Dumbledore faked the Prophecy

FuzzyMuffins
June 14th, 2006, 10:32 pm
This is a strange theory I have been working on, and it probably isn’t true, but anyway. My theory is that … Dumbledore faked the prophecy in order to lure Voldemort to Godric’s Hollow.

Before you dismiss me as crazy, which I probably am, let me explain my thinking. It is the height of Voldemorts first reign. Terror is everywhere, and people are going crazy. Dumbledore needs a new plan. Strong in his belief that love can defeat Voldemort, he finds somebody sure to sacrifice themselves for their child. Lily and James Potter. He asks them if they will put themselves in danger for the good of the wizarding world, and they agree. Step one done, two more.

Now he needs to lure Voldemort to the Potters and attempt the kill the baby first, so Lily can do the sacrifice. What is Voldemorts worst fear? To paraphrase Dumbledore “Someone who would challenge him” The only way to do this, however, is to fake a prophecy. How to do that and make Voldemort know about it.

Enter Snape. A young man in Voldemorts employ. At the moment, he is against Dumbledore, or he could be leaning towards his side. Either way, he is more with Voldemort than with Dumbledore. Somebody, Dumbledore’s double-agent at the time, or Dumbledore himself, tips Snape off that there is a big meeting with Dumbledore in the Hogshead. So off he goes.

Now Dumbledore knows that Voldemort will hear the “prophecy”. So how does he make it look convincing? Trelawney reports being “lightheaded”. Sounds like Obliviate. Perhaps Dumbledore created a potion with the prophecy in it and slipped it In Trelawny’s drink.

Now, Dumbledore has to pretend he is putting up a fight. Fidelius Charm time.He gives the job to Sirius. But Sirius says “I can’t just kill my best friend,” So he gives the job to Pettigrew. However, Pettigrew stays loyal with Voldemort when because he likes the attention, which gives Sirius a reason to track him down. Peter is scared Voldie will realize it was a trap, and becomes Scabbers.

Everything else works out as told in the story. Dumbledore sticks with the story as told in the book in order to build Harry’ s confidence.

So? Am I crazy or not?

Lord Godric
June 14th, 2006, 10:38 pm
The only problem I see with this is that Dumbledore said he thought Voldemort had horcruxes for a while, a while could have been before the incident at Godric's Hollow. Also can you imagine Dumbledore willingly giving up two of his loyal subjects to Voldemort? That is murder on Dumbledore's part. He would be the reason that the Potters are dead, and the Potters wouldn't have known a thing about the plan. I can't imagine Dumbledore having innocent people just killed like that.

Also Dumbledore said he told Harry everything, again how would Harry feel if he were completely betrayed by Dumbledore?

Proud_Slytherin
June 14th, 2006, 10:54 pm
The problem here is that the prophecy was reported to the MoM. And in my understanding, the MoM ONLY has records of REAL prophecies. If the prophecy was a plot from Dumbledore, the prophecy would've never appear at the Ministry of Magic...

kingwidgit
June 14th, 2006, 11:06 pm
It is the height of Voldemorts first reign. Terror is everywhere, and people are going crazy. Dumbledore needs a new plan. Strong in his belief that love can defeat Voldemort, he finds somebody sure to sacrifice themselves for their child. Lily and James Potter. He asks them if they will put themselves in danger for the good of the wizarding world, and they agree. Step one done, two more.
We have canon from JK, independant of the books, which states no one knew what the results would be were someone to sacrifice themselves...and further canon, from the same interview, that no one had ever been offered a chance to live in quite that way:MA: Did she know anything about the possible effect of standing in front of Harry?

JKR: No - because as I've tried to make clear in the series, it never happened before. No one ever survived before. And no one, therefore, knew that could happen.

MA: So no one - Voldemort or anyone using Avada Kedavra - ever gave someone a choice and then they took that option [to die] -

JKR: They may have been given a choice, but not in that particular way. NO one knew what would happen, not Dumbledore, not Voldemort, not Lily. It had never occurred before.

As for the prophecy being fake...it would not explain Trelawney giving another prophecy---in exact manner---to Harry, many years later.

Beyond that, JK discusses it in greater detail on her site:
What is the significance of Neville being the other boy to whom the prophecy might have referred?

Finally, I am answering the poll question! I am sorry it has taken so long, but let me start by saying how glad I am that this was the question that received the most votes, because this was the one that I most wanted to answer. Some of you might not like what I am going to say – but I'll address that issue at the end of my response!

To recap: Neville was born on the 30th of July, the day before Harry, so he too was born 'as the seventh month dies'. His parents, who were both famous Aurors, had 'thrice defied' Voldemort, just as Lily and James had. Voldemort was therefore presented with the choice of two baby boys to whom the prophecy might apply. However, he did not entirely realise what the implications of attacking them might be, because he had not heard the entire prophecy. As Dumbledore says:

'He [the eavesdropper] only heard the beginning, the part foretelling the birth of a boy in July to parents who had thrice defied Voldemort. Consequently, he could not warn his master that to attack you would be to risk transferring power to you.'

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

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

So where does this leave Neville, the boy who was so nearly King? Well, it does not give him either hidden powers or a mysterious destiny. He remains a 'normal' wizarding boy, albeit one with a past, in its way, as tragic as Harry's. As you saw in 'Order of the Phoenix,' however, Neville is not without his own latent strengths. It remains to be seen how he will feel if he ever finds out how close he came to being the Chosen One.

Some of you, who have been convinced that the prophecy marked Neville, in some mystical fashion, for a fate intertwined with Harry's, may find this answer rather dull. Yet I was making what I felt was a significant point about Harry and Voldemort, and about prophecies themselves, in showing Neville as the also-ran. If neither boy was 'pre-ordained' before Voldemort's attack to become his possible vanquisher, then the prophecy (like the one the witches make to Macbeth, if anyone has read the play of the same name) becomes the catalyst for a situation that would never have occurred if it had not been made. Harry is propelled into a terrifying position he might never have sought, while Neville remains the tantalising 'might-have-been'. Destiny is a name often given in retrospect to choices that had dramatic consequences.

Of course, none of this should be taken to mean that Neville does not have a significant part to play in the last two novels, or the fight against Voldemort. As for the prophecy itself, it remains ambiguous, not only to readers, but to my characters. Prophecies (think of Nostradamus!) are usually open to many different interpretations. That is both their strength and their weakness.Lastly, I just cannot see Dumbledore ever knowingly sacrificing people, on the off chance that something---which had never occurred before---might happen.

Proud_Slytherin
June 14th, 2006, 11:20 pm
That's the other thing... i cannot picture Dumbledore sacrificing important people for him, even if it was for the sake of the community. There must be other ways to do it.

halfbloodsnape
June 14th, 2006, 11:31 pm
That's the other thing... i cannot picture Dumbledore sacrificing important people for him, even if it was for the sake of the community. There must be other ways to do it.

I agree to that. Dumbledore is not the kind of person to choose two people to die for the "greater good". Not to mention that if we suppose this is true than Dumbledore has been lieing to Harry all along, and that one I really cannot imagine of him.

LikeLuna
June 14th, 2006, 11:32 pm
It's possible, but I don't believe Dumbledore would be so deceptive. I think he would have told Harry the truth about what happened.

FuzzyMuffins
June 14th, 2006, 11:34 pm
Somehow I knew this was going to be contraversal.

To everyone who said that Dumbledore would never sacrifice the Potters, what if the Potters WANTED to give themselves for Voldemort. James and Lily were noble and selfless.

To Kingwiget, perhaps not sacrifice, but Dumbledore could theorize that even the smallest bit of struggle that showed love would create a special bond.

Finally, to Proud Slytherin, for all intent and purposes, this was a real prophecy. Although faked, it caused Voldemort to hunt down Lily and James Potter, and give special properties to their baby, which is what would have happen had it been a real prophecy.

gavina
June 14th, 2006, 11:50 pm
Here's a piece I posted on Livejournal several days ago, it expands somewhat on your theory, I must say though that I don't really believe a word of it:

Some facts.

Lord Voldemort has been an active threat to the wider wizarding world since around the mid 1960s. This is based on Fudge’s statement that the Ministry had been trying to track him down for thirty years. Even if the time is pushed back to 1957 when Lord Voldemort turned up at Hogwarts seeking employment or moved forward to 1970 (per Dumbledore’s statement that Lord Voldemort had been terrorising the WW since 11 years before his initial downfall at Godric’s Hollow) it would make no significant difference to this theory.

Dumbledore, in whatever capacity (take your pick from Grand Sorceror, Chief Warlock, Supreme Mugwump or Headmaster of Hogwarts), has known of the threat posed by Lord Voldemort from the time he became a problem. Here as a small aside I say that it is often overlooked that Dumbledore is a Grand Sorceror, a title that he has never lost and one that Lord Voldemort may covet himself, hence his outburst at the end of Chamber of Secrets.

When Lord Voldemort first became a threat the generation of the Marauders were toddlers or certainly not much more and had definitely yet to start at Hogwarts. In fact, of the Death Eaters introduced so far in canon very few would have yet finished, or even started, school at the time Lord Voldemort was becoming problematic.

Extrapolating from the above stated facts it seems reasonable to propose that Dumbledore had been looking for a way to neutralise Lord Voldemort since before the Marauder generation entered his thinking, probably for several years before he came to know them at all. There is a strong likelihood that he succeeded in keeping some of Lord Voldemort’s worst excesses at bay but had no clear view of just how he would end his “reign of terror” until certain matters to be listed in the next section of this piece happened in the late 1970s and early 1980s.

The Late ‘70s / Early 80s.

As a preliminary point it does not affect the overall hypothesis when any of these matters took place to the exact date. That they took place in the timeframe as per the sub-heading cannot be denied.

The Marauders themselves and Severus Snape took part in the Werewolf Caper (as named by Red Hen on her invaluable site). None of them left school as a result and from what we can safely surmise all went on to complete their NEWTs.

James Potter marries Lily Evans, who conceives and gives birth to Harry Potter. No further details have been given, but it is my view that we will learn more of wizarding marriages in the course of book 7 from Fleur and Bill’s matrimonies.

Sybil Trelawney makes a prophecy at the Hog’s Head in Hogsmeade concerning a child yet to be born and the Dark Lord (who has to be Lord Voldemort for the Prophecy’s central importance to be valid – or perhaps the Prophecy is a rather large red herring – perish the thought!). The implications of this are central to the whole series and to this theory.

The Order of the Phoenix as constituted in the photo Moody shows Harry is brought together. A further small aside – I am of the opinion that the Order of the Phoenix existed in some form, although not by the same name, from the time of Lord Voldemort’s rise (or even perhaps earlier if Grindelwald was a significant threat) and was not formed only as a result of the prophecy but rather as a consequence of Dumbledore’s overall plan.

The recently disclosed Black Family tapestry indicates that both Regulus Black and his father Orion died in 1979, making Regulus approximately two years younger than Sirius.

Peter Pettigrew becomes Secret Keeper for the Potters leading to their deaths at the hands of Lord Voldemort on 31st October 1981. This date leads neatly on to the next portion.

Where were they then?

As at 1st November 1981 the main protagonists of the currently unfolding story were, with the exception of those who may or may not be dead, in no particular order: -

(i) Albus Dumbledore – Headmaster of Hogwarts, at the school.

(ii) Tom Riddle – Disembodied vapour entity.

(iii) Harry Potter – With the Dursleys.

(iv) The Weasleys – At the Burrow (All of them, as Bill would have started Hogwarts the following school year, although this is not important and would not be addressed if criticism is forthcoming upon it).

(v) Sirius Black – In Azkaban (or shortly to be).

(vi) Severus Snape, Rubeus Hagrid, Minerva McGonagall – At Hogwarts.

(vii) Peter Pettigrew – In hiding.

(viii) Death Eaters – Mostly worried at various locations.

(ix) Members of Order of the Phoenix – Mostly elated at various locations.

Any others were not at that point relevant to the story (including Hermione Granger whose existence would have been irrelevant to Dumbledore’s purpose).

The Problem.

Simply stated, and to repeat, the problem was, and is, how to get rid of Lord Voldemort. Dumbledore finally discovered a way, the difficulty was that it would involve the deaths of several close associates and the potential exposure of the wizarding world. That it would take almost twenty years to come to fruition was a minor consideration if the world (and not just the wizarding community) was to be rid of perhaps the most evil genius (and yes Lord Voldemort is a genius) ever to threaten its existence. This man, Lord Voldemort, would gladly see all humans destroyed and use any means to achieve his goal. That was the choice he made in the absence of any normal controlling morals, which we have now been shown that Tom Riddle lacked practically from the moment he was born.

Dumbledore’s choice, as I will postulate, is the central driving force of the current position in the wizarding world. His choice, which he considered right, was to neutralise / destroy Lord Voldemort by whatever means necessary. If I am any where near to being correct then Albus would not have mentioned his plan to anyone else, with the possible exception of Aberforth – and this is the reason Aberforth will be important in book 7.

The Theory.
Dumbledore’s choice was to manufacture the situation whereby Lord Voldemort would initiate his own downfall. What Albus discovered about Lord Voldemort during the course of his research was that he took prophecies seriously.

For this reason the prophecy was devised by Dumbledore to be espoused by Sybil Trelawney. Dumbledore would have some knowledge at the time immediately prior to the prophecy that two of his close associates’ families were expecting children around the end of July. My partner knew she was pregnant within days both times so far and it is not unreasonable to project that both Lily Potter and Alice Longbottom knew they were pregnant by the time the prophecy was made.

The additional feature of the prophecy that Dumbledore carefully manufactured was that Lord Voldemort would mark the child as his equal and thereby give him the tools to neutralise our Tom. The only factor Dumbledore could not control was which child Lord Voldemort would go after, but even this could have been quite easily worked out due to Lord Voldemort’s background (half-blood), so it could be said with some certainty that he would go after the Potter’s child. This would also eliminate the need to tell the Longbottoms of their hypothetical danger.

The only people who would need to be aware of their parts in the initial stages of the set up would be the Potters and Peter. It would account for why the Potters only went into hiding a week before Lord Voldemort came after them because Dumbledore had some way of ascertaining when the time would come for Lord Voldemort’s search and destroy mission. Dumbledore had to offer to be Secret Keeper to the Potters, but this was really just a cover story for Sirius’s benefit. As part of the plot his agent (yes Peter Pettigrew) would be made Secret Keeper. Remember this is about choices between what is right and what is easy if we are to believe Ms. Rowling’s interviews and what Dumbledore himself told us in Goblet. If Albus were Secret Keeper it would not be realistic to others that he had betrayed them, and they had to be betrayed for the plan to succeed.

This last is what I have a hunch one of the biggest surprises of the books will be, that is that Peter Pettigrew has always been working for Dumbledore.

Wasn’t he the man who killed a dozen Muggles and Cedric Diggory and did many other unspeakable crimes, including betraying the Potters you ask? Yes, he was. Did he do this from his own choice you further inquire? Yes, he did. Was it right or was it easy? Certainly not easy, but possibly right in the interest of the wider wizarding world.

In fact for the plan to work Pettigrew had to betray the Potters and do all those others things because otherwise Lord Voldemort would not have fallen into Albus’s carefully contrived trap. Add to this that he owes a known life debt to Harry and it is not hard to conclude that Peter will be of great assistance in finally neutralising Lord Voldemort, perhaps when he is on the point of killing Harry, even though he has actually played his part in the scheme already by notifying Lord Voldemort of the Potter’s whereabouts and later resurrecting Lord Voldemort. He may well also give Harry crucial information regarding the remaining Horcruxes. It was important for the plan to work that nobody other than Albus knew Peter was still working for him.

So the prophecy is projected into Sybil by Albus and it is arranged that part, but not all, of it is overheard by someone who would then report this back to Voldemort. It does not alter the basic theory whether or not Snape is on Dumbledore or Lord Voldemort’s side. There is a compelling argument out there that Snape must be Dumbledore’s man due to his having reported only half the prophecy when he must have heard the whole thing (a judicious Muffliato from Aberforth all but puts the kibosh on that one). I agree that Snape is Dumbledore’s man. This is not so far supported in canon, despite myriad attempts to do so, but as I say makes no real difference to this theory. The only important aspect is that Snape would report back to Lord Voldemort and he did. The fact is the only independent and unaware witness to the events at the Hog’s Head was Sybil herself whose pay off was lifetime protection at Hogwarts on Dumbledore’s instruction (and because he was not prepared to sacrifice absolutely everyone in order for his plan to succeed). She would give authenticity to the genuineness of the contrived prophecy should anyone care to check, and of course Harry duly did.

The first half of the prophecy is this:

“The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches … born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies … and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal”

I do not think the report went further, otherwise Lord Voldemort would also be aware that the child possesses a power he does not know. Knowing what we know of Lord Voldemort if he had known this portion he would have made some inquiries – the man who is so afraid of death that he would go to any lengths to avoid it.

This is the part Albus needs Lord Voldemort to be aware of for his plot to work. It is pivotal that Lord Voldemort mark the child as his equal and it is my view that Lord Voldemort would be aware of what this means (Dark Arts?). Albus would have contrived the magic that saved Harry and protects him yet with Lily and James’s full acquiescence well before Lord Voldemort’s attack at Godric’s Hollow. This was James and Lily’s part in the grand design; they willingly sacrificed themselves for the greater good. Why would Albus state that death is but the next great adventure to the well organised mind otherwise? All those who would die as a result of Albus’s plan to rid the world of Lord Voldemort would have been chosen by him specifically for being well organised minds ready for the next adventure. Indeed taking this to its logical conclusion Peter would have been alerted to inform Lord Voldemort of the Potter’s whereabouts only at the point where all preparations were in place

The blood protection being in place the tricky part of the plan kicks in. Persuading the Dursleys to accept their nephew as a surrogate child. This was managed and Harry was left for the next almost ten years to grow up. During the time Albus would have ample opportunity to keep tabs on Harry, but would not want to interfere for fear of derailing the overall plan. Albus would have been confident that Lord Voldemort would not come back for many years as the only person with the necessary knowledge and skill to perform the only ritual to reconstitute a body was Peter, whose instructions were to do just that at the appointed time. Dumbledore does not seem particularly surprised that Lord Voldemort returned to a body when he did and this may also have something to do with the notorious gleam (because the final phase of the plan could then be initiated and duly was).

For the next six years from the time Harry enters the wizarding world Dumbledore prepares him for his final showdown with Lord Voldemort, which is slated for a year later. Dumbledore has given Harry all he can by this stage in order to succeed including his embedded agent / agents.

A small interjection for clarification – I believe Dumbledore is well aware of what has been happening with Lord Voldemort in whatever guise since the time Harry arrived at Hogwarts and probably well before. He did tell us that he had reports of Lord Voldemort being in Albania and he appears to know what Lord Voldemort is up to at every turn. This makes me suspect that we have not yet met all the spies and JKR has all but admitted this (about the multiplicity of spies) in interviews. His whole thing is to prepare Harry for what only he can do – which is to neutralise Lord Voldemort with the tools Lord Voldemort himself has given to Harry.

Conclusion
If, as many theorists expect, there is to be a parallel between book 3 and book 7 then I propose the major revelation will be that all the time Peter has been working for Dumbledore. It certainly would give an extraordinarily good reason as to why Peter was and remains a Gryffindor. And some of you thought Dumbledore was sloppy.

It certainly would explain an awful lot of incongruities.

kingwidgit
June 15th, 2006, 12:10 am
To Kingwiget, perhaps not sacrifice, but Dumbledore could theorize that even the smallest bit of struggle that showed love would create a special bond.
How utterly cruel, mean, nasty, and blase of Dumbledore to risk the lives of James/Lily/Harry {not to mention the rest of the wizarding world}---on the astronomically unknown chance that a 'sacrifice' be made by Lily in a manner that it had never occurred before---and that it be done in just the exact manner that Voldemort did it---which also had never occurred before.

Sorry, I don't buy it at all. No one, not even Dumbledore knew or thought that such a thing could occur...so no one, including Dumbledore and Lily---as the canon clearly shows---pre-arranged anything: MA: Did she know anything about the possible effect of standing in front of Harry?

JKR: No - because as I've tried to make clear in the series, it never happened before. No one ever survived before. And no one, therefore, knew that could happen.

silver ink pot
June 15th, 2006, 12:19 am
Somehow I knew this was going to be contraversal.

To everyone who said that Dumbledore would never sacrifice the Potters, what if the Potters WANTED to give themselves for Voldemort. James and Lily were noble and selfless.

To Kingwiget, perhaps not sacrifice, but Dumbledore could theorize that even the smallest bit of struggle that showed love would create a special bond.

Finally, to Proud Slytherin, for all intent and purposes, this was a real prophecy. Although faked, it caused Voldemort to hunt down Lily and James Potter, and give special properties to their baby, which is what would have happen had it been a real prophecy.
That's just not the canon, though.

James and Lily wanted to live, though they were willing to sacrifice themselves for Harry. But since they were Harry's last defense against death, why would they offer themselves as a sacrifice?

I don't believe for a minute that Dumbledore faked anything or put the Potters in danger on purpose. Voldemort's obsession with Harry put them all in danger.

Dumbledore offered to be the Potter's SK, which he wouldn't have done if he wanted James and Lily to sacrifice themselves. James told Dumbledore that Sirius was the SK, then Sirius got James and Lily to change to Peter, secretly. That's the canon we have.

Dumbledore wanted them all to stay alive. Your theory would mean that he knew Harry would grow up an orphan and he somehow manipulated things for that to happen. That would just be evil!

poetixerika01
June 15th, 2006, 12:37 am
I also don't believe a word of this theory. What Lily did for Harry had never been done before, so there was no way Dumbledore could have known that Harry would survive. Dumbledore would not put the Potters in danger that way if he was not sure of the concequences of the sacrifice.

Neither would Dumbledore deliberately cause Harry to go through everything that has happened to him because of Voldemort and his parents' deaths.

I also believe that Dumbledore told Harry the whole truth. I can't imagine that he would have lied to him when he promised Harry he would tell him everything.

FuzzyMuffins
June 15th, 2006, 1:23 am
I also don't believe a word of this theory. What Lily did for Harry had never been done before, so there was no way Dumbledore could have known that Harry would survive. Dumbledore would not put the Potters in danger that way if he was not sure of the concequences of the sacrifice.

Neither would Dumbledore deliberately cause Harry to go through everything that has happened to him because of Voldemort and his parents' deaths.

I also believe that Dumbledore told Harry the whole truth. I can't imagine that he would have lied to him when he promised Harry he would tell him everything.

It had never been done before. However, Dumbledore knew