under the Fidelus to protect them selves and their baby from the DE in disguise, who was very close to them.

Who was that?

They did take Dumbledore's warning very seriously, but assumed Remus to be the traitor, instead of checking Dumbledore, Remus and Peter, is what I think.

Perhaps we should take a step back wards and ask why JKR wrote this particular plot line in the way she did. I can't believe that part of her intent was to portray James and Lily as foolish and negligent when it came to their safety and that of their child's, and I think that should be borne in mind. :)

She has written them as hasty and careless IMO. I read the books based on my understanding of what life has taught me, and I understand and realise that it may be very different from how another will view it. :)

It is because of all these fascinating and different views that makes HP so wonderful and COS such a great place to meet IMO. :)

For example, JKR may have meant that Snape had handed over memories of such a personal nature to a boy he loathed and detested, for it probably looked okay with her, I personally cannot; because if I loathed a boy, I would never, ever give my very personal memories which shamed me, to him. I would stop with showing him my work and the message I would need to pass on to the disgusting brat and die loathing him.

JKR obviously thinks differently from me LOL. :D

Like that here too, she may have meant something, but I am afraid at times I understand something else completely different from what she may have meant, because my understanding, my ethics and morals show me something else about a particular situation IMO.

Like I have no problem at all, with lupin leaving Tonks, because to me the words showed something else than it did to others. While I have a huge problem with lupin not visiting Harry all those years and not telling Dumbeldore about Sirius's animagus form in Harry's 3rd year. I persoanlly think it's all about how we read the books, which IMO depend on our own experiences and understanding in life, which may differ greatly from JKR's and each others. :)

But I highly doubt that Harry thought his parents were to blame for their own deaths. :huh:

Well, I don't know what Harry thought, but I do think this. For Harry, they were his parents and he loved them and knew they died for him. His love for them was unconditional. That is not to say that James and Lily could make no mistake or that they could never be careless or reckless IMO.

Harry thinks Sirius was reckless in DH; he could think that his parents did not check properly; that would IMO take nothing away from them as far as Harry was concerned IMO.

The entire post is my opinion only.

Perhaps we should take a step backwards and ask why JKR wrote this particular plotline in the way she did. I can't believe that part of her intent was to portray James and Lily as foolish and negligent when it came to their safety and that of their child's, and I think that should be borne in mind.

I think she wanted Harry's parents dead and she used a betrayal as a dramatic catalyst. The whole dilemma is based on chaos and misunderstandings in times of war. Something similarly catastrophic could have easily happened to Harry and his friends when Ron ran off during the camping trip. JKR developed the secret keeper plot over the years and the fact that the Potters needed someone else as a secret keeper became rather questionable. Why didn't James or Lily become Secret Keeper for themselves? It's because they needed to die. So we can discuss the trust issue ad nauseam, we won't get closer to the truth because there is no ultimate truth. It's not clear why they trusted Peter over Remus and we will never know if James mistrusted Remus or not. I don't think it's relevant, to be honest, because their actions are not necessarily logical.

It's not clear why they trusted Peter over Remus

We do actually have canon on this. Sirius said they chose Peter because they felt Voldemort would approach him first. That is because he was considered the least talented of the friends.

and we will never know if James mistrusted Remus or not

In my view, that is a matter of opinion. We have canon for that also in my judgment. I don't believe Remus was lying in DH when he told Harry that he reminded him of James and that James would have thought it the height of dishonor to mistrust any of his friends. And Remus said it. I think JKR had Remus say it to Harry in DH, under circumstances similar to that which Harry's parents faced to help us understand how/why people like James and Harry might be trusting of all of those close to them (and Harry knew some of those people far, far less than James knew Peter). Just like James and Lily with Peter, Harry (and everyone else) was betrayed by one he trusted entirely - Dumbledore. Moody and Hedwig died and George lost an ear and I think it is up to each reader to decide whether or not Dumbledore was acting in good faith under the circumstances and based on the reasoning he provided. I found his reasoning wholly inadequate and thus, his machiavellian nature was in play in my view; making his action very similar to Peter's in ways. I feel both acted in terms of their personal "greater good" and while I feel Dumbledore's greater good was actually good and Peter's bad, that does not salvage Dumbledore's behavior in this scenario, imo.

I It's not clear why they trusted Peter over Remus and we will never know if James mistrusted Remus or not. I don't think it's relevant, to be honest, because their actions are not necessarily logical.

While it was important that Lily and James die, I really think JKR could have gone about the whole thing in a better manner. I agree with you that the plot demanded it, but she could have made it a lot better by not sacrificing IMO James and Lily's decision making abilities. By doing that, she has also made her heroes have feet of clay IMO. :)

Even by making James Sk, she could have had Peter take Harry to Voldemort (who could have been waiting by the gates he could not see, like the DEs waiting in front of GP in DH), with both the parents rushing out of their home to defend their child IMO.

This way it looks to me that she sacrificed the reputation of all the Marauders in one way or another IMO.

We do actually have canon on this. Sirius said they chose Peter because they felt Voldemort would approach him first. That is because he was considered the least talented of the friends.

No, that's why they chose him as Secret Keeper. This doesn't explain why they or at least Sirius trusted him more than Remus. If he was more likely to be approached by Voldemort than Remus, why suspect Remus to be the traitor? It's not very clear, in my view.

No, that's why they chose him as Secret Keeper. This doesn't explain why they or at least Sirius trusted him more than Remus. If he was more likely to be approached by Voldemort than Remus, why suspect Remus to be the traitor? It's not very clear, in my view.

Oh I misunderstood you. :lol:. I agree, we don't know why Sirius suspected Remus was the spy. :tu:

No, that's why they chose him as Secret Keeper. This doesn't explain why they or at least Sirius trusted him more than Remus. If he was more likely to be approached by Voldemort than Remus, why suspect Remus to be the traitor? It's not very clear, in my view.

This seems to be more of a plot hole than anything else IMO. I can only think of 2 reasons, both are not very good. One is because Remus was a werewolf and the other, is the elimination process. Sirius knew it was not him, thought Peter incapable and so that left only Remus IMO.

This seems to be more of a plot hole than anything else IMO. I can only think of 2 reasons, both are not very good. One is because Remus was a werewolf and the other, is the elimination process. Sirius knew it was not him, thought Peter incapable and so that left only Remus IMO.

It really does look like it's the elimination process doen't it?There seems to be no other reason.Remus being a werewolf?This was never a problem with any of them. His personality? I highly doubt he was thought untrustworthy by the others.In fact the opposite.He disagreed with things they had done in the past and still stood by them(so to speak).Remus was a great wizard,and I don't think we were ever shown just how great.He was the only one left after elimation,and had the skill.

As Greenwoods said it seems like a plot hole,even if we discover the cause of Sirius's suspician,why did Remus suspect him?There are too many unanswered question with regard to this subject.

While it did remind me of other friendship tales in lore, it had a completely kind of new twist to it in that the werewolf aspect was completely ignored here (in the literature itself). I must admit, I had to take my hat off to JKR for that one because it was pretty much a novel idea. By the time the lycan topic arose again, we were onto a different scenario, but that previous reunion scene set a foundation for the rest that would not let you forget that Sirius hadn't greeted the 'werewolf'.

Maybe that makes no sense to everyone; but even in revelation tales like this (where the werewolf has not been confirmed for the reader) there is always some clue in the meeting of friends when a werewolf is involved, that has you looking back and saying 'oh - that is what was meant' once the revelation is had. But not here.Hm I admit this doesn't make sense to me, :lol: but I am intrigued!
This seems to be more of a plot hole than anything else IMO. I can only think of 2 reasons, both are not very good. One is because Remus was a werewolf and the other, is the elimination process. Sirius knew it was not him, thought Peter incapable and so that left only Remus IMO.I'd have to agree that I can't really find a reason for Remus to be suspected other than the two you listed, and the circumstances of the times (ie the fact that the Imperius Curse was running rampant and trust had to be carefully given). Another thought I'd had in my mind was that Peter had subtly tried to plant the seeds of doubt against him, or that perhaps Remus' work with the Order - being away for long periods of time - could have made Sirius suspect him.

All in all, I kind of agree with Moriath that it's pretty much a moot point, since things had to happen so that James and Lily died. I think having the whole switching secret keepers without telling Remus had to be done that way so that Peter could crop up later, and it would be a case of mistaken guilt and innocence.

It really does look like it's the elimination process doen't it?There seems to be no other reason.Remus being a werewolf?This was never a problem with any of them. His personality? I highly doubt he was thought untrustworthy by the others.In fact the opposite.He disagreed with things they had done in the past and still stood by them(so to speak).Remus was a great wizard,and I don't think we were ever shown just how great.He was the only one left after elimation,and had the skill.

As Greenwoods said it seems like a plot hole,even if we discover the cause of Sirius's suspician,why did Remus suspect him?There are too many unanswered question with regard to this subject.

I agree. Too many unanswered questions. :)

I waver between Sirius suspecting Remus because he was a werewolf and the elimination process. This is where I feel JKR has written James and Lily as less than perfect. For, I cannot believe that Sirius would not have told James about his suspicions and then we don't know what happened. After this it's like what Dumbeldore told Harry, [not the exact words]"From now on we leave the firm ground of facts to the murky marshes of ......(I forget :D)"

I thought Remus suspected Sirius because he belonged to a dark family where one brother and all cousins were in the service of Voldemort. But Remus could have also suspected Sirius after Sirius was imprisoned. That works too IMO.

All in all, I kind of agree with Moriath that it's pretty much a moot point, since things had to happen so that James and Lily died. I think having the whole switching secret keepers without telling Remus had to be done that way so that Peter could crop up later, and it would be a case of mistaken guilt and innocence.

I think so too, only I feel JKR could have written it in such a way, that James and Lily either suspected Remus because they had a reason (wrong though it may have been, but at that time something which made an awful lot of sense) rather then switching SK from Sirius to Peter and leaving Remus out in the cold IMO.

But then, we would not have discussed this so much. :lol:

Were all the Marauders really close friends? At the time when the Fidelus Charm was cast?

There was James and Sirius, Remus and Peter.

James and Sirius were practically brothers and loved each other very much and were always together.

"you could not see one without the other and they were the ringleaders of their group." POA (not the exact words)

So James and Sirius were more than close IMO. Added to that Sirius ran away from his home when he was 16 and bunked with James, whose parents took care of him and accepted him. Not to mention the werewolf incident where James risked his life to save Snape so that Sirius and Remus would not have been kissed or died IMO.

So Sirius was not just a friend, he was also almost a brother IMO. Remus and Peter are not as close as James and Sirius. Peter is referred to as a tag-along, while I think Remus was closer to James and Sirius than Peter.

I agree that James and Sirius were like brothers and they probably were a bit closer to each other than the others. However, I don't see where that matters because that doesn't change the fact that they were still very close friends. James was supporting Lupin because he couldn't get a good job due to being a werewolf - he was also helping Sirius. Lupin and Sirius told Pettigrew that they would have died for him in POA - James would have done the same. They were willing to give their lives for each other so we do know that they were still very close friends.

Assuming Sirius told James about Remus, what do you think James should have done, when Dumbledore had also warned him about the traitor?

(It was also because James took Dumbledore's warning seriously that he planned to go under the Fidelus)

Most have said that James trusted his friends.

I am only asking, trusted under what context?

The fact James was going under the Fidelus meant that he agreed with Dumbledore that, one, there was a traitor, and two, he should protect himself and his family against him (the traitor).

Once he went under the Fidelus, James would become inaccessible to the traitor. That was the reason he went under the Fidelus, so that the DE could not betray them to Voldemort.

Who did James think was the traitor?

The other person who did not know about the switch was Dumbledore or Bathilda who used to visit them. If James thought Dumbledore was the traitor, then how did Sirius allow Hagrid who told Sirius that he was there on Dumbledore's orders to take Harry to the Dursleys (POA)?

But Sirius allows that, so I presume Dumbledore was not thought of as the traitor.

The Potters were well hidden already. James and Lily were in hiding, which meant that they were not accessible to everyone. They went under the Fidelus to protect them selves and their baby from the DE in disguise, who was very close to them.

Who was that?

They did take Dumbledore's warning very seriously, but assumed Remus to be the traitor, instead of checking Dumbledore, Remus and Peter, is what I think.

I'm cutting the quote to save space, but also because the basic premise you have here is incorrect. Dumbledore did not suggest the Fidelius Charm because he thought there might be a traitor. Dumbledore suggested the Fidelius Charm because he had confirmation - concrete evidence - that Voldemort had chosen Harry and was going to go after the Potters. He felt that the Fidelius Charm would be their best bet in hiding from Voldemort. The possibility of there being a traitor came up after that because James said he was going to use Sirius as Secret Keeper. Dumbledore did not think that was a good idea because he suspected that there might be a traitor. James did not agree and was adamant about using Sirius anyway.

Canon does tell us that James did not believe Dumbledore's suspicions of a traitor were correct. He trusted his friends implicitly and did not believe that any of them would betray him. He felt it would be the height of dishonor to mistrust any of his friends. And he had no reason not to trust them at that point. They had been friends for over 10 years and proven their loyalty to each other time and time again. Dumbledore's vague suspicions were not enough for him to turn his back on people he had known and trusted for over 10 years.

The Potters went under the Fidelius Charm because Dumbledore had concrete evidence that Voldemort was going to come after them. Prior to that, it had only been a vague suspicion so they exercised some caution, but did not feel any extreme measures were necessary. Once they had confirmation that Voldemort had chosen Harry - concrete evidence - that changed and extreme measures like the Fidelius Charm were necessary.

We don't know if Sirius discussed his suspicions about Lupin with James or not. However, we do know that - even if he had - James would not have agreed with those suspicions because he would have considered it the height of dishonor to mistrust any of his friends. So it really does not matter if Sirius told him or not, IMO because James would have taken the same action either way. He trusted all of his friends and believed that none of them would betray him.

We also know that Sirius and Lupin understood that about James because it is Lupin who explains that to Harry in DH. So Sirius would have known that James would never agree with his suspicions unless he had concrete evidence to prove it. Since Sirius would have known how James would react to that, it makes sense that he would take it upon himself to look out for James in that regard by choosing not to tell Lupin about the switch without James knowing about it.

Simply put, there was nothing more that James and Lily could have done with the information they had at that point in time. They did not believe any of their friends was a traitor. They knew Voldemort was coming after them. They were given reason to doubt Dumbledore when Bathilda told them of his past with Grindelwald. They made the obvious choice given the information they had - they turned to their friends. They turned to the people who they believed they could trust based on over 10 years of friendship.

Again, we cannot look at this from the angle of what did happen because James and Lily had no way of knowing that. We have the benefit of hindsight - they did not. We have to look at it from the angle of what they did know at that point in time. Dumbledore's vague suspicions that there might be a spy close to them were not enough to justify turning their backs on their friends.

James and Lily were not hasty or careless. They took the information they had and did everything they could to protect themselves and Harry. They believed that none of their friends would betray them. They were wrong about Pettigrew, but there was no way for them to know that and they can't be held at fault just because they trusted someone who had been their friend for over 10 years. Pettigrew fooled everyone - not just James and Lily.

We do actually have canon on this. Sirius said they chose Peter because they felt Voldemort would approach him first. That is because he was considered the least talented of the friends.

In my view, that is a matter of opinion. We have canon for that also in my judgment. I don't believe Remus was lying in DH when he told Harry that he reminded him of James and that James would have thought it the height of dishonor to mistrust any of his friends. And Remus said it. I think JKR had Remus say it to Harry in DH, under circumstances similar to that which Harry's parents faced to help us understand how/why people like James and Harry might be trusting of all of those close to them (and Harry knew some of those people far, far less than James knew Peter). Just like James and Lily with Peter, Harry (and everyone else) was betrayed by one he trusted entirely - Dumbledore. Moody and Hedwig died and George lost an ear and I think it is up to each reader to decide whether or not Dumbledore was acting in good faith under the circumstances and based on the reasoning he provided. I found his reasoning wholly inadequate and thus, his machiavellian nature was in play in my view; making his action very similar to Peter's in ways. I feel both acted in terms of their personal "greater good" and while I feel Dumbledore's greater good was actually good and Peter's bad, that does not salvage Dumbledore's behavior in this scenario, imo.

I agree. I think it is very significant that Jo had Lupin be the one to tell Harry that James would consider it the height of dishonor to mistrust his friends. That tells us that James trusted Lupin and Lupin was aware of that. It was Sirius who came to suspect Lupin was the spy - not James.

There is some irony in that as well because - had anyone ever suggested that Dumbledore would have betrayed them - nobody would have believed it. They all trusted Dumbledore implicitly and he did betray them by having Snape tell Voldemort when Harry was being moved.

This seems to be more of a plot hole than anything else IMO. I can only think of 2 reasons, both are not very good. One is because Remus was a werewolf and the other, is the elimination process. Sirius knew it was not him, thought Peter incapable and so that left only Remus IMO.

Actually, there are other reasons that are much more likely. We know that Lupin being a werewolf had nothing to do with it - they had known he was a werewolf for years and it wasn't an issue with them. The process of elimination is highly unlikely because they had been friends for over 10 years and had proven they could trust each other time and time again. Sirius would not have come to suspect Lupin on anything so flimsy as that.

It is most likely that the information Dumbledore received that led him to suspect there might be a spy was skewed to make it appear that the information came from Lupin. Sirius wouldn't have wanted to believe it, but would still have been cautious. Plus the possibility of Lupin being put under the Imperius Curse would be something he would have considered.

It's also possible that Pettigrew manipulated the situation to make Sirius think Lupin was the spy. He already had his plan in place to frame Sirius when it was all over - he had to adapt that plan to fake his own death after Voldemort fell because all the Death Eaters had known that he was the one who told Voldemort how to get to the Potters, but he had always intended to frame Sirius for it. In order for that plan to work, Lupin could not know about the switch. Pettigrew would need to make sure that the only people who knew were James, Lily, Sirius, and himself. Otherwise, he would not be able to frame Sirius when it was over.

It is also possible that Dumbledore had Lupin working undercover with the werewolves during the first war like he did with the second. Fans have speculated about this for years actually. Lupin does not appear to have been around and he had no idea that Sirius had suspected him of being the spy until that night in the Shrieking Shack when he figured it all out. We see in HBP that Lupin is gone a great deal of the time and not communicating with anyone while he was with the werewolves. That type of behavior could have made Sirius suspcious as well.

I'm cutting the quote to save space, but also because the basic premise you have here is incorrect. Dumbledore did not suggest the Fidelius Charm because he thought there might be a traitor. Dumbledore suggested the Fidelius Charm because he had confirmation - concrete evidence - that Voldemort had chosen Harry and was going to go after the Potters. He felt that the Fidelius Charm would be their best bet in hiding from Voldemort. The possibility of there being a traitor came up after that because James said he was going to use Sirius as Secret Keeper. Dumbledore did not think that was a good idea because he suspected that there might be a traitor. James did not agree and was adamant about using Sirius anyway.

And the reason IMO that Dumbledore knew that they had been targeted was that Snape had told him about what he did with the information about the prophecy. It's interesting that Snape apparently did not know who the spy was either. Where was he when all the DE's were told that Peter supplied the information?

And the reason IMO that Dumbledore knew that they had been targeted was that Snape had told him about what he did with the information about the prophecy. It's interesting that Snape apparently did not know who the spy was either. Where was he when all the DE's were told that Peter supplied the information?

Honestly, it still seems to me that Snape did know about Pettigrew - I thought that after reading POA because his behavior that night was so inconsistent with him actually thinking Sirius was guilty. However, that plot hole would be off topic here - we've been discussing issues like that in the Plot Holes thread (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=114635) if you would like to join us. :)

But you bring up a good point here because Dumbledore's reasoning here does seem to be a plot hole. Snape's memories in DH do not provide any clue as to why Dumbledore began to suspect that there was a spy close to the Potters. Harry only sees a memory of Snape telling Dumbledore that he told Voldemort about the prophecy and that he was going to go after Lily. Nothing Snape said would have led to Dumbledore thinking there as a spy.

In POA, Fudge talks about Dumbledore having "spies" of his own - in the pleural. So who were the other spies and how did they factor into all this? Jo left a pretty big hole here because there are so many unanswered questions. Dumbledore suspecting that there might be a spy, Sirius suspecting Lupin, etc... We really do need more information to work all that out.

I'm cutting the quote to save space, but also because the basic premise you have here is incorrect. Dumbledore did not suggest the Fidelius Charm because he thought there might be a traitor.

Dumbledore suggested the Fidelius Charm because he had confirmation - concrete evidence - that Voldemort had chosen Harry and was going to go after the Potters. He felt that the Fidelius Charm would be their best bet in hiding from Voldemort. The possibility of there being a traitor came up after that because James said he was going to use Sirius as Secret Keeper. Dumbledore did not think that was a good idea because he suspected that there might be a traitor. James did not agree and was adamant about using Sirius anyway.

I don't know about this. The Potters went under the Fidelus just one week before they were killed. Sirius in POA says that Peter was pasing information to Voldmeort for almost a year. McGonagall says that Dumbeldore had been suspecting a traitor for quite sometime, who was in the Order but working for Voldemort.

I don't think that Dumbeldore came up with the mention of a traitor to the Potters only when they were planning to go under the Fidelus. Perhaps he came up with his suspicion of Sirius then (naming him I mean).

After re-reading the books, I really think Rowling was mirroring Neville and Peter Pettigrew. They are written very similarly, it's almost creepy. Both were sorted into Gryffindor when it was not obviously apparent that they belonged there at first, both have bad memories, are awkward, fat and not the brightest or most athletic

I think Rowling was trying to contrast Harry from James in how both Neville and Peter ultimately turned out.

It's scary, read Spinner's End when Pettigrew appears and imagine this as an adult Neville and it really fits, it's creepy the way Peter reacts to Snape's taunts. It's remarkably similar to Neville reacting to Draco or someone.

I think it was deliberate that Rowling had Voldemort tempt Neville to join his side at the end of DH instead of just trying to kill him right away. The way Voldemort spoke to Neville, praising him and seducing him with delusions of granduer, that he would make a noble death eater were probably the manner in which Voldemort earned Peter as his spy and therein lies the difference.

I really don't think James and Sirius saw Peter as their equal. While Harry valued Neville and helped him grow and come into his own.

I think Peter had the potential to turn into what Neville becomes had he had a friend who could influence him to take the right path instead of stringing him along and feeding into his insecurities never stopping him from gawking over James.


The sorting hat certainly saw the potential within him.

After re-reading the books, I really think Rowling was mirroring Neville and Peter Pettigrew. They are written very similarly, it's almost creepy. Both were sorted into Gryffindor when it was not obviously apparent that they belonged there at first, both have bad memories, are awkward, fat and not the brightest or most athletic

I don't see how one's features are relevant to if one is similar or not.

It's scary, read Spinner's End when Pettigrew appears and imagine this as an adult Neville and it really fits, it's creepy the way Peter reacts to Snape's taunts. It's remarkably similar to Neville reacting to Draco or someone.

IMO, Neville wouldn't behave like that. Neville was willing to beat Draco up in PS/SS and he attacked Draco when he insulted people in St. Mungo's. Neville wasn't a complete pushover before DH and by DH he proved that he wasn't.

I really don't think James and Sirius saw Peter as their equal. While Harry valued Neville and helped him grow and come into his own.

If they never saw him as their equal, why did they trust him so highly? They obviously cared about him enough to trust him with the Potter's lives. Furthermore, Sirius confirms that they would have died for Peter.

I think Peter had the potential to turn into what Neville becomes had he had a friend who could influence him to take the right path instead of stringing him along and feeding into his insecurities never stopping him from gawking over James.

I disagree. The difference was that Neville showed signs of how courageous he could be from PS/SS and definitely in OotP and HBP. Sirius admits himself in PoA that Peter was always the kind of person who would befriend someone just for the sake of saving himself. Peter wanted to be friends with the Marauders because he wanted to be protected. He was not like Neville at all in that aspect, IMO.

I don't see how one's features are relevant to if one is similar or not.



IMO, Neville wouldn't behave like that. Neville was willing to beat Draco up in PS/SS and he attacked Draco when he insulted people in St. Mungo's. Neville wasn't a complete pushover before DH and by DH he proved that he wasn't.



If they never saw him as their equal, why did they trust him so highly? They obviously cared about him enough to trust him with the Potter's lives. Furthermore, Sirius confirms that they would have died for Peter.



I disagree. The difference was that Neville showed signs of how courageous he could be from PS/SS and definitely in OotP and HBP. Sirius admits himself in PoA that Peter was always the kind of person who would befriend someone just for the sake of saving himself. Peter wanted to be friends with the Marauders because he wanted to be protected. He was not like Neville at all in that aspect, IMO.

But the books are all about the choices you make in life that determine who you are. Not about how people are just good or bad all along. Harry and Tom were very similar but it was their choice that set them apart. I think Neville and Peter were very similar. I don't mean to compare them because of their descriptions, I meant that maybe this is telling that Rowling wrote them both in this way almost like mirror characters in a way.

Neville only stood up to Malfoy because of Ron or Harry's comments about Neville being worth twelve of Malfoy.

Trusting someone and seeing them as your equal are two different things. They chose Peter as the secret keeper because they thought him so pathetic that no one would have suspected him.

Sure James and Sirius might have died for Peter but that doesn't mean they thought of him as their social equal.

After re-reading the books, I really think Rowling was mirroring Neville and Peter Pettigrew. They are written very similarly, it's almost creepy. Both were sorted into Gryffindor when it was not obviously apparent that they belonged there at first, both have bad memories, are awkward, fat and not the brightest or most athletic

I think Rowling was trying to contrast Harry from James in how both Neville and Peter ultimately turned out.

It's scary, read Spinner's End when Pettigrew appears and imagine this as an adult Neville and it really fits, it's creepy the way Peter reacts to Snape's taunts. It's remarkably similar to Neville reacting to Draco or someone.

I think it was deliberate that Rowling had Voldemort tempt Neville to join his side at the end of DH instead of just trying to kill him right away. The way Voldemort spoke to Neville, praising him and seducing him with delusions of granduer, that he would make a noble death eater were probably the manner in which Voldemort earned Peter as his spy and therein lies the difference.

I really don't think James and Sirius saw Peter as their equal. While Harry valued Neville and helped him grow and come into his own.

I think Peter had the potential to turn into what Neville becomes had he had a friend who could influence him to take the right path instead of stringing him along and feeding into his insecurities never stopping him from gawking over James.


The sorting hat certainly saw the potential within him.

I would disagree because Young Neville never stood around trying to idolize anyone, clapping and gawking and such to my memory. He also didn't trail after the trio and attempt to become the "4th" member; he was just their buddy, but didn't participate in most of their adventures. Also, Harry never had the opportunity to help Neville grow into his own from the boy he was, because they simply didn't spend as much time together, imo. Neville did that on his own - and while I agree he was encouraged by those around him, I don't feel he was ever accepted as a part of the trio to the degree where we can say Harry or any of the trio really faciliated any change in him.

I do think Neville showed vulnerability and insecurity like Peter, but it was in a different way to me. I don't recall him always wanting to be in the shadow of a great person merely because he was a coward and felt he needed protection. He seemed to just roll with the punches until he grew into his own man. If he had been a fourth member of the trio, I would agree, but like Luna, he was more of an outsider and did not really have a bond with the group. I don't think JKR was trying to draw a comparison with Neville and the rat. Peter, like Snape, had an opportunity open and wonderful for them both to take the right path, and fell off at different times. But Peter never showed the bravery of even a young Neville and Neville never showed the overt neediness of Peter, imo. Those around Peter may have been able to exert a hammar hand influence over him, but friends generally don't do that, especially when the friend is pretending to be of like mind and pulling it off well. I am sure if the Marauders felt that Peter was capable of turning to evil they would have done something about it, but that didn't occur to them because he was a trusted friend, who like them, joined the Order and "did" everything right on the outside. There is no canon to my memory indicating that the Marauders felt Peter was not their social equal; he was their friend for 10 years, I think that says just the opposite.

I would even imagine that the other Marauders did attempt to help Peter with magic to some degree as they did help him when they became animagi to a great extent. They would not want him to be killed easily as an Order member, so they likely tried to help him improve his magic so that he would not die when they went out on missions. But that would be nothing next to what Voldemort could teach him...

But the books are all about the choices you make in life that determine who you are. Not about how people are just good or bad all along. Harry and Tom were very similar but it was their choice that set them apart. I think Neville and Peter were very similar. I don't mean to compare them because of their descriptions, I meant that maybe this is telling that Rowling wrote them both in this way almost like mirror characters in a way.

Okay, I get what you mean. :)

Neville only stood up to Malfoy because of Ron or Harry's comments about Neville being worth twelve of Malfoy.

Yes, but that wasn't really my point. My point was that Neville was capable of standing up to people whereas we never have seen Peter do that. Neville stood up to Bellatrix in OotP, I believe.

Trusting someone and seeing them as your equal are two different things. They chose Peter as the secret keeper because they thought him so pathetic that no one would have suspected him.

Sirius' words then were, as was discussed, most likely due to his bitterness. Was he really going to censor his hatred for Peter after spending 12 years in Azkaban and hiding for another year? :huh: Sirius' statement comes across as something he thought then rather than what he thought when he was thinking about the Potter's lives.

Sure James and Sirius might have died for Peter but that doesn't mean they thought of him as their social equal.

What canon is there to indicate that he thought of him to be beneath him?

Well, it's either that or it's a major plot hole. If Peter's relationship with the marauders was so perfect, why would he have betrayed them?

The difference between how the Marauders treated Peter and how the trio treated Neville can be summed up like this IMO:

If a bully was taunting or bullying Peter, James and Sirius would have gone over their and protected him and defended him as one might do a younger brother.

When Draco taunted Neville, Harry and Ron told Neville he was worth twleve of Malfoy and inspired Neville to stand up to him on his own.

There is a difference there. I'm sure if a group of bright and powerful kids offered to protect and defend Neville, he'd become co-dependent and reliant and would not have been given the chance to grow.

Now, I'm not saying that James and Sirius would have been wrong to protect Peter, I just think that since James and Sirius both came from rich and pureblood backgrounds, they would not know what it would be like to be the underdog. They would not have possessed the ability to see from Peter's point of view. While Harry and Ron were both downtrodden insecure outcasts themselves so would naturally be able to empathize with Neville on an equal level instead of just on a 'big brother' level.

I don't know, I remember Neville following the trio around alot in PS/SS. The adventure through the castle at night where they discover Fluffy comes to mind.

Peter, I think was a mesh of Neville and Colin Creevey but even so, I think there are intended similarities between Neville and Peter.

Well, it's either that or it's a major plot hole. If Peter's relationship with the marauders was so perfect, why would he have betrayed them?

No relationship is perfect; if Ron and Harry's was perfect, Ron would have never turned on him in GoF; Hermione and Ron would never have stopped speaking to one another; Ron wouldn't have left camp in DH. But I do not think we can assume to know what the relationship of the Maruaders in conjunction with Peter was in a comprehensive sense, especially once they became adults because we were not presented with it in canon. However, guessing is good :lol:...I would just disagree with your guess that Peter's friends held him as a social inequal. Maybe they weren't as tight with him in some respects; maybe they lost patience with him - and maybe Peter's responses were not evident of how he felt about it...we don't know. I do know that when Harry lost patience with Ron and Hermione, they reacted strongly as individuals though; perhaps Peter did not do this...but again, that is a guess, because we have no information.

The difference between how the Marauders treated Peter and how the trio treated Neville can be summed up like this IMO:

If a bully was taunting or bullying Peter, James and Sirius would have gone over their and protected him and defended him as one might do a younger brother. When Draco taunted Neville, Harry and Ron told Neville he was worth twleve of Malfoy and inspired Neville to stand up to him on his own.

Again I disagree. I reject the idea that Harry or any of the trio members would stand by while Malfoy hexed Neville if they could do soemthing about it. In fact, when Hermione was in a rush and Neville tried to delay her, she hexed him herself. But the normal reaction of the trio was to defend as they did on the pitch when Draco and friends verbally taunted the Weasleys - with the exception of Hermione, they all jumped in and started a brawl. Harry also attacked Draco when he was verbally taunting Ron and Hermione. He struck the boy with hard snowballs from beneath his invisibility cloak. Harry also jumped to Ron's defense on the train. And recall how they rushed to Hermione's defense when Draco called her a Mudblood. In the scenario you spoke of, they spoke to Neville after the fact, and your assumption that Peter's friends would not do this, is to me, at best a guess. We were never shown such a situation. I agree they would likely jump in and defend him like Harry and Fred did, but if the matter had passed, they would likely try to teach him some magic to defend himself (although it seems as if he had little ability in that regard). We know they helped him become an animagi which was difficult to do - I mean the teaching was difficult due to Peter's lack of talent - so it isn't like they didn't have the patience to attempt to help him, imo.

There is a difference there. I'm sure if a group of bright and powerful kids offered to protect and defend Neville, he'd become co-dependent and reliant and would not have been given the chance to grow.

That is possible too. Peter may not have been 'alone' very often and thus merely stayed in the shadow of his stronger friends for protection. We just don't know.

Now, I'm not saying that James and Sirius would have been wrong to protect Peter, I just think that since James and Sirius both came from rich and pureblood backgrounds, they would not know what it would be like to be the underdog. They would not have possessed the ability to see from Peter's point of view. While Harry and Ron were both downtrodden insecure outcasts themselves so would naturally be able to empathize with Neville on an equal level instead of just on a 'big brother' level.

Harry and Ron were not underdogs, imo, they were well liked and only Harry was not well liked one year, but the circumstances were extraordinary. Otherwise, he was a popular boy - a Quidditch hero, famous from his youth, nice looking and no was was unfriendly toward him except that one year due to Voldemort. Ron as his friend caught shadow fame just as Remus and Peter did. So I don't see the distinction you are trying to draw.

Also, I am not sure why you brought up blood standing; Ron was a pureblood also and Harry a half blood. I don't see how that is relevant. Harry was was rich also - richer than James at one point. Neville wasn't poor I don't think and he was also a pureblood (we don't know Peter's blood status). I don't see that has anything to do with it. James certainly didn't believe in blood prejudice though, I believe that was made clear in the book with his defense of, and ultimately marrying, a muggle born. James, Sirius and Remus were not underdogs because they stood up for themselves, arrogantly so.

I don't know, I remember Neville following the trio around alot in PS/SS. The adventure through the castle at night where they discover Fluffy comes to mind.

Neville trailing the trio 1 time and going with them at the DOM is hardly similar of the friendship that Peter had with the Marauders. Peter was a Maruader - Neville was not one of the trio. He was not as good a friend of theirs and did not participate with the 100 things they did - the few he participated with doesn't cut it to make him nearly as tight with them as Peter would have been with people he adventured and hung out with on a consistent basis, imo.

Peter, I think was a mesh of Neville and Colin Creevey but even so, I think there are intended similarities between Neville and Peter.

I just think Neville was 100000 of Peter and there is little to compare them except for Neville's initial insecurities. But to me that is not enough to try to show they were at all a like. Their mentalities were way different; Neville was bravery waiting to come out - Peter was just a coward, imo.

No relationship is perfect; if Ron and Harry's was perfect, Ron would have never turned on him in GoF; Hermione and Ron would never have stopped speaking to one another; Ron wouldn't have left camp in DH. But I do not think we can assume to know what the relationship of the Maruaders in conjunction with Peter was in a comprehensive sense, especially once they became adults because we were not presented with it in canon. However, guessing is good :lol:...I would just disagree with your guess that Peter's friends held him as a social inequal. Maybe they weren't as tight with him in some respects; maybe they lost patience with him - and maybe Peter's responses were not evident of how he felt about it...we don't know. I do know that when Harry lost patience with Ron and Hermione, they reacted strongly as individuals though; perhaps Peter did not do this...but again, that is a guess, because we have no information.



Again I disagree. I reject the idea that Harry or any of the trio members would stand by while Malfoy hexed Neville if they could do soemthing about it. In fact, when Hermione was in a rush and Neville tried to delay her, she hexed him herself. But the normal reaction of the trio was to defend as they did on the pitch when Draco and friends verbally taunted the Weasleys - with the exception of Hermione, they all jumped in and started a brawl. Harry also attacked Draco when he was verbally taunting Ron and Hermione. He struck the boy with hard snowballs from beneath his invisibility cloak. Harry also jumped to Ron's defense on the train. And recall how they rushed to Hermione's defense when Draco called her a Mudblood. In the scenario you spoke of, they spoke to Neville after the fact, and your assumption that Peter's friends would not do this, is to me, at best a guess. We were never shown such a situation. I agree they would likely jump in and defend him like Harry and Fred did, but if the matter had passed, they would likely try to teach him some magic to defend himself (although it seems as if he had little ability in that regard). We know they helped him become an animagi which was difficult to do - I mean the teaching was difficult due to Peter's lack of talent - so it isn't like they didn't have the patience to attempt to help him, imo.



That is possible too. Peter may not have been 'alone' very often and thus merely stayed in the shadow of his stronger friends for protection. We just don't know.



Well I am not sure why you brought up blood standing; Ron was a pureblood also and Harry a half blood. I don't see how that is relevant. Harry was was rich also - richer than James at one point. Neville wasn't poor I don't think and he was also a pureblood (we don't know Peter's blood status). I don't see that has anything to do with it. James certainly didn't believe in blood prejudice though, I believe that was made clear in the book with his defense and ultimately marrying a muggle born. James and Sirius were not underdogs because they stood up for themselves, arrogantly so.

Harry and Ron were not underdogs either, imo, they were well liked and only Harry was not well liked one year, but the circumstances were extraordinary. Otherwise, he was a popular boy - a Quidditch hero, famous from his youth, nice looking and no was was unfriendly toward him except that one year due to Voldemort. Ron as his friend caught shadow fame just as Remus and Peter did. So I don't see the distinction you are trying to draw.



Neville trailing the trio 1 time and going with them at the DOM is hardly similar of the friendship that Peter had with the Marauders. Peter was a Maruader - Neville was not one of the trio. He was not as good a friend of theirs and did not participate with the 100 things they did - the few he participated with doesn't cut it to make him nearly as tight with them as Peter would have been with people he adventured and hung out with on a consistent basis, imo.



I just think Neville was 100000 of Peter and there is little to compare them except for Neville's initial insecurities. But to me that is not enough to try to show they were at all a like. Their mentalities were way different; Neville was bravery waiting to come out - Peter was just a coward, imo.

I didn't mean to say Harry or Hermione or Ron would have stood there as Neville was hexed. I meant after the fact. If Peter went and told them that someone was hexing him, James and Sirius would have went to go find them.

I said pureblood rich because I couldn't think of the word: Privileged is what I meant. James was an only child, he was put up on a pedestal, loved, nurtured and maybe a little spoiled. Naturally he would have a high self-esteem (I'm not saying it's a bad thing. I'm talking objectively here.) Harry was bullied by Dudley and unloved by the Dursleys his entire life. Ron's family was poor and considered blood-traitors and had so much to live up to but and had so many siblings and was on occasion bullied by the twins. It's natural that they would have lower self-esteems IMO.

Now, I think labeling Peter as a coward and nothing else is wrong IMO. Rowling's characters are all rich and complex which is one of the things I like most about HP. None of the characters are black and white.

Peter was sorted into Gryffindor, he became a Marauder, he joined the Order of the Phoenix. I really think he had potential to be brave. Rowling could have easily written Peter into the train scene in the Prince's Tale where James and Sirius meet for the first time. She could have included Peter meeting James and Sirius and feeling protected and implying that he was only sorted into Gryffindor because he wanted to be protected by James and Sirius. But she didn't. The way it is written implies that Peter didn't meet James and Sirius until after the were sorted which tells me the sorting hat genuinely saw courage within him.

I strongly disagree with the philosophy that people 'just are'. I believe the people we become is not based on who we were born but who we grow to become and I think the books support this ideology.

Saying Peter was just a coward zaps the complexity and power out of the series IMO.

No relationship is perfect, no, but I doubt Ron or Hermione or Neville would have sold out Harry's family to Voldemort. There was clearly something missing vital missing from their relationship if Peter was ready to sell out his friends. Sure, you could say Peter was just a coward but I think he's a man who never was given the benefits of the struggle. He was protected and taken care of, so when the time came when he confronted Voldemort all on his own, I think it makes sense that he wouldn't have the courage to stand up to him.

It's about circumstance, influence and choice IMO.

Sure the man Neville became is 1000 more than the man Peter became but you would be guessing just as much as I am to say that Peter was always a coward from the beginning and never had the potential to be like Neville.

After re-reading the books, I really think Rowling was mirroring Neville and Peter Pettigrew. They are written very similarly, it's almost creepy. Both were sorted into Gryffindor when it was not obviously apparent that they belonged there at first, both have bad memories, are awkward, fat and not the brightest or most athletic[QUOTE]

I agree that I think that JKR is trying to mirror Neville and Peter. Here is another passage that struck me:


A hatred such as [Harry] had never known before was coursing through Harry like poison. He could see Black laughing at him through the darkness, as though somebody had pasted the picture from the album over his eyes. He watched, as though somebody was playing him a piece of film, Sirius Black blasting Peter Pettigrew (who resembled Neville Longbottom) into a thousand pieces

I find it interesting that Harry pictured Peter resembling Neville. Peter at that point had been described as "a fat little boy who was always tagging around after [James and Sirius]", "Never quite in their league, talent-wise." and "Stupid boy...foolish boy...he was always hopeless at dueling". What made Harry think of Neville?

I really don't think James and Sirius saw Peter as their equal. While Harry valued Neville and helped him grow and come into his own.

I agree with this as well. In SWM, I think that they treat him like a hanger on.

Wormtail watched in awe [at James playing with the snitch]
Wormtail was watching him with his mouth open.
Wormtail gasped and applauded.
After five minutes, Harry wondered why James didn't tell Wormtail to get a grip on himself, but James seemed to be enjoying the attention.
"Put that away, will you," said Sirius finally, as James made a fine catch and Wormtail let out a cheer, "before Wormtail wets himself with excitement."
"How thick are you, Wormtail?" said James impatiently,

It just seems to me that Pettigrew is in awe of his friends and James, at least, seems to enjoy that relationship. I just don't think that James and Sirius are treating him like an equal in this scene (compared to Lupin and each other) and this is one of the few Maurader scenes we get.


I think Peter had the potential to turn into what Neville becomes had he had a friend who could influence him to take the right path instead of stringing him along and feeding into his insecurities never stopping him from gawking over James.
I agree. I think this is what JKR is trying to show us. The Trio helped Neville to see his value (as did Dumbledore giving him points), whereas I think that James was happy to have a fan club.

I'm not blaming James and Sirius that Peter ended up betraying them, but I do think that they made mistakes in their relationship with him. But, hey, kids make mistakes.

I didn't mean to say Harry or Hermione or Ron would have stood there as Neville was hexed. I meant after the fact. If Peter went and told them that someone was hexing him, James and Sirius would have went to go find them.

I said pureblood rich because I couldn't think of the word: Privileged is what I meant. James was an only child, he was put up on a pedestal, loved, nurtured and maybe a little spoiled. Naturally he would have a high self-esteem (I'm not saying it's a bad thing. I'm talking objectively here.) Harry was bullied by Dudley and unloved by the Dursleys his entire life. Ron's family was poor and considered blood-traitors and had so much to live up to but and had so many siblings and was on occasion bullied by the twins. It's natural that they would have lower self-esteems IMO.

Now, I think labeling Peter as a coward and nothing else is wrong IMO. Rowling's characters are all rich and complex which is one of the things I like most about HP. None of the characters are black and white.

Peter was sorted into Gryffindor, he became a Marauder, he joined the Order of the Phoenix. I really think he had potential to be brave. Rowling could have easily written Peter into the train scene in the Prince's Tale where James and Sirius meet for the first time. She could have included Peter meeting James and Sirius and feeling protected and implying that he was only sorted into Gryffindor because he wanted to be protected by James and Sirius. But she didn't. The way it is written implies that Peter didn't meet James and Sirius until after the were sorted which tells me the sorting hat genuinely saw courage within him.

I strongly disagree with the philosophy that people 'just are'. I believe the people we become is not based on who we were born but who we grow to become and I think the books support this ideology.

Saying Peter was just a coward zaps the complexity and power out of the series IMO.

No relationship is perfect, no, but I doubt Ron or Hermione or Neville would have sold out Harry's family to Voldemort. There was clearly something missing vital missing from their relationship if Peter was ready to sell out his friends. Sure, you could say Peter was just a coward but I think he's a man who never was given the benefits of the struggle. He was protected and taken care of, so when the time came when he confronted Voldemort all on his own, I think it makes sense that he wouldn't have the courage to stand up to him.

It's about circumstance, influence and choice IMO.

Sure the man Neville became is 1000 more than the man Peter became but you would be guessing just as much as I am to say that Peter was always a coward from the beginning and never had the potential to be like Neville.

Ah you misunderstood me. I meant as we were actually shown in canon. I actually agree with you that at points Peter might have done things that would be considered brave (people looking at him from the outside, notwithstanding the fact that inside he may not have felt brave). I also feel he was correctly sorted. All Gryffindors do not have to have the potential to be brave, there are other traits that pertain to the house and certainly people in other houses are brave.

What I do believe, and what I felt the series was attempting to show was the autonomy people have - the power of choice, independent of influences, circumstances, background and environment. Those things influence everyone, but what you ultimately decide to do, how you choose to respond is what is most important. In that sense, everyone in the series had potential, including Peter, so I agree with your basic contention.

I note that often blame is issed to others around a person that makes bad decisions, but those same people receiving all of the accolades for their good decisions. I don't buy that. Peter hesitated to kill Harry which cost him his life in the end and I have never heard anyone lay responsibility on James or the Marauders for that - but responsibility flies their way for Peter turning to Voldmort. But to me, that was not what JKR was trying to show at all. I felt she wished to show that when Peter turned to Voldemort, it was an autonomous decision - and while every influence in his life led to that decision, it was still the one he decided to make and he alone was responsible for it. This was true for his hesitation also. I could say "oh he hesitated because in that moment he suddenly remembered all of the compassion James had showed him when helping him become an animagi or protecting him during a mission while they were on the Order" - but in the end, that would merely be one of many influences that led to his decision - the decision to hesitate (a good if momentary act) - was a decision that Peter made of his own accord, despite all of the influences, good and bad in his life, imo.

We could say that Dumbledore, who also realized Peter's weaknesses, should have put him into a rigid training session for two years and made him into a hardened warrior. But that is not the story JKR was writing. She repeatedly showed (and stated in interview) that she was very emphatic about people making choices for themselves and taking responsibility for those choices naturally is a part of that, imo.

Oh, I want to make clear that I don't blame James for Peter's betrayal. That was his choice. I'm just saying that you can't logically deny that friends and how they treat you, especially for someone with a co-dependent personality as Peter, will have a strong effect and influence on you.

I would never blame James or Sirius or Lily for trusting their friends. It was Peter's fault but I think it is important to take into consideration the circumstances of why Peter made that choice to betray his friends and not just paint him as a cowardly evil-doer who just wanted James and his family to die. I think Peter did regret it. Notice how Lily described him as sickly-looking and upset in her last letter to Padfoot. I do not believe for a second that Peter relished his decision. He might have justified it to himself but I don't think he was proud of it. The fact that he stopped strangling Harry speaks volumes as to the amount of guilt and shame that was buried within him.

Oh, I want to make clear that I don't blame James for Peter's betrayal. That was his choice. I'm just saying that you can't logically deny that friends and how they treat you, especially for someone with a co-dependent personality as Peter, will have a strong effect and influence on you.

I think that begs the question: is there anyone in the entire wizard world that Peter would not have betrayed?

I do realize that was your point; I may simply not understand what you mean by have a 'stong influence' on you. I do not believe that Peter's friends treated him with disdain or ignored him. He visited them and they obviously welcomed him over; they noted his downcast state; they trusted him with their lives.

So unless I am misunderstanding you; any negative feelings Peter had were born of more subtle things; like a feeling of insecurity and feelings of being less of a person than his friends. And I feel you are saying they should have noted these things and made him feel more secure and like more of a person. But my point is that regardless as to whether they noticed and did anything about it, Peter should not have betrayed his friends. :lol:. That is the bottom line for me. My only example is to say that Remus cut them slack because he was grateful for having friends - and maybe they should have all noticed that (including Peter) and forced him to stop cutting them slack. But Remus did not betray them for not doing this; it is simply not a proper response. The proper response is to get yourself together which Remus did on his own - not say to yourself that since they didn't fix you up and make you stop cutting slack you will betray them. That doesn't make sense to me.

I think it is important to take into consideration the circumstances of why Peter made that choice to betray his friends

I agree with your last paragraph for the most part. But understanding "why" Peter made the choice, in my opinion, is not correctly achieved by looking at those around him to see what they could have done differently. To me, understanding "why" means looking at Peter and how he responded to everything going on around him. There were too many other people and factors, not just his best friends, that influenced him, perhaps much more strongly than they; Voldemort for instance. And we don't know the extent and nature of any of that influence at the time as it is not given in canon. So it is hard to do, especially with Remus being in a similar position (friend wise) and not reacting similarly or even close to the same behavior. That right there tells me that Peter himself was of a different mentality.

For me, it is all about response. If a mean neighbor's house catches fire and he is caught inside, the tenant on his right might just stand and watch; the one on the left might call the fire department; the one across the street might rush into the house and save the man. The varied reactions might be influenced, in part, by the man's attitude, but that has nothing to do with the ultimate decisions of the three tenants, imo, because you also chose what will influence you and how. They are going to react according to their mentality, their personal integrity as human beings. To know why the tenant who stood and watched did so is not determined by the attitude of the man; it is determined by that tenant because the man was the same to everyone - yet they all respond distinctly. That is to me a culmination of many influences and other factors that affect each tenant's ultimate disposition as a human being. Say that man who just stood and watched had the mentality of "well he was mean just like my boss and my father and I hate them all, so I won't help at all" - what is important is what such a decision and reasoning says about the person who made it, not the influences that brought him to that point, because even in real life, those are so many and varied, they usually cannot be fully determined.

Say that man who just stood and watched had the mentality of "well he was mean just like my boss and my father and I hate them all, so I won't help at all" - what is important is what such a decision and reasoning says about the person who made it, not the influences that brought him to that point, because even in real life, those are so many and varied, they usually cannot be fully determined.

But I find it interesting to explore those reasons. We may never determine the exact reasons, but some of the enjoyment I get out of the books is trying to fit together puzzle pieces of how people are impacted by the world around them.

Nurture vs. Nature. I don't think it's either all one or the other. How do they interplay? The nice thing about such a large series is we get a fair amount of background on some of the characters.

I don't think that your hypothetical neighbours would always react the same way regardless of who the person was in the burning building. The man who watches the home burn may have done more if they had liked the person. In a way, the action of one person can impact how another person reacts and that's interesting to me. True, there are some selfless people who would rescue everyone and some selfish people who wouldn't even phone the fire department for anyone, but I think most people fall somewhre in between on that spectrum. I agree that we are all responsible for how we chose to react, but I also think that we need to be aware that our actions may impact how others react to us.

Personally, I think that James could have been a better friend to Peter. Maybe he was a better friend as he grew older. Maybe, if he had been a better friend to Peter while they were growing up, Peter might have had more strength to defy Voldemort. Ultimately, it was Peter's choice to betray his friends and I think that showed a flaw in him. I think the worst thing is that he could have stayed hidden, but he apparently did not. It would be one thing to give up one's friend while facing death oneself and quite another when one actively sets up a friend for death. I think this is repeated when he returns to Voldemort. In my opinion, he had other options.

Nevertheless, I think James treatment of Peter showed a flaw in him. Not a flaw deserving death, but a flaw. And kids are flawed.

I think the Peter/James relationship was flawed. I don't think the Mauraders were all equal players.

I think that begs the question: is there anyone in the entire wizard world that Peter would not have betrayed?

I think that the adult Peter we meet would betray anyone. Self-preservation and toadism seems to rule him, in my opinion. I don't think he has any self-respect left (i.e. he even betrays himself).

Nevertheless, I think James treatment of Peter showed a flaw in him. Not a flaw deserving death, but a flaw. And kids are flawed. I think James' treatment of Peter was indicative of his arrogance and "bigheadedness" at that particular time in his life. He (and Sirius) allowed Peter to hang around and hero-worship him because I think it fed his ego. I'd have been curious to know how the relationship between Peter and James (and Sirius) changed after James' head shrunk down in their seventh year. I wonder if they treated him a bit more equally at that point. I'm guessing he was never completely equal, but I do wonder if James treated him a bit better later on.

I'd have been curious to know how the relationship between Peter and James (and Sirius) changed after James' head shrunk down in their seventh year. I wonder if they treated him a bit more equally at that point. I'm guessing he was never completely equal, but I do wonder if James treated him a bit better later on.

I suspect that is true. I would love to know more about post-SWM Mauraders (especially James). I think they matured a lot in those two years.

Personally, I think that James could have been a better friend to Peter. Maybe he was a better friend as he grew older. Maybe, if he had been a better friend to Peter while they were growing up, Peter might have had more strength to defy Voldemort.

My point is hard to make. The only response I can give you is this: if Peter had been a better friend to James, maybe he wouldn't have been arrogant while growing up; maybe he wouldn't have defended muggle-borns. No one can say I am mistaken for certain because we don't know what influence Peter had on James. I cannot say I am correct for the same reason.

The issue is not how influences affected these characters, nor how their minds worked, but how ours do, imo. That I am certain of because that is all we can do when the reasons and influences are not given in canon. And it cannot be denied that nobody looks around for influences and reasons for "good acts" only bad ones. Peter is his own man when behaving appropriately, but when behaving inappropriately, we must look around him to find influences, causes and others that impacted his poor decisions.

For example, why did Peter hesitate when attempting to kill Harry? Because there was good in him, enough to feel regret - or because he was shocked and disoriented - or because he responded on automatic barely recognizing what he was doing - or he felt indebted to Harry - I have heard all of those reasons. But the reason has never been suggested that it was because the love his friend James showed him when they were young influenced him in that moment to hesitate when confronted with killing his son - or that Harry's compassion in the shack influenced him to recognize compassion in his own heart. All too often I find good influence counts for nothing, but bad influence is valid in finding "reasons", so I don't buy it. Even taking both into consideration, I feel it would be difficult to reach conclusions since we have so little information - but it would at least be more valid reasoning in my view. I respect the fact that others may feel that a one sided analysis of that type is productive, but my view is that it is an invalid exercise.

After re-reading the books, I really think Rowling was mirroring Neville and Peter Pettigrew.

I respectfully disagree. I don't think Peter had the character that Neville displayed.

In PS/SS, he stands up to the trio, telling them that he would not allow them to go out in the night and get themselves and Gryffindor House (I think) into trouble IMO.

That speaks of a courage that I feel was completely absent in Peter. Neville, when when he was friendless, lonely and was jeered by the Slytherins, still was able to stand up to Harry and his friends who he admired deeply. We never see Peter stand up to his friends and tell them that they were wrong in the SWM. On the contrary, he seems excited (avid anticipation are the words used in the books) that they were going to ridicule and make fun of another boy IMO.

I don't know about this. The Potters went under the Fidelus just one week before they were killed. Sirius in POA says that Peter was pasing information to Voldmeort for almost a year. McGonagall says that Dumbeldore had been suspecting a traitor for quite sometime, who was in the Order but working for Voldemort.

I don't think that Dumbeldore came up with the mention of a traitor to the Potters only when they were planning to go under the Fidelus. Perhaps he came up with his suspicion of Sirius then (naming him I mean).

My point was that the Potters decided to go under the Fidelius Charm because Dumbledore had concrete evidence that Voldemort had chosen Harry and was going to come after them. The reason behind it was Voldemort coming after them - not Dumbledore's vague suspicions that there might be a traitor.

The timing comes down to when Snape went to Dumbledore and told him that Voldemort was going after the Potters. Dumbledore immediately told James and Lily and suggested the Fidelius Charm was the best way to hide from Voldemort - the charm was performed and then Voldemort attacked about a week later. As it is presented in the text, the issue that there might be a traitor did not come up until after James had said he was going to use Sirius as secret keeper.

I respectfully disagree. I don't think Peter had the character that Neville displayed.

In PS/SS, he stands up to the trio, telling them that he would not allow them to go out in the night and get themselves and Gryffindor House (I think) into trouble IMO.

That speaks of a courage that I feel was completely absent in Peter. Neville, when when he was friendless, lonely and was jeered by the Slytherins, still was able to stand up to Harry and his friends who he admired deeply. We never see Peter stand up to his friends and tell them that they were wrong in the SWM. On the contrary, he seems excited (avid anticipation are the words used in the books) that they were going to ridicule and make fun of another boy IMO.

I agree. Pettigrew was presented as a coward from the time they met him. His reason for wanting to be friends with the Marauders was the fact that he saw them as the biggest and strongest at school and he wanted them to protect him. His reason for turning on them was the fact that someone bigger and stronger came along. Pettigrew decided that the Marauders were no match for Voldemort so they were no longer useful to him in regards to protecting him. He felt that his best chance for survival was to align himself with Voldemort.

I don't think the fact that Pettigrew was presented as a coward from the time they met him at the age of 11 undermines anything. It is early childhood influences that determine such things - that is the most significant time in any person's life. By the time a child is 11-12 years old, their personality is pretty well set. For example, we see that Hermione is studious and fairly rigid about rules when we first meet her at the age of 12. This never really changes as she gets older. She eventually comes to understand that there are times when it is acceptable to break rules, but her overall personality does not change - she remains studious and fairly rigid about following the rules even at the end. James is another example - we see that he is fun loving, doesn't set much store by the rules, and likes to joke around at the age of 11. As he gets older that does not really change. He matures and learns what behaviors are acceptable and what is not, but he remains fun loving, doesn't set much store by the rules, and likes to joke around even as an adult. Some changes come naturally with maturity and experience, but who a person is - their core personality - never really changes.

Neville was never a coward like Pettigrew. He lacked confidence in himself, but he never looked to others to protect him. He simply needed to realize that he was worthy to be able to stand up for himself. Neville makes that journey on his own - he gets encouragement along the way, but the choices were his. The same holds true for Pettigrew. He was simply a coward who looked to others to protect him. That was his choice - he made it at a young age, but he never deviated from that path. When it came right down to it, Pettigrew was always going to align himself with whoever he saw as the biggest and strongest.

Oh, I want to make clear that I don't blame James for Peter's betrayal. That was his choice. I'm just saying that you can't logically deny that friends and how they treat you, especially for someone with a co-dependent personality as Peter, will have a strong effect and influence on you.

I think you raise a very good point here. There is a 'missing note', IMO, in the story of the Marauders ... why oh why oh why would Peter ever have turned on his friends in that terrible way?

I would never blame James or Sirius or Lily for trusting their friends.

Absolutely not. I'm right with you on that one!

It was Peter's fault but I think it is important to take into consideration the circumstances of why Peter made that choice to betray his friends and not just paint him as a cowardly evil-doer who just wanted James and his family to die.

Exactly. Such a view of Peter is not psychologically convincing or interesting. I'm not interested in one-dimensional stereotypical villains! If someone does something really awful -- as Peter does -- I want to know why they did it.

I do not believe for a second that Peter relished his decision. He might have justified it to himself but I don't think he was proud of it. The fact that he stopped strangling Harry speaks volumes as to the amount of guilt and shame that was buried within him.

I find that a plausible interpretation. It's hardly possible to make sense of Peter otherwise, frankly. He may be a fairly minor character but his part in the story is hugely significant.

And from an earlier post of yours:

Saying Peter was just a coward zaps the complexity and power out of the series IMO.

I agree. Cowardice is despicable but it's also complex. I can buy the concept of a terrified Peter caving under pressure from a merciless Voldemort .. and then suffering absolute mental agony because he was betraying James and Lily.

But that's not what canon gives us. Canon gives us an extremely calculating Peter who very cleverly frames Sirius for James and Lily's murders, goes undercover in his Animagus form for 12 years and then in the summer of 1994 hands Harry, the son of his best friend, over to Voldemort without one single moral qualm. These are not the actions of a terrified little nobody! This is quite a clever man at work, if you ask me. :p An amoral man, too: all that matters to him is the saving of his own skin. It's as if his closest friendships meant absolutely nothing to him.

No relationship is perfect, no, but I doubt Ron or Hermione or Neville would have sold out Harry's family to Voldemort.

Absolutely. They would have died first, in Sirius's words, before they would have betrayed their friends. All of them. (Pauses to sob.)

There was clearly something missing vital missing from their relationship if Peter was ready to sell out his friends. Sure, you could say Peter was just a coward but I think he's a man who never was given the benefits of the struggle. He was protected and taken care of, so when the time came when he confronted Voldemort all on his own, I think it makes sense that he wouldn't have the courage to stand up to him.

And, as I say, I can buy that.

What I cannot buy are Peter's actions afterwards. Not so much the going on the run, that is believable! ... but the cold-bloodedness with which he frames Sirius and the way he goes back to Voldemort in the summer of 1993.

Peter will forever be a mystery to me. :p

I think the brief glimpse we have of him in SWM paints him as a most unpleasant person and I can't help wondering ... what on earth did James, Sirius and Remus ever see in the guy? Because canon never shows us that at all. :)

Cowardice is despicable but it's also complex. I don't see cowardice as being complex. I see cowardice as being simple. It is doing what another wants you to do without question. A coward lacks moral conviction, in my opinion. They are afraid of standing up for what is right because it might cause him to suffer in some form or another. Peter knew his friends would not make him suffer for his mistakes the way Voldemort would make him suffer for his refusal to join him. He took the easy way out in my opinion.
I can buy the concept of a terrified Peter caving under pressure from a merciless Voldemort .. and then suffering absolute mental agony because he was betraying James and Lily. But that's not what canon gives us. Canon gives us an extremely calculating Peter who very cleverly frames Sirius for James and Lily's murders, goes undercover in his Animagus form for 12 years and then in the summer of 1994 hands Harry, the son of his best friend, over to Voldemort without one single moral qualm. These are not the actions of a terrified little nobody! This is quite a clever man at work, if you ask me. :p An amoral man, too: all that matters to him is the saving of his own skin. It's as if his closest friendships meant absolutely nothing to him.I agree that Peter was clever to hide his role as a spy. I believe that canon tells us that he had been feeding secrets to Voldemort for quite a long time. But I don't exactly know if the attack on Sirius was premeditated. I thought that the canon said that Sirius had tracked down Peter and confronted him. If it was simply a matter of Peter acting because he had been cornered by Sirius, then I don't consider it pre-meditated.

I don't view Peter as amoral. If he was then he wouldn't have suggested that they get another wizard rather than Harry for the spell that returns Voldemort to his body, as he did in the first chapter of GoF. I felt that Peter showed some qualms when performing that regeneration spell, too. Didn't his hands shake when he was doing the spell? And the hestitation when choking Harry indicated some moral qualms, too, in my opinion.


And to add to the earlier discussion about betraying your friends: it isn't a matter of someone treating someone else badly and therefore they somehow got what they deserved. It is a matter of morals. People on the same side of a war don't betray each other. Mundungus was not a very nice person in the book, especially when he kept stealing Sirius' heirlooms, for example. But none of those people would have betrayed Mundungus. And it had nothing to do with whether they were friends or not. It had to do with morality. You do what is right because it is right, not because there in something in it for you. What Peter did when he betrayed the Potters was immoral. Whether they deserved it or not doesn't matter one bit. It was still wrong, in my opinion.

My point is hard to make. The only response I can give you is this: if Peter had been a better friend to James, maybe he wouldn't have been arrogant while growing up; maybe he wouldn't have defended muggle-borns.

I agree with this. I think with the way Peter behaves, he is not being a good friend to James. Personally, I think that the relationship shown between Peter and James in SWM is pretty unhealthy for both of them. That scene changed my entire view of The Mauraders. I no longer thought of them of a teenage band of bossom buddies that had a lot of fun. I think they were James and Sirius with a sychophant. I'm still a little fuzzy on Lupin's role. He certainly was respected, but I suspect that he wasn't quite as close to James and Sirius as they were to each other.

The issue is not how influences affected these characters, nor how their minds worked, but how ours do, imo. That I am certain of because that is all we can do when the reasons and influences are not given in canon.

But I think that we are shown some influences in canon and I think we are shown those influences for a reason. In the first chapter of the book, JKR has Dumbledore say that one of the reasons he has for leaving Harry with the Dursleys is because he thinks that if Harry grows up in the wizarding world it, all his fame would likely have a bad influence on him ("It would be enough to turn any boy's head. Famous before he can walk and talk! Famous for something he won't even remember! Can't you see how much better off he'll be growing up away from all that until he's ready to take it?"). I think the Harry we meet at Hogwarts would be quite different if he'd grown up famous all his life. At the core, he might be the same, but I think he would certainly behave a little differently.

And it cannot be denied that nobody looks around for influences and reasons for "good acts" only bad ones. Peter is his own man when behaving appropriately, but when behaving inappropriately, we must look around him to find influences, causes and others that impacted his poor decisions.

I can deny it. I believe that the MasterOfDeath just last night speculated that the Trio had a positive influence on Neville by encouraging him to stand up for himself. I've also seen people credit Lily for giving James a wake-up call and causing him to modify his behaviour for the better (I'll keep it to a small number of examples). I do agree that it would be unbalanced to only ever look for the negative influences and ignore the positive ones.

For example, why did Peter hesitate when attempting to kill Harry? Because there was good in him, enough to feel regret - or because he was shocked and disoriented - or because he responded on automatic barely recognizing what he was doing - or he felt indebted to Harry - I have heard all of those reasons. But the reason has never been suggested that it was because the love his friend James showed him when they were young influenced him in that moment to hesitate when confronted with killing his son - or that Harry's compassion in the shack influenced him to recognize compassion in his own heart.

I think that Peter hesitated because he felt a little twinge of guilt about killing somebody who saved his life. For a moment, he thought maybe he should spare his saviour's life. But unfortunately, by this point in the story, I think that Pettigrew is pretty reprehensible and there aren't many positive things he does at all.

Even taking both into consideration, I feel it would be difficult to reach conclusions since we have so little information - but it would at least be more valid reasoning in my view. I respect the fact that others may feel that a one sided analysis of that type is productive, but my view is that it is an invalid exercise.

I agree that it is difficult to reach definitive conclusions, but I still enjoy speculating.


I don't view Peter as amoral. If he was then he wouldn't have suggested that they get another wizard rather than Harry for the spell that returns Voldemort to his body, as he did in the first chapter of GoF.

I'm never quite sure of Peter's motivations here, but I suspect that part of his reasoning here is that it would be easier and safer to grab another wizard that is not so protected as Harry. I suspect that Peter likes to take the easier and safer route in general. I think that Peter is still quite willing to have somebody harmed to help Voldemort with his plan. I just think he prefers a faster and less risky plan. He does seem to regret somewhat Bertha's death because he actually argues that it shouldn't have been done (a memory charm could have been used instead). That was a little surprising to me that he would still be objecting after the death. I don't think people often debate issues with Voldemort so I think Peter shows some fortitude and qualms there.

That scene changed my entire view of The Mauraders. I no longer thought of them of a teenage band of bossom buddies that had a lot of fun. I think they were James and Sirius with a sychophant. I'm still a little fuzzy on Lupin's role. He certainly was respected, but I suspect that he wasn't quite as close to James and Sirius as they were to each other.

You make a good point here,the dynamics of the mauraders is not what we first thought it to be.

I agree with those who say that maybe James and Sirius's treatement of Peter effected his loyalty to them.But it does seems that Peters motives for joining there group was ,as Sirius said,to have powerful friends. It's possible that it was because the dark side was stronger so Peter needed to find more powerful friends,namely the deatheaters.He could join them but he has nothing to offer ,he certainly wasn't a strong wizard,he needed a reason to be accepted,hence his betrayl.Peter seems a purely selfish characters.There seems no other real reason for what he did,as far as I can see.

Susan Bones ... you are quite right, of course. :) On all counts. :D

I agree with this. I think with the way Peter behaves, he is not being a good friend to James. Personally, I think that the relationship shown between Peter and James in SWM is pretty unhealthy for both of them. That scene changed my entire view of The Mauraders.

Mine too. :cool: But let me qualify that: it changed my view of the Marauders when they were teenagers.

I no longer thought of them of a teenage band of bossom buddies that had a lot of fun. I think they were James and Sirius with a sychophant.

I think that is very true of the Marauders at that particular stage of their lives. But I also make a lot of allowances for the characters to grow up: I don't judge Adult James on his behaviour when he was still an arrogant little 15 year old and revelling in Peter's fanboying.

Fast forward to 1981: from the tiny glimpse we get of Peter in Lily's letter to Sirius, he does seem genuinely close to James and Lily. Yes, I know he was already planning to betray them at that point. :sigh: But I am talking about how he would have appeared to them, i.e. as a close friend. He was close enough to James and Lily to have earned one of her dreadful nicknames: "Wormy". :rolleyes: :D

So I am not prepared to believe that Peter remained in an obviously sycophantic role as an adult. Obviously those tendencies were still within him, but I am talking about his outward demeanour. He was probably always that guy with slightly low self-esteem that the other Marauders loved and were fond of, and less obviously a prat than he had been at 15. As they all were.

I'm still a little fuzzy on Lupin's role. He certainly was respected, but I suspect that he wasn't quite as close to James and Sirius as they were to each other.

That is my impression too, although I am not doubting the depth of Remus's affection for either James or Sirius. Gang dynamics can be complicated.

But I think that we are shown some influences in canon and I think we are shown those influences for a reason.

I agree. And without those influences being shown in the story, the Marauders backstory would just feel rather flat. (There were these four really cool dudes at school and then one of them turned traitor out of nowhere. :whistle: Hmm, well, that needs a bit of fleshing out, backstory or no. :p )

As it is, the Marauders backstory is fascinating. Even if we don't get quite enough of it.

I agree with this. I think with the way Peter behaves, he is not being a good friend to James. Personally, I think that the relationship shown between Peter and James in SWM is pretty unhealthy for both of them. That scene changed my entire view of The Mauraders. I no longer thought of them of a teenage band of bossom buddies that had a lot of fun. I think they were James and Sirius with a sychophant. I'm still a little fuzzy on Lupin's role. He certainly was respected, but I suspect that he wasn't quite as close to James and Sirius as they were to each other.

That wasn't what I meant, and actually I would respectfully disagree. I should have put it more blatantly: If Peter was a better friend to James, maybe he would have been a Death Eater. My point was, Peter's influence on James was just part of a grand number of influences that led to the person James was, but there is no way to pinpoint any one influence and try to say it was super impactual unless the author actually said it was, which in this case she did not, imo.

Maybe because I am a guy and I had a best mate as well as a lot of very good mates as well. Perhaps the dynamics of a bunch of girlfriends is distinct, I dunno. But the way JKR portrayed the Marauders is like a tame outtake on how general male group dynamics can be in as far as teasing/taunting comments, inane antics and statements that if said to someone who isn't your friend, would seem contemptible and rude. All group dynamics are distinct in ways of course, but the basic idea was there, so I thought she portrayed it well. I know girls rolled their eyes at us a lot, so I assume they behaved distinctly. :lol:.

Some mates naturally are not as close to each other as others are. That doesn't make any difference; those people who are not as close don't get older and betray you or hate you because you had a better friend within a group of friends. So if that was what JKR was attempting to show, I would disagree with her.

But I think that we are shown some influences in canon and I think we are shown those influences for a reason.

Again, if JKR was putting down male dynamics and attempting to say that males turn out bad in general due to how many of us are in our youth, and the influence we thus have on one another, then I would fervently disagree. Meanwhile, Lily and her little group of saintly friends by the lake were all having a benevolent influence on one another because none of them betrayed the other when they were older. I didn't read it that way.

In the first chapter of the book, JKR has Dumbledore say that one of the reasons he has for leaving Harry with the Dursleys is because he thinks that if Harry grows up in the wizarding world it, all his fame would likely have a bad influence on him ("It would be enough to turn any boy's head. Famous before he can walk and talk! Famous for something he won't even remember! Can't you see how much better off he'll be growing up away from all that until he's ready to take it?"). I think the Harry we meet at Hogwarts would be quite different if he'd grown up famous all his life. At the core, he might be the same, but I think he would certainly behave a little differently.

While Dumbledore's goal may have been good, his point as well as his good intentions were completely negated by the fact that he left Harry with the abusive Dursleys and never lifted a finger to correct the situation. Harry would have been better off living with the Weasleys or some family like that, imo, wizard world or no. If he was so worried about influences, he should have never allowed Harry to stay with that family - but he did, so apparently he was talking out of the left side of his mouth while the right side was saying something else altogether.

I can deny it. I believe that the MasterOfDeath just last night speculated that the Trio had a positive influence on Neville by encouraging him to stand up for himself. I've also seen people credit Lily for giving James a wake-up call and causing him to modify his behaviour for the better (I'll keep it to a small number of examples). I do agree that it would be unbalanced to only ever look for the negative influences and ignore the positive ones.

Well you have made my point for me. Lily gave James a wake up call and caused him to modify his behavior has been suggested, but there is no suggestion for why he was so arrogant based on outside influences - that is just relegated to a personal flaw because of his background. That is a prime example of a one-sided analysis of that type, imo. The trio had a positive influence on Neville, but what outside influence had a negative influence on him? Not considered...why not? That invalidates the analysis of that type to me.

My feeling is that it hurts someone's point when they do a balanced analysis of this type. You see, it is hard to make a sound argument that the influence of the three Marauders both influenced Peter to become a betrayer AND influenced him to wish to be an upstanding member of society and join the Order - fighting for what was right. So the argument is made either one way or the other. That is why I contend that it doesn't work that way. In my opinion, all of the influences in Peter's life (most of which we don't know) caused him to do both things (as well as every other thing he chose to do, good and bad) and any influences his friends had on him simply melded into the total package of influence, imo.

I think that Peter hesitated because he felt a little twinge of guilt about killing somebody who saved his life. For a moment, he thought maybe he should spare his saviour's life. But unfortunately, by this point in the story, I think that Pettigrew is pretty reprehensible and there aren't many positive things he does at all.

This is what I mean. Peter's inner guilt based on his recognition that someone had saved his life came from within him. A good act, based on his inner being, who he was, whatever morals he might have. But why was he bad in the frist place? The influences of his friends. I don't buy that reasoning. I agree with Susan's above post. People's actions are based on their own morals, the decisions they make are based on the influences they allow to affect them and they respond according to who they are, imo.

Perhaps the dynamics of a bunch of girlfriends is distinct, I dunno.

Oh, believe you me, it is. ;)

But the way JKR portrayed the Marauders is like a tame outtake on how general male group dynamics can be in as far as teasing/taunting comments, inane antics and statements that if said to someone who isn't your friend, would seem contemptible and rude.

I totally get that about guy bonding. :) (And I agree that the Marauders' bantering is tame. :D)

But I still think that Peter comes off as a total sycophant in SWM. :p

Again, if JKR was putting down male dynamics and attempting to say that males turn out bad in general due to how many of us are in our youth, and the influence we thus have on one another, then I would fervently disagree. I didn't read it that way.

I don't think she is at all down on male bonding. :cool: I still maintain that Peter is hardly presented in his best light in SWM. This is true of the other Marauders. ;)

I think Peter lacked a strong moral system to begin with, and I think that's just how he was. I also believe he had a strong "what's in it for me" complex - in other words, his behavior and decisions were always based on what he could stand to gain. This IMO is what lead to Peter's betrayal: the fact that Voldemort's camp could provide him with something that his former friends could not (in his view). Throw in a little fear tactics, and Peter was hooked. I believe in PoA Peter says something about the fact that Voldemort was winning the conflict, and that he would have been killed if he hadn't joined. In general, it sounds to me like there were two influences that caused Peter to end up as the betrayer: 1) his desire to look out for number one, so to speak; and 2) his cowardliness, which made it easy for him to be coerced.

I don't think she is at all down on male bonding. :cool: I still maintain that Peter is hardly presented in his best light in SWM. This is true of the other Marauders. ;)

I just didn't see it like that. Peter's antic was just a moment when you have to tell a mate to 'get a life'. That happens. There is no way Sirius would have tolerated Peter on a general basis if he was like that all of the time; they would not have remained friends, imo. It was a reaction to James showing off for Lily in an overt manner. But that doesn't mean that when James got a good mark on an assignment Peter would start jumping up and down in class. The extrapolation here is what I disagree with. Peter may have had hero worship like behavior for all of the Marauders, that is something that happens also in groups, but on a normal basis, it is much more subtle. In other words, I think the reaction to Peter if he had been laying on the grass, looked up and said, 'that's pretty good, James' would have been much different - and yet, it would represent the same thing. So to me it is the 'overt reaction' - the 'inane antic' that gets the focus and 'hero worship' syndrome is escalated in anaylsis to something bigger than life. Again, if that is what JKR was trying to show, I would disagree with her also. Nobody would put up with someone constantly behaving like that - Sirius didn't put up with it beyond a few seconds, so I don't think that is what JKR was trying to show.

I think Peter lacked a strong moral system to begin with, and I think that's just how he was. I also believe he had a strong "what's in it for me" complex - in other words, his behavior and decisions were always based on what he could stand to gain. This IMO is what lead to Peter's betrayal: the fact that Voldemort's camp could provide him with something that his former friends could not (in his view). Throw in a little fear tactics, and Peter was hooked. I believe in PoA Peter says something about the fact that Voldemort was winning the conflict, and that he would have been killed if he hadn't joined. In general, it sounds to me like there were two influences that caused Peter to end up as the betrayer: 1) his desire to look out for number one, so to speak; and 2) his cowardliness, which made it easy for him to be coerced.

I missed this. I would completely agree with this analysis; it played into every decision he made, imo; his over reaction in SWM, his joining the Order, his falling in with Voldemort and his betrayal. And with what you have written (#1 & #2), I would add that there was also good in Peter in that he did have a fundamental understanding of what was right and a part of him wished to follow that path (which was why I feel we see him join the Order, feeling bad while visiting James and Lily and hesitate to kill Harry). But this was at war with #1 & #2, and as a result, he often made poor decisions.

I'm kinding of jumping into the discussion but I think you guys are talking about why Peter betrayed James and if James had any influence on the betrayal.

We don't know much about Peter. We don't know why he betrayed James and Lily. We don't about his home life and his family. We don't know about any loved ones he had.

I don't think Peter's betrayal was on a spur whim. I believe there were deeping meanings behind it. It could possibly be resentment against James for being "the rich, cool, popular, atheletic, funny person" that Peter thought he was. It could possibly be that it wasn't about James and that it was about how he felt about Lily.

I think it was a good possibility that it was Voldemort that got him to betray James. For all we know, Voldemort could have bullied, blackmailed, threatened, or tortured Peter into betraying James.

Nobody would put up with someone constantly behaving like that - Sirius didn't put up with it beyond a few seconds, so I don't think that is what JKR was trying to show.

I'm not saying that Peter behaved like that with his fellow Marauders all the time.

All I'm saying is, we are shown things in canon for a reason ... and what we see of Peter in SWM all adds to our overall picture of him.

I don't think Peter's betrayal was on a spur whim. I believe there were deeping meanings behind it. It could possibly be resentment against James for being "the rich, cool, popular, atheletic, funny person" that Peter thought he was. It could possibly be that it wasn't about James and that it was about how he felt about Lily.

That's a deliciously dark theory. :wow: I love it. :evil:

But, from a strictly canon POV, I think that RemusLupinFan is right. :tu:

I think it was a good possibility that it was Voldemort that got him to betray James. For all we know, Voldemort could have bullied, blackmailed, threatened, or tortured Peter into betraying James.

That's what I've always assumed, actually. Voldemort went after the weakest link in the chain. :cool:

I just didn't see it like that. Peter's antic was just a moment when you have to tell a mate to 'get a life'. That happens. There is no way Sirius would have tolerated Peter on a general basis if he was like that all of the time; they would not have remained friends, imo. It was a reaction to James showing off for Lily in an overt manner. But that doesn't mean that when James got a good mark on an assignment Peter would start jumping up and down in class. The extrapolation here is what I disagree with. Peter may have had hero worship like behavior for all of the Marauders, that is something that happens also in groups, but on a normal basis, it is much more subtle. In other words, I think the reaction to Peter if he had been laying on the grass, looked up and said, 'that's pretty good, James' would have been much different - and yet, it would represent the same thing. So to me it is the 'overt reaction' - the 'inane antic' that gets the focus and 'hero worship' syndrome is escalated in anaylsis to something bigger than life. Again, if that is what JKR was trying to show, I would disagree with her also. Nobody would put up with someone constantly behaving like that - Sirius didn't put up with it beyond a few seconds, so I don't think that is what JKR was trying to show.


I agree. I think Pettigrew was very clever in all of this - including forging a friendship with the Marauders in the first place. He played a role for them - parroting their beliefs and values, sucking up to them, etc... He was a sycophant, but he wasn't always obvious about it. He was clever enough not to be obvious all the time because it would get on their nerves.

I don't think Pettigrew's friendship was ever genuine. I think his primary concern from the beginning was simply having friends who could look out for him and protect him. As long as he saw them as the biggest and the strongest, he would play that role and be their friend. As soon as someone bigger and stronger came along, he was going to jump ship. That was just his nature.

I missed this. I would completely agree with this analysis; it played into every decision he made, imo; his over reaction in SWM, his joining the Order, his falling in with Voldemort and his betrayal. And with what you have written (#1 & #2), I would add that there was also good in Peter in that he did have a fundamental understanding of what was right and a part of him wished to follow that path (which was why I feel we see him join the Order, feeling bad while visiting James and Lily and hesitate to kill Harry). But this was at war with #1 & #2, and as a result, he often made poor decisions.

I'm not so sure about that. I think RemusLupinFan is spot on with that analysis. Pettigrew was always looking to the consequences in regards to his own safety. For example, he objects to Voldemort killing Bertha Jorkins in GOF. Why did he object? I don't believe it was because the act of murder bothered him - he had no trouble in killing Cedric himself later. I think it was the potential consequences that bothered him. Bertha was sure to be missed and people would eventually go searching for her. That could lead them back to Voldemort and, subsequently, Pettigrew. The same can be said about his efforts to convince Voldemort to use a wizard other than Harry for his ritual. Using Harry was extremely risky because he was so well protected. Had Voldemort listened to Pettigrew and used another wizard, then he would have been able to return to power much sooner - not to mention the fact that he would not have made such a grave error in using Harry's blood and further strengthening that connection between them.

That's not to say he never felt any regret over his actions, but he would always put himself first. Even his hesitation in killing Harry was not a definite action - he hesitated, but he didn't completely let go. I don't think he would have stopped if the hand hadn't strangled him. I think it is more likely that he was weighing the consequences in regards to what would be the bigger threat to himself. Eventually he would have concluded that the thread the Death Eaters represented was greater than any debt he might have felt he owed Harry. Pettigrew was much more clever than anyone gave him credit for. His primary motivations are looking out for himself and his own cowardice, but he was very clever about it and able to fool people.

My point was that the Potters decided to go under the Fidelius Charm because Dumbledore had concrete evidence that Voldemort had chosen Harry and was going to come after them. The reason behind it was Voldemort coming after them - not Dumbledore's vague suspicions that there might be a traitor.

Dumbledore suspected a traitor some time ago. The Potters were already in hiding for some time. The Fidelus was because Dumbledore got the information about Voldemort coming after them (I agree with you on this), and I presume he also thought that the traitor may show the way to the Potters, like he had been passing information for some time IMO.

The timing comes down to when Snape went to Dumbledore and told him that Voldemort was going after the Potters. Dumbledore immediately told James and Lily and suggested the Fidelius Charm was the best way to hide from Voldemort - the charm was performed and then Voldemort attacked about a week later. As it is presented in the text, the issue that there might be a traitor did not come up until after James had said he was going to use Sirius as secret keeper.

I think Dumbledore knew of a traitor for some time, but based on Snape's information IMO, Dumbledore assumed the traitor to be one of those close to and with access to the Potters. He may have assumed or Snape may have brought him information Voldemort decided to go after the Potters, because he had someone who would lead him to the Potters.

Since the Potters were in hiding, Dumbledore may have assumed that the traitor was one of the 3 friends.

Dumbledore goes and tells the Potters to use him as the SK, James says "Sirius" and Dumbledore is worried. James says he trusts Sirius with his life and the comment Lupin makes in DH; that James thought it the height of dishonour to mistrust his friends.

Meanwhile Sirius who had been suspecting Remus for some time, decides to do the switch to Peter, without telling Remus so that Remus would be kept out of even knowing the SK. They also don't tell Dumbledore, and it could be because Dumbledore suspected Sirius IMO.

But this once again raises the question, why Sirius suspected Remus and why did James and Lily allow themselves to be persuaded by Sirius and went ahead with the switch without checking Peter.

It is apparent that there are cracks between the friends, perhaps because of the strain of war, where everyone was suspicious of every one else. I think this is all the more reason to check Peter for the mark, before accepting him, for if one friend for whom they had done so much could become a DE (according to Sirius who persuaded James and Lily on his suspicion [Remus says so in POA "I assume you did not tell me because you thought I was the spy--not the exact words]) then in times of such uncertainty and fear, it was all the more important that Peter, who was going to take on the job of SK was not placed under the Imperius or had been forced to take the mark IMO.

We see Kingsley turn his wand on Harry, intending to question him, when lupin vouched for him and Lupin too dragged off Harry "none too gently" to question Harry, because they were betrayed and attacked in the 7 Potters; why are James and Lily excused from this, because they trusted a friend? When Sirius suspected Remus as the spy, it became all the more important to see that Peter too was not taken in like he thought Remus was, or Confunded/Imperiused.

Lupin was also very close to Harry; close enough that he made Harry Godfather to Teddy, even when Harry told him off for leaving Tonks; Kingsley who also thought of Harry very highly, both of them questioned Harry and asked for verification; I think James and Lily too should have IMO.

Is that not neglect, carelessness or arrogance that they were not wrong and that they would not be betrayed when Dumbeldore spoke of a traitor and Sirius was suspecting Remus? In my opinion it is.

--------------------
I agree with you that Peter and Neville have really got nothing in common. IMO Neville's a Hero, Peter doesn't even qualify.

The entire post is my opinion only.

Dumbledore suspected a traitor some time ago. The Potters were already in hiding for some time. The Fidelus was because Dumbledore got the information about Voldemort coming after them (I agree with you on this), and I presume he also thought that the traitor may show the way to the Potters, like he had been passing information for some time IMO.

I think Dumbledore knew of a traitor for some time, but based on Snape's information IMO, Dumbledore assumed the traitor to be one of those close to and with access to the Potters. He may have assumed or Snape may have brought him information Voldemort decided to go after the Potters, because he had someone who would lead him to the Potters.

Since the Potters were in hiding, Dumbledore may have assumed that the traitor was one of the 3 friends.

Dumbledore suspected that there was a traitor, but the issue was never addressed with James and Lily until after he had suggested they use the Fidelius Charm to hide from Voldemort. That is the timeline we are given in POA. Up to that point, the Potters were not actually in hiding. They stayed in their own home, but were more cautious - keeping a low profile and using other protective enchantments, etc... - but they were not actively hiding until they had confirmation that Voldemort was going to come after them.

Dumbledore goes and tells the Potters to use him as the SK, James says "Sirius" and Dumbledore is worried. James says he trusts Sirius with his life and the comment Lupin makes in DH; that James thought it the height of dishonour to mistrust his friends.

It was the other way around actually. Dumbledore suggested the Fidelius Charm - James said he was going to use Sirius as secret keeper - Dumbledore advised against it because he suspected someone close to the Potters was spying and offered to do it himself - James refused because he did not believe that any of his friends would betray him.

Meanwhile Sirius who had been suspecting Remus for some time, decides to do the switch to Peter, without telling Remus so that Remus would be kept out of even knowing the SK. They also don't tell Dumbledore, and it could be because Dumbledore suspected Sirius IMO.

There's nothing to suggest that Sirius was suspicious of Remus "for some time". It is more likely that those suspicions arose after Dumbledore had told James he suspected someone close to him was spying for Voldemort. That would have been just before the Fidelius Charm was performed. So we're looking at maybe the week before - maybe just a few days - depending on how long it would take to set up the Fidelius Charm. It might have even been the same day.

Sirius persuaded James to switch to Pettigrew at the last minute. The charm was performed and Pettigrew was made secret keeper. Sirius chose not to tell Lupin about the switch. The more I think about the timing of this, the more I think this was a temporary precaution on Sirius' part. This all happened very quickly so it is likely that Sirius chose to wait to tell Lupin until after he had made sure he was not spying or being controlled by the Imperius Curse, etc...

The decision not to tell Dumbledore is more understandable. After James and Lily had heard about Dumbledore's past from Bathilda, it makes sense that they had doubts and opted not to tell him about the switch.

But this once again raises the question, why Sirius suspected Remus and why did James and Lily allow themselves to be persuaded by Sirius and went ahead with the switch without checking Peter.

James wouldn't have checked any of them. He had no reason to. Sirius was more cautious than James in that regard because he grew up in a different background. He knew the temptation the Dark Arts represented as well as the thread because of his family. He did not consider Pettigrew a risk because they perceived him as the weak one and did not believe that Voldemort would consider Pettigrew for anything - that's why they chose him to be secret keeper.

They wouldn't have made the switch with Lupin even if Sirius had told him about it. The whole reason they chose Pettigrew was because they figured he would be the last person Voldemort would approach. That wasn't an issue of trust - it was an issue of which person Voldemort was more likely to approach to find out information about James and Lily. They simply did not believe that Voldemort would ever approach Pettigrew and did not know that he already had and Pettigrew had been passing information for a year.

It is apparent that there are cracks between the friends, perhaps because of the strain of war, where everyone was suspicious of every one else. I think this is all the more reason to check Peter for the mark, before accepting him, for if one friend for whom they had done so much could become a DE (according to Sirius who persuaded James and Lily on his suspicion [Remus says so in POA "I assume you did not tell me because you thought I was the spy--not the exact words]) then in times of such uncertainty and fear, it was all the more important that Peter, who was going to take on the job of SK was not placed under the Imperius or had been forced to take the mark IMO.

We see Kingsley turn his wand on Harry, intending to question him, when lupin vouched for him and Lupin too dragged off Harry "none too gently" to question Harry, because they were betrayed and attacked in the 7 Potters; why are James and Lily excused from this, because they trusted a friend? When Sirius suspected Remus as the spy, it became all the more important to see that Peter too was not taken in like he thought Remus was, or Confunded/Imperiused.

They didn't know about the Dark Mark back then. Remember when Harry told Sirius about Snape grabbing his arm in GOF? Sirius did not have any idea what that could be about - he did not know anything about the Dark Mark. It was Snape who told Dumbledore about the Dark Mark - and that was much later because Snape didn't get involved until the last minute - within that week prior to the Fidelius Charm being performed, which could have been the same day, a few days, or more - depending on how long it took them to set up the Fidelius Charm, as I said above.

And there's no reason to assume that they weren't cautious. They knew the risk of polyjuice being used and the Imperius curse so it is likely that they did check for those things. That would not have been an issue of mistrust - it would simply have been verifying that the person in question was indeed the friend he trusted and not someone using polyjuice. In regards to the Imperius curse and things like the Confundus charm, there wasn't much they could do. Even in DH we see that Mundungus was confunded without anyone being aware of it.

Simply put, they did what they could do with the information they had. They didn't know about the Dark Mark so they had no way of knowing that Pettigrew was a Death Eater and had received it. They didn't even know to look for it because they didn't know it existed. Beyond checking for polyjuice and possibly checking for signs of magical control - if they were able to - there really wasn't anything else they could do based on the information they had.

Lupin was also very close to Harry; close enough that he made Harry Godfather to Teddy, even when Harry told him off for leaving Tonks; Kingsley who also thought of Harry very highly, both of them questioned Harry and asked for verification; I think James and Lily too should have IMO.

Is that not neglect, carelessness or arrogance that they were not wrong and that they would not be betrayed when Dumbeldore spoke of a traitor and Sirius was suspecting Remus? In my opinion it is.

I would still have to say no because there was no concrete evidence. Dumbledore's vague suspicions were not enough for James to justify turning against someone he had been friends with for over 10 years. He had every reason to trust Pettigrew at that point in time and no reason to believe that Dumbledore's vague suspicions were correct. It's not arrogant to believe in your friends - particularly when you have over 10 years of history showing the person to be trustworthy.

We can't judge James on the basis of Sirius' actions/choices. They were different people with different backgrounds. And we simply do not have enough information regarding Sirius suspecting Lupin to make any judgment there. For all we know, all of that happened over the course of one day - in regards to the decision to use the Fidelius Charm and casting it - and Sirius was simply being cautious and decided to check on Lupin to make sure he wasn't being controlled by the Imperius, etc... before telling him about the switch. All we know is that Sirius was taking all of that very seriously - no pun intended ;) - because he was personally involved with every aspect of it. It was his plan to use Pettigrew because he thought it was foolproof because he believed that Voldemort would never think to approach Pettigrew. He made the decision not to tell Lupin - or to wait to tell Lupin. He was even checking on Pettigrew himself to make sure everything was going according to plan - that's how he came to realize that something had gone wrong. Pettigrew was not there when Sirius arrived to check on him.

So I don't see any evidence that they were careless or arrogant. What we are shown is that they did everything they possibly could based on the information they had at that point in time to protect themselves and Harry.

--------------------
I agree with you that Peter and Neville have really got nothing in common. IMO Neville's a Hero, Peter doesn't even qualify.


At least we agree on something! :tu: :D

I think Peter lacked a strong moral system to begin with, and I think that's just how he was. I also believe he had a strong "what's in it for me" complex - in other words, his behavior and decisions were always based on what he could stand to gain. This IMO is what lead to Peter's betrayal: the fact that Voldemort's camp could provide him with something that his former friends could not (in his view). Throw in a little fear tactics, and Peter was hooked. I believe in PoA Peter says something about the fact that Voldemort was winning the conflict, and that he would have been killed if he hadn't joined. In general, it sounds to me like there were two influences that caused Peter to end up as the betrayer: 1) his desire to look out for number one, so to speak; and 2) his cowardliness, which made it easy for him to be coerced.

This is the point I was making,Peter associated himself with those who had power,who he could gain from.The situation around the first war proabably began to look like the dark side would eventually win,for him it was time to again associate himself with the most powerful people,namely the deatheaters.His betrayl of the Potters was a way for him to be accepted by the death eaters.But here I'm assuming he approached the dark side,it's possible it may have been the otherway round.

This is the point I was making,Peter associated himself with those who had power,who he could gain from.The situation around the first war proabably began to look like the dark side would eventually win,for him it was time to again associate himself with the most powerful people,namely the deatheaters.His betrayl of the Potters was a way for him to be accepted by the death eaters.But here I'm assuming he approached the dark side,it's possible it may have been the otherway round.

I would imagine Peter was telling the truth, at least partially. If Voldemort wanted a spy in the Order, Peter would be the one to go to I would imagine. And it isn't like Voldemort was a kind man :lol:. So he likely threatened him and Peter caved. But too, Peter admitted that he thought Voldemort was going to win and he didn't see any benefit in turning him down. So it sounds like it went both ways. I believe JKR said Peter was actually a little more talented than he let on and that was likely because he was vulnerable and insecure. If he made a slight pretense of slowness in learning and such, his friends would naturally seek to help and in that way he might have felt more secure - like it allowed him to have a need and for them to fill it. But of course that is damaging too because it can become tiring and so that is why I felt his friends may have been a little patronizing with him at times; helping him, but exasperated. In those moments I could see Peter as becoming burdensome, and his buddies allowing him to hang just because he was a friend, but would rather send him sailing :lol:. But there were likely other times when skills were not an issue (swimming, watching Hogwarts games, hanging out and such) and I imagine then the relationship would be more run of the mill. The thing is, Voldemort is not a longsuffering individual; he had no patience at all. The problem would be if he was in a position where he had to teach Peter things related to his duties. I can only imagine he would have become tremendously annoyed, but I guess he'd figure it was worth it for the gains Peter would allow him.

But I don't think it ever came down to Peter actually being tortured by Voldemort because he would have likely run back to Dumbledore and his friends for protection. Voldemort was likely wise enough to treat Peter carefully in order to keep him loyal. Once he won him over it was a different story as we saw later in the series. Voldemort was not interested in being nice to him, imo. But by then, Peter didn't have an alternative but to grin and bear it because Voldemort (and likely the other DEs) would not be as longsuffering as his friends had been. He likely got major condescension from the DEs if he tried to pull the same stunts and act needy around them. He may not have though, because they were likely very condescending toward him from the start; like we saw Snape at Spinner's End treating him with disdain. I would imagine that was the treatment he received from all of the DEs as they wouldn't look kindly on the weak and vulnerable Peter, but rather tolerate him because Voldemort required them to do so.

Dumbledore suspected that there was a traitor, but the issue was never addressed with James and Lily until after he had suggested they use the Fidelius Charm to hide from Voldemort. That is the timeline we are given in POA. Up to that point, the Potters were not actually in hiding. They stayed in their own home, but were more cautious - keeping a low profile and using other protective enchantments, etc... - but they were not actively hiding until they had confirmation that Voldemort was going to come after them.

It was the other way around actually. Dumbledore suggested the Fidelius Charm - James said he was going to use Sirius as secret keeper - Dumbledore advised against it because he suspected someone close to the Potters was spying and offered to do it himself - James refused because he did not believe that any of his friends would betray him.

I'm okay with most of this, only James was speaking for Sirius rather than all his friends (POA) IMO.

There's nothing to suggest that Sirius was suspicious of Remus "for some time".

I disagree slightly with this, mainly because if we take this to be how it was, it looks as if Sirius simply suspected Remus on that day, without any reason, just because he had to and that makes their actions worse (IMO. I think Sirius must have had his suspicions about Remus for a little while at least. Lily in her letter which was written after Harry's first birthday, also does not mention Remus. So, it may be that Sirius may have been suspecting Remus for a couple of months at the very least IMO.

Sirius persuaded James to switch to Pettigrew at the last minute. The charm was performed and Pettigrew was made secret keeper. Sirius chose not to tell Lupin about the switch.

I agree with this. Only I would add as my opinion that James and Lily too chose along with Sirius not to tell Lupin about the switch.

The more I think about the timing of this, the more I think this was a temporary precaution on Sirius' part. This all happened very quickly so it is likely that Sirius chose to wait to tell Lupin until after he had made sure he was not spying or being controlled by the Imperius Curse, etc...

We don't know if this is a temporary precaution IMO. Mainly because Sirius was planning to go into hiding himself. That Sirius suspected Lupin and that was the reason Lupin was not informed about the change is canon (POA). So I don't think this was a temporary thing.

The decision not to tell Dumbledore is more understandable. After James and Lily had heard about Dumbledore's past from Bathilda, it makes sense that they had doubts and opted not to tell him about the switch.

I respectfully disagree with this. If James, Lily and Sirius had suspected Dumbledore, there was no way Sirius would have allowed Harry to go off with Hagrid, when Hagrid said that he came from Dumbledore. Bathilda herself knew that Dumbledore and GG were very close friends. Perhaps she implied they were kind of dating. That would have sounded crazy to the Potters, because Dumbledore defeated GG in an epic battle. That could not be disputed and neither could the fact that Dumbledore was at that time working tirelessly against Voldemort.

They may have also believed that Dumbledore and Grindelwald were seeing each other, but would have thought that Dumbledore broke off his friendship with GG, when he realised the darker things GG had planned for the WW IMO.

James wouldn't have checked any of them. He had no reason to.

I think this is where I differ from you. I respectfully disagree. James and Lily had all the reason to check all of them. Even assuming Dumbledore got the news of a traitor being someone close to the Potters and Sirius was suspecting Remus, I think James and Lily should have checked Peter and Dumbledore, and Peter the moment they decided they were not going to tell Dumbeldore or Remus the secret IMO.

By not checking Peter, what they assumed was that one, the traitor was Remus, or that Peter, for any reason could not be the traitor; he would not be placed under the Imperius, Confunded or had become a DE voluntarily.

Which IMO means that James and Lily did not take the protection of their child seriously.

It all boils down to what was important. Remus was already a traitor as far as Sirius was concerned, because he suspected Remus; which meant that particular friendship of the Marauders was broken. Sirius IMO would have surely told James and lily about his suspicions, because that is what good friends do and I think Sirius was a very good friend to James; he was weeping after 13 years for the death of a friend and he felt guilty enough to stay in Azkaban for 13 years, thinking as he said in POA, that he as good as killed James and Lily, because he persuaded them to make the switch IMO.

Between the 4 friends, Sirius was already not friendly with Remus; Sirius was also suspected by Dumbed lore and James had to talk to Dumbledore on Sirius's behalf.

The times were also very dangerous and terrifying, where everyone could be placed under the Imperius, where no one knew who was working for whom, and the Order was getting picked off one by one, thanks to the traitor.

In the letter too, Lily cries for some friends (I forget their name) who were killed.

In times like this, were james and Lily justified in simply trusting Peter and going on with him as the Sk? I really don't think so.

If it was a choice between trusting their friend (not friends for they were already suspecting one friend of theirs) and the danger they and their family were in, I really don't think there was any choice whatsoever. they simply had to check Peter, if only for the simple reason that Remus who they thought of as the traitor may have placed Peter under the Imperius and asked him to report whatever happened to him.

But they never thought of anything at all IMo. They simply went ahead which IMO was very, very wrong.

At least we agree on something! :tu: :D

:lol: Yes. Peter was such a coward, I really don't know how 3 and later 4 (Lily) very intelligent people could get fooled all the time. It is very baffling IMO.

And I really feel that there isn't any comparison whatsoever with such an awesome guy like Neville IMO. :)

The entire post is my opinion only.

I disagree slightly with this, mainly because if we take this to be how it was, it looks as if Sirius simply suspected Remus on that day, without any reason, just because he had to and that makes their actions worse (IMO. I think Sirius must have had his suspicions about Remus for a little while at least. Lily in her letter which was written after Harry's first birthday, also does not mention Remus. So, it may be that Sirius may have been suspecting Remus for a couple of months at the very least IMO.

They didn't know there was a spy for a couple of months, just for a week, so there would not have been a reason to mistrust prior to that, imo.

I agree with this. Only I would add as my opinion that James and Lily too chose along with Sirius not to tell Lupin about the switch.

This contradicts what is written in DH, so I would have to disagree. It means Remus was lying when he said James thought it the height of dishonor to mistrust his friends and there is no evidence in canon that he was, imo. I would have to disagree with your assertion that Remus meant one friend because that would make no sense based on the point Remus was making at the time. Plus he used the word in plural, meaning not just one friend, but all of them.

I think this is where I differ from you. I respectfully disagree. James and Lily had all the reason to check all of them. Even assuming Dumbledore got the news of a traitor being someone close to the Potters and Sirius was suspecting Remus, I think James and Lily should have checked Peter and Dumbledore, and Peter the moment they decided they were not going to tell Dumbeldore or Remus the secret IMO.

I think the canon was pretty clear that people don't treat their friends this way if they are trusted friends. For example, after Harry realized he'd been betrayed, he did not check Ron and Hermione to make sure it wasn't them. Instead, he took them on his quest. What if the traitor had been Hermione? Then you could make the same claim about Harry. Harry wasn't just risking his family (his own life) by trusting his friends, the entire wizard world was at stake. However, if you feel Harry should have checked out Ron and Hermione, then we just have a basically different way of looking at trusted friendships and would have to agree to disagree.

By not checking Peter, what they assumed was that one, the traitor was Remus, or that Peter, for any reason could not be the traitor; he would not be placed under the Imperius, Confunded or had become a DE voluntarily.

Again, I would use the analogy. What Harry assumed was that Ron could not be the traitor or could not be placed under the Imperius, Confunded or become a DE voluntarily. And later, when Ron left the camp, Harry and Hermione had no idea where he'd been, he could have been confunded or imperiused then too, but they welcomed him back without checking him and with no suspicion at all. Do you remember when Remus went to Shell Cottage and made Harry the godfather? Bill had told him the SK information because he trusted him. He didn't first step outside and give him veritaserum to ensure he hadn't been imperiused - and in the house Bill had Harry, the most important wizard in the wizard world at that time when it came to defeating Voldemort. So the issue of trusting your friends was something that JKR showed throughout the series in some people. Some were more trusting than others, all of the Potters, Harry, James and Lily were completely trusting of their friends - but Remus wasn't as trusting. Remember at #12G he told the trio they had been too trusting of him when he entered the house (The Bribe) and earlier he'd told Harry he was too trusting when they were at the Burrow (A Fallen Warrior). So he was much more cautious; but Harry and his parents were not like that. Neither were Bill, Hermione, Ron and many others. I feel you are not taking that into consideration with your assertion.

Which IMO means that James and Lily did not take the protection of their child seriously.

Again, should we conclude that Harry didn't take his own life seriously because he completely trusted Ron and Hermione? They had never betrayed him and Peter had never betrayed his friends, so they were all in the same situation. Harry and his parents were trusting of their friends, but that does not mean that they didn't take their lives or that of their family seriously.

In any case I am not sure what you mean by taking it seriously. Do you think the Potters and later Harry saw all of these situations as a big joke? Volemort was after the Potter family the same as he was after Harry - I feel that they all would have seen their respective situations as serious.

We know it is possible for the DEs to get to people, just like Snape was able to get to Mundungus and confund him. However, people like the Potters and Harry (the trio), didn't assume that happened. That is why Hermione and Harry didn't give Ron veritaserum when he returned to the camp. Like Moody Jr., who helped Harry all the while betraying him, Ron could have been doing the same thing. But it never crossed Harry or Hermione's mind that he was not their trusted friend.

It all boils down to what was important. Remus was already a traitor as far as Sirius was concerned, because he suspected Remus; which meant that particular friendship of the Marauders was broken.

I would disagree. It was merely a suspicion and as far as we know, Sirius may have been suffering greatly over his belief, hoping it was not true. Indeed the quickness with which they bonded after 12 years tells me that the friendship ran very deep.

Sirius IMO would have surely told James and lily about his suspicions, because that is what good friends do and I think Sirius was a very good friend to James; he was weeping after 13 years for the death of a friend and he felt guilty enough to stay in Azkaban for 13 years, thinking as he said in POA, that he as good as killed James and Lily, because he persuaded them to make the switch IMO.

This doesn't logically follow to me. First, it contradicts what Remus said in DH. Second, even if Sirius had told James and Lily that he suspected Remus might be the spy, in my opinion, they would have told him he was nuts because they trusted Remus. What could Sirius do about that? He could not force them to mistrust Remus. Since all we have in canon is that Sirius likely reached his conclusion based on the process of elimination, James and Lily would not accept that as a justified reason or they would have mistrusted Sirius on that basis. After all, he was a great and trusted friend, but the process of elimination brings you to two and it isn't a matter of picking, it is a matter of being certain, which you have pointed out. But if you are certain about both, then the point is moot, imo.

One other thing that your theory fails to take into account, imo. If all the Marauders mistrusted Remus, there is no way that they would not have informed Dumbledore and marked him as the spy at the beginning of that week. Why wouldn't they? That doesn't make sense because it would be a certain way to ensure their safety. What makes more sense to me is that it was only Sirius and he probably didn't share his suspicion with anyone at all. Even if Sirius had told just Dumbledore, something could have been ascertained. But Dumbledore didn't do anything either, so you have to figure that nobody was making accusations to anyone. That makes sense to me also because for Sirius, it was only a suspicion, not a certainty. But if the Potters AND Sirius believed it, and even Peter, then they would have done something about it, imo.

In times like this, were james and Lily justified in simply trusting Peter and going on with him as the Sk? I really don't think so.

So how do you justify Harry trusting Ron and Hermione? The times were just as bad if not worse. They also knew there was a traitor among them.

If it was a choice between trusting their friend (not friends for they were already suspecting one friend of theirs) and the danger they and their family were in, I really don't think there was any choice whatsoever. they simply had to check Peter, if only for the simple reason that Remus who they thought of as the traitor may have placed Peter under the Imperius and asked him to report whatever happened to him.

But they never thought of anything at all IMo. They simply went ahead which IMO was very, very wrong.

Well I would like to hear how you justify this when it comes to Harry. Remember before they realized that saying "Voldemort" the DEs would discover them when they did it? That was a moment when it would seem that the traitor was one of the trio. But the thought never crossed their minds. Why? Because they trusted each other. It is that simple, imo.

They didn't know there was a spy for a couple of months, just for a week, so there would not have been a reason to mistrust prior to that, imo.

Well I think it was a lot more time that a week; because if Sirius just suspected Remus on the day Dumbledore came with the information, it shows even more confusion and lack of proper thinking among James, lily and Sirius IMO.

I think Sirius did start suspecting Remus a lot earlier, and probably told James about his suspicions as well, which is why I have been saying that Remus was excluded by not only Sirius, but also James and Lily IMO.

This contradicts what is written in DH, so I would have to disagree. It means Remus was lying when he said James thought it the height of dishonor to mistrust his friends and there is no evidence in canon that he was, imo. I would have to disagree with your assertion that Remus meant one friend because that would make no sense based on the point Remus was making at the time. Plus he used the word in plural, meaning not just one friend, but all of them.

I think Remus told this in the context of Sirius.

"Naturally," said Professor McGonagall. "James Potter told Dumbledore that Black would die rather than tell where they were, that Black was planning to go into hiding himself... and yet Dumbledore remained worried. I remember him offering to be the Potters' Secret-Keeper himself."

....."But James Potter insisted on using Black?"

"He did and barely a week later....."

I don't think Remus's words applies to himself, because we have canon that Remus was thought the traitor and we don't have canon that James and Lily refused to believe it. On the contrary, we have canon that James and Lily went ahead with the switch without telling Remus IMO.

I think the canon was pretty clear that people don't treat their friends this way if they are trusted friends.

Lupin made Harry godfather to his child. He thought of Harry as family. And yet, he was cautious after the 7 Potters, because it was war. He would have been more than careless had he not taken precautions to see if Harry was really Harry and not an impostor IMO.

That actually shows his caring and dedication, for if it were not Harry, then the real Harry would have been in so much trouble IMO.

It does not take away anything from him IMO. Likewise with Kingsley as well.

And I think the same rule applies to the Potters. By not checking and suspecting Remus they were guilty of suspecting a man who was their good friend as the traitor and allowing the actual traitor to betray them IMO. How can this be a positive trait?

Real friends don't suspect each other without reason too! But Sirius suspected Remus. Then would you say he was not a real friend to Remus?

They had never betrayed him and Peter had never betrayed his friends, so they were all in the same situation.

Correct! But what would they do, when Dumbledore brings them information that one of them may be a traitor? What does James do when Sirius suspects Remus as the traitor?

While we don't have his words, we have his actions. Remus was not told about the switch, which James, lily, Sirius and Peter knew. So how would you read James and Lily's actions?

I read them as being with Sirius in their suspicion. Then the question arises; how and on what basis did they suspect Remus?

I would disagree. It was merely a suspicion and as far as we know, Sirius may have been suffering greatly over his belief, hoping it was not true. Indeed the quickness with which they bonded after 12 years tells me that the friendship ran very deep.

That was because of Remus, who just like he did everything, looked over this as well, for the sake of his friends who had done so much for him. But I do think the feeling of betrayal ran very deep in him, and I also think it was natural, that was why he never made an effort to see Harry for almost 13 years IMO.

How can such things not hurt? Remus must have been anguished and he must have felt that his curse had yet another thing to give him; the tag of betrayer and I can only imagine his hurt and sadness and then his anger when he realised that the man who spread the word to James and Lily that He, Remus was the traitor was the man who had killed both of them and also Peter IMO.

That James spoke for Sirius to Dumbledore and yet was willing to listen to Sirius's suspicion that he, Remus was a spy would have wounded him greatly IMO.

One other thing that your theory fails to take into account, imo. If all the Marauders mistrusted Remus, there is no way that they would not have informed Dumbledore and marked him as the spy at the beginning of that week.

They did not do that because Dumbledore was suspecting Sirius to be the spy (POA) IMO .

So how do you justify Harry trusting Ron and Hermione? The times were just as bad if not worse. They also knew there was a traitor among them.

Not among them; in the 7 Potters Harry suspects Hagrid; he thinks about the dragon (Ist year) and concludes that Hagrid had blabbered over fire whisky. That was why Harry says he trusted everyone. Not because he thought Hagrid to be a DE and still trust him IMO.

With Hermione and Ron the suspicion of a traitor never arose IMO.
----------------

We have been talking about how the Marauders were a group of very close trusted friends or not. I have some questions on that, if anyone cares to answer. :)

Were they really? Why do you feel so?

When Sirius suspected Remus, Peter was double crossing everyone and Remus was not informed about the switch and James was firmly on Sirius's side, by talking for Sirius to Dumbledore? Why do people feel that the Marauders were very, very good friends, who trusted each other implicitly?

The entire post is my opinion only.

Not among them; in the 7 Potters Harry suspects Hagrid; he thinks about the dragon (Ist year) and concludes that Hagrid had blabbered over fire whisky. That was why Harry says he trusted everyone. Not because he thought Hagrid to be a DE and still trust him IMO.

With Hermione and Ron the suspicion of a traitor never arose IMO.
----------------

But you didn't answer the question. Why didn't the issue of trust arise? According to you, it should have. Harry should have given Hermione and Ron veritaserum before heading out on a quest with them. He should have given Ron veritaserum when he returned to the camp. Harry didn't do either of these things and he never lacked trust for his friends. But you have stated again and again that when a traitor is suspected, people should check their close friends to be sure they are not the traitor. Why do you feel Harry is special and does not have to do this?

I ask because it seems you are placing "special" responsibility on the Marauders arbitrarily. Harry's own life was at risk, he trusted his friends. The Potters own lives were at risk, they trusted their friends. I do not see a difference. I feel that your granting Harry the right to trust his friends, but not granting that same right to the Potters is a very unfair analysis.

We have been talking about how the Marauders were a group of very close trusted friends or not. I have some questions on that, if anyone cares to answer. :)

They were close friends - like running buddies. Within the group, James and Sirius were best friends, closer to one another than the rest. Nonetheless, they were all good friends and hung out together, did things for one another and had fun. But they also were concerned about one another - shown by the three Marauders becoming Animagi for Remus; taking care of him when he could not find employment and holding no prejudice against him for being a werewolf. I think due to Peter being natural slow, and also pretending to be slow sometimes to get attention, the other Marauders would become exasperated with him and I could see them being slightly patronizing with them. But it didn't stop them from considering him their friend. In those moments I feel they would more "allow" Peter to hang around them than want for him too because Peter's slow act would get tiring. Imagine the 8th time you had to show him how to do a simple spell...that kind of thing gets old. But apart from that, I feel they had a lot of fun together and when Peter was not acting moronic, he was just one of the gang.

I don't believe the canon was attempting to show that the Marauders were the "tightest group of friends known to mankind" :lol:. They were just good friends that trusted one another and had a lot of fun together. James and Sirius were alone portrayed as being a much tighter pair; but they had minds of their own and that I feel actually strengthened their friendship. Neither James nor Sirius were pushovers and they disagreed on things (as we saw in the werewolf incident.) I feel that IF Sirius suggested to James that Remus might be the spy, James would tell him he was nuts and that he trusted them all. He felt it the height of dishonor to mistrust his friends. I emphasize the "S" because it is plural, and that is what Remus said. We cannot change the canon to suit our theories, imo. I feel James would have said the same thing to Remus, if he had suggested that Sirius might be the spy. I feel Lily would be with James on that - all of the Potters, including Harry were very trusting. :)

I'm okay with most of this, only James was speaking for Sirius rather than all his friends (POA) IMO.

Sirius came up specifically because James was planning to use him as secret keeper at that point in time. And we also have to remember that McGonagall, Flitwick, Hagrid, and Fudge were telling Rosmerta what they remembered about all that after the fact with the belief that James had made Sirius secret keeper. Their story focuses on Sirius because they still believe him to be guilty at that point in time.

James' statement correlates to all of his friends and Lupin confirms that in DH. James did not believe that any of his friends would betray him. He had no reason to believe that because he had been friends with them for over 10 years and none of them had ever given him any reason not to trust them.

I disagree slightly with this, mainly because if we take this to be how it was, it looks as if Sirius simply suspected Remus on that day, without any reason, just because he had to and that makes their actions worse (IMO. I think Sirius must have had his suspicions about Remus for a little while at least. Lily in her letter which was written after Harry's first birthday, also does not mention Remus. So, it may be that Sirius may have been suspecting Remus for a couple of months at the very least IMO.

Actually that is the most logical scenario because all of that happened very quickly. None of them suspected that there was a spy and the issue never came up until Dumbledore told James about his suspicions - and that was done at the same time that he recommended the Fidelius Charm. We don't know how long it takes to set the Fidelius Charm up specifically, but considering that Dumbledore established an elaborate and complex protection around Privet Dr. for Harry within 24 hours, I would say the Fidelius Charm would take no more than one day. I think we're looking at two days at the most - allowing time for them to discuss there options, etc... But it was most likely only one day.

So what you have is -


Dumbledore tells James that Voldemort has chosen Harry and is going to come after them specifically and recommends the Fidelius Charm.
.
James agrees to the charm and says he will use Sirius as secret keeper.
Dumbledore advises against using Sirius - or any of his other friends - and offers to be secret keeper himself because he suspects there is a spy among them.
.
James disagrees and tells Dumbledore that Sirius would die before betraying him and is adamant about using Sirius.
.
James tells Sirius what Dumbledore said and asks him to be secret keeper.
.
Sirius realizes that he is the obvious choice for secret keeper and comes up with the idea of switching - using Pettigrew instead. He believes that Voldemort would never consider Pettigrew as an option and would never approach him.
.
Sirius thinks Dumbledore might be right and suspects Lupin - we don't know the specific reason for this, but it is most likely due to the information Dumbledore receiving being skewed to make it appear that it came from Lupin. Though we also know that Sirius would have automatically ruled out Pettigrew because none of them believed Voldemort would approach Pettigrew. We don't know if Sirius discussed this with James or not, but we do know that James would never have agreed even if Sirius had because he considered it the height of dishonor to mistrust his friends.
.
Before the charm is performed, Sirius presents his idea about the switch to James and Lily - they agree and Pettigrew is made secret keeper instead of Sirius.
.
Sirius chooses not to tell Lupin. Given the timeframe of 1-2 days, this was most likely planned as a temporary precaution until he could ascertain if Lupin was under the Imperius curse, etc...
.
Dumbledore was not told about the switch. We don't know if that was deliberate or if they simply did not get a chance since the attack occurred barely a week after the charm was performed. Given that James and Lily had just recently been told about Dumbledore's past with Grindelwald, it seems likely that this was deliberate though.


That's the basic timeframe we are given and all of that would have occurred within 1 to 2 days. It happened very quickly and the attack occurred barely a week after the charm was performed.

I agree with this. Only I would add as my opinion that James and Lily too chose along with Sirius not to tell Lupin about the switch.

That is contradictory to canon. Lupin himself tells Harry that James would have considered it the height of dishonor to mistrust his friends - using the pleural which includes himself. That tells us that James was never suspicious of Lupin. We don't know why Sirius became suspicious or even if he told James about it, but we do know that James would never have agreed with that because he trusted all of his friends implicitly.

We don't know if this is a temporary precaution IMO. Mainly because Sirius was planning to go into hiding himself. That Sirius suspected Lupin and that was the reason Lupin was not informed about the change is canon (POA). So I don't think this was a temporary thing.

Again, we have to remember that the conversation Harry overhears with McGonagall, Flitwick, Hagrid, and Fudge telling Rosmerta what they remember is skewed by the perception that Sirius was guilty. None of them knew the truth and the facts they had were sketchy and based on hearsay.

The entire idea was to present Sirius as the secret keeper even though he was not. Sirius wanted everyone to think he was the secret keeper - that was the whole point of the switch. We know that Sirius had not gone into hiding because he was checking on Pettigrew the night the attack occurred.

And the timing was very quick - as I stated above. All of this happened within 1 or 2 days so it makes sense that Sirius would hold off telling Lupin until he could be sure that Lupin was not being controlled by the Imperius, etc...

Another potential factor - as was mentioned before - is the possibility that Lupin was not around due to his duties with the Order. Dumbledore had Lupin spying/living with the werewolves in the second war so it is likely that he had Lupin doing that in the first war as well. That would put him in the position of being unable to safely communicate with his friends while he was with the werewolves.

I respectfully disagree with this. If James, Lily and Sirius had suspected Dumbledore, there was no way Sirius would have allowed Harry to go off with Hagrid, when Hagrid said that he came from Dumbledore. Bathilda herself knew that Dumbledore and GG were very close friends. Perhaps she implied they were kind of dating. That would have sounded crazy to the Potters, because Dumbledore defeated GG in an epic battle. That could not be disputed and neither could the fact that Dumbledore was at that time working tirelessly against Voldemort.

They may have also believed that Dumbledore and Grindelwald were seeing each other, but would have thought that Dumbledore broke off his friendship with GG, when he realised the darker things GG had planned for the WW IMO.

First off, I never said Sirius was suspicious of Dumbledore. In fact, canon shows quite clearly that Sirius had complete faith in Dumbledore up to OOTP. Sirius did not have any doubts about Dumbledore until he found out about the situation with Snape, but even then, Sirius opted to trust Dumbledore in the end - though he continued to have doubts about Snape and this was apparently a point of contention between Sirius and Dumbledore. But that didn't occur until OOTP - prior to that, Sirius showed complete faith in Dumbledore.

However, the situation with James and Lily is different. They really weren't give time to come to terms with Dumbledore's past with Grindelwald. And Dumbledore keeping James' cloak so long was bound to add to their doubts - what could he possibly need it for that would take six months? And - unlike James and Lily - Sirius survived to know exactly what happened and that Dumbledore was not involved. When Sirius met Hagrid after James and Lily had been killed, he had already figured out the truth - that Dumbledore had been right about the spy and Pettigrew had betrayed them all.

It is possible that Sirius might have had some suspicions about Dumbledore as well, but by the time he ran into Hagrid after the attack, he knew that Dumbledore was not involved and Pettigrew had betrayed them. So even if he had been suspicious, he would have known those suspicions were wrong at that point - just as he knew he had been wrong about Lupin. He would not have had any qualms about letting Hagrid take Harry to Dumbledore because of that.

I think this is where I differ from you. I respectfully disagree. James and Lily had all the reason to check all of them. Even assuming Dumbledore got the news of a traitor being someone close to the Potters and Sirius was suspecting Remus, I think James and Lily should have checked Peter and Dumbledore, and Peter the moment they decided they were not going to tell Dumbeldore or Remus the secret IMO.

By not checking Peter, what they assumed was that one, the traitor was Remus, or that Peter, for any reason could not be the traitor; he would not be placed under the Imperius, Confunded or had become a DE voluntarily.

Which IMO means that James and Lily did not take the protection of their child seriously.

It all boils down to what was important. Remus was already a traitor as far as Sirius was concerned, because he suspected Remus; which meant that particular friendship of the Marauders was broken. Sirius IMO would have surely told James and lily about his suspicions, because that is what good friends do and I think Sirius was a very good friend to James; he was weeping after 13 years for the death of a friend and he felt guilty enough to stay in Azkaban for 13 years, thinking as he said in POA, that he as good as killed James and Lily, because he persuaded them to make the switch IMO.

Between the 4 friends, Sirius was already not friendly with Remus; Sirius was also suspected by Dumbed lore and James had to talk to Dumbledore on Sirius's behalf.

The times were also very dangerous and terrifying, where everyone could be placed under the Imperius, where no one knew who was working for whom, and the Order was getting picked off one by one, thanks to the traitor.

In the letter too, Lily cries for some friends (I forget their name) who were killed.

In times like this, were james and Lily justified in simply trusting Peter and going on with him as the Sk? I really don't think so.

If it was a choice between trusting their friend (not friends for they were already suspecting one friend of theirs) and the danger they and their family were in, I really don't think there was any choice whatsoever. they simply had to check Peter, if only for the simple reason that Remus who they thought of as the traitor may have placed Peter under the Imperius and asked him to report whatever happened to him.

But they never thought of anything at all IMo. They simply went ahead which IMO was very, very wrong.

I'm sorry, but that is not logical at all. What exactly were they supposed to check? Pettigrew had been friends with James for over 10 years. James already knew his background, who his family was, etc... As far as James was aware, he knew everything there was to know about Pettigrew - as well as Lupin and Sirius. James had no reason whatsoever to be suspicious of his friends. Dumbledore's vague suspicions were not enough to justify turning his back on over 10 years worth of friendship because none of his friends had given him any reason not to trust them. James believed that he knew his friends better than Dumbledore did and he did not believe any of them would betray him.

As wickedwickedboy pointed out, this is no different from Harry putting complete trust in Ron and Hermione and never checking them out. Harry was presented with the same situation in DH because they believed that someone had to have betrayed them by telling Voldemort that Harry was being moved that night. It had to be somebody who was involved in the plan and that included Ron and Hermione. Yet Harry never even considers them as a possibility. He immediately looks to the accidental solution - that Hagrid might have let something slip to someone unintentionally. He never even considers the possibility that anyone there might have deliberately betrayed him.

Lupin makes the comparison to James in that situation because that is exactly what James did. But the reasoning was logical and it is not careless to trust a friend who has never given you any reason not to trust them. James and Lily cannot be held responsible because Pettigrew fooled them. Pettigrew fooled everyone.

Canon shows us clearly that James and Lily did not believe that there was a traitor. They firmly believed that they could trust all of their friends. Sirius had suspicions about Lupin, but they were not strong enough for him to confront Lupin or turn him over to the Order.

And, quite frankly, Dumbledore was already looking into the situation and checking out everyone. If he couldn't find any evidence as to who the spy was, then how on earth were James and Lily supposed to? None of them knew about the Dark Mark at that point. Pettigrew had no history of practicing Dark Magic or associating with Death Eaters. He was not under the Imperius curse, he had not been confunded, etc... Simply put, there was nothing for them to find because they did not know what to look for. And they could not know. James and Lily cannot be held at fault because they did not have all the necessary information - and neither did Dumbledore.

:lol: Yes. Peter was such a coward, I really don't know how 3 and later 4 (Lily) very intelligent people could get fooled all the time. It is very baffling IMO.

And I really feel that there isn't any comparison whatsoever with such an awesome guy like Neville IMO. :)

I agree. Though I don't find it baffling that Pettigrew was able to fool them. Pettigrew was very clever in that regard and he knew how to act. He had been doing it for over 10 years. He knew exactly what each of them wanted to see and behaved accordingly. Nobody was going to question it if he was depressed because they were all upset over deaths of people they knew. He had a secure, private means of communication with Voldemort and the other Death Eaters with the Dark Mark that nobody in the Order was aware of. There was no chance of anyone figuring out that he was the spy.

But there is definitely very little comparison to Neville, IMO. At best, you could make some comparison to how people perceived the two of them when they first came to Hogwarts. But even there, the differences between Neville and Pettigrew stand out because Neville was never the type of person to attach himself to people he considered bigger and stronger like Pettigrew did.

I think Remus told this in the context of Sirius.

"Naturally," said Professor McGonagall. "James Potter told Dumbledore that Black would die rather than tell where they were, that Black was planning to go into hiding himself... and yet Dumbledore remained worried. I remember him offering to be the Potters' Secret-Keeper himself."

....."But James Potter insisted on using Black?"

"He did and barely a week later....."

I don't think Remus's words applies to himself, because we have canon that Remus was thought the traitor and we don't have canon that James and Lily refused to believe it. On the contrary, we have canon that James and Lily went ahead with the switch without telling Remus IMO.

We have canon that Sirius suspected Lupin might be the traitor - not James. Canon shows us that James did not believe there was a traitor among his friends - the same applies to Lily.

Lupin refers to friends in the pleural and that automatically includes himself. Lupin knew that James trusted him as much as he did Sirius and Pettigrew. It was Sirius who became suspicious - not James.

Again, the conversation that Harry overheard with McGonagall and the others was made in the context of the fact that all of them believed that Sirius was guilty. Their recollections are skewed to that perception. By the time we get to DH, everyone knows the truth - specifically Lupin. He and Sirius had plenty of time to discuss what happened and work it out. Lupin knew that it was Sirius who suspected him and that James had trusted him.

Lupin made Harry godfather to his child. He thought of Harry as family. And yet, he was cautious after the 7 Potters, because it was war. He would have been more than careless had he not taken precautions to see if Harry was really Harry and not an impostor IMO.

That actually shows his caring and dedication, for if it were not Harry, then the real Harry would have been in so much trouble IMO.

It does not take away anything from him IMO. Likewise with Kingsley as well.

And I think the same rule applies to the Potters. By not checking and suspecting Remus they were guilty of suspecting a man who was their good friend as the traitor and allowing the actual traitor to betray them IMO. How can this be a positive trait?

Lupin checks to make sure that Harry is not an imposter using polyjuice potion - so did Kingsley. There is a difference. That was standard practice and James and Lily would have done that as well. Checking to make sure someone is not an imposter using polyjuice is not the same thing as believing your friend would deliberately betray you. That's making sure that the person is who they are supposed to be. The same would apply to the Imperius curse, being confunded, etc... because those are means of magically controlling a person and forcing them to do something against their will. None of those things are issues of trust because the inherent message there is that you know you can trust the real person over an imposter using polyjuice and you know that person would never willingly betray you without being controlled magically.

I have no doubt that James and Lily would have done all of those things on a regular basis - not just with their friends, but with each other as well. Polyjuice and magical means of control would be used with a person who was trusted - that's the entire point of their existence. Harry and Ron impersonated Crabbe and Goyle in COS because they knew Malfoy would tell them anything in that guise. It's not a reflection of Crabbe and Goyle's loyalty because it wasn't Crabbe and Goyle - it was Harry and Ron. That does not apply to the situation with Pettigrew because he was not being impersonated with polyjuice potion or under any means of magical control. Those checks would have been done regularly and they would have shown nothing because Pettigrew was acting of his own free will and was not being impersonated.

Real friends don't suspect each other without reason too! But Sirius suspected Remus. Then would you say he was not a real friend to Remus?

I would say that Sirius would not have suspected Lupin at all without a good reason - which is why I think it is most likely that the information Dumbledore was receiving was skewed to make it appear that it came from Lupin. However, it also appears very clear that Sirius did not want to believe it either because he never confronted Lupin or turned him over to the Order. His suspicions against Lupin were not strong enough to prompt him to take direct action - he merely exercised caution in choosing not to tell Lupin about the switch, which was likely a temporary measure while he attempted to check the situation out. Either way, that was something that came up due to Dumbledore telling James that he suspected that there was a spy among them and was short lived because Sirius got confirmation as to who the spy really was within the following week.

Correct! But what would they do, when Dumbledore brings them information that one of them may be a traitor? What does James do when Sirius suspects Remus as the traitor?

He doesn't believe him of course. He has no reason to believe that Dumbledore's vague suspicions would be correct because he had no reason not to trust any of his friends. The same applies to Sirius - if he did say anything to James, then it is clear that James would not have believed it or agreed with him.

While we don't have his words, we have his actions. Remus was not told about the switch, which James, lily, Sirius and Peter knew. So how would you read James and Lily's actions?

I read them as being with Sirius in their suspicion. Then the question arises; how and on what basis did they suspect Remus?

James and Lily were not in the position of telling anyone about the switch. That came down to Sirius and Pettigrew. They had no choice but to trust Sirius and Pettigrew to tell the people who needed to know about it.

The significant factor here is that Pettigrew was the secret keeper so it would actually come down to him because even Sirius could not reveal the Potter's location. Pettigrew was the secret keeper. So Pettigrew would be necessary for that. And Dumbledore was told the secret insofar as the Potters' location - he was able to use spells to monitor the location so he was alerted the minute Voldemort attacked and was able to act quickly. It is most likely that Pettigrew was given that responsibility since he was the actual secret keeper and they trusted him. It would not have been that difficult for Pettigrew to deceive Dumbledore because the secret could be revealed through a note - as we see Dumbledore do himself by giving Moody the note for Harry revealing the secret of Grimmauld Place being the Order's headquarters. He could also have used polyjuice to make himself appear to be Sirius - we've seen that Dumbledore could fooled by polyjuice potion after all.

That was because of Remus, who just like he did everything, looked over this as well, for the sake of his friends who had done so much for him. But I do think the feeling of betrayal ran very deep in him, and I also think it was natural, that was why he never made an effort to see Harry for almost 13 years IMO.

How can such things not hurt? Remus must have been anguished and he must have felt that his curse had yet another thing to give him; the tag of betrayer and I can only imagine his hurt and sadness and then his anger when he realised that the man who spread the word to James and Lily that He, Remus was the traitor was the man who had killed both of them and also Peter IMO.

That James spoke for Sirius to Dumbledore and yet was willing to listen to Sirius's suspicion that he, Remus was a spy would have wounded him greatly IMO.

That never happened. We see quite clearly in canon - specifically POA - that Lupin did not know that Sirius suspected he might be the spy until that night in the Shrieking Shack. That was when he figured everything out. They had switched without telling him and the only reason Sirius would not have told him was if he had been suspicious that he was the spy. That moment between Sirius and Lupin in the shack was the moment that Lupin realized that and forgave Sirius for it all at once. He did not spend 12 years thinking his friends thought he was a spy. He spent 12 years questioning how Sirius could have been the spy without him realizing it. Lupin never had any idea that Sirius suspected him until that night in the shack. His words are very clear -“I assume that’s why you didn’t tell me, Sirius?” That shows that Lupin had no idea that Sirius suspected him until that night - and he forgave him immediately.

They did not do that because Dumbledore was suspecting Sirius to be the spy (POA) IMO .

Dumbledore did not suspect anyone specifically. He suspected that someone close to the Potters might be a spy, but he had no idea of who it could be. He offered to be the secret keeper himself because there was no way of knowing/proving who the spy was.

If Sirius' suspicions had been that strong, he would have confronted Lupin himself - which we know never happened because Lupin did not know Sirius suspected him until that night in POA - at the very least, Sirius would have turned Lupin in if that were the case. So we do know that this was a very vague suspicion - Sirius thought it was possible, but did not actually believe it to the point where he took direct action. He took a passive action instead - choosing not to say anything to Lupin at all. That is most likely due to him deciding to try and confirm it one way or the other before doing anything. Voldemort attacked the Potters before he was able to do that.

Not among them; in the 7 Potters Harry suspects Hagrid; he thinks about the dragon (Ist year) and concludes that Hagrid had blabbered over fire whisky. That was why Harry says he trusted everyone. Not because he thought Hagrid to be a DE and still trust him IMO.

With Hermione and Ron the suspicion of a traitor never arose IMO.

Actually, that is incorrect. The fact is, they knew that someone had to have betrayed them and told Voldemort that Harry was being moved that night. As far as they knew, that could only be someone involved in the plan - one of the people in that room or Mundungus. They had no way of knowing who it was and that included Ron and Hermione. Any one of them could have betrayed that Harry was being moved that night.

Harry thinks of Hagrid accidentally letting information slip because he refuses to consider the possibility of any one of those people deliberately betraying him. He decides that it could only be an accident and that points to Hagrid because he had a reputation for letting important information slip accidentally.

Harry follows the same logic as James in this situation. Those people had proven themselves in his opinion and he did not see any reason not to trust any of them. He refused to even consider the possibility that one of those people might have deliberately betrayed him. Lupin makes the comparison to James himself and it is clear that he is looking at it with the benefit of hindsight in knowing that it had turned out to be a mistake to trust Pettigrew. However, Harry is right - as was James. By all means, be cautious and check to make sure that no one is being impersonated with polyjuice - check for magical means of control if you can - but don't become so jaded that you don't trust anyone. Harry had to trust people because there was no way he could succeed alone. The same applies to James - he needed his friends to help him as much as Harry needed Ron and Hermione to help him. Harry had no reason to believe that any one of those people had deliberately betrayed him and he refused to even consider the possibility. Just as James had no reason to believe that any of his friends would deliberately betray him and refused to even consider the possibility.

----------------

We have been talking about how the Marauders were a group of very close trusted friends or not. I have some questions on that, if anyone cares to answer. :)

Were they really? Why do you feel so?

When Sirius suspected Remus, Peter was double crossing everyone and Remus was not informed about the switch and James was firmly on Sirius's side, by talking for Sirius to Dumbledore? Why do people feel that the Marauders were very, very good friends, who trusted each other implicitly?

Pettigrew is the one I would say was not close to the others - though they were not aware of that. I think Pettigrew had fooled them from the beginning - his interest in being friends with them was based entirely upon the fact that he saw them as the biggest and strongest and he sought to attach himself to them so they would protect him.

I think that James, Sirius, and Lupin were close - and they were close to Pettigrew as well on the basis of their perception of him. They believed that Pettigrew shared the same level of affection/commitment to the friendship. They would have willingly died to protect each other and believed that Pettigrew would do the same. That's why James refused to even consider the possibility that any of his friends would betray him and even Sirius did not want to believe his suspicions about Lupin were correct and never took direct action on those suspicions. I consider those three the true Marauders. Pettigrew stood out in that regard, but none of them knew - nor could they have known - until it was too late.

I feel for Sirius. :rockon: Locked up for 12 years for a murder he didn't commit? Chucked into jail without even being tried first? Having to keep himself from going completely insane? etc. etc. etc. Lordy. It's just horrible.
But Sirius's dreadful 'punishment' far outweighs his 'crime' of carelessness, wouldn't you say? :wow:

This is a very interesting question IMO. Off hand I would say, of course not. That is too harsh a punishment for anyone.

But if I stop to think a bit about it, then I would not be so hasty and I also would nmot blame only Sirius. James and Lily too IMO are to be blamed, but they died.

Careless to what extent; if I think of this, I really don't know what to say, frankly. The carelessness resulted in the following by Sirius, James and Lily individually and/or collectively IMO.

1) James and Lily died.
2) Harry became an orphan and spent the first 10 years in a cupboard beneath the stairs.
3) Harry also suffered abuse at the hands of the Dursleys, apart from the cupboard itself.
4) Sirius spent 13 years in Azkaban for a crime he did not commit but was careless to switch without proper checking.
5) Sirius died a fugitive from justice.
6) Remus was suspected wrongly by Sirius; and it probably hurt Remus a lot.
7) The real culprit Peter escaped.

While I still think 13 years in Azkaban is too harsh, I cannot but wonder if all this was brought upon themselves by the Potters and Sirius, by their wrong choices, which sems to be a very important theme in the books IMO.

Of course I am not discounting Snape's or Voledmort's or Peter's role in all this. I am at present seeing it only from the Potters and Sirius's view points.

The entire post is my opinion only.

Careless to what extent; if I think of this, I really don't know what to say, frankly. The carelessness resulted in the following by Sirius, James and Lily individually and/or collectively IMO.

1) James and Lily died.
2) Harry became an orphan and spent the first 10 years in a cupboard beneath the stairs.
3) Harry also suffered abuse at the hands of the Dursleys, apart from the cupboard itself.
4) Sirius spent 13 years in Azkaban for a crime he did not commit but was careless to switch without proper checking.
5) Sirius died a fugitive from justice.
6) Remus was suspected wrongly by Sirius; and it probably hurt Remus a lot.
7) The real culprit Peter escaped.

And you're blaming James, Lily and Sirius for all of this? :err:

Seriously??????????

While I still think 13 years in Azkaban is too harsh, I cannot but wonder if all this was brought upon themselves by the Potters and Sirius, by their wrong choices, which sems to be a very important theme in the books IMO.

It is only human to make a bad judgement call (as the Potters did with Peter). I do not believe that makes them responsible for their own murders. :no:

To follow this line of ethics to its logical conclusion, we might as well start blaming murder or rape victims for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. :no:

Or blame Anne Frank and her family for having trusted the people who eventually betrayed them.

OK, I realise we're talking about fictional characters here, not real ones, but ethics are really important to me in a story and I am not happy about blaming murder victims in the Potterverse for their own murders.

Of course I am not discounting Snape's or Voledmort's or Peter's role in all this. I am at present seeing it only from the Potters and Sirius's view points.

They would bitterly regret having trusted Peter and not seen through him for what he was. I do not think that means they were morally responsible for what transpired.

I mean, if we're going down this path of blaming the Potters and Sirius for the events of 31 October 1981, we might as well start blaming everybody else in the Potterverse for doing rash or ill-advised things. Like Molly in DH. Do you think she was irresponsible and reckless for duelling a dangerous and powerful witch like Bellatrix? What if Bellatrix had killed her? Would you then blame Molly for having left Ginny and her brothers bereaved?

While I still think 13 years in Azkaban is too harsh, I cannot but wonder if all this was brought upon themselves by the Potters and Sirius, by their wrong choices, which sems to be a very important theme in the books IMO.

Of course I am not discounting Snape's or Voledmort's or Peter's role in all this. I am at present seeing it only from the Potters and Sirius's view points.

The entire post is my opinion only.
I have to say that I find this idea entirely ridiculous. What exactly are the wrong choices that they made that make them responsible? Not submitting to evil? Fighting for what was right? Trusting someone they'd have died for? :err:

And you're blaming James, Lily and Sirius for all of this? :err:

Seriously??????????



It is only human to make a bad judgement call (as the Potters did with Peter). I do not believe that makes them responsible for their own murders. :no:

To follow this line of ethics to its logical conclusion, we might as well start blaming murder or rape victims for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. :no:

Or blame Anne Frank and her family for having trusted the people who eventually betrayed them.

OK, I realise we're talking about fictional characters here, not real ones, but ethics are really important to me in a story and I am not happy about blaming murder victims in the Potterverse for their own murders.



They would bitterly regret having trusted Peter and not seen through him for what he was. I do not think that means they were morally responsible for what transpired.

I mean, if we're going down this path of blaming the Potters and Sirius for the events of 31 October 1981, we might as well start blaming everybody else in the Potterverse for doing rash or ill-advised things. Like Molly in DH. Do you think she was irresponsible and reckless for duelling a dangerous and powerful witch like Bellatrix? What if Bellatrix had killed her? Would you then blame Molly for having left Ginny and her brothers bereaved?

:clap:

And you're blaming James, Lily and Sirius for all of this? :err:

Seriously??????????

If Snape was culpable to hand over a Prophecy and he was IMO, if Peter was culpable because he handed over the secret to Voldemort, who every one knew was a bad guy; and when I know the Potters and Sirius knew it too; I will hold them responsible when we have canon that someone close to the Potters was a traitor and that Voldemort had chosen Harry as the Prophecy child and was going to attack him, and when we have canon that the Potters knew about all this; when we know that Dumbledore wanted to be their SK; when they were at war; when they knew the dangers of what they were planning to avert by going under the Fidelus; I am very sorry, I hold them responsible too!

Snape and Peter I hold them culpable; Sirius and the Potters IMO are very much responsible too. That would be about the only difference IMO.

It was not as if they covered all bases, they checked and double checked everyone and still they were betrayed.

What we have in POA is Sirius saying that he "persuaded" the Potters to change SK, because Peter was the weakest and no one would think of him.

I am very sorry, but in a war, when there is information about a traitor, when Sirius suspected Remus, I really don't think they checked Peter for the Imperius, under veritaserum or anything.

Of course they could be fooled, like we saw in the 7 Potters, where Dung was Confunded, but here we see none of these precautions taken in the light of a very serious report by Dumblelore and I really think they kind of messed it up.

It is only human to make a bad judgement call (as the Potters did with Peter). I do not believe that makes them responsible for their own murders. :no:

A bad judgement was something they could not afford at that time IMO. And they had the information with them. I really think they did not treat it with the care I, personally feel they should have.

To follow this line of ethics to its logical conclusion, we might as well start blaming murder or rape victims for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. :no:

Or blame Anne Frank and her family for having trusted the people who eventually betrayed them.

I don't understand, but I would be very interested to know how you arrive at that conclusion. :)

They would bitterly regret having trusted Peter and not seen through him for what he was.

I agree. I also think they would bitterly regret trusting Peter. What I have taken into consideration is that the Pottes and Sirius were

1) In a war
2) They were already in hiding
3) They were aware of a traitor close to them
4) Sirius suspected Remus already
5) Dumbeldore suspected Sirius, but James spoke up for him
6) Dumbledore remained worried and offered to be SK

And yet they choose a SK on what basis; that James trusts everyone, even when Sirius suspected Remus?

I respectfully disagree and feel that the Potters and Sirius were responsible too!

I mean, if we're going down this path of blaming the Potters and Sirius for the events of 31 October 1981, we might as well start blaming everybody else in the Potterverse for doing rash or ill-advised things. Like Molly in DH. Do you think she was irresponsible and reckless for duelling a dangerous and powerful witch like Bellatrix? What if Bellatrix had killed her? Would you then blame Molly for having left Ginny and her brothers bereaved?

No! I won't say Molly was irresponsible. That was fighting in a war. In that duel, it was Bellatrix who was careless IMO.

Harry sees her laughing and realises that he knows what would happen next, because he rememberd Sirius, who laughed and then fell into the veil the look of surprise and fear still on his face (not the exact words).

Harry sees Bellatrix laughing and the next minute she is dead. If Molly weasley died in the war, I don't think I'll call her irresponsible. But if she knew that among the people who were coming to her home, one was a DE and she still decided to trust them because she knew all of them, I would call her irresponsible.

The entire post is my opinion only.

I have to say that I find this idea entirely ridiculous. What exactly are the wrong choices that they made that make them responsible? Not submitting to evil? Fighting for what was right? Trusting someone they'd have died for? :err:

I must say I don't find this idea ridiculous at all. If I had, I would not have written it.

I have given my reasons in this post itself.

If Snape was culpable to hand over a Prophecy and he was IMO, if Peter was culpable because he handed over the secret to Voldemort, who every one knew was a bad guy; and when I know the Potters and Sirius knew it too;

Sorry, the Potters and Sirius knew what? I'm not following. :)

I will hold them responsible when we have canon that someone close to the Potters was a traitor and that Voldemort had chosen Harry as the Prophecy child and was going to attack him, and when we have canon that the Potters knew about all this; when we know that Dumbledore wanted to be their SK; when they were at war; when they knew the dangers of what they were planning to avert by going under the Fidelus; I am very sorry, I hold them responsible too!

You think that James and Lily didn't treat any of this seriously? :huh: We'll just have to agree to disagree then. :) I can't imagine that they didn't take it extremely seriously, when their lives and the life of their baby boy were under threat.

Snape and Peter I hold them culpable; Sirius and the Potters IMO are very much responsible too. That would be about the only difference IMO.

Well, why not take it further? I say we start blaming Dumbledore for not having checked out the suspects himself. ;) (Actually, that might not be a bad idea. :lol: )

It was not as if they covered all bases, they checked and double checked everyone and still they were betrayed.

But surely they believed they had covered all the bases to the best of their ability. :) Like their son Harry, they just weren't prepared to distrust one of their closest friends. :cool:

I am very sorry, but in a war, when there is information about a traitor, when Sirius suspected Remus, I really don't think they checked Peter for the Imperius, under veritaserum or anything.

If Harry was in a similar situation, would you blame him for not subjecting Hermione or Ron to the Imperius, or giving them Veritaserum?

A bad judgement was something they could not afford at that time IMO. And they had the information with them. I really think they did not treat it with the care I, personally feel they should have.

But in James and Lily's judgement, they were taking care. And they trusted the wrong person. I disagree that makes them culpable.

I don't understand, but I would be very interested to know how you arrive at that conclusion. :)

I wasn't trying to be obnoxious, TGW :) but that is honestly where I think that line of reasoning ends up, logically. If we can blame Lily and James for their own deaths because we think they were careless, then I don't see what prevents us from blaming other murder victims for being too trusting or not taking enough care or whatever.

What I have taken into consideration is that the Pottes and Sirius were

1) In a war
2) They were already in hiding
3) They were aware of a traitor close to them
4) Sirius suspected Remus already
5) Dumbeldore suspected Sirius, but James spoke up for him
6) Dumbledore remained worried and offered to be SK

And yet they choose a SK on what basis; that James trusts everyone, even when Sirius suspected Remus?

But we are not told in canon whether the Potters also believed, like Sirius, that Remus could be the traitor. :shrug:

Harry sees Bellatrix laughing and the next minute she is dead. If Molly weasley died in the war, I don't think I'll call her irresponsible. But if she knew that among the people who were coming to her home, one was a DE and she still decided to trust them because she knew all of them, I would call her irresponsible.

But we have a very similar, indeed practically identical, situation with the Seven Potters. :huh: And one person, Moody, died because of the betrayal. :( Harry knew somebody somewhere had betrayed him and yet he still decided to trust all of his friends. How is that, honestly, any different from the situation which James and Lily faced? Why let Harry off the hook for being too trusting and not his parents? :shrug:

I just don't understand that, I'm afraid. :)

Sorry, the Potters and Sirius knew what? I'm not following. :)

There was a traitor close to them. :)

You think that James and Lily didn't treat any of this seriously? :huh: We'll just have to agree to disagree then. :) I can't imagine that they didn't take it extremely seriously, when their lives and the life of their baby boy were under threat.

I'll put it this way. I did not see it in canon.

Well, why not take it further? I say we start blaming Dumbledore for not having checked out the suspects himself. ;) (Actually, that might not be a bad idea. :lol: )

I did, in his thread. :)

But surely they believed they had covered all the bases to the best of their ability. :) Like their son Harry, they just weren't prepared to distrust one of their closest friends. :cool:

This is where I respectfully disagree, because I feel they did not cover all their bases.

lupin and Kingsley (I think) dragged Harry away in DH, once they knew they were betrayed, to check if Harry was indeed Harry and not an imposter.

I actually think this showed care and did not show that they did not trust Harry. Because if Harry was an imposter then they get to catch a DE and they also realise that the real Harry is trouble and in danger of losing his life and so they could start hunting for him.

Such caution in a war, only makes people look more responsible and really does not make them look bad for not trusting their own.

Lupin made Harry Godfather to his son, and yet he checked Harry throughly; that was for Harry's own well being; that did not show Lupin was less of a friend to do so IMO.

That is what I think the Potters and Sirius should have done knowing the repercussions of their actions could be truly horrible (and it was too) if something would go wrong. It did and if it weren't for Snape's request Harry too would have died and Voldemort would have won the war that day IMO.

That is why I feel they were irresponsible.

If Harry was in a similar situation, would you blame him for not subjecting Hermione or Ron to the Imperius, or giving them Veritaserum?

If Dumbledore got information through his spy that someone close to harry had turned traitor; I would want Harry to choose between simply trusting his friends and protecting his family.

I would expect Harry to choose the latter, by checking his friends for the Imperius or some potion, for by doing so, he would not suspect the wrong man as the spy and 2 he would protect his family and that would be the prudent thing to do in a war and I am sure it will never take anything away from Harry for wanting to do so.

It would lessen his character, if only he did not do this IMO.

But in James and Lily's judgement, they were taking care. And they trusted the wrong person. I disagree that makes them culpable.

On what basis? They went on simply trusting their friends, when one of their friends was suspecting another friend?

I wasn't trying to be obnoxious, TGW :)

Of course you weren't. :) I hope I did not say anything which made you feel so, Pearl_Took.

but that is honestly where I think that line of reasoning ends up, logically. If we can blame Lily and James for their own deaths because we think they were careless, then I don't see what prevents us from blaming other murder victims for being too trusting or not taking enough care or whatever.

It all depends on how well they took care of themselves IMO.

But we are not told in canon whether the Potters also believed, like Sirius, that Remus could be the traitor. :shrug:

Yes, we are not told so. But if Sirius suspected Remus (this is canon) why should he hide that from James and Lily? And when Remus says that he was not told of the switch because he was thought to be the traitor, I suppose it could go either way.

1) That Sirius refused to tell Remus because he believed Remus to be the spy and so did not heed James's words taht he trusted his friends or

2) James and Lily reluctantly agreed with Sirius.

Either way Remus was not told IMO.

But we have a very similar, indeed practically identical, situation with the Seven Potters. :huh: And one person, Moody, died because of the betrayal. :( Harry knew somebody somewhere had betrayed him and yet he still decided to trust all of his friends. How is that, honestly, any different from the situation which James and Lily faced? Why let Harry off the hook for being too trusting and not his parents? :shrug:

Because Harry was NOT the decision making authority there. Lupin and Kingsley were, and they checked everyone, even Harry IMO. It was Harry's opinion, brought by the fear that Hagrid had blabbered while drunk (that is what Harry thinks; he is sure Hagrid is the culprit and then goes to save him).

But Lupin and Kingsley and Arthur who were the elders there and in charge, did not blindly believe everyone. They had been betrayed and they checked everyone even the BWL.

Had the decisoion been in Harry's hands and he had made this statement, I am very afraid it would have been extrememly irresponsible in the light of what had happened in the 7 Potters.

The entire post is my opinion only.

I'll put it this way. I did not see it in canon.

Well, we all interpret canon in different ways, of course ... I guess I choose not to see James and Lily Potter as careless parents who brought about their own deaths and a miserable life for their son. James and Lily have their flaws, like everybody else in Potterverse, but I simply can't hold their own betrayal against them or blame them for it.

They made a catastrophic error of judgement in trusting Peter and paid a dreadful price for it. To call them 'careless' and 'irresponsible', however, just seems incredibly harsh to me, and I really can't agree that makes them virtually as responsible as the people who plotted their downfall.

I did, in his thread. :)

LOL. :lol:

Lupin made Harry Godfather to his son, and yet he checked Harry throughly; that was for Harry's own well being; that did not show Lupin was less of a friend to do so IMO.

How did Remus check Harry? He loved and trusted Harry, certainly. But what extra checking did he do? I don't recall any canon reference ...

I would expect Harry to choose the latter, by checking his friends for the Imperius or some potion, for by doing so, he would not suspect the wrong man as the spy and 2 he would protect his family and that would be the prudent thing to do in a war and I am sure it will never take anything away from Harry for wanting to do so.

It would lessen his character, if only he did not do this IMO.

Well, surely James's motive was to protect his family first and foremost, just as Harry's would be in the same situation. James made an error of judgement in choosing Peter for SK because he didn't seem to wholly trust Dumbledore at the time, remember? (And I would say he had some cause there. :whistle: I don't always trust Dumbledore's methodology either. :lol: )

To know that a friend of yours had died because they were too trusting would be truly agonising. But would you blame them for their naivety? James and Lily certainly made a catastrophic mistake in trusting Peter. The fault, however, is Peter's, and Peter's alone.

On what basis? They went on simply trusting their friends, when one of their friends was suspecting another friend?

I don't know how to answer this. All I can say, it was a fearful and paranoid time. And people can make mistakes. I still don't think the betrayed are as much to blame as the betrayers.

Of course you weren't. :) I hope I did not say anything which made you feel so, Pearl_Took.

No, not at all. :huggles: I did not want to say anything that caused offence either. :blush: :)

But if Sirius suspected Remus (this is canon) why should he hide that from James and Lily?

That's a good point. :) But we don't know when and how he entertained his suspicions, actually.

Because Harry was NOT the decision making authority there. Lupin and Kingsley were, and they checked everyone, even Harry IMO.

They did? How? They didn't use the Imperius Curse or Veritaserum to check everyone was telling the truth, as I recall. Which is what you suggested earlier that James and Lily should have done.

It was Harry's opinion, brought by the fear that Hagrid had blabbered while drunk (that is what Harry thinks; he is sure Hagrid is the culprit and then goes to save him).

Actually, I think it was Fleur who first suggested the harsh possibility ... don't have book on me so can't check. :)

But Lupin and Kingsley and Arthur who were the elders there and in charge, did not blindly believe everyone. They had been betrayed and they checked everyone even the BWL.

BWL? :hmm:

Had the decision been in Harry's hands and he had made this statement, I am very afraid it would have been extremely irresponsible in the light of what had happened in the 7 Potters.

Well, OK, I see a bit more where you're coming from. :) But calling Harry irresponsible and careless is not quite the same as saying he brought down his own death on himself. I think. :relax:

I'll have to leave this debate for now because I am away for the next two days. :)

How did Remus check Harry? He loved and trusted Harry, certainly. But what extra checking did he do? I don't recall any canon reference ...

They did? How? They didn't use the Imperius Curse or Veritaserum to check everyone was telling the truth, as I recall. Which is what you suggested earlier that James and Lily should have done.

No sooner had Mrs Weasley bent over her son than Lupin grabbed Harry by ythe upper arm and dragged him, non too gently into the kitchen, where Hagrid was still attempting ease his bulk through the back door.

'Oi' said Hagrid indignantly. 'Le' go of him! Le' go of him!'

Lupin ignored him.

"Wwhat creature sat in the corner, the first time Harry Potter visited my office at Hogwarts?' he said, giving Harry a small shake.

'A - a Grinbdylow in a tank, wasn't it?'

.........Over Hermione's shoulders Harry saw him raise his wnad and point it at Lupin's chest.

"The last words Albus Dumbledore spoke to the pair of us?"

"Harry is the best hope we have. Trust him.' said Lupin calmly.

Kingsley turned his wand on Harry, but Lupin said, "It's him, I've checked."

None of this takes anaything away from Kingsley or Lupin. In fact IMO it adds to them, for the caution they showed IMO.

This was not there with the Potters, at least we don't see it in canon; what we are given in canon is that the switch was made by Sirius persuading the Potters.

Remus was also suspected. But James (DH) according to Lupin says it is a dishonour to not truts his friends?!

In what way is what I cannot understand. Nothing IMO would be taken away from James because he checked his friends, given what was at stake. But James and Lily never do. I do hold them responsible I'm afraid. along with Sirius, who persuaded them to make the switch IMO.

-------------

Though, I think Lupin meant that comment about James trusting his friends in DH for Sirius and not for all of his friends, for one close friend already suspected another (Sirius, Remus).

BWL? :hmm:

:blush: I am sorry. Boy Who Lived. (BWL)

Well, OK, I see a bit more where you're coming from. :) But calling Harry irresponsible and careless is not quite the same as saying he brought down his own death on himself. I think. :relax:

He would have been both careless and irresponsible if James Sirius, Albus severus or Ginny Potter had been involved and Harry was in charge I'm afraid.

But you didn't answer the question. Why didn't the issue of trust arise? According to you, it should have. Harry should have given Hermione and Ron veritaserum before heading out on a quest with them. He should have given Ron veritaserum when he returned to the camp. Harry didn't do either of these things and he never lacked trust for his friends. But you have stated again and again that when a traitor is suspected, people should check their close friends to be sure they are not the traitor. Why do you feel Harry is special and does not have to do this?

I think you bring up an important point. And in this case, I think Harry should have checked his friends--particularly Ron-- when they were travelling in the woods. I would toss it up to a need for the story, as much as I hate giving those answers, because if JKR had written about how Harry asked 'saftey questions' of everyone all the time it would get old. And, because Hermione and Ron were not traitors, it simply may have never occured to JKR that they should be suspected. After all, she may have gotten to far into the story that she didn't look at the situation from any other angles.

And I don't think that checking your friends, to be sure they have not betrayed you, would be dishonoring them. You may trust them to die before they give any information on you, but can you trust that they will never fall victim to the Imperious curse? And, when we look at Remus' statement about James we are supposed to feel good about it. We are supposed to think, "Oh, look at James and what a great guy he was!" But, all things considered, James was betrayed by a friend of his. This tells us that James would (and did) put his (and his families) life on the line for honor-- was it really worth it?

Sorry for jumping in out of nowhere, but something from TGW's post caught my eye and I just had to respond. :D

Fallen WarriorNo sooner had Mrs Weasley bent over her son than Lupin grabbed Harry by ythe upper arm and dragged him, non too gently into the kitchen, where Hagrid was still attempting ease his bulk through the back door. 'Oi' said Hagrid indignantly. 'Le' go of him! Le' go of him!' Lupin ignored him. "Wwhat creature sat in the corner, the first time Harry Potter visited my office at Hogwarts?' he said, giving Harry a small shake. 'A - a Grinbdylow in a tank, wasn't it?' .........Over Hermione's shoulders Harry saw him raise his wnad and point it at Lupin's chest. "The last words Albus Dumbledore spoke to the pair of us?" "Harry is the best hope we have. Trust him.' said Lupin calmly. Kingsley turned his wand on Harry, but Lupin said, "It's him, I've checked."

None of this takes anaything away from Kingsley or Lupin. In fact IMO it adds to them, for the caution they showed IMO. This was not there with the Potters, at least we don't see it in canon; what we are given in canon is that the switch was made by Sirius persuading the Potters. Remus was also suspected. But James (DH) according to Lupin says it is a dishonour to not truts his friends?! In what way is what I cannot understand. Nothing IMO would be taken away from James because he checked his friends, given what was at stake. But James and Lily never do. I do hold them responsible I'm afraid. along with Sirius, who persuaded them to make the switch IMO.

All right, I definitely agree that it was prudent and right of Lupin and Kingsley to check whether anybody was an impostor under the Polyjuice Potion, or under any other disguise. But this merely proved that no one was a Death Eater under the disguise of a friend - it did not, however, prove that none of their friends had turned traitor to their side and were now secretly working for Voldemort.

Why didn't they use Veritaserum to check that everyone was indeed on the right side? In fact, they didn't even check for the Imperius curse. Does this not make them irresponsible and just as culpable? That despite the death of a trusted member of the Order (Moody) and George's serious injury, they did not apply more caution at the prospect of there being a traitor in the Order?

This line of logic does not work for me because we have no canon that James, Lily and the other Marauders did not do the same. How do we know that they did not ask each other 'the question' every time they met just to make sure that it wasn't an impostor imitating their friend? We don't have any canon to disprove this, and we know that James and Lily took the safety of their family very seriously (they went into hiding for a year and a half, which is no small feat).

Just imagine this scenario for a second. Peter arrives at James and Lily's house, where Sirius also is at that moment. They ask Peter a question, "What is your animagus form?" or "What did we do in our fifth year that McGonagall gave us a week's worth of detentions for?" and Peter answers correctly. They know it's him and let him in.

Does this in anyway ensure that Peter is not the traitor? No, in my opinion. It merely ensures that it is really their friend, their friend who they've known for years now and who they would die for. This cautionary action wouldn't even have hinted towards the idea of Peter being the traitor.

It's the same thing Lupin and Kingsley did; the same thing that Molly did with Arthur (to make sure it was really him. Can you imagine Molly suspecting Arthur to be a spy for the Dark side?) and yet nobody's blaming them for being irresponsible. Why then blame James, Lily and Sirius?

To me (and Harry), it would seem inconceivable for Ron and Hermione to be traitors, and I get the feeling James and Lily felt the same way. If by any chance Ron or Hermione did betray Harry, I would never, ever blame him. And that is pretty much why I could never hold James and Lily (and Sirius) responsible for their deaths either. :no:

I think you bring up an important point. And in this case, I think Harry should have checked his friends--particularly Ron-- when they were travelling in the woods. I would toss it up to a need for the story, as much as I hate giving those answers, because if JKR had written about how Harry asked 'saftey questions' of everyone all the time it would get old. And, because Hermione and Ron were not traitors, it simply may have never occured to JKR that they should be suspected. After all, she may have gotten to far into the story that she didn't look at the situation from any other angles.

And I don't think that checking your friends, to be sure they have not betrayed you, would be dishonoring them. You may trust them to die before they give any information on you, but can you trust that they will never fall victim to the Imperious curse? And, when we look at Remus' statement about James we are supposed to feel good about it. We are supposed to think, "Oh, look at James and what a great guy he was!" But, all things considered, James was betrayed by a friend of his. This tells us that James would (and did) put his (and his families) life on the line for honor-- was it really worth it?

You speak like a reader who has all of the details. However, the truth is, we have no idea if James asked all of his friends "what did I keep in the secret compartment of my trunk?" just to be sure they were not on polyjuice when he saw them or before making them SK (as Lupin and Kingsley did in 7 Potters.)

So when you wrap up with the statement "James was betrayed by a friend" and then suggest he put his and his family's life on the line, (notably leaving Lily out of it) and declare that it was all done for honor, I can only feel that your reasoning is biased in terms of your own imaginings of what happened. Thus, I could not answer your question "was it really worth it" because my own biased "imaginings" are different than yours, and the reasoning does not lead me to believe that either James or Lily put their lives and that of their child on the line for "honor". That in my view would be stupid and these were not stupid people so I don't feel that they would follow your line of reasoning. :)

I disagree with Remus that James and Harry were too trusting; so I would have to respectfully disagree with your assertion that Harry should have checked his friends with veritaserum or whatever prior to setting out on the quest. The thing is, you can live your life as a distrustful person when it comes to your friends, but clearly in canon nobody was thinking that way when it came to the trio going out on their quest or someone would have suggested that everyone be checked :lol:. So I agree with the majority as I read it in canon; most people trust those close to them. Otherwise you would have Arthur interrogating Molly and feeding her veritaserum everyday when he came home for work. The possibilities start bordering on the ridiculous, imo.

You speak like a reader who has all of the details. However, the truth is, we have no idea if James asked all of his friends "what did I keep in the secret compartment of my trunk?" just to be sure they were not on polyjuice when he saw them or before making them SK (as Lupin and Kingsley did in 7 Potters.)

I speak as a reader who knows that Sirius suspected Remus to be the traitor and Remus, likewise, suspected Sirius. As such, I assume that because Lily and James were still in contact with Sirius and made him Secret Keeper, yet absolutely no mention is ever made of Remus, that they agreed with him in his assessment of Remus. To take this one step further, we can go into why Sirius suspected Remus and Remus suspected Sirius, but since we seem to be in a disagreement over even this fact, despite it being canon, I’m not sure taking the next logical step would make sense at this time.

And I can’t quite understand where you are coming from. First you say that it isn’t logical for James and Lily to have suspected Remus, and that there not talking to him isn’t important. (Which I respectfully disagree with. Remember the Snape/Lily theories that were based solely on Severus’ not ever mentioning Lily?) But you also think that they were checking their friends-- why would Sirius still suspect Remus if they were checking him?

So when you wrap up with the statement "James was betrayed by a friend" and then suggest he put his and his family's life on the line, (notably leaving Lily out of it) and declare that it was all done for honor, I can only feel that your reasoning is biased in terms of your own imaginings of what happened. Thus, I could not answer your question "was it really worth it" because my own biased "imaginings" are different than yours, and the reasoning does not lead me to believe that either James or Lily put their lives and that of their child on the line for "honor". That in my view would be stupid and these were not stupid people so I don't feel that they would follow your line of reasoning.

I left Lily out because she had nothing to do with Remus’ original statement about James and his sense of honor. It didn’t seem prudent to somehow and suddenly stick her into everything that has to do with James, simply because she married him.

I still have yet to see any answer from you to explain James and Lily’s behavior, since you reject my interpretations, nor have I seen you present any canon to refute my interpretations. If my interpretations of what had happened aren’t accurate, then what do you propose did happen?

I disagree with Remus that James and Harry were too trusting; so I would have to respectfully disagree with your assertion that Harry should have checked his friends with veritaserum or whatever prior to setting out on the quest. The thing is, you can live your life as a distrustful person when it comes to your friends, but clearly in canon nobody was thinking that way when it came to the trio going out on their quest or someone would have suggested that everyone be checked . So I agree with the majority as I read it in canon; most people trust those close to them. Otherwise you would have Arthur interrogating Molly and feeding her veritaserum everyday when he came home for work. The possibilities start bordering on the ridiculous, imo.


In some ways, that would be ridiculous, but only in terms of literature. In the same way you shouldn’t include mundane conversations such as ‘pass the butter, please’ when people are eating dinner, you aren’t going to show people going through the same activity over and over again. However, in a war situation, where there is a very real possibility that a Death Eater could have broke into the Burrow and Imperioused Molly, I would say that it is entirely reasonable for Arthur to check and be sure that it is still Molly. As I said before, you may trust that they wouldn’t betray you, but you can’t know for sure that they haven’t been compromised in some way. (Such as being under the influence of the Imperious curse or being impersonated by a Death Eater with poly juice potion.)

I disagree with Remus that James and Harry were too trusting;

Canon says differently, in that it was James and Sirius and Lily’s trust in Peter that lead to their deaths.

I speak as a reader who knows that Sirius suspected Remus to be the traitor and Remus, likewise, suspected Sirius.

My point is, that is all you know. You don't know if Sirius expressed his concerns and James and Lily responded like Harry did to Lupin in A Fallen Warrior: "I trust you all." You don't know if James and Lily asked each friend when they saw them something secret to ensure they were not on polyjuice. I don't know either because we were not given any information on this. It was not relevant to the storyline in JKR's view or she would have given it to us.

As such, I assume that because Lily and James were still in contact with Sirius and made him Secret Keeper, yet absolutely no mention is ever made of Remus, that they agreed with him in his assessment of Remus. To take this one step further, we can go into why Sirius suspected Remus and Remus suspected Sirius, but since we seem to be in a disagreement over even this fact, despite it being canon, I’m not sure taking the next logical step would make sense at this time.

First, you are confusing me with someone else on what I have said I believe and do not believe. I agree Sirius and Remus did not trust one another and I have never said differently. I have only told those who indicated that Remus did trust Sirius until he was imprisoned, that their thought is a possibility too (as are all views). As you indicated you assume that Lily and James agreed with Sirius; I assume they did not. I don't think you have provided any canon to support your assertion that is any more evidentiary than mine. Remus was not mentioned by anyone who was speaking (Fudge, Rosmerta & McGonagall), but Remus spoke for himself in POA and he did not mention anything about Lily and James not trusting him. He then told Harry that he was too trusting just like his father in DH. So that would mean to me, based on canon, that James' reaction if Sirius did say anything about his lack of trust in Remus, would be just like Harry's was. So there you have my canon evidence which is in my view, stronger than nothing being said at all.

And I can’t quite understand where you are coming from. First you say that it isn’t logical for James and Lily to have suspected Remus,

I don't recall saying this. However, if I did, you would have to provide the context in which I said it for me to understand why I said it. It does not sound like something I would say. My belief has always been what I stated above; that it didn't matter if Sirius said he didn't trust Remus (or visa versa) because James and Lily would simply say they trusted them all.

and that there not talking to him isn’t important.

I am certain I have never said this because I don't agree with it and I never have. Remus knew everything going on (except the last minute switch). He was obviously speaking with them or he would have claimed that he'd not been involved at all. He knew Sirius was made secret keeper and that was only a week before the Potters were killed. I am not at all certain what canon you are basing the fact that the Potter's never spoke to Remus on. I think you are mixing up what I have said with what someone else has said.

(Which I respectfully disagree with. Remember the Snape/Lily theories that were based solely on Severus’ not ever mentioning Lily?) But you also think that they were checking their friends-- why would Sirius still suspect Remus if they were checking him?

I do not lump James, Sirius and Lily into one individual. They were all distinct to me and all autonomous individuals. Sirius and Remus being mistrustful has nothing to do with James and Lily asking their friends secret questions to ensure they were not strangers on Polyjuice or something along those lines. I believe Sirius and Remus felt the other might be the spy based on the process of elimination. But I do not feel they were certain about it. Their make up scene tells me that they were likely praying that it was not true.

I can ask you your own question. James and Lily aside; why didn't Sirius himself check on Remus or visa versa? Are you sure they did not? Maybe they investigated (figuring it was actual betrayal if anything, rather than imperiused or polyjuice). Perhaps they "trailed" one another. As I have said, we have no idea because there is no canon. So it is useless to ask these types of questions we can only guess the answers for - except for fun. But to then go on and reach conclusions based solely on our guesses is not logical to me.

I left Lily out because she had nothing to do with Remus’ original statement about James and his sense of honor. It didn’t seem prudent to somehow and suddenly stick her into everything that has to do with James, simply because she married him.

But this situation has everything to do with Lily - just as much as James. This is about trusting your friends; that is something honorable and the only way that 'honor' fits into the equation, imo. The decision wasn't "do I place my honor in my friends over my own life" - the decision was I place my life in my friends hands because I honor them with my trust. And that trust is built up over time and that is why it is an honor to place your trust in someone.

Harry honored Ron and Hermione with his trust, which is why he wasn't feeding them daily doses of veritaserum. The whole idea of his doing so would not have seemed like an act of caution to me - it would have seemed like he simply didn't trust his friends. Maybe it is a personal thing. But I do trust my friends, and I would with my life - without doing an FBI check on them first. So to me, this is normal. But I respect the idea that others do not trust their close friends as I do - and as Harry, James and Lily Potter evidently did. You may get burned doing it, but you know, if I had to live a life of distrusting those close to me, I'd rather not bother. :lol:.

I still have yet to see any answer from you to explain James and Lily’s behavior, since you reject my interpretations, nor have I seen you present any canon to refute my interpretations. If my interpretations of what had happened aren’t accurate, then what do you propose did happen?


I hope I have made that clear above now. I am not attempting to refute your view at all; I am simply disagreeing with it.

In some ways, that would be ridiculous, but only in terms of literature. In the same way you shouldn’t include mundane conversations such as ‘pass the butter, please’ when people are eating dinner, you aren’t going to show people going through the same activity over and over again. However, in a war situation, where there is a very real possibility that a Death Eater could have broke into the Burrow and Imperioused Molly, I would say that it is entirely reasonable for Arthur to check and be sure that it is still Molly. As I said before, you may trust that they wouldn’t betray you, but you can’t know for sure that they haven’t been compromised in some way. (Such as being under the influence of the Imperious curse or being impersonated by a Death Eater with poly juice potion.)

Right, so we see this type of thing distinctly. ;) You move under the notion of caution and presume distrust is in order; whereas I move under the notion of confidence and presume trust is in order - when it comes to close friends. We just see it differently and that is all right. We would just have to agree to disagree...as usual. :lol:

Canon says differently, in that it was James and Sirius and Lily’s trust in Peter that lead to their deaths.

But you speak in hindsight. At the time, James and Lily trusted Peter just as much as Harry trusted Hermione. And as I pointed out, canon does not speak differently from my view on the issue of trusting your close friends and loved ones in general. Specifically, the Potters were trusting people; one can criticize them for that, but I don't. I think it was very honorable and generally, it works out wonderfully. Dumbledore betrayed Harry's trust and it was by the luck of the gods that he didn't get killed (or one of the trio). But Moody did die. Shall we then say that he was too trusting of Dumbledore? Yes. But nobody thought to "check" Dumbledore's trecherous portrait, so they were duped, by a friend. Just like James and Lily. And as a result, death occurred in both cases. Just because Harry lived doesn't make it any different - Moody was just as valuable in terms of being a human being, imo. And note I can only say that in "hindsight" - at the start of 7 Potters, no one suspected that Dumbledore meant to betray them because they trusted him and even his portrait.

I don't think you have provided any canon to support your assertion that is any more evidentiary than mine. Remus was not mentioned by anyone who was speaking (Fudge, Rosmerta & McGonagall), but Remus spoke for himself in POA and he did not mention anything about Lily and James not trusting him. He then told Harry that he was too trusting just like his father in DH. So that would mean to me, based on canon, that James' reaction if Sirius did say anything about his lack of trust in Remus, would be just like Harry's was. So there you have my canon evidence which is in my view, stronger than nothing being said at all.

You bring up PoA, but I was refrencing DH, where Lily writes a letter to Sirius and makes no mention of Remus, although she does mention almost everyone else. Added with the fact that Sirius didn't trust Remus, and James and Lily seemed to be trusting Sirius, I don't see why it should be such a large logical leap to assume that Lily and James agreed with Sirius?

In PoA, we have Remus speaking on himself. Why would he tell Harry that his father didn't trust him? Even if it was the truth, it just doesn't seem to be the right sort of moment to give that sort of information, nor does Remus seem the sort of person who would outright say that. We only know that Remus and Sirius didn't trust each other because of their mutual interactions with each other-- each admitting to not trusting each other-- not because of any time Remus took to sit down and have a heart-to-heart chat with Harry.

It may have been that James didn't distrust Remus, but then why the silence? Why not mention him? The four Marauders are supposed to be really close. Why is Remus the only one who seems to be out of the loop, here?

Right, so we see this type of thing distinctly. ;) You move under the notion of caution and presume distrust is in order; whereas I move under the notion of confidence and presume trust is in order - when it comes to close friends. We just see it differently and that is all right. We would just have to agree to disagree...as usual.

In any normal situation, I would have to agree with you. But, under the circumstances that James (and all the others, including Lily ;)) were under and the circumstances under which DH took place, I would argue that even with close friends it would be best to proceed with caution.

Harry honored Ron and Hermione with his trust, which is why he wasn't feeding them daily doses of veritaserum. The whole idea of his doing so would not have seemed like an act of caution to me - it would have seemed like he simply didn't trust his friends. Maybe it is a personal thing. But I do trust my friends, and I would with my life - without doing an FBI check on them first. So to me, this is normal. But I respect the idea that others do not trust their close friends as I do - and as Harry, James and Lily Potter evidently did. You may get burned doing it, but you know, if I had to live a life of distrusting those close to me, I'd rather not bother.

But, again, I believe there is a distince difference between 'the real world' situation you brought up and the HP world situation we are discussing. In the real world, you can't magically take the form of another person or cast a spell on them to force them to do your bidding. Within the confines of Harry Potter, you can, and this adds a new level of suspicion, imho. I agree that not being able to trust your friends, especially your best friends, would be a terribel thing. But to ignore the possibility of what we could essentially call their identity being stolen is rather risky to the point of being reckless.

I don't recall saying this. However, if I did, you would have to provide the context in which I said it for me to understand why I said it. It does not sound like something I would say. My belief has always been what I stated above; that it didn't matter if Sirius said he didn't trust Remus (or visa versa) because James and Lily would simply say they trusted them all.

I would, but I don't have the time to look back through your epic posts and still get my homework done. XD Besides, I most likely did confuse you with someone else's posts, sorry for that. :(

And I just checked the time and realized I'm late for a meeting. >.< I will come back later to see if there is more to add.

How did James' and Sirius' particularly close friendship influence Remus and Peter? Did they feel left out or inferior?

I don't think anyone felt left out or inferior, I think Peter and Remus might've been just as close friends as Sirius and James were, so no body ever felt jealous or anything.

Why was Remus the main suspect in 1981? Did Peter have a walk-over to discredit Remus if he did so at all?

I think Peter might've been afraid of getting found out, so probably tried to convince James and Sirius, that Remus was probably the one betraying them.

James, Sirius and Peter became Animagi for Remus. Was this noble or adventurous?

I think it was both.

What did the other Marauders think about James' obsession with Lily?
How did Lily influence the dynamics within the Marauders?
I think they might've thought it was silly but supported him; I think James growing up in his 7th year, might've had something to do with Lily, James growing up probably made Sirius grow up a little too.


James chose Sirius as godfather. Were Remus and Peter understanding or hurt by this decision?

I think Remus was probably understanding, Remus probably would've insisted on Sirius being the godfather, if James had chose him, and I'm sure James probably knew Remus well enough by then to know Remus would reject the position, anyway.
I'm not sure about Peter, I think he might've been a little hurt but kept it to himself.

Peter betrayed his friends. Was he ever happy with this decision and do you think that his friends would be able to forgive him if they had the chance?

I don't think he was happy with the decision, but I'm sure if he had the chance to go back and change he wouldn't. I don't think they would be very forgiving.

Was joining the Order a joint decision or was peer pressure involved? For instance, did James and Sirius lead the way and Remus and Peter follow?

I think it was a joint decsion.


The Marauders had a very hostile relationship with Snape. Would this have been different if Snape had been sorted into Gryffindor? Did the Marauders antagonise other students that were into the Dark Arts as well or did they single out Snape from the start?

I think they probably picked on other students in Slytherin or interested into the dark art, but I think they probably picke on Snape the most.


How do the Marauders compare to Fred and George? Do you think that they, and especially James and Sirius, were worse or just as funny as the Weasley twins?

The Marauders compare to Freds and George quit a bit, they're funny and seemed like they'd enjoy playing tricks on other people.
I Sirius and James, as well as, Remus and Peter were just as funny was the Weasley twins, they seemed liked in SWM.


Did Deathly Hallows change your mind about the Marauders? Do you think that they were portrayed favourably or came out badly?

I've always thought the same thing of the Marauders, they were funny, arrogant and ignorant, but I think alot of teenage boys are like that, I know quit a few (seeing as I go to a middle school) and most of them seem to act almost exactly like that.
I think they were protrayed favourably up until Order of the Phoenix.

Which Marauder do you like best and what are the traits that endear him to you? Did the other Marauders appreciate these traits?

I like Remus best, because, he intrigues me because he seems so smart, but I can imagine hime being very funny when he was younger.

You bring up PoA, but I was refrencing DH, where Lily writes a letter to Sirius and makes no mention of Remus, although she does mention almost everyone else. Added with the fact that Sirius didn't trust Remus, and James and Lily seemed to be trusting Sirius, I don't see why it should be such a large logical leap to assume that Lily and James agreed with Sirius?

But that is precisely why you believe it and I do not. It is a large logical leap to me. I don't even reason the same way you did. Too many unknowns are involved. Sirius and Remus may have been on assignment together and they both received letters, so there was nothing to say to both of them about the other. Peter was mentioned because he seemed depressed, but if Remus seemed the same as always (and he wasn't with Sirius), why mention him? Mostly, as you pointed out, JKR writes for her storyline and had no reason to mention Remus, imo - every single thing in that letter had relevance to the storyline - there was no casual lines thrown out in my view. So when she was writing, it didn't likely cross her mind to add anything about Remus, why would it?

To assume simply because he is not mentioned in the letter that they didn't trust him is a logical leap of several mountains to me. So I would have to respectfully disagree that it is a reasonable conclusion in my opinion. But I respect your right to see it that way. :)

In any case, as I have mentioned; Remus was "in the know" about everything. If everyone distrusted him, he wouldn't have even known that Sirius was made secret keeper (which was a serious and final decision at the time.) So I would lean against your theory in any case based on that fact.

In PoA, we have Remus speaking on himself. Why would he tell Harry that his father didn't trust him? Even if it was the truth, it just doesn't seem to be the right sort of moment to give that sort of information, nor does Remus seem the sort of person who would outright say that. We only know that Remus and Sirius didn't trust each other because of their mutual interactions with each other-- each admitting to not trusting each other-- not because of any time Remus took to sit down and have a heart-to-heart chat with Harry.

Let me explain why I disagree. Remus was trying to convince Harry not to be so trusting in DH. He told him that he reminded him of his father, something that had a positive reaction from Harry when he did it before in HBP. So Remus knew that it was a statement that Harry would not like. But he felt it necessary to teach Harry a lesson; that being too trusting of your close friends is not always good. Harry became upset and ignored the advice; preferring to be like his father, trusting.

Now if James and Lily had not been trusting of Remus, then Remus could have said: "Look Harry, even your father was not completely trusting. He trusted Peter, but he didn't trust me. There are times when even your dad had to be distrustful of his close friends." Harry would not be upset, he might feel bad for Remus, but the same message would get across and it actually may have had an impact on Harry (just like his father's view of Remus being 'normal' did in HBP - which provoked his statements in DH: "do you think my father would do that...").

But Remus was being honest. James, in his opinion, had been too trusting, just like Harry. And so he told him and it had no impact at all - Harry remained too trusting. So to me, Remus knew James even better than he knew Harry and he would have not lied in this situation, because as we see, the results were bad, when saying the opposite, the results would have likely been better. Remus was wise enough to know that, imo. So to me this is proof positive that in Remus' view, James would have thought it the height of dishonor to trust any of his friends - that included Remus.

That is the "long version" of why I believe as I do and why I cannot subscribe to your theory that James did not trust Remus. Further, no one brought up the issue of Lily's trust but her faith in Sirius and Peter as SK is enough for me to believe that she was as trusting as her husband - and that is my guess about Lily.

It may have been that James didn't distrust Remus, but then why the silence? Why not mention him? The four Marauders are supposed to be really close. Why is Remus the only one who seems to be out of the loop, here?

First, James didn't write the letter, so this has nothing to do with the 4 Marauders. Second, I feel Lily had nothing to say about Remus, perhaps for one of the reasons I gave that were "guesses" - or simply because Remus was so uninvolved in the actual dirty details of this part of the plotline (it only involved Peter, The Potters and Sirius) that JKR didn't feel it necessary to include him.

Think about it...what would she add about him? As I said, there is absolutely nothing in that letter that is not highly relevant and I have shown that to be true in a previous post. For example, even the mundane information that James was ansy was provided for us to know that he was a warrior at heart and that Sirius and he were not able to be together much at this juncture because Sirius was still doing Order business - important because otherwise there would be no basis for Lily to write the letter. Peter felt some remorse - hence his depression. Lily and Petunia still had strained relations - which explains her treatment of Harry while raising him. Harry had experience on a broom that he did not recall - which explained the ease with which he could fly later. And it also showed James was a dad concerned with his son; after all the speculation in forums, JKR gave us several scenes of this sort to ensure we knew. And there was much more as well, not the least of which was the information the Potters found out about Dumbledore.

So there was no reason for JKR to write about Remus as I see it. He had no appreciable role in the storyline at that point. The fact that JKR chose to have Remus speak about James being trusted was proof positive to me that James trusted Remus, Sirius and Peter completely. I also feel Lily did, based on her agreeing to have any of them serve as SK for her family. Now for me the bit about James is proof positive and I feel it is "canon" - however, I respect your right to see it distinctly.

In any normal situation, I would have to agree with you. But, under the circumstances that James (and all the others, including Lily ;)) were under and the circumstances under which DH took place, I would argue that even with close friends it would be best to proceed with caution.

I understand, but under those circumstances I would be especially trusting, so I would again have to respectfully disagree. We simply see it distinctly and I think that is okay. ;)

But, again, I believe there is a distince difference between 'the real world' situation you brought up and the HP world situation we are discussing. In the real world, you can't magically take the form of another person or cast a spell on them to force them to do your bidding.

I would respectfully disagree. Do you know how much betrayal goes on in the real world? Just because the magical world has a few more means of betraying makes it no more likely that they will betray. If someone wants to betray you in real life, they will find a way to do it, and it will be all the more easier if they have your complete trust. :lol:. However, I don't move under the assumption that my friends will betray me, so I do not suspect them in my greatest time of need. As I say, it is just a distinction in the way we look at this - under these circumstances.

Within the confines of Harry Potter, you can, and this adds a new level of suspicion, imho. I agree that not being able to trust your friends, especially your best friends, would be a terribel thing. But to ignore the possibility of what we could essentially call their identity being stolen is rather risky to the point of being reckless.

I don't follow this reasoning. As it turned out, Peter was not under the imperius, nor someone else on Polyjuice. So testing for those things would not have helped. For all we know, Dumbledore tested everyone in the Order, including the friends (remember the Longbottoms were also targeted at first and they knew way back there was a spy according to McGonagall.) Because Voldemort would likely expect these types of things would be done regularly (even without such a threat - just checking for spies), he may have taught Peter how to withstand the effects of Veritaserum - which JKR said was possible to do. So as I say, there are too many unknowns involved to reach solid conclusions. Guessing is fun and I may agree or disagree with guesses - but I will not draw conclusions from them, not even my own. My interpretations (like about what Remus said in DH) are another matter and on those things we would just have to agree to disagree.

I would, but I don't have the time to look back through your epic posts and still get my homework done. XD Besides, I most likely did confuse you with someone else's posts, sorry for that. :(

No worries, there are a million posts and I remember reading those things too, but not exactly who said them. :lol:.

Originally Posted by WWB
But you didn't answer the question. Why didn't the issue of trust arise?

I think it was because there was no information that one of them was a traitor. I don't think that everyone needs to check everyone else all the time; that IMO would be impossible for everyone except Moody, perhaps ;), but when something like the 7 Potters happened, when Dumbledore told the Potters about a traitor, when Dumbledore was aware of a spy in the Order of the Phoenix, then I think one must take precautions and check everyone and everything in sight.

This line of logic does not work for me because we have no canon that James, Lily and the other Marauders did not do the same. How do we know that they did not ask each other 'the question' every time they met just to make sure that it wasn't an impostor imitating their friend? We don't have any canon to disprove this, and we know that James and Lily took the safety of their family very seriously (they went into hiding for a year and a half, which is no small feat).

What we have canon for is that Sirius persuaded the Potters rto switch SK's in the last minute. They chose Peter because he was the weakest among them and no one would think of them. There is no other reason given in canon except this IMO.

Just imagine this scenario for a second. Peter arrives at James and Lily's house, where Sirius also is at that moment. They ask Peter a question, "What is your animagus form?" or "What did we do in our fifth year that McGonagall gave us a week's worth of detentions for?" and Peter answers correctly. They know it's him and let him in.

But it did not happen this way. We have nothing in canon to say that they checked Peter and found him trustworthy. On the contrary, we have canon for Remus being suspected, though we don't have reasons for that either and we also have Sirius being suspected by Dumbeldore, though we don't know why he suspected Sirius, either IMO.

Why didn't they use Veritaserum to check that everyone was indeed on the right side? In fact, they didn't even check for the Imperius curse. Does this not make them irresponsible and just as culpable? That despite the death of a trusted member of the Order (Moody) and George's serious injury, they did not apply more caution at the prospect of there being a traitor in the Order?

They did check. That was what I was trying to say. Those in charge did not let off anyone. They had been betrayed and they had lost a colleague and they were cautious IMO.

I think it was because there was no information that one of them was a traitor. I don't think that everyone needs to check everyone else all the time; that IMO would be impossible for everyone except Moody, perhaps ;), but when something like the 7 Potters happened, when Dumbledore told the Potters about a traitor, when Dumbledore was aware of a spy in the Order of the Phoenix, then I think one must take precautions and check everyone and everything in sight.

They did know, they said so right in canon (A Fallen Warrior). They simply asked secret questions when they discovered it and only of some people - I am not sure why. They didn't check everyone and they didn't check with veritaserum nor to see if they were imperiused. I don't recall them checking Hermione, Ron, Tonks, Fleur or Bill. Mr. Weasley barged in and declared he didn't have time to be checked because he wanted to see his son. But he could have marched up and shot Harry dead - it could have all been an act. But the bottom line is, there was trust between them and that is why they obviously let things slide.

Knowing there was a traitor, Harry didn't check Hermion and Ron after that either. He trusted them. He didn't check anyone - he trusted them all. At that point, they fully knew there was a traitor, they just didn't know who it was. Checking doesn't help anyway if the person is doing it of their own free will - JKR said a person can even escape the effects of Veritaserum. So it is not only showing distrust in your friends, it is rather useless, imo.

They did know, they said so right in canon (A Fallen Warrior). They simply asked secret questions when they discovered it and only of some people - I am not sure why.

I thought they checked everyone. :hmm:

Secret questions are okay, though they could have also used other means as well! There was no way an imposter Harry would know about the Grindylow, though IMO.

What I am trying to say is that the Potters did not do any checking, mild or strong.

They didn't check everyone and they didn't check with veritaserum nor to see if they were imperiused. I don't recall them checking Hermione, Ron, Tonks, Fleur or Bill.

Was it because they were injured, perhaps? But even that was wrong. They should have checked IMO.

But the point I was trying to make was about Lupin checking Harry. We were discussing if those whom we trust with our lives and who are our bestest friends should be checked IMO.

When there is knwoledge about a traitor I think they should be. Lupin checked Harry and I feel it makes Lupin a better person, rather than letting down a relationship he had with Harry. That was the point I was trying to make.

James and lily should have checked everyone. We don't see that they did and I feel that was very wrong on their part, considering just what and who they were hiding from and for what reason they were planning to go under the Fidelus IMO.

Mr. Weasley barged in and declared he didn't have time to be checked because he wanted to see his son. But he could have marched up and shot Harry dead - it could have all been an act. But the bottom line is, there was trust between them and that is why they obviously let things slide

You mean Lupin and Kingsley trusted Arthur but did not trust Harry? They should have checked everyone IMO. If they did not, that was a terrible mistake which could have cost them IMO.

Knowing there was a traitor, Harry didn't check Hermion and Ron after that either. He trusted them. He didn't check anyone - he trusted them all. At that point, they fully knew there was a traitor, they just didn't know who it was. Checking doesn't help anyway if the person is doing it of their own free will - JKR said a person can even escape the effects of Veritaserum. So it is not only showing distrust in your friends, it is rather useless, imo.

Harry was not the person in charge. Yes, I agree with you that an evil person could have got around everything. But just because he can get around everything, should we not do our best to protect ourselves. Had the Potters done their best and had still died, then that was their misfortune. But in canon we don't see anything like that. What we see is Sirius suspecting Remus, persuading the Potters to make the switch to a weak wizard and the Potters agreed to be persuaded and made the switch. It looks like Dumbeldore's warning, his offer and the times the were living in, completely ignored IMO.

The entire post is my opinion only.

Are we talking about Harry? Or the Marauders? :D

I always figured that maybe they didn't see the need for such stringent checking. They were already, as far as they knew, being very careful. Sure, they took a risk with picking the weak member of the team, but at the same time, the backwards psychology thing might have worked, had it not been for Peter being a traitor.

The thing is, you never expect your nearest and dearest to stab you in the back. They didn't have enough security, but I can't judge them for it. I would have done what they did. After all, they had the charm. Nobody expected the charm to lose.

After all, they had the charm. Nobody expected the charm to lose.

The problem was that IMO. While normally to look suspicously at one's near and dear ones is just not the done thing, here the case IMO was different.

The Potters were already in hiding. So the charm was to protect them specifically against the traitor IMO.

Sirirus suspected Remus; Dumbledore suspected Sirius; and Sirius persuaded the Potters to switch SK's at the very last minute to keep Remus from even knowing who the SK was, by choosing a weak, talentless thing as SK. And their reason is an assumption, because no where in canon is it given that Remus was in any way behaving suspiciously IMO.

The problem was not trusting the friends; the problem was trusting friends when one of them was a traitor and one friend believed another of his friend from the same circle to be the DE, traitor and the man who would sell out the Potters to Voldemort.

In that light, checking on their friends should not have been a bad idea IMO. As i wrote ckecking close ones when there is a known traitor does not make them disloyal to the friendship IMO.

We saw Lupin check Harry in DH. That did not harm their relationship and neither did Harry take offence at Kingsley for turning the wand on him IMO.

I thought they checked everyone. Secret questions are okay, though they could have also used other means as well! There was no way an imposter Harry would know about the Grindylow, though IMO. What I am trying to say is that the Potters did not do any checking, mild or strong.

Where do we have any canon that they did not? The Potters went into hiding shortly after Harry's birth. They stayed in hiding for more than a year before their deaths - all just to ensure that Harry was safe from the reaches of Voldemort. Does that honestly seem like an easy decision? They had to give up their liberty, perhaps even some friends and family, and maybe even their sanity to do this (staying cooped up in a house for this period of time is inordinately daunting to me.)

Does this really show that they did not care for their and Harry's safety? That they went the length of going into hiding, and yet were not responsible enough when it came to protecting Harry? I don't see it that way at all.

Where and how would JKR show James and Lily checking everyone with a 'secret question'? To me, that they took the precaution of confining to their house is enough to prove that they were maintaining a low profile and they took the issue of their safety very, very seriously.

All right: say James and Lily didn't in fact ask Peter the 'secret question' everytime they met. Peter did indeed betray them.

Say James and Lily did ask Peter the 'secret question'. Peter would still have betrayed them.

So the logic that "James&Lily's deaths + Peter the traitor = proof that they did not ask the secret question" is not correct imo, because it could have happened either way.

And from all that I've learned from the text, it doesn't make sense to me that the Potters would take so many extreme steps to ensure their safety and yet not follow the basic rules (ie. checking to make it is not an impostor in disguise of a friend). JKR did not show everything that they did because there was absolutely no need for it - she meant to show that the Potters had trusted a friend (not a Death Eater under disguise of a friend) and the friend turned out to betray them; not that they were irresponsible berks who went around flaunting Harry despite knowing that Voldemort was after him, and are culpable for their own deaths, IMO. :)

1.How did James' and Sirius' particularly close friendship influence Remus and Peter? Did they feel left out or inferior?

I believe Remus did feel left out but never showed it.

2.Why was Remus the main suspect in 1981? Did Peter have a walk-over to discredit Remus if he did so at all?

I don’t think Peter had anything to do with it. Or if he did, that means that Sirius and James were willing to believe Peter’s word over Remus’s, and this shows that the rift had existed for quite some time. I think Remus was disturbed by Sirius’s behaviour in their 5th year: not only did Sirius betray Remus by coming up with a prank which could have thrown Remus out of school or even landed in Azkaban, but he also displayed no consideration for Remus's feelings on the matter later – in SWM. Sirius had not trouble provoking and angering Snape who was the only one to know of Remus’s condition and could have revealed the secret easily to retaliate for the "prank". This could have led to serious consequences for Remus. But Sirius – and James – did not think about it. I believe this was one of the reasons for Remus to distance himself from their friends – he was simply offended. And rightly so.

3.James, Sirius and Peter became Animagi for Remus. Was this noble or adventurous?

Adventurous, I think. Because I don’t consider neither Sirius, nor James noble for many reasons. (I will not even speak of Peter.)

4.What did the other Marauders think about James' obsession with Lily?

Remus probably found it amusing. I don’t think Peter cared much. Sirius, I had an impression in the 5th book that he was intensely jealous because he preferred to have all James’s attention centered on himself. It is a common thing for people to be jealous when their best friends suddenly engage into a romantic relationship, and the scene in OotP almost convinced me that Sirius was annoyed at James’s constant efforts to get Lily notice him. The way Sirius redirects James’s attention back to himself is pretty telling.

However, in DH it is obvious that Lily and Sirius were on friendly terms. So, either they had been friendly to begin with, or their relationship grew warmer after school.

5.How did Lily influence the dynamics within the Marauders?

No idea because I don’t know enough about Lily’s personality and her relationship with Remus, Sirius and Peter. I don’t think she ever took any part in their school adventures because in this case Sirius would have definitely mentioned it to Harry. But Sirius always compares Harry with James, not Lily. James was far more important for him.

6.James chose Sirius as godfather. Were Remus and Peter understanding or hurt by this decision?

I think Remus was a little hurt but he understood that he had never been as close to James as Sirius, so the decision was not a surpise for him. Peter, I think, didn’t care at that moment.

7.Peter betrayed his friends. Was he ever happy with this decision and do you think that his friends would be able to forgive him if they had the chance?

Neither Remus, nor Sirius seemed particularly forgiving in PoA, which is perfectly understandable. As for Peter, he was shown to be such a one-dimensional cardboard villain that I doubt he even had any feelings at all.

8.Was joining the Order a joint decision or was peer pressure involved? For instance, did James and Sirius lead the way and Remus and Peter follow?

Well, Peter definitely did follow. The other three, I think, joined quite readily.

9.The Marauders had a very hostile relationship with Snape. Would this have been different if Snape had been sorted into Gryffindor? Did the Marauders antagonise other students that were into the Dark Arts as well or did they single out Snape from the start?

I think it’s pretty obvious that Snape had the misfortune of being singled out from the very beginning. Sirius confirms it in OotP: “Snape was a special case”. Both James and Sirius had personal reasons for their hatred of Severus. I’m sure they were not on the best terms with other Slytherin students either.
If Severus had been sorted into Gryffindor, he’d have had to share a dormitory with the Marauders. I think things would have been quite different. For once, I believe Severus would have been able to find something in common with Remus. Peter might not have been included into the group (he might even have sorted into another House). There might have been no Marauders at all. Who knows?

10.How do the Marauders compare to Fred and George? Do you think that they, and especially James and Sirius, were worse or just as funny as the Weasley twins?

I do not find Sirius and James funny. The Weasley twins are very sharp-witted, and many of their jokes made me laugh, but I don’t see them as “just funny” mischief-lovers either because they really went overboard with some of their “pranks” (Montague).

11.Did Deathly Hallows change your mind about the Marauders? Do you think that they were portrayed favourably or came out badly?

DH did not portray the Marauders favourably for me. What Remus wanted to do cannot be justified or rationalized in any way, IMO. James was even more reckless and careless and Sirius more aggressive than I thought.

12.Which Marauder do you like best and what are the traits that endear him to you? Did the other Marauders appreciate these traits?

I like Sirius and Remus as characters, though I do not find them endearing in any way, shape or form. I dislike Sirius’s hypocrisy, arrogance and cruel streak, but I deeply sympathize with him because of what he had to endure. He's one of the most intriguing, interesting and deep characters. Remus is not one of my favourites, but, curiously enough, he is probably the one I identify myself with the most. Also, I admire his teaching abilities.

Where and how would JKR show James and Lily checking everyone with a 'secret question'? To me, that they took the precaution of confining to their house is enough to prove that they were maintaining a low profile and they took the issue of their safety very, very seriously.

They did. The point being made is that they didn't take it as seriously as other people did later on. I always thought that they were justified. They did, after all, hide out for a year, as you stated. Also, asking a secret question of a secret keeper seems to defeat the purpose, so I see why they didn't.

All right: say James and Lily didn't in fact ask Peter the 'secret question' everytime they met. Peter did indeed betray them.

And still would have, regardless, yes.

So the logic that "James&Lily's deaths + Peter the traitor = proof that they did not ask the secret question" is not correct imo, because it could have happened either way.

I agree with you on this, absolutely. I just figured that those secret questions were not thought of as a precaution back then, and if they were, they would have made no difference in this particular circumstance.

As for the answers to the actual questions posed in the beginning that I did not answer...

1.How did James' and Sirius' particularly close friendship influence Remus and Peter? Did they feel left out or inferior?

I think Peter always felt inferior, and I think that no matter what would happen, he would always feel less talented and left out. Though Remus was undoubtedly also feeling terrible, I think the fact that he had a condition as terrible as Lycanthropy already marginalised him in the extreme. He already felt left out, and I don't think the strong bond between James and Sirius helped much in that time.

2.Why was Remus the main suspect in 1981? Did Peter have a walk-over to discredit Remus if he did so at all?

I always thought that this might have been because, as in the later war, Remus was in and out to werewolves all the time. He was with people who had suffered along with him, and the chances of him being influenced and turning dark might have been slightly higher?

3.James, Sirius and Peter became Animagi for Remus. Was this noble or adventurous?

A bit of both. They loved the adventure, but I do think they did it with Remus in mind first and foremost. They didn't want him alone any more than they would have liked to be alone themselves.

4.What did the other Marauders think about James' obsession with Lily?

I imagine Remus felt sad that he might never have that, Sirius I'm not sure of, and I think Peter was quite jealous when it became apparent that James and Lily would be a couple. Maybe Sirius was just happy that James had settled down and that he had won Lily over. Finally! (Took him long enough..)

5.How did Lily influence the dynamics within the Marauders?

I think she was adopted into the group and that she got to know them very well. I think she might have particularly been close to Lupin, and I don't see her as liking Wormtail too much. I think she would have really liked Sirius too though, he had a good attitude to adventure and life. Otherwise, he would never have been selected as secret keeper.

6.James chose Sirius as godfather. Were Remus and Peter understanding or hurt by this decision?

I think Remus understood, and Peter likely always knew that he was never as into the group as he might have been. I don't think hurt id the word for Remus at all, I think he just accepted that James and Sirius were closer.

7.Peter betrayed his friends. Was he ever happy with this decision and do you think that his friends would be able to forgive him if they had the chance?

I think none of them would have ever forgiven him. Remus and Sirius had already made it quite clear that killing him was a serious option. I don't know enough about James to think that one through. Nor do I think Peter was ever happy with his decision. Like Snape, he just wanted the power.

8.Was joining the Order a joint decision or was peer pressure involved? For instance, did James and Sirius lead the way and Remus and Peter follow?

I think it was a joint decision. There was no reason why they wouldn't. But I suppose it's a story we will never know.

9.The Marauders had a very hostile relationship with Snape. Would this have been different if Snape had been sorted into Gryffindor? Did the Marauders antagonise other students that were into the Dark Arts as well or did they single out Snape from the start?

If he had been sorted into Gryffindor, the good influence away from the Slytherin bunch who became Death Eaters would have been larger. I think things would have worked out better. Maybe Lily would have even chosen Snape, I don't know. I think the Marauders always hated the Slytherin group, but I think Snape was singled out.

10.How do the Marauders compare to Fred and George? Do you think that they, and especially James and Sirius, were worse or just as funny as the Weasley twins?

I think they were more vindictive, but also very funny. I bet they came up with great stuff!

11.Did Deathly Hallows change your mind about the Marauders? Do you think that they were portrayed favourably or came out badly?

I think they were portrayed well overall, but they're not my favourite group of people. I think they showed poor judgement, they bullied, they corrupted, they made difficult but poor choices, they were cruel, but they were also brave, upstanding and strong. I just think their faults outweigh their good, but that doesn't stop Lupin from being my second favourite character.

12.Which Marauder do you like best and what are the traits that endear him to you? Did the other Marauders appreciate these traits?

Remus. Patience, Understanding, his fears and insecurities, his ability to love, the fact that he triumphed in tough odds. I think the Marauders did appreciate these traits for sure.

Also, asking a secret question of a secret keeper seems to defeat the purpose, so I see why they didn't.

I agree with you, but I was also talking about the time James and Lily were in hiding but not under the Fidelius charm (which was applied for just a week before their deaths). They did last a whole year from Voldemort's clutches, didn't they? So I get the feeling that they did take enough measures to ensure that none of their friends were really a Death Eater in disguise.

Now, why Peter didn't reveal their location to Voldemort before the Fidelius charm was applied is something I didn't understand really well. After all he had been a spy for a whole year. :hmm:

I just figured that those secret questions were not thought of as a precaution back then, and if they were, they would have made no difference in this particular circumstance.

I saw it pretty much the same way, actually. And you're right about it not making a difference in this situation. In any case, I can't imagine where it would have been possible for JKR to show in the books that James&Lily checked everyone that came to their house - like I said, just the fact that they went into hiding for so long is enough proof (for me) that Harry's safety was their number one priority.

I think they were portrayed well overall, but they're not my favourite group of people. I think they showed poor judgement, they bullied, they corrupted, they made difficult but poor choices, they were cruel, but they were also brave, upstanding and strong. I just think their faults outweigh their good, but that doesn't stop Lupin from being my second favourite character.

Whew. And Snape is your favourite because...? :D

Just kidding. ;) I've seen it the other way round, actually. With the exclusion of Peter, the Marauders (and Lily) have always struck me as intensely brave, loyal, dedicated to the Order, willing to die for each other at a moment's notice. Their flaws were minor because they were essentially good people in my opinion, and the faults that did stand out when they were teenagers, they eventually grew out of (mostly, with a few exceptions). They definitely made some mistakes, but in all seriousness, who doesn't? I don't blame Peter's treachery on anyone other than Peter himself - the other Marauders and Lily don't come into it at all. And to me, the fact that their intentions were good and noble is enough to make up for those mistakes. :)

I agree with you, but I was also talking about the time James and Lily were in hiding but not under the Fidelius charm (which was applied for just a week before their deaths). They did last a whole year from Voldemort's clutches, didn't they? So I get the feeling that they did take enough measures to ensure that none of their friends were really a Death Eater in disguise.

Now, why Peter didn't reveal their location to Voldemort before the Fidelius charm was applied is something I didn't understand really well. After all he had been a spy for a whole year. :hmm:

Because Voldemort wasn't asking him for the information, imo. Both the Potters and the Longbottoms would have gone into hiding because it was not known who Voldemort would choose (or if indeed he would simply kill both just in case). So When Voldemort finally made his decision, Snape went to Dumbledore and told him and that is when the charm was placed. At that point, Peter was not only able to tell him the location, but because he was SK, he could reveal it. McGonagall and Sirius both say this last bit in POA. The "movements" of the Potters was only spoken about and relevant because they were ultimately killed. However, I would assume the 'movements' of the Longbottoms were also revealed by Peter if he learned of them. It is possible that Peter would not have learned of them as often though. Dumbledore had spies at that time among the Death Eaters who kept him abreast of that information. But in reality it would seem that Voldemort had not pinpointed a specific child until Snape went to Dumbledore because why would Snape wait a year? And Dumbledore would not wait a year to tell them to protect themselves with the SK charm either, so the way it is told in canon is the most reasonable explanation for it all, imo.

The problem was that IMO. While normally to look suspicously at one's near and dear ones is just not the done thing, here the case IMO was different.

The Potters were already in hiding. So the charm was to protect them specifically against the traitor IMO.

Sirirus suspected Remus; Dumbledore suspected Sirius; and Sirius persuaded the Potters to switch SK's at the very last minute to keep Remus from even knowing who the SK was, by choosing a weak, talentless thing as SK. And their reason is an assumption, because no where in canon is it given that Remus was in any way behaving suspiciously IMO.

The problem was not trusting the friends; the problem was trusting friends when one of them was a traitor and one friend believed another of his friend from the same circle to be the DE, traitor and the man who would sell out the Potters to Voldemort.

In that light, checking on their friends should not have been a bad idea IMO. As i wrote ckecking close ones when there is a known traitor does not make them disloyal to the friendship IMO.

We saw Lupin check Harry in DH. That did not harm their relationship and neither did Harry take offence at Kingsley for turning the wand on him IMO.

There are still a lot of problems with this line of reasoning.

First - the Potters decided to use the Fidelius Charm because they had received confirmation that Voldemort was after them specifically - that he had chosen Harry over Neville. The fact that Dumbledore suspected there might be a traitor was not the reason he suggested the Fidelius Charm nor the reason they decided to use it. They were protecting themselves from Voldemort because Dumbledore had received concrete evidence that Voldemort was going to come after them. That is clearly stated in canon.

Second - Dumbledore only suspected that there might be a spy and, if there was, it was likely someone close to the Potters. He had no idea if there was actually a spy and he had no way of knowing who the spy was. That's why he advised against using Sirius as secret keeper. Not because he suspected Sirius, but because he couldn't be sure who the spy would be if there was one. He would have given the same advice if James had said he was going to use Lupin or Pettigrew.

Third - Sirius became suspicious of Lupin, but canon is quite clear that James and Lily did not. Lupin himself tells Harry that James would have considered it the height of dishonor to mistrust his friends.

Where all this falls apart is your continued assertion that they should have checked their friends. I've asked repeatedly what you are talking about there, but you have yet to address this. So I'll ask again. What exactly were they supposed to check?

You keep going on about how Lupin checked Harry in DH, but Lupin was checking to make sure that it was actually Harry and not someone impersonating Harry with polyjuice. Once he was sure it was Harry, everything was fine because he trusted Harry. The same applies to Pettigrew. They would have checked to make sure it was actually him and not someone impersonating him with polyjuice. But, like Lupin with Harry, once they were sure it was him, that would have been the end of it because they trusted Pettigrew. Likewise, he wasn't under the Imperius curse so that's a moot point as well.

So I'm not really sure what you're trying to say there because they did everything they could possibly do under the circumstances given the information that they had at that point in time. They did not know that there was a spy and Dumbledore's vague suspicions were not supported by anything concrete. They had known Pettigrew for over 10 years and did not have any reason not to trust him. They were not careless or reckless. They were tricked by someone they believed they could trust. They can't be blamed for that, IMO.

Because Voldemort wasn't asking him for the information, imo. Both the Potters and the Longbottoms would have gone into hiding because it was not known who Voldemort would choose (or if indeed he would simply kill both just in case). So When Voldemort finally made his decision, Snape went to Dumbledore and told him and that is when the charm was placed. At that point, Peter was not only able to tell him the location, but because he was SK, he could reveal it. McGonagall and Sirius both say this last bit in POA. The "movements" of the Potters was only spoken about and relevant because they were ultimately killed. However, I would assume the 'movements' of the Longbottoms were also revealed by Peter if he learned of them. It is possible that Peter would not have learned of them as often though. Dumbledore had spies at that time among the Death Eaters who kept him abreast of that information. But in reality it would seem that Voldemort had not pinpointed a specific child until Snape went to Dumbledore because why would Snape wait a year? And Dumbledore would not wait a year to tell them to protect themselves with the SK charm either, so the way it is told in canon is the most reasonable explanation for it all, imo.

Yep, definitely makes sense. :tu: Though I wonder why Voldemort took so long to decide, if it came to that. I think it might be possible that it took him some time to figure out which couple it was that satisfied the conditions of the prophecy - defying him three times, and giving birth to a baby at the end of July. I can't imagine he made a record of how many times people defied him. :lol: Specifically, Order members would have stood out, so I guess he started there. He might've wished to look at all options thoroughly, though in the end he did choose Harry after all.

Yep, definitely makes sense. :tu: Though I wonder why Voldemort took so long to decide, if it came to that. I think it might be possible that it took him some time to figure out which couple it was that satisfied the conditions of the prophecy - defying him three times, and giving birth to a baby at the end of July. I can't imagine he made a record of how many times people defied him. :lol: Specifically, Order members would have stood out, so I guess he started there. He might've wished to look at all options thoroughly, though in the end he did choose Harry after all.

Yeah, I always figured he had to wait to see who actually had males in July, then of those whose parents had defied him thrice. And there may have been a lot of wizards who could fit that description somehow; so he had to check them all and then narrow it down. Additionally, he may have taken into consideration that Harry is a 1/2 blood like he was. And finally waited a little while to see if there was some manifestation on the part of the kids that singled one of them out as "special". But the kids who were born to parents that had defied him thrice were all hidden. :lol:. It would make sense that eventually he would simply try to kill them both and just decided on Harry first. But of course he never had the time to actually consider the matter after his attempt on Harry's life.

Yep, definitely makes sense. :tu: Though I wonder why Voldemort took so long to decide, if it came to that. I think it might be possible that it took him some time to figure out which couple it was that satisfied the conditions of the prophecy - defying him three times, and giving birth to a baby at the end of July. I can't imagine he made a record of how many times people defied him. :lol: Specifically, Order members would have stood out, so I guess he started there. He might've wished to look at all options thoroughly, though in the end he did choose Harry after all.

I was browsing the 'flair' on Facebook the other day and I found one that said "Voldemort chose Harry because he feared baby Neville" and thought it was absolutly fantastic! /off topic


Third - Sirius became suspicious of Lupin, but canon is quite clear that James and Lily did not. Lupin himself tells Harry that James would have considered it the height of dishonor to mistrust his friends


I'm really not sure that this comment of Lupin's can be used a definitive evidence that Lily and James did not share Sirius' suspicions of Remus. Particularly when we have other canon-- actual actions and not just hearsay years later-- that seem to contradict this.

However, in the end, we really don't have quite enough canon information to say definitvely whether or not James and Lily mistrusted Remus. Quite frankly, I believe it could go either way, but think it is more likely that they did mistrust him.

I believe WWB once mentioned that it was likely that Lily didn't mention Remus because Sirius may have been working with him-- but then why didn't she adress the letter to both of them, or ask Sirius about Remus? Just as JKR set up the whole of Snape/Lily based on Severus' refusal to speak about Lily (which was vehemently denied, because you can't base a theory on nothing, but later proven true) I think that she is setting up Lily and James to be distrustful of Remus based on the lack of mention of him. For people who are supposed to be as close as the Marauders are said to be, it just seems hollow and odd not to mention him.

I was browsing the 'flair' on Facebook the other day and I found one that said "Voldemort chose Harry because he feared baby Neville" and thought it was absolutly fantastic! /off topic

Why is that fantastic and why on earth would Voldemort fear baby Neville? :lol:

I'm really not sure that this comment of Lupin's can be used a definitive evidence that Lily and James did not share Sirius' suspicions of Remus. Particularly when we have other canon-- actual actions and not just hearsay years later-- that seem to contradict this.

What other actions contradict it?

I believe WWB once mentioned that it was likely that Lily didn't mention Remus because Sirius may have been working with him-- but then why didn't she adress the letter to both of them, or ask Sirius about Remus?

Because she wrote Remus separately to thank him for his gift as well of course. I feel there is ample canon in what Remus said to understand that Lily and James (especially James) trusted Remus completely. I don't know what other "actions" you are referring to. Indeed the letter is regarding trust issues a little, with respect to Dumbledore and it would have been a great opportunity for Lily to express her (and James) distrust in Remus, but she did no such thing. I can't think of any other actions in this light at all. And as I said, Remus knew everything going on, so he was in contact with the family in those last days.

Just as JKR set up the whole of Snape/Lily based on Severus' refusal to speak about Lily (which was vehemently denied, because you can't base a theory on nothing, but later proven true) I think that she is setting up Lily and James to be distrustful of Remus based on the lack of mention of him. For people who are supposed to be as close as the Marauders are said to be, it just seems hollow and odd not to mention him.

In the case with Snape not talking about Lily, it was shown that his feelings for her were behind it. That is why the situation was set up that way. JKR did not have a big reveal about James and Lily not trusting Remus though, so the literary comparison falls apart. She would have told us, as she did in the Snape situation if she was doing the silent thing in order to indicate distrust.

There was a hug and make up in POA between the parties that did not trust one another. The only scene we have them all together again is at the resurrection scene and there was clearly no issues brought up along these lines to make one feel like 'ah, they are all made up again' - because it was not an issue. In my judgment, it is just a means of trying to show dissention between the Marauders that did not exist and I am not very certian what relevance it has to the story at all. What if everyone in the wizard world mistrusted Remus? So what? He was a werewolf and would expect that to be the case. But the fact that he loved his 3 friends so much (later not Peter of course), was precisely because they loved and trusted him for who he was - werewolf and all. Same with his parents and later Harry and others. :)

Why is that fantastic and why on earth would Voldemort fear baby Neville? :lol:


Well, it was a joke saying that Neville is so amazing that even as a baby he struck fear into the very core of Voldemort. So, the huge Neville fan that I am, I adored it! :lol:

As for the Remus issue, I still hold it is likely they didn't trust him but like WWB don't really see how it holds too much relevance, nor do I think we have enough canon to really pinpoint an answer. Really, we must be obsessed if we can spend days arguing this simple point! XD

Where do we have any canon that they did not?

In POA we have Sirius who told us how and why the SK was chosen, switched and why Remus was not told.

Say James and Lily did ask Peter the 'secret question'. Peter would still have betrayed them.

Yes, he would have; I agree with you! Peter was not going to turn into a good guy because they suspected him. He may have even got around veritaserum and/or may have been an innocent who was Confuned or placed under the Imperius IMO.

But just because he could, is not a reason not to check. And also Sirius suspected Remus as well. So it was not as if all the Marauders were only trusting and full of faith and belief in each other IMO.

And in a war Sirius suspecting Remus or Peter or James suspecting Peter or Sirius is not wrong, though I believe they should have valid reasons. Here we don't know why Sirius suspected Remus as well. So there is suspicion and then I see what they did on that suspicion; should they not see if that suspcicion is a fact, before deciding who the traitor actually was? Or should they think Peter was automatically disqualified, because he was a weak, talentless thing? I think they should have checked.

I think they should to the best of their ability, for otherwise they would like we saw suspect the wrong person and choose the DE as the friend IMO.

Where all this falls apart is your continued assertion that they should have checked their friends. I've asked repeatedly what you are talking about there, but you have yet to address this. So I'll ask again. What exactly were they supposed to check?

Sirius, check on his suspicion about Remus! James check everyone who would know the secret! And especially the SK. All because Dumbledore warned them of a traitor. Otherwise they need not have checked anyone, because they were all friends who trusted each other and who would die for each other IMO.

But when Dumbledore says there is a traitor, when Sirius suspects Remus and would have told James (I cannot see why he should not have when he was such a good friend), it becomes James's responsibility to check on principle, in such a situation, knowing a mistake could mean death of not only himself but his wife and child IMO.

They were supposed to check everyone who would know the secret plus the SK with whatever means they had at their disposal to ensure to the best of their ability that all people who would know the secret and the SK were neither DEs not traitors IMO.

What I have understood from canon is Sirius "persuaded" James to change SK at the very last minute". And a page later Sirius admits he suspected Remus IMO.

There is only guilt from Sirius who declared that he as good as killed James and Lily because he "persuaded" them to change SK. There is nothing to say that they tried their best and yet were betrayed IMO.

The entire post is my opinion only.

Sirius, check on his suspicion about Remus! James check everyone who would know the secret! And especially the SK. All because Dumbledore warned them of a traitor. Otherwise they need not have checked anyone, because they were all friends who trusted each other and who would die for each other IMO.

But when Dumbledore says there is a traitor, when Sirius suspects Remus and would have told James (I cannot see why he should not have when he was such a good friend), it becomes James's responsibility to check on principle, in such a situation, knowing a mistake could mean death of not only himself but his wife and child IMO.

They were supposed to check everyone who would know the secret plus the SK with whatever means they had at their disposal to ensure to the best of their ability that all people who would know the secret and the SK were neither DEs not traitors IMO.

Check what? That's what you aren't being clear on. What exactly are they supposed to check? Checking for polyjuice was the standard practice and wouldn't have mattered anyway because Pettigrew wasn't being impersonated.

So what exactly are they supposed to have checked? They had known each other for over 10 years. They knew all about their backgrounds and family history. They knew their personal history because they had been friends for so long.

The point I'm trying to make here is that there was nothing for them to check.

Check what? That's what you aren't being clear on. What exactly are they supposed to check? Checking for polyjuice was the standard practice and wouldn't have mattered anyway because Pettigrew wasn't being impersonated.

So what exactly are they supposed to have checked? They had known each other for over 10 years. They knew all about their backgrounds and family history. They knew their personal history because they had been friends for so long.

The point I'm trying to make here is that there was nothing for them to check.

I suppose it just goes to show that you never fully know your friends. I agree that there was, at a late stage, nothing for them to check. It had been almost a year in hiding before they ever did the charm, if I'm correct, and so why would they start questioning their friends then?

I think its a consistent thing that when nobody betrays you, you start getting used to them and so don't request that they prove themselves time and again.

Check what? That's what you aren't being clear on. What exactly are they supposed to check? Checking for polyjuice was the standard practice and wouldn't have mattered anyway because Pettigrew wasn't being impersonated.

Peter was not being impersonated, he would have come up trumps on the security question and the polyjuice and may have even cheated on the truth spell/veritaserum, but despite that, I feel they should have checked him evey one of these anyway and also for the Imperius/Confundus; anything and everything they knew at and could think of that time IMO.

All because they knew there was a traitor; and Sirius suspected another friend as that traitor IMO.

So what exactly are they supposed to have checked? They had known each other for over 10 years. They knew all about their backgrounds and family history. They knew their personal history because they had been friends for so long.

And yet Sirius suspected Remus IMO!

The point I'm trying to make here is that there was nothing for them to check.

I respectfully disagree with this. What you say would have been correct if they were friends with no suspicion about each other like Harry, Ron and Hermione IMO.

The Marauders were not like that. Sirius suspected Remus, one of their very close friends, for whom they turned animagi and on whose side they stood, when Remus was shunned by the WW because of his curse IMO.

When there was a suspicion, I also think there should be verification based on that suspicion, so that they are indeed sure that the man they suspect was the traitor and that they were not mistaken.

So I would say that it was most important that they check, seeing what they could lose if they went on an assumption or a mere suspicion without being backed by facts IMO.

Of course they could have still been betrayed, but just because they could still be cheated even after all the precautions they took, I feel is no reason not to check at all in the first place.

The entire post is my opinion only.

Peter was not being impersonated, he would have come up trumps on the security question and the polyjuice and may have even cheated on the truth spell/veritaserum, but despite that, I feel they should have checked him evey one of these anyway and also for the Imperius/Confundus; anything and everything they knew at and could think of that time IMO.

All because they knew there was a traitor; and Sirius suspected another friend as that traitor IMO.



And yet Sirius suspected Remus IMO!



I respectfully disagree with this. What you say would have been correct if they were friends with no suspicion about each other like Harry, Ron and Hermione IMO.

The Marauders were not like that. Sirius suspected Remus, one of their very close friends, for whom they turned animagi and on whose side they stood, when Remus was shunned by the WW because of his curse IMO.

When there was a suspicion, I also think there should be verification based on that suspicion, so that they are indeed sure that the man they suspect was the traitor and that they were not mistaken.

So I would say that it was most important that they check, seeing what they could lose if they went on an assumption or a mere suspicion without being backed by facts IMO.

Of course they could have still been betrayed, but just because they could still be cheated even after all the precautions they took, I feel is no reason not to check at all in the first place.

The entire post is my opinion only.

You're missing the point here. I have absolutely no doubt that they did check for polyjuice. Nobody was being impersonated so they wouldn't have been concerned there. And I have no doubt that Sirius checked Lupin regarding the Imperius curse as well. Again, Lupin was not under the curse so that is a moot point.

Once those things are eliminated there was nothing else for them to do - and we know those things would have been eliminated because they weren't being used. Barring someone being impersonated by polyjuice potion or being controlled by the Imperius curse, they could not check anything else. James and Lily trusted all of their friends implicitly - including Lupin. They had absolutely no reason not to. Dumbledore's vague suspicions were not backed up by any concrete evidence and even he wasn't sure if he was right or who the spy might be if there was one. That's not enough reason to turn your back on over 10 years of friendship.

So I would have to say that this theory of yours does not hold up. James and Lily did everything they could do with the information that they had and what they believed at that point in time. They were not careless or reckless. They took every precaution in protecting themselves and their son. It's not their fault that Pettigrew was lying to them and they had no way to know that he was and no reason to think that he was. The only people responsible for what happened to James and Lily are Snape - for telling Voldemort about the prophecy, Pettigrew - for lying to them and passing information to Voldemort, and Voldemort - for killing them. James and Lily - as well as Sirius - were the victims here. They cannot be held responsible for something that they had no way of preventing just because they cared about Pettigrew and believed him to be trustworthy, IMO.

When there was a suspicion, I also think there should be verification based on that suspicion, so that they are indeed sure that the man they suspect was the traitor and that they were not mistaken.

This was not necessary because the person who suspected Remus was Sirius. Instead of checking, Sirius simply didn't tell him about the switch - that way, there was no need to check because Remus would not know anything and could not betray them.

This was not necessary because the person who suspected Remus was Sirius. Instead of checking, Sirius simply didn't tell him about the switch - that way, there was no need to check because Remus would not know anything and could not betray them.

You mean Sirius took that decision without informing James and Lily? Which would mean that Sirius had concluded without basis that Remus was the spy. And he took an unilateral decision on this? Is this what you meant?

You mean Sirius took that decision without informing James and Lily? Which would mean that Sirius had concluded without basis that Remus was the spy. And he took an unilateral decision on this? Is this what you meant?

Oh, I don't doubt that there was some basis for Sirius suspecting Lupin. We aren't told what the reasons were, but we are given enough information about the friendship between the Marauders to know that Sirius would not have been suspicious without reason. Just as we are given enough information to know that James wouldn't have agreed with it and saw no reason to mistrust any of his friends.

I think wickedwickedboy makes a good point and that's essentially how I've always seen it as well. I have no doubt that Sirius would have investigated, but the timing of all this is a big factor. It went down so quickly there really wasn't time for any intensive investigation. Sirius made the decision not to tell Lupin when they made the switch because he was suspicious. But that doesn't mean he never intended to tell Lupin at all. it's most likely that he was simply being cautious and wanted to investigate first. But James and Lily were killed before he could.

The significant factor there is that neither James nor Lily was in any position to tell anyone about the switch themselves. They were in full hiding at that point - not leaving the house, using the Fidelius Charm, etc... Communication was limited because owls could be intercepted, the floo network could be monitored, and even a Patronus posed too much of a risk because there could be other people around when the message was delivered and that would defeat the purpose of switching secret keepers in the first place. In order for James or Lily to tell anyone, that person would have to have come to see them at the house in person. It was down to Sirius and Pettigrew to tell anyone else about the switch - on a need to know basis of course. Since Pettigrew was the actual secret keeper, he would have been the one they depended on to inform anyone who needed to know.

So they do the switch - Sirius tells Pettigrew to hold off on telling Lupin while he checks things out and Pettigrew skips off to tell Voldemort.

Oh, I don't doubt that there was some basis for Sirius suspecting Lupin. We aren't told what the reasons were, but we are given enough information about the friendship between the Marauders to know that Sirius would not have been suspicious without reason. Just as we are given enough information to know that James wouldn't have agreed with it and saw no reason to mistrust any of his friends.

I think wickedwickedboy makes a good point and that's essentially how I've always seen it as well. I have no doubt that Sirius would have investigated, but the timing of all this is a big factor. It went down so quickly there really wasn't time for any intensive investigation. Sirius made the decision not to tell Lupin when they made the switch because he was suspicious. But that doesn't mean he never intended to tell Lupin at all. it's most likely that he was simply being cautious and wanted to investigate first. But James and Lily were killed before he could.

The significant factor there is that neither James nor Lily was in any position to tell anyone about the switch themselves. They were in full hiding at that point - not leaving the house, using the Fidelius Charm, etc... Communication was limited because owls could be intercepted, the floo network could be monitored, and even a Patronus posed too much of a risk because there could be other people around when the message was delivered and that would defeat the purpose of switching secret keepers in the first place. In order for James or Lily to tell anyone, that person would have to have come to see them at the house in person. It was down to Sirius and Pettigrew to tell anyone else about the switch - on a need to know basis of course. Since Pettigrew was the actual secret keeper, he would have been the one they depended on to inform anyone who needed to know.

So they do the switch - Sirius tells Pettigrew to hold off on telling Lupin while he checks things out and Pettigrew skips off to tell Voldemort.
That makes perfect sense. :tu: I really couldn't quite figure out how the two scenarios - James refusing to mistrust one fo his friends, and Lupin being kept out of the loop - could occur simultaneously. But, it does make sense, if Sirius simply didn't have the time to check out Lupin before telling him.

I also like the point about communication being difficult. For that matter did they even have the patronus method during the first war? There seems to be a surprising lack of communication between McGonagall and Dumbledore, with McGonagall not being fully aware of the facts.

Oh, I don't doubt that there was some basis for Sirius suspecting Lupin. We aren't told what the reasons were, but we are given enough information about the friendship between the Marauders to know that Sirius would not have been suspicious without reason. Just as we are given enough information to know that James wouldn't have agreed with it and saw no reason to mistrust any of his friends.

So Sirius would have information on Remus that is bad enough to prompt him to suspect Remus is actually betraying the Potters, yet James doesn't buy it on the blind faith that his friends would never consider such a thing?

Quite frankly, as much as it is nice to believe that the Marauders were this group of fantastic guys who were super close friends-- I think canon shows that there were a few cracks in this relationship, and they weren't all because of Peter.

Things are either going to go one of three ways-- that Sirius had sufficient reason to actually suspect a close friend of being a traitor, but James denied it because it was dishonorable to suspect a friend like that. (which demonstrates a naivitee in James) or Sirius didn't have much to go on, but suspected Remus anyway. James rejected the suspicions because it wasn't founded on anything solid. (which demonstrates that there had to have been a falling out between Remus and Sirius-- my vote is for the werewolf prank Sirius pulled.) Then, there is the third option in that Sirius (whether by sufficient evidence or not) suspected Remus and James bought it as well-- which would imply that the crack between Remus and Sirius (most likely over the Werewolf prank, and demonstrated in SWM) actually had James, too.

Because, ultimatly, Remus could have suspected Sirius at any time-- both before and after the Potter's death, when Sirius was taken to Azkaban. But Sirius had to suspect Remus before the death of the Potters, because afterward he realized who it really was.

Oh, I don't doubt that there was some basis for Sirius suspecting Lupin. We aren't told what the reasons were, but we are given enough information about the friendship between the Marauders to know that Sirius would not have been suspicious without reason. Just as we are given enough information to know that James wouldn't have agreed with it and saw no reason to mistrust any of his friends.

I respectfully disagree. In canon, Sirius is all about guilt; he never says that at that time there was so much stacked against Remus that they were forced to go with Peter; there is no explanation of any sort, instead Sirius says that he suggested Peter because Peter was so weak, no one would ever suspect him. Dumbledore suspected Sirius as the spy, not Remus, and James told DUmbledore that Sirius would rather die than betray him. But I don't think we have anything in canon about reasons for not trusting Remus. Dumbldore for example never mistrusted Remus IMO.

But when Sirius was nominated SK, McGonagall says that Dumbledore remained worried and offered to be the Potters SK IMO. So we have 2 things. Dumbledore suspected Sirius and Sirius suspected Remus IMO.

I think wickedwickedboy makes a good point and that's essentially how I've always seen it as well. I have no doubt that Sirius would have investigated, but the timing of all this is a big factor. It went down so quickly there really wasn't time for any intensive investigation. Sirius made the decision not to tell Lupin when they made the switch because he was suspicious. But that doesn't mean he never intended to tell Lupin at all. it's most likely that he was simply being cautious and wanted to investigate first. But James and Lily were killed before he could.

If Sirius made the switch before he actually became SK, then there was almost a week before the Potters were killed. It was not in a hurry IMO. If Sirius first became SK and then switched, that would clearly show that switching was only to keep Remus out IMO.

Both ways I feel that the Potters and Sirius took steps to keep out Remus, for they thought him to be the traitor IMO.

So they do the switch - Sirius tells Pettigrew to hold off on telling Lupin while he checks things out and Pettigrew skips off to tell Voldemort.

Again it is the timing as I have written above. In both cases Remus is suspected, but without any basis IMO.

@wimblemimble, excellent post. :tu:

But when Sirius was nominated SK, McGonagall says that Dumbledore remained worried and offered to be the Potters SK IMO. So we have 2 things. Dumbledore suspected Sirius and Sirius suspected Remus IMO.But then in that case, everyone would be at fault. You can hardly blame James and Lily for switching to Peter when Dumbledore himself didn't trust Sirius. If they couldn't trust Dumbledore then they couldn't trust anyone. No one suspected Peter, so they chose him. You can't lay blame on them for that. They had to trust somebody. All IMO. :D

That makes perfect sense. :tu: I really couldn't quite figure out how the two scenarios - James refusing to mistrust one fo his friends, and Lupin being kept out of the loop - could occur simultaneously. But, it does make sense, if Sirius simply didn't have the time to check out Lupin before telling him.

I also like the point about communication being difficult. For that matter did they even have the patronus method during the first war? There seems to be a surprising lack of communication between McGonagall and Dumbledore, with McGonagall not being fully aware of the facts.

That's a really good point. We don't know if they actually used the Patronus for communication during the first war or not. However, I would still see that as too risky when they were trying to limit the number of people who knew about the switch. As we see in DH at the wedding and at Grimmauld, the patronus would simply show up and communicate it's message regardless of who is around. And we also see that in HBP as well with Snape being able to intercept the patronus that Tonks sent to Hagrid. So even if they were using the patronus for communication back then, it would have been too risky to use it to tell Lupin about the switch because he could have been with someone that they did not want to know about it when the patronus found him.

So Sirius would have information on Remus that is bad enough to prompt him to suspect Remus is actually betraying the Potters, yet James doesn't buy it on the blind faith that his friends would never consider such a thing?

Quite frankly, as much as it is nice to believe that the Marauders were this group of fantastic guys who were super close friends-- I think canon shows that there were a few cracks in this relationship, and they weren't all because of Peter.

Things are either going to go one of three ways-- that Sirius had sufficient reason to actually suspect a close friend of being a traitor, but James denied it because it was dishonorable to suspect a friend like that. (which demonstrates a naivitee in James) or Sirius didn't have much to go on, but suspected Remus anyway. James rejected the suspicions because it wasn't founded on anything solid. (which demonstrates that there had to have been a falling out between Remus and Sirius-- my vote is for the werewolf prank Sirius pulled.) Then, there is the third option in that Sirius (whether by sufficient evidence or not) suspected Remus and James bought it as well-- which would imply that the crack between Remus and Sirius (most likely over the Werewolf prank, and demonstrated in SWM) actually had James, too.

Because, ultimatly, Remus could have suspected Sirius at any time-- both before and after the Potter's death, when Sirius was taken to Azkaban. But Sirius had to suspect Remus before the death of the Potters, because afterward he realized who it really was.

That's not what I said. I said Sirius would have some basis for suspicion - not concrete evidence. That was the difference between James and Sirius. James would take nothing less than absolute solid ironclad proof. Sirius came from a completely different background that James and was more cautious in that regard. Dumbledore's vague suspicions that there was a spy would be enough for Sirius to stop and consider which of them could be the spy if Dumbledore was right - something James would never do or agree with without concrete evidence. I think it is most likely that the information Dumbledore received that made him suspicious was skewed to make it appear that it might have come from Lupin as a means of protecting Pettigrew so they wouldn't suspect him. But the fact that they all underestimated Pettigrew is a factor as well because none of them could believe that Voldemort would ever approach Pettigrew.

I respectfully disagree. In canon, Sirius is all about guilt; he never says that at that time there was so much stacked against Remus that they were forced to go with Peter; there is no explanation of any sort, instead Sirius says that he suggested Peter because Peter was so weak, no one would ever suspect him. Dumbledore suspected Sirius as the spy, not Remus, and James told DUmbledore that Sirius would rather die than betray him. But I don't think we have anything in canon about reasons for not trusting Remus. Dumbldore for example never mistrusted Remus IMO.

But when Sirius was nominated SK, McGonagall says that Dumbledore remained worried and offered to be the Potters SK IMO. So we have 2 things. Dumbledore suspected Sirius and Sirius suspected Remus IMO.

Dumbledore did not specificaly suspect anyone as the spy. He suspected that there was a spy and that it was someone close to the Potters. He had no way of knowing who the spy could be and that was why he was against the idea of using Sirius.

“He suspected Black?” gasped Madam Rosmerta.

“He was sure that somebody close to the Potters had been keeping You-Know-Who informed of their movements,” said Professor McGonagall darkly. “Indeed, he had suspected for some time that someone on our side had turned traitor and was passing a lot of in-formation to You-Know-Who.”

Canon is very clear on that point. It does not say that he suspected Sirius - it directly states that he suspected "somebody close to the Potters". Dumbledore did not directly suspect anyone specifically - he suspected that it could be any of them. He did not have enough information or any direct evidence that would definitively confirm that there was a spy or who the spy might be if there was. All he had were vague suspicions that worried him. Dumbledore did not trust any of them because he felt that any of them could be spying on the Potters - that included Lupin and Pettigrew. That was why Dumbledore offered to be their secret keeper himself - he was the only person he knew for sure could be trusted.

Sirius became suspicious of Lupin, but the reasons for that were never explained. However, we know enough about the friendship between the marauders to know that Sirius would not have suspected Lupin without some basis for it. As I said above, the difference between James and Sirius is the fact that Sirius was not as trusting as James. He came from a completely different background. James refused to even consider the idea without concrete evidence, but Sirius was more cautious and felt Dumbledore's vague suspicions should be taken into consideration. He ruled out Pettigrew because he could not believe that Voldemort would ever approach Pettigrew. And of course he would feel guilty about that after he realized he was wrong and it had been Pettigrew the whole time. Lupin also felt guilty for believing Sirius to be guilty for all those years. That's natural.

But that only applies to Sirius because canon shows us that James would never have agreed with that. He would not have accepted that any of his friends would betray him without concrete evidence against them.

If Sirius made the switch before he actually became SK, then there was almost a week before the Potters were killed. It was not in a hurry IMO. If Sirius first became SK and then switched, that would clearly show that switching was only to keep Remus out IMO.

Both ways I feel that the Potters and Sirius took steps to keep out Remus, for they thought him to be the traitor IMO.

Again, Sirius was never made secret keeper. They decided to switch to Pettigrew before the charm was performed. Pettigrew was made secret keeper and Voldemort attacked the Potters barely a week after the charm was performed.

Canon tells us that Sirius made the decision not to tell Lupin. James and Lily were not part of that and were not in any position to tell anyone about the switch themselves. James and Lily did not believe that any of their friends was a traitor. Sirius suspected that Lupin might be, but he did not have enough time to properly investigate the situation.

Checking for polyjuice would only confirm that nobody was being impersonated. Checking for the Imperius curse would only confirm that nobody was being controlled. Trying to confirm that someone close to you is lying and betraying you is much more involved and would take quite some time.

That's been my point all along. Of course they checked for polyjuice - that was standard practice in the Order and did not show mistrust in your friends. That shows that you trust your friends and want to make sure that it is really them. Checking for the Imperius curse falls along the same lines - it does not show any mistrust because you are merely confirming that the person is not being controlled to do something against their will. From what we are shown in canon, these things were done by the Order as standard practice - that would include James and Lily.

Beyond that there was nothing they could do. Nobody was being impersonated - nobody was being controlled. The "suspects" as Dumbledore saw it were their closest friends - people they had known for over 10 years and had absolutely no reason whatsoever to be suspicious of. James and Lily did not believe Dumbledore because his vague suspicions were not enough to convince them. In order to prove that any of them were guilty a major investigation would have to be initiated and that would take time. Nothing short of following Pettigrew around 24/7 was going to prove that he was guilty of any wrongdoing.

James and Lily did not do anything wrong. They did everything that they possibly could with the information they had at that point in time. Dumbledore on the other hand, did not. If he was so concerned, then why didn't he bring Sirius, Lupin, and Pettigrew in and question them directly using Legillimency?

I think it is most likely that the information Dumbledore received that made him suspicious was skewed to make it appear that it might have come from Lupin as a means of protecting Pettigrew so they wouldn't suspect him. But the fact that they all underestimated Pettigrew is a factor as well because none of them could believe that Voldemort would ever approach Pettigrew.

What? Are you implying that Voldemort sent information to Dumbledore, but was sure to skew it to seem as though Lupin gave him the information so it protected Peter? Why would that even make anyone suspicious of Lupin?

I thought it was implied that Severus gave them the information. :/

That's not what I said. I said Sirius would have some basis for suspicion - not concrete evidence. That was the difference between James and Sirius. James would take nothing less than absolute solid ironclad proof. Sirius came from a completely different background that James and was more cautious in that regard. Dumbledore's vague suspicions that there was a spy would be enough for Sirius to stop and consider which of them could be the spy if Dumbledore was right - something James would never do or agree with without concrete evidence. I think it is most likely that the information Dumbledore received that made him suspicious was skewed to make it appear that it might have come from Lupin as a means of protecting Pettigrew so they wouldn't suspect him. But the fact that they all underestimated Pettigrew is a factor as well because none of them could believe that Voldemort would ever approach Pettigrew.

Still, it seems odd that Sirius suspects Remus because of this deeply cautious nature, yet doesn't suspect Peter. I still think there would have to have been some sort of falling out between Sirius and Remus for Sirius to really suspect Remus with such little proof.

And, quite frankly, canon hasn't shown Sirius to be the most careful guy, imho.

Still, it seems odd that Sirius suspects Remus because of this deeply cautious nature, yet doesn't suspect Peter. I still think there would have to have been some sort of falling out between Sirius and Remus for Sirius to really suspect Remus with such little proof.


I don't follow this reasoning. I recall once suspecting my sister of tampering with my motorbike so I could not take a trip she didn't want me to go on - and I had no proof at all. I love her to pieces, but that didn't stop me from thinking her guilty of gross destruction of my bike. I didn't openly accuse her because of the lack of proof, but I watched her like a hawk whenever she neared the garage after I'd fixed it :lol:. We'd had no falling out that caused me to suspect her, it was merely my knowing she'd not wished for me to travel that made me believe it - and that hadn't even been an argument, just a casual conversation. So I would have to disagree that there was a falling out; circumstances can lead to a false belief as easily as anything else, imo.

We'd had no falling out that caused me to suspect her, it was merely my knowing she'd not wished for me to travel that made me believe it - and that hadn't even been an argument, just a casual conversation. So I would have to disagree that there was a falling out; circumstances can lead to a false belief as easily as anything else, imo.

But what circumstance would have lead to Sirius' belief that Remus was a traitor? Asumming they were still close friends, it would have to be some pretty telling circumstances-- I mean, we are talking about believing that Remus is actually trying to get Lily and James killed! That Sirius would believe this, but not James, just seems silly and only leads to me concluding that James was being terribly naive about everything.

Otherwise, I believe that Sirius and Remus had a falling out over the Werewolf prank, or James and Lily believed Sirius. I honestly can't think of any other alternative to these three options.

But what circumstance would have lead to Sirius' belief that Remus was a traitor?

The madness of war? Remus was most likely unemployed and shunned by society, he was a werewolf and he was very talented, at least at duelling and DADA. He made a much better target than Peter. It is likely that Dumbledore sent him on secret missions even back then. Framing him would have been ridiculously easy for Peter. Just a little word here and there to feed suspicion. And nobody, not even Dumbledore, ever seemed to consider Peter to be the traitor, because it seemed impossible that he could keep such a huge secret and would betray the man he basically worshipped. But I doubt that this would have been enough to shake Sirius's face in normal times. But the war made everyone paranoid. People were dying left and right and Voldemort killed Order members one after the other. He must have got the information somewhere.

The madness of war? Remus was most likely unemployed and shunned by society, he was a werewolf and he was very talented, at least at duelling and DADA. He made a much better target than Peter. It is likely that Dumbledore sent him on secret missions even back then. Framing him would have been ridiculously easy for Peter. Just a little word here and there to feed suspicion. And nobody, not even Dumbledore, ever seemed to consider Peter to be the traitor, because it seemed impossible that he could keep such a huge secret and would betray the man he basically worshipped. But I doubt that this would have been enough to shake Sirius's face in normal times. But the war made everyone paranoid. People were dying left and right and Voldemort killed Order members one after the other. He must have got the information somewhere.

Exactly. If Sirius and Lupin had a falling out, then there would have been some sign of that from Lupin. Instead, we see that he was caught completely by surprise at Sirius' apparent betrayal. He tells Harry that he thought he knew Sirius - which tells us that they were still close friends when all that went down because Lupin could not believe that Sirius had done such a thing. That doesn't sound like someone holding a grudge over something that happened when they were 15-16 years old.

I agree with wickedwickedboy on this. The basis was the circumstances and Dumbledore's vague suspicions. Sirius simply could not believe that Voldemort would approach Pettigrew and he knew it wasn't him so that left Lupin. Pettigrew knew all of them well enough to manipulate the situation and make Sirius think it was Lupin - which would have been damage control in his eyes. He needed Sirius to take the fall and that wouldn't happen if Lupin was in on the switch.

The madness of war? Remus was most likely unemployed and shunned by society, he was a werewolf and he was very talented, at least at duelling and DADA. Just a little word here and there to feed suspicion. And nobody, not even Dumbledore, ever seemed to consider Peter to be the traitor, because it seemed impossible that he could keep such a huge secret and would betray the man he basically worshipped. But I doubt that this would have been enough to shake Sirius's face in normal times. But the war made everyone paranoid. People were dying left and right and Voldemort killed Order members one after the other. He must have got the information somewhere.

And it is just this paranoia and suspicion that makes me think that James and Lily had to, at the very least, consider that it was possible for Remus to be the traitor. At the very least, they had to be putting off any communications with him-- effectivly cutting him off from the group-- until they were certain it wasn't him. For James to deny it on the basis of 'he's my friend, he wouldn't do that' just seems silly and naive to me. And that was just my point all along.

If they couldn't trust Dumbledore then they couldn't trust anyone. No one suspected Peter, so they chose him. You can't lay blame on them for that. They had to trust somebody. All IMO. :D

They could trust themselves. So far I haven't seen a single convincing argument explaining why it didn't occur to James and Lily to take the matter into their own hands and become Secret-Keepers, so I'm still puzzled.

I'm in the same spot, Raelis. In my mind, when Dumbledore told them 'someone close to [them] had been keeping You-Know-Who informed of their movements', it was time to take those people out of the equation. It was their lives and Harry's life that mattered at that point. I know it's easy for me to say, but nothing else should have been an option.

Well it was Dumbledore who told the Potter's about the Fidelius Charm. Why didn't he suggest that they be their own secret keeper instead of asking to serve as SK himself? We could just as easily speculate that Dumbledore knew that "one must die at the hand of the other" so Voldemort could not be killed until Harry was dead. So Dumbledore didn't tell the Potter's the most safe plan because he was actually planning that Harry should be killed - in his normal "I can be machiavellian at times' fashion.

Well I have a feeling most people wouldn't like that idea too much. But it is as possible as all of the other speculation. The Potter's didn't know the spell or how it worked as far as we know. Dumbledore taught them - so why is he bypassed for blame in all of the speculation? When that happens, I feel that there is simply bias against the Potters because it is assumed they could somehow have figured out on their own that they could be their own secret keeper. In my view, the fundamental fact was that Harry's parents were written to have been trying to save their family - not recklessly kill themselves. So I don't imagine scenarios based on the latter in speculating what JKR might have been thinking - it is not in her thinking to call them reckless because her big plan in the end was for them to sacrifice themselves and be heroes - a tribute to her own parents. (Because initially she just had them horribly killed via some terrible death, but then her own mother died and her perspective changed.) So speculation in light of what JKR was actually trying to do has more relevance to me personally. In that light, I assume they did the best they could. But at the same time, I don't think JKR intended to have Dumbledore guilty of negligence either - so the being your own secret keeper thing I don't feel JKR had thought about in terms of this part of the story.

Well it was Dumbledore who told the Potter's about the Fidelius Charm. Why didn't he suggest that they be their own secret keeper instead of asking to serve as SK himself? We could just as easily speculate that Dumbledore knew that "one must die at the hand of the other" so Voldemort could not be killed until Harry was dead. So Dumbledore didn't tell the Potter's the most safe plan because he was actually planning that Harry should be killed - in his normal "I can be machiavellian at times' fashion.


Albus wouldn't have known that Harry would have to die-- it just as eaily could have been Neville. At this point in time, Voldemort hadn't 'marked' anyone as his equal yet, so Albus couldn't be sure who the prophecy would apply too.

I'm in the same spot, Raelis. In my mind, when Dumbledore told them 'someone close to [them] had been keeping You-Know-Who informed of their movements', it was time to take those people out of the equation. It was their lives and Harry's life that mattered at that point. I know it's easy for me to say, but nothing else should have been an option.

:agree: It was the safest and most reasonable choice.

Well it was Dumbledore who told the Potter's about the Fidelius Charm. Why didn't he suggest that they be their own secret keeper instead of asking to serve as SK himself? We could just as easily speculate that Dumbledore knew that "one must die at the hand of the other" so Voldemort could not be killed until Harry was dead. So Dumbledore didn't tell the Potter's the most safe plan because he was actually planning that Harry should be killed - in his normal "I can be machiavellian at times' fashion.

I heard this theory. I also heard a theory according to which Dumbledore didn't lift a finger to help Sirius get out of the jail and exonerate him from blame because it was inconvenient for him - he knew that under Sirius's care Harry would grow up much more independent and would be harder or impossible to control.

Now I don't like Dumbledore and don't understand the reasoning behind many of his decisions and choices. But I don't want to believe that he was prepared to go this far for achieving his goal, even if it was "for the greater good". It just seems too much.

On the other hand, it was ridiculously easy for Dumbledore to get proof of Sirius's innocence... And I still don't understand why he didn't do it.


The Potter's didn't know the spell or how it worked as far as we know. Dumbledore taught them - so why is he bypassed for blame in all of the speculation?

Didn't they? I forgot what is said in canon about this, but I find it hard to believe that the Potters hadn't known about the charm until Dumbledore told them. Weren't they brilliant, well-read students? Or couldn't they have found out more information about the charm by themselves after Dumbledore had told them about it? Or did they just meekly accept his words?

The explanation is probably much simpler - maybe JKR herself didn't know it was possible to be the SK of your own House when she was writing the first book. And then, while writing DH, she came up with the idea, used Bill as an example and created an inconsistency. :) But what's done is done, and we have to work with what we have.

They could trust themselves. So far I haven't seen a single convincing argument explaining why it didn't occur to James and Lily to take the matter into their own hands and become Secret-Keepers, so I'm still puzzled.

I think this is completely off topic and I am sure there is another thread about this which has made me think about it. I don't think it is possible to be your own secret-keeper. There is no proof that Bill and Fleur owned Shell Cottage. They could have been renting, they were just married and they may not have had the money or time time as yet to buy. Arthur is Secret keeper at Muriel's, but he does not own Muriel's house. Until JKR writes her own definite explanation of how the charm works blaming Jame and Lily for carelessness in this issue is --Careless? IMO

Kind of OT: I think Shell Cottage was Bill and Fleur's... and wasn't Arthur SK for the Burrow when it became Order Headquarters in DH?

Albus wouldn't have known that Harry would have to die-- it just as eaily could have been Neville. At this point in time, Voldemort hadn't 'marked' anyone as his equal yet, so Albus couldn't be sure who the prophecy would apply too.

I was referring to when they put the charm on. That was after Dumbledore was told who was marked; one week prior to the Potter's being killed. He knew the prophecy and so he knew that one of them had to die or both, in order for Voldemort to ultimately die.

Nonetheless, I don't think JKR had this in mind with respect to Dumbledore; I don't think she had the idea about being your own secret keeper in mind at that time either. We don't know who was secret keeper at the Burrow to my memory - Arthur was SK of Muriel's and we don't know if Bill owned Shell Cottage. So maybe being your own SK is not possible in JKR's mind.

And it is just this paranoia and suspicion that makes me think that James and Lily had to, at the very least, consider that it was possible for Remus to be the traitor. At the very least, they had to be putting off any communications with him-- effectivly cutting him off from the group-- until they were certain it wasn't him. For James to deny it on the basis of 'he's my friend, he wouldn't do that' just seems silly and naive to me. And that was just my point all along.

I don't know. As I see it, it shows that James didn't lose his head and trust. To me, that's an admirable trait, not naive and silly.

I don't know. As I see it, it shows that James didn't lose his head and trust. To me, that's an admirable trait, not naive and silly.

I agree. I thought it highly admirable of both James and Harry (and Lily by inference) to place their trust in their friends. I feel that JKR was attempting to say that betrayal is not a reason to lose faith in others that are close to you. It happens, but it is a poor reflection on the betrayer, not the betrayed. I think that is why she brought the issue up again in DH and had Harry retain faith in everyone as his parents had, despite the reminder of the past by Lupin. Dumbledore had betrayed Harry and friends in 7 Potters and Peter had betrayed the Potters - and death resulted due to both betrayals (Moody/Hedwig/the Potters). But the moral is not that one should not trust their friends; in my judgment, the moral is that there are friends who turn out to be bad apples and friends who place their agendas before the friendship. But in my view, that was shown to be uncommon. Look at the numerous others in the Potter's and Harry's lives; all trustworthy, loyal and wonderful people at heart.

But then in that case, everyone would be at fault. You can hardly blame James and Lily for switching to Peter when Dumbledore himself didn't trust Sirius. If they couldn't trust Dumbledore then they couldn't trust anyone. No one suspected Peter, so they chose him. You can't lay blame on them for that. They had to trust somebody. All IMO. :D

They did trust Dumbeldore, for they placed great importance on his information and were willing to got under the Fidelus Charm on his idea. I think they did not tell him because he would not have approved of either their suspecting Remus (he may have thought Sirius was trying to shift the spotlight from himself to Remus, because Dumbeldore suspected Sirius (have given canon below) and they also wanted to keep Remus out. For Remus would think Sirius was the SK and even if Sirius was attacked or tortured, he would not tell the secret, because he could not.

What they failed to take into consideration was that while Siriuis would not be able to reveal the secret, he could under torture reveal the name of the very weak, talentless SK who would not hold on against Voldemort and his men even for a minute.

That was why I feel Sirius, James and Lily did not do this thing properly. they refused advice and they thought they knew who the traitor was, without any basis IMO.

Dumbledore did not specificaly suspect anyone as the spy. He suspected that there was a spy and that it was someone close to the Potters. He had no way of knowing who the spy could be and that was why he was against the idea of using Sirius.

“He suspected Black?” gasped Madam Rosmerta.

“He was sure that somebody close to the Potters had been keeping You-Know-Who informed of their movements,” said Professor McGonagall darkly. “Indeed, he had suspected for some time that someone on our side had turned traitor and was passing a lot of in-formation to You-Know-Who.”

"Naturally," said Professor McGonagall. 'James Potter told DUmbeldore that Black would die rather than tell where they were, that Black was planning to go into hiding himself... and yet, Dumbeldore remained worried. I remember him offering to be the Potters' SK himself."

James Potter was defending Sirius who was planning to be SK. It was Sirius whom Dumbleore was worried about IMO.

Canon tells us that Sirius made the decision not to tell Lupin. James and Lily were not part of that and were not in any position to tell anyone about the switch themselves. James and Lily did not believe that any of their friends was a traitor. Sirius suspected that Lupin might be, but he did not have enough time to properly investigate the situation.

If that were the case then, Sirius took that decision without informing James and Lily. And he took an unilateral decision on this which they allowed? Was Sirius the person who called the shots there that he took decisions on his own for James and Lily?

I don't think so. I think Sirius did persuade them and I think they were persuaded. When the switch was made all of them except Peter thought Remus was the traitor IMO.

That's been my point all along. Of course they checked for polyjuice - that was standard practice in the Order and did not show mistrust in your friends. That shows that you trust your friends and want to make sure that it is really them. Checking for the Imperius curse falls along the same lines - it does not show any mistrust because you are merely confirming that the person is not being controlled to do something against their will. From what we are shown in canon, these things were done by the Order as standard practice - that would include James and Lily.

I really don't know about this; is there any canon for this? That James checked all his friends I mean.

Beyond that there was nothing they could do. Nobody was being impersonated - nobody was being controlled. The "suspects" as Dumbledore saw it were their closest friends - people they had known for over 10 years and had absolutely no reason whatsoever to be suspicious of.

And yet after 10 years of friendship and loyalty, Sirius suspected Remus IMO.

James and Lily did not do anything wrong. They did everything that they possibly could with the information they had at that point in time. Dumbledore on the other hand, did not. If he was so concerned, then why didn't he bring Sirius, Lupin, and Pettigrew in and question them directly using Legillimency?

Well, this is what I feel James and Lily must have done. The responsibility was theirs ultimately, not Dumbeldore's IMO. He could and did offer advice and offered to be their SK, but the final decision was James and Lily's and this was what and how they chose. They allowed themselves to be "persuaded" IMO.

The madness of war? Remus was most likely unemployed and shunned by society, he was a werewolf and he was very talented, at least at duelling and DADA. He made a much better target than Peter. It is likely that Dumbledore sent him on secret missions even back then. Framing him would have been ridiculously easy for Peter.

I respectfully disagree. I don't think that Peter sowed seeds of mistrust between Sirius and Remus. It was Sirius suspecting Remus and I feel at times it was because Dumbeldore said "someone close to the Potters" and that Sirius chose Remus by the process of elimination, which was like, he knew he was not the traitor, he thought Peter incapable and that left Remus. So I think Sirius suspected REmus. We are not given any other reason in canon IMO.

Surely we are not supposed to take Severus's words here so literally. :huh: The HP books are full of subtext, and this is one of those prime examples!

Surely the point is that James had not been mistaken in trusting Sirius. So Severus has that completely backwards!

At that time with what Snape knew, he was indeed not mistaken. For at that time everyone thought James had been mistaken in Sirius's loyalty.

Snape was indeed correct in another way too, though he did not know that at that time as well. The words James was "too arrogant to believe you might be mistaken in Black - now get out of the way or I will make you." (POA) also meant James accepting Sirius's persuasion without thinking on his own, and I include Lily in this as well.

They were mistaken in trusting Black's judgement about the traitor was what I was referring to. Sirius "persuaded" them to use Peter as opposed to Remus because of his suspicions, which James simply accepted IMO when he agreed to make the switch IMO.

The entire post is my opinion only.

Personally, I don't blame James and Lily for trusting their friends at all: when one thinks of it, James's (and Lily's) parents were probably dead by the time they went into hiding, they had no family except each other, and their closest friends- the Marauders. Given the way James is described in canon, I feel he was the kind of person who would have absolutely no qualms about trusting his friends with something that important, because to him, they were his family. And as for Sirius's mistrust of Remus, I always thought it was significant that never once does anyone mention that James mistrusted Remus back in 1981, even in passing.

1. How did James' and Sirius' particularly close friendship influence Remus and Peter? Did they feel left out or inferior?



I don't think so. Lupin seems confident enough and I feel close enough with all three of them to feel no ill will towards James and Sirius for being "left out". As far as Peter I doubt he gave it a thought considering he was a friend to in his mind the coolest students at the school.


2. Why was Remus the main suspect in 1981? Did Peter have a walk-over to discredit Remus if he did so at all?

I always wondered about this. What would make them discredit Lupin over someone like Peter? I have to think it has something to do with being a werewolf. They obviously wouldn't admit it but the Dark Lord having Werewolves on his side couldn't have mad them feel confident that Lupin was 100% trustworthy. Maybe Lupin fell in with the wrong crowd or some prejudice was there before and it came up during the war.

3. James, Sirius and Peter became Animagi for Remus. Was this noble or adventurous?

A little bit of both, but I'd say they did it for noble reasons but the adventure was just an added bonus.


4. What did the other Marauders think about James' obsession with Lily?

I think they were taken back by it at first but then it made sense. I can see Lupin thinking it was great and Peter just being happy that James is happy. I could see Black thinking James was crazy at first but then like most friends seeing how good she was for James.


5. How did Lily influence the dynamics within the Marauders?

I think it made James grow up and maybe put a damper on some of there more adventurous things they did. But seeing how James and Sirius were I highly doubt they stopped being the Marauders and doing some of there old tricks and games.

6. James chose Sirius as godfather. Were Remus and Peter understanding or hurt by this decision?

I think they were understanding but I believe Remus was upset more then Peter. Like I said before I think Peter was just happy to be there for the ride always seeking to be with the cool or strong as were Lupin was generally there equal. I still think in the back of Lupin's mind he knew it was going to be and should be Sirius.

7. Peter betrayed his friends. Was he ever happy with this decision and do you think that his friends would be able to forgive him if they had the chance?

I think he was happy at first but once he discovered he would still be treated like vermin and not respect he probably felt a twinge of regret probably more because the plan didn't work out then because he lost a friend. And I doubt they would have forgiven him. If anyone would have it would have been Lupin and he seemed well and ready to serve Peter the justice Black thought he deserved.

8. Was joining the Order a joint decision or was peer pressure involved? For instance, did James and Sirius lead the way and Remus and Peter follow?

I think it was a joint decision but I believe Peter would or wouldn't have joined depending on the group. I could see maybe Sirius being the one with reservation if he had to take orders from people. Its odd to imagine DD telling James and Sirius what to do and them listening.


9. The Marauders had a very hostile relationship with Snape. Would this have been different if Snape had been sorted into Gryffindor? Did the Marauders antagonise other students that were into the Dark Arts as well or did they single out Snape from the start?

I don't think it would have mattered the house they were in. I think Snape vs James and Sirius was going to happen no matter what. Lilly upped the ante and so did Snape being obsessed with the Dark Arts. I also think Snape would have loathed them with or without Lilly being there. Jealousy of them would be guess.

10. How do the Marauders compare to Fred and George? Do you think that they, and especially James and Sirius, were worse or just as funny as the Weasley twins?

There a lot alike as far as joking, adventure and popularity goes. But I think James and Sirius were more dangerous with there jokes and adventures then the Twins were. Still all and all I think there similarities are more alike then different.


11. Did Deathly Hallows change your mind about the Marauders? Do you think that they were portrayed favourably or came out badly?


It didn't change my mind at all if not it made me like them more. I think sometimes they were portrayed badly but I think they were just young and having fun. I think them giving Snape a hard time is somehow evident of them being bad people or reckless to the point they don't care about who get hurts. But all the scenes of them are from someone else's point of view, someone that hates them, loathes them even. Of all the Marauders obviously Peter is shown to be a terrible person through and through so maybe the Marauders worst choice is they trusted the wrong man. But outside of Peter they all gave there life for what they thought was the greater good. James gave his life to Lilly could try to take Harry and get out, Sirius gave his life trying to keep Harry alive an Lupin died fighting to give his newborn son a better place to grow up.


12. Which Marauder do you like best and what are the traits that endear him to you? Did the other Marauders appreciate these traits?

I like Sirius Black the best. I think his loyalty to Harry after all the years in prison and him still thinking of James and Lilly and still blaming himself for something know one saw is one of the things that endear me the most. Also the way he treats Harry as an equal. Some people think hes to reckless with Harry but I think he understands Harry needs to grow up fast and why should someone who has lived a life of adventure and mischief tell someone else they can't have fun either. Like I stated before people think its bad Sirius treats him as a friend not a son but I think someone like Harry needed a friend not someone trying to be his father.

I think they all appreciated Sirius loyalty and penchant for the exciting. Its shown by how close James and Sirius and Lupin's behavior once he finds out Peter is still alive and the way he and Sirius act around each other. I think being able to trust someone 100% is the most important trait you can ask for in a friend and I think they all believe Sirius had it.

This is a new and shiny attempt at having a thread analysing the Marauders without focussing on one Marauder only. Remus, James, Sirius and Peter are probably the most tragic group within the series and they all end up dead. But the dynamics are also very complex and and so are the readers' opinions when it comes to the Marauders.



How did James' and Sirius' particularly close friendship influence Remus and Peter? Did they feel left out or inferior?
I'm not quite sure how. I'd probably just say that Remus was unique, and that he wasn't TREATED inferior to anyone in particular. His "cool head", much like Hermione's in comparison with Harry and Ron's, was giving a much needed contrast to James's or Sirius's much "hotter" heads. If anything, I'd say Peter probably felt left out at times, though...
Why was Remus the main suspect in 1981? Did Peter have a walk-over to discredit Remus if he did so at all?
Um, unless you mean why was SIRIUS the main suspect?... I'm confused. How was Remus framed for doing anything?
James, Sirius and Peter became Animagi for Remus. Was this noble or adventurous?
Probably a little bit of both. It was really noble of them to think of Remus in his times of rejection and depression, and they were all true friends in the way that they wanted to help and support him. On the other hand, however, it was adventurous, even risky and dangerous, to illegally become Animagi, and had it gone wrong, everything could have been simple disastrous. There were other not-so-adventurous ways of showing that they cared, not that they would have been more fun though:D
What did the other Marauders think about James' obsession with Lily?
Oh, I'm sure Sirius was teasing about it.:p Remus was probably more likely to just say "Well, if that's what you want, then I'm fine with it. Go get her!" or something. I'm sure they all had doubts or disapproved at times though, esp. Peter, seeing as we know he's a little insecure sometimes.


(I have to go, but I'll finish up soon.)

Personally, I don't blame James and Lily for trusting their friends at all: when one thinks of it, James's (and Lily's) parents were probably dead by the time they went into hiding, they had no family except each other, and their closest friends- the Marauders. Given the way James is described in canon, I feel he was the kind of person who would have absolutely no qualms about trusting his friends with something that important, because to him, they were his family. And as for Sirius's mistrust of Remus, I always thought it was significant that never once does anyone mention that James mistrusted Remus back in 1981, even in passing.

I agree with all this, if only Dumbeldore had not brought information that one person very close to the Potters was a DE. That I feel changes everything and I feel James did heed Dumbedlore's warning, only he and Lily went about it wrongly. While we don't have explicit canon that James too thought Remus was the traitor, I feel it is implied, the moment Sirius said he suspected Remus, and that James and Lily allowed themselves to be persuaded by Siirus to switch SK at the very last minute.

I agree with all this, if only Dumbeldore had not brought information that one person very close to the Potters was a DE. That I feel changes everything and I feel James did heed Dumbedlore's warning, only he and Lily went about it wrongly. While we don't have explicit canon that James too thought Remus was the traitor, I feel it is implied, the moment Sirius said he suspected Remus, and that James and Lily allowed themselves to be persuaded by Siirus to switch SK at the very last minute.

But was Peter a DE? He was a traitor and a spy but there is no evidence he had the DE's mark. I think everyone is overlooking the fact that the Potters' had many freinds in the Order and it was possible it could have been someone outside of the Maruaders. I think to say that James and Lily allowed themselves to be persuaded is a somewhat poor choice of words. I have always thought it that they had a serious discussion with Sirius and a probably more serious discussion with Peter. They were after all discussing life and death issues and they were intelligent people who would have weighed up the pros and cons of what they were doing. Adult people in their situation have to make a choice, from their perspective it was a good plan. It is only from the perspective of hindsight, which as the saying goes is 20/20that it appears to be a poor one. I dont think they considered anyone in that close circle of freinds to be the traitor. I think they looked outside to the next circle. IMO

But was Peter a DE? He was a traitor and a spy but there is no evidence he had the DE's mark.

Well he had a mark in the graveyard; Voldmeort used that to call the others. But Peter was a DE. That is canon (POA)

I think everyone is overlooking the fact that the Potters' had many freinds in the Order and it was possible it could have been someone outside of the Maruaders.

I agree. But the Potters were already in hiding when The Fidelus charm was suggested, which meant those having access to them and their home were the very close friends IMO.

I think to say that James and Lily allowed themselves to be persuaded is a somewhat poor choice of words.

"Persuaded" is not my choice of words. It is what Sirius used when he shouted at Peter in POA.

And Sirius also states that it was he who persuaded the Potters, and that they made the switch shows, they were persuaded as well IMO.

I have always thought it that they had a serious discussion with Sirius and a probably more serious discussion with Peter. They were after all discussing life and death issues and they were intelligent people who would have weighed up the pros and cons of what they were doing.

If they did, there is nothing in canon to show that. On the contrary there is canon to show that Sirius persuaded them to make the switch at the very last minute IMO.

I dont think they considered anyone in that close circle of freinds to be the traitor. I think they looked outside to the next circle. IMO

But they did. Sirius did think Remus to be the traitor. And Sirius bing James's best friend, would have told him as well. He would not have shielded Remus to James, when their lives were at stake IMO.

James and Lily made the switch. Which means they agreed with Sirius that Remus could indeed be the traitor IMO.

1. How did James' and Sirius' particularly close friendship influence Remus and Peter? Did they feel left out or inferior?

No..I think they were so used to seeing Sirius and James together that it was strange only if it was the other way round.I'm sure they had a lot of fun together.Sirius went to live with James too-that forms a bond of friendship that is extremely strong and I'm sure that Remus and Peter felt that too.I dont think they felt left out-when Sirius and Remus meet in PoA its quite obvious how close they were too.I'm sure they were probably happy to be friends with two of the most popular and trustworthy men around.


2. Why was Remus the main suspect in 1981? Did Peter have a walk-over to discredit Remus if he did so at all?

It was Sirius who suspected Remus and others thought so too because Sirius was too close to James to suspect and Peter..nobody thought that Peter had the guts to betray his friend,let alone join the Death Eaters.Remus was clever and talented, so he was possibly the best candidate to suspect.

3. James, Sirius and Peter became Animagi for Remus. Was this noble or adventurous?

I think it was extremely noble, considering how tough the transformations were.But also, seeing this is Sirius and James we're talking about, it had to have something on the adventure quotient too:lol:.They both loved it:tu:

4. What did the other Marauders think about James' obsession with Lily?

I'm sure they were pretty okay with it.I mean, crushes are normal at that age and they had their own crushes too I'm sure.Sirius was supposedly extremely handsome, so you can bet he was busy on that front too;).James was a bit too obsessed with Lily, so I guess they had a talk about it.But I'm sure they were all cool and pretty normal about it:lol:

5. How did Lily influence the dynamics within the Marauders?

I'm guessing she was nice to them too.Though at first she may have considered them snobs like James(except Remus perhaps).But later, they were real good friends, seeing Lily's letter to Sirius(addressed Padfoot).I'm sure that after James got close to Lily, the Marauders were very good friends with her too.

6. James chose Sirius as godfather. Were Remus and Peter understanding or hurt by this decision?

No.I'm sure they would have seen it coming and it probably was the most obvious thing that James would do.I'm sure they were cool about it.They were mature enough to know that just because they werent named godfather does not mean that they werent liked by James or something like that.

7. Peter betrayed his friends. Was he ever happy with this decision and do you think that his friends would be able to forgive him if they had the chance?

He always probably had a twinge of regret, but not enough.He was too weak, too afraid of Voldemort and worrying about his life and too less concerned about his friends' life.Like Sirius says "You should have died, rather than betray your friends,like we would have done for you"-that was the difference between Peter and the rest of the marauders.I dont think Sirius would forgive him, Remus might think of it, but then decide against it.What Peter did was very low-he sold off his friends who deserved anything but that.I dont think they would have ever forgiven him(as is obvious in PoA)

8. Was joining the Order a joint decision or was peer pressure involved? For instance, did James and Sirius lead the way and Remus and Peter follow?

No..except for Peter,I'm pretty sure they all wanted to fight against Voldemort in the Order.No peer pressure,just plain urge to fight for what is right.

7. The Marauders had a very hostile relationship with Snape. Would this have been different if Snape had been sorted into Gryffindor?

Probably..but his relationship with Lily would have always made James jealous and thus, lead to a bad relationship.But things wouldnt have gone so bad had Snape been in Gryffindor.

8. Did the Marauders antagonise other students that were into the Dark Arts as well or did they single out Snape from the start?

I think they hated all those involved in the DarkArts, but Snape more than the others.Again,for James it would have been the Lily connection and that would have influenced Sirius and then the others in a lesser frame.

9. How do the Marauders compare to Fred and George? Do you think that they, and especially James and
Sirius, were worse or just as funny as the Weasley twins?

I think that Sirius and James were just what we've seen Fred and George to be.Sirius was too good looking and probably used that too, to add to his popularity.But apart from that,I think they were all so similar.

10. Did Deathly Hallows change your mind about the Marauders? Do you think that they were portrayed favourably or came out badly?

They came out brilliantly in DH.My only regret was that I couldnt see more of James and Sirius:love:

11. Which Marauder do you like best and what are the traits that endear him to you? Did the other Marauders appreciate these traits?

I cant pick between James,Sirius and Remus.They were all awesome in their own way.But Sirius enchants me , because he was a rebel, he rebelled against his parents, he got sorted to Gryffindor, he ran away from home,he fought for what was right,he was imprisoned wrongly, he shared the closest bond to a father that Harry had, he loved his godson,he was a great great, trustworthy friend and he died fighting for justice and the victory of the good over the evil.It doesnt hurt that he's too sexy either;)
Yay Sirius:tu:

And it is just this paranoia and suspicion that makes me think that James and Lily had to, at the very least, consider that it was possible for Remus to be the traitor. At the very least, they had to be putting off any communications with him-- effectivly cutting him off from the group-- until they were certain it wasn't him. For James to deny it on the basis of 'he's my friend, he wouldn't do that' just seems silly and naive to me. And that was just my point all along.

I would have to disagree. Trusting in people you have been close to and shared secrets and adventures with for over 10 years is not naive and silly. With everything the Marauders had been through and done together, James did not have any reason to mistrust any of them. Dumbledore's vague suspicious that one of James' friends might be a traitor was not enough for James to justify betraying that friendship. That would only have been justifiable with concrete evidence showing that one of his friends was a traitor - i.e. Dumbledore personally witnessing Sirius meeting with a known Death Eater and showing James the memory of it in the pensieve.

From James' perspective, he knew more than Dumbledore when it came to his friends. He had known these people for over 10 years. He had shared a dormitory with them, shared adventures and secrets - as far as James knew, he knew everything there was to know about Sirius, Lupin, and Pettigrew. Dumbledore did not. As far as James was concerned, his friends had proven their loyalty time and time again and "he's my friend so I know him better than you" was a much stronger argument than "I think someone close to you might be giving Voldemort information, but I can't prove it".

Albus wouldn't have known that Harry would have to die-- it just as eaily could have been Neville. At this point in time, Voldemort hadn't 'marked' anyone as his equal yet, so Albus couldn't be sure who the prophecy would apply too.

At this point in time, Dumbledore knew that Voldemort had chosen Harry over Neville because Snape had told him. That was the reason he went to James and recommended the Fidelius Charm in the first place - he had gotten confirmation that Voldemort was going to go after Harry. He had heard the full prophecy and knew that "the one" would be whichever boy Voldemort chose. Once that choice was confirmed to be Harry - which occurred when Snape met with Dumbledore on that hill - Neville ceased to be part of the equation.

I was referring to when they put the charm on. That was after Dumbledore was told who was marked; one week prior to the Potter's being killed. He knew the prophecy and so he knew that one of them had to die or both, in order for Voldemort to ultimately die.

Nonetheless, I don't think JKR had this in mind with respect to Dumbledore; I don't think she had the idea about being your own secret keeper in mind at that time either. We don't know who was secret keeper at the Burrow to my memory - Arthur was SK of Muriel's and we don't know if Bill owned Shell Cottage. So maybe being your own SK is not possible in JKR's mind.

I agree. Dumbledore's choices and actions are just vague enough to lead to that line of reasoning - particularly with what is revealed about him in DH. But I feel that line of reasoning is closed by Dumbledore's obvious disgust with the fact that Snape was willing to let Voldemort kill James and Harry in exchange for Lily's life. I think that goes a long way towards showing that Dumbledore's goal at that point in time was to prevent the prophecy from coming to pass.

I do think the inconsistencies with the Fidelius Charm causes problems within the story though. The Fidelius Charm was established in POA to be a very strong protection and - at that point - there was no way around it. If Pettigrew had not betrayed the Potters, then Voldemort would not have been able to get to them. She wanted to set up the scenario of Pettigrew willingly betraying his friends and the Fidelius Charm - as it was initially presented - was perfect for that. Jo added to the strength of the charm with the explanation on her website that, if the secret keeper died, then the secret died with them. The changes made in DH - specifically the change that the secret keeper dying meant that anyone told became secret keeper - makes the Fidelius Charm much weaker because Jo created ways to get around it.

Of course, we can see why Jo did that - the Fidelius Charm being so strong caused problems for her in writing the story because she needed the trio to end up at Grimmauld Place on their own as well as not be able to stay there throughout the book. So she had to create a reason for the Order to abandon Grimmauld Place as headquarters so the trio could be there alone as well as a reason for the trio to abandon it as a hideout. But I think it would have made more sense if she had simply worked with what she had already established in HBP. The Order had already abandoned Grimmauld Place because of the possibility of Bellatrix wanting to lay claim to the Black family home - since the secret was about it being headquarters for the Order, it was feasible for Bellatrix to seek out the Black family home and be able to see it. And the fact that Snape had been given the secret was more than enough reason for them not to stay at Grimmauld Place for very long - and even with the changes the fact that they do stay there for weeks doesn't work very well because they know he could show up at any point.

But Jo's choice to change the Fidelius Charm to try and work around all that does cause problems with the information we were given in earlier books. It would certainly help to have more detail about the charm - in regards to the process of casting it, whether who owns the property matters, etc... It is possible that Bill and Fleur did not own Shell Cottage and that might have enabled him to be secret keeper there - which would be similar to Dumbledore being secret keeper for the Order. If that is the case, that would explain why neither James or Lily could have been secret keeper since they owned the house in Godric's Hollow.

I agree. I thought it highly admirable of both James and Harry (and Lily by inference) to place their trust in their friends. I feel that JKR was attempting to say that betrayal is not a reason to lose faith in others that are close to you. It happens, but it is a poor reflection on the betrayer, not the betrayed. I think that is why she brought the issue up again in DH and had Harry retain faith in everyone as his parents had, despite the reminder of the past by Lupin. Dumbledore had betrayed Harry and friends in 7 Potters and Peter had betrayed the Potters - and death resulted due to both betrayals (Moody/Hedwig/the Potters). But the moral is not that one should not trust their friends; in my judgment, the moral is that there are friends who turn out to be bad apples and friends who place their agendas before the friendship. But in my view, that was shown to be uncommon. Look at the numerous others in the Potter's and Harry's lives; all trustworthy, loyal and wonderful people at heart.

Exactly. :agree:

They did trust Dumbeldore, for they placed great importance on his information and were willing to got under the Fidelus Charm on his idea. I think they did not tell him because he would not have approved of either their suspecting Remus (he may have thought Sirius was trying to shift the spotlight from himself to Remus, because Dumbeldore suspected Sirius (have given canon below) and they also wanted to keep Remus out. For Remus would think Sirius was the SK and even if Sirius was attacked or tortured, he would not tell the secret, because he could not.

What they failed to take into consideration was that while Siriuis would not be able to reveal the secret, he could under torture reveal the name of the very weak, talentless SK who would not hold on against Voldemort and his men even for a minute.

That was why I feel Sirius, James and Lily did not do this thing properly. they refused advice and they thought they knew who the traitor was, without any basis IMO.

They did not trust Dumbledore enough to accept his offer of being secret keeper. Nor did they believe him when he said he suspected that one of their friends was a traitor. Canon shows us that James and Lily were given reason to doubt Dumbledore's integrity - both through discovering his past with Grindelwald and the fact that he kept James' cloak for over six months. It is most likely that James and Lily decided to use the Fidelius Charm because that was something they could do to protect themselves without Dumbledore being involved.

Canon shows us that James and Lily did not have any reason to suspect that any of their friends would betray them - as well as directly stating that James would have considered it the height of dishonor to mistrust his friends. Dumbledore's vague suspicions that one of his friends might be a traitor with no concrete evidence to support it or even any idea of who it could be was not enough for James to turn against his friends. Sirius became suspicious of Lupin for unknown reasons - but not to the point that he ever confronted Lupin or discussed it with anyone in the Order. So we know that even this was something that Sirius wasn't completely sure about and merely showed extra caution. It is most likely that Sirius was simply planning on checking to make sure that Lupin was not being controlled by the Imperius curse and planned to tell him later. The fact that all of this happened so quickly prevented Sirius from being able to do any proper investigation and making sure the Potters were hidden under the Fidelius Charm had to come first.

James knew that Sirius would have died before betraying him in any way - and that included telling anyone that they had switched secret keepers no matter how he was being tortured. And they all believed that Pettigrew would do the same. Pettigrew fooled everyone and James and Lily are not to blame for believing they could trust him.

"Naturally," said Professor McGonagall. 'James Potter told DUmbeldore that Black would die rather than tell where they were, that Black was planning to go into hiding himself... and yet, Dumbeldore remained worried. I remember him offering to be the Potters' SK himself."

James Potter was defending Sirius who was planning to be SK. It was Sirius whom Dumbleore was worried about IMO.

That is not what canon tells us. Dumbledore was worried about all of James' friends - not just Sirius. Sirius came up because James said that he was going to use Sirius as secret keeper - not because Dumbledore suspected him directly. Dumbledore advised against that because, if his suspicions were correct, then they had no way of knowing who the traitor was. Dumbledore would have given the same response if James had said he was going to use Lupin or Pettigrew as secret keeper for the same reason because - as far as Dumbledore knew - it could have been any one of them. That's why Dumbledore offered to be secret keeper himself. Dumbledore never suspected anyone specifically - he only suspected that one of the three was passing information to Voldemort. He did not have any idea of which one it was.

If that were the case then, Sirius took that decision without informing James and Lily. And he took an unilateral decision on this which they allowed? Was Sirius the person who called the shots there that he took decisions on his own for James and Lily?

I don't think so. I think Sirius did persuade them and I think they were persuaded. When the switch was made all of them except Peter thought Remus was the traitor IMO.

Canon tells us just the opposite. Lupin acknowledges that it was Sirius who made the decision not to tell him because Sirius suspected he might be the spy. Sirius admitted this to be true and apologized to Lupin. Lupin also tells Harry that James would have considered it the height of dishonor to mistrust his friends - which confirms that James was never suspicious of Lupin at all. Lupin knew that it was Sirius who had suspected him and not James.

We don't know whether Sirius discussed his suspicions with James or not. However, we do know that - even if he had - James would never have agreed with him about it. The only thing that Sirius persuaded James to do was switch secret keepers at the last minute - using Pettigrew instead. That is stated explicitly on page.

I really don't know about this; is there any canon for this? That James checked all his friends I mean.

We are shown that this was standard practice within the Order. They checked for polyjuice and watched for signs of the Imperius curse being used. The Marauders were all members of the Order so they would have followed that same practice.

These things do not show mistrust at all and James would have had no issue with that. They show trust in your friends because that is merely making sure that the person in question is your friend and not an imposter or that your friend is not being magically controlled.

And yet after 10 years of friendship and loyalty, Sirius suspected Remus IMO.

But not to the point that he felt it necessary to confront Lupin or discuss the issue with the Order. Whatever misgivings Sirius had were vague and undefined. He was more cautious than James in that regard - which makes sense given their different backgrounds. As I said before, it is most likely that Sirius simply decided to wait to tell Lupin until he got the chance to make sure that Lupin was not being impersonated or under the control of the Imperius curse. All of this happened so quickly, he didn't have time.

Well, this is what I feel James and Lily must have done. The responsibility was theirs ultimately, not Dumbeldore's IMO. He could and did offer advice and offered to be their SK, but the final decision was James and Lily's and this was what and how they chose. They allowed themselves to be "persuaded" IMO.

They agreed that Sirius had come up with a good plan - and it was a good plan. The fact that Pettigrew had fooled all of them does not change the fact that it was a brilliant idea to use Sirius as a decoy so the real secret keeper would be safe.

James and Lily had no reason whatsoever to be suspicious of any of their friends so why would they do anything beyond checking for polyjuice or the Imperius curse? That goes against all logic and reason, IMO. Without evidence against one of their friends, there was no reason for them to interrogate any of them.

Dumbledore, on the other hand, was a neutral party. He did not know any of them as well as they knew each other. He had been given information that led him to believe that one of James' friends was passing information to Voldemort. He had no idea which of them it was, but he was worried. Dumbledore could not prove his suspicions to James without evidence, but he could have gone to all three of them - Sirius, Lupin, and Pettigrew - and used Legillimency to try and determine which of them was passing information. James and Lily cannot be faulted for not believing Dumbledore's vague suspicions because there was no evidence to support those suspicions and it does not appear that Dumbledore did anything to get any evidence to support his suspicions.

I respectfully disagree. I don't think that Peter sowed seeds of mistrust between Sirius and Remus. It was Sirius suspecting Remus and I feel at times it was because Dumbeldore said "someone close to the Potters" and that Sirius chose Remus by the process of elimination, which was like, he knew he was not the traitor, he thought Peter incapable and that left Remus. So I think Sirius suspected REmus. We are not given any other reason in canon IMO.

Of course Pettigrew sowed seeds of mistrust. He knew what was going to happen and he knew that it was necessary for him to take steps to lead the trail away from himself. Pettigrew's plan all along was for Sirius to take the fall for betraying James and Lily. That way, he could remain a spy within the Order and continue to pass information to Voldemort. Pettigrew wasn't stupid - he knew that he had to find a way to continue to be useful to Voldemort. But in order to do that, he had to make sure that Lupin did not know anything about the switch. If Lupin had been in on it, then Pettigrew would not have been able to frame Sirius.

I do agree that the process of elimination also played a part because Sirius did not believe that Voldemort would ever approach someone like Pettigrew. The reason behind Sirius coming to be suspicious was never revealed, but it is very likely that Pettigrew played a role in feeding those suspicions because it was necessary for his plan to work that Lupin be excluded. Even so, Sirius was never so suspicious of Lupin that he felt it necessary to confront him or discuss the matter with the Order. He simply showed caution in not telling Lupin about the switch right away - most likely planning on investigating the situation before he did so.

Personally, I don't blame James and Lily for trusting their friends at all: when one thinks of it, James's (and Lily's) parents were probably dead by the time they went into hiding, they had no family except each other, and their closest friends- the Marauders. Given the way James is described in canon, I feel he was the kind of person who would have absolutely no qualms about trusting his friends with something that important, because to him, they were his family. And as for Sirius's mistrust of Remus, I always thought it was significant that never once does anyone mention that James mistrusted Remus back in 1981, even in passing.

Exactly. :agree: Canon is very clear on that. Sirius became suspicious of Lupin for unknown reasons. James was not suspicious of Lupin - he trusted all of his friends implicitly. And you make a good point there - they were like family to him.

I agree with all this, if only Dumbeldore had not brought information that one person very close to the Potters was a DE. That I feel changes everything and I feel James did heed Dumbedlore's warning, only he and Lily went about it wrongly. While we don't have explicit canon that James too thought Remus was the traitor, I feel it is implied, the moment Sirius said he suspected Remus, and that James and Lily allowed themselves to be persuaded by Siirus to switch SK at the very last minute.

That changes nothing because Dumbledore did not have any evidence. All he had were vague suspicions that one of James' friends might be passing information to Voldemort. He didn't know if he was right nor did he have any idea which of them it might be if he was. Canon shows us very clearly that James did not believe Dumbledore's concerns were valid - nor did he have any reason to because Dumbledore did not have any evidence.

Well he had a mark in the graveyard; Voldmeort used that to call the others. But Peter was a DE. That is canon (POA)

I agree. But the Potters were already in hiding when The Fidelus charm was suggested, which meant those having access to them and their home were the very close friends IMO.

"Persuaded" is not my choice of words. It is what Sirius used when he shouted at Peter in POA.

And Sirius also states that it was he who persuaded the Potters, and that they made the switch shows, they were persuaded as well IMO.

If they did, there is nothing in canon to show that. On the contrary there is canon to show that Sirius persuaded them to make the switch at the very last minute IMO.

But they did. Sirius did think Remus to be the traitor. And Sirius bing James's best friend, would have told him as well. He would not have shielded Remus to James, when their lives were at stake IMO.

James and Lily made the switch. Which means they agreed with Sirius that Remus could indeed be the traitor IMO.

I just reread 'The Servant of Lord Voldemort' from POA and there is no mention of Peter being a DE. They call him a traitor and a spy but do not call him a DE. The graveyard scene from GOF occurs a year later, plenty of time for him to officially become a DE.
The Potter's were in hiding not exile. They had other visitors, Bathilda Bagshot for one.
For him to 'persuade' Lily and James a discussion must have taken place where he presented his plan and they would have to agree to it. I say again they were intelligent adults who must have felt the plan was a good one. Sirius considered Remus to be the traitor, that's true, there is no canon to support Lily and James did as well, he simply was not there and it is never brought up in canon that he was thought of as the traitor by Lily and James. IMO Sirius's words about his responsibility in the death of the Potters is misplaced survivor guilt. They died, he lived and he thought up the plan, ergo he had to be guilty. The facts as presented in canon say otherwise. Many people feel guilty about things they did not do, Sirius is a beautifully presented case in point. He did not kill his freinds, he did all he could to preserve their lives. It's interesting that Sirius continually expesses guilt over their deaths and the three who were responsible, Snape, Peter and most of all LV, never express regret for them dying. Snape of course bitterly regretted Lily's death but he never actually comes out and says 'I'm sorry I did what I did and Lily died.'

How did James' and Sirius' particularly close friendship influence Remus and Peter? Did they feel left out or inferior?

No, I'm sure they didn't. James and Sirius were the ones who were exceptionally bright, were the natural leaders and I imagine the most eager pranksters. It was only natural that they would be closer than the others. Remus I think was so happy to have friends at all that he didn't care that the two of them were closer, and Peter was glad to be included as well. Come to think of it, he may have felt a bit inferior, but I think it just made him admire James and Sirius more.


Why was Remus the main suspect in 1981? Did Peter have a walk-over to discredit Remus if he did so at all?

Like others have said, Sirius probably suspected Remus because there didn't seem to be anyone else it could be. Also I think it's vey likely that he tried to discredit Remus to Sirius, and maybe Sirius to Remus, but I don't think James and Lily ever suspected Remus at all, and I'm not even sure that Remus suspected Sirius until after the Potters' death.


James, Sirius and Peter became Animagi for Remus. Was this noble or adventurous?

Noble at first (JKR has said you don't know what animal you will transform into until you become an animagus, so for all they knew, they could have turned into mice), and then it became adventurous when they discovered that two of them were strong enough to keep a werewolf in check. But I can see James and Sirius especially seeing the whole project as an exciting adventure - not least because they were doing it illegally;).


James chose Sirius as godfather. Were Remus and Peter understanding or hurt by this decision?

Understanding. I think Sirius and James were so close that it was always obvious who would be godfather, just as it was obvious who would be Secret Keeper.


Peter betrayed his friends. Was he ever happy with this decision and do you think that his friends would be able to forgive him if they had the chance?

I don't think he was happy about it, but he probably found some way to justify it to himself. I think they would have found it very hard to forgive him, because his betrayal caused all of them a lot of pain. Lily and James died, Sirius was in Azkaban for twelve years and Remus was without any really close friends all that time. But maybe, if he tried to prove to them that he was sorry, they would be able to forgive him after a while.


Was joining the Order a joint decision or was peer pressure involved? For instance, did James and Sirius lead the way and Remus and Peter follow?

I think Peter might have followed, but the other three I think really wanted to fight. I'm new here and I haven't had a chance to read all I want to yet, so apologies if this has been discussed before, but do you think Peter might have remained on the good side if he had just stayed out of the Order, so that Voldemort hadn't found him as interesting?


The Marauders had a very hostile relationship with Snape. Would this have been different if Snape had been sorted into Gryffindor? Did the Marauders antagonise other students that were into the Dark Arts as well or did they single out Snape from the start?

I think it would have been different if Snape had been sorted into Gryffindor, because it would just have been to tiring to constantly hate someone you shared a dormitory with for seven years. As it was, they probably antagonised others who were interesed in the Dark Arts as well (like the student James and Sirius had used an illegal hex on, though we don't know why that was, maybe the person had just annoyed them), but like Harry and Ron were enemies with Malfoy from their first train ride, I think Sirius and James were enemies with Snape from the start as well.


How do the Marauders compare to Fred and George? Do you think that they, and especially James and Sirius, were worse or just as funny as the Weasley twins?

Hard to say, as we only have SWM to show us what the Marauders were like. I don't think they were that horrible all the time, but I think they (at least James and Sirius) were a lot more arrogant than Fred and George. Not that they were bad people or anything, they just, like Lupin told Harry, got a bit carried away.

And I'm not sure I've got the timeline right here, but wasn't this shortly after Sirius sent Snape to the Shack? Maybe he said or did something really nasty to them in retaliation, and they were still bitter about it?


Did Deathly Hallows change your mind about the Marauders? Do you think that they were portrayed favourably or came out badly?

It didn't change my mind about them at all. I liked all of them except Peter, and that's still how I feel. I would have liked to have found out more about James, as we don't really know that much about him, but I understand that it wasn't exactly relevant to the story. I loved the part with the Resurrection Stone, it was so good to see Harry surronded by the adults he loved and looked up to. I was a little disappointed that Remus died, but that part almost made up for it.


Which Marauder do you like best and what are the traits that endear him to you? Did the other Marauders appreciate these traits?

Remus has been one of my favorite characters ever since I first read PoA. I love his entire peronality: his sense of humor, how he has been shunned and rejected for most of his life, but still manages to be so compassionate and caring, how he tries so hard to lead a normal life, etc. And I definitely think the other Marauders appreciated those traits:).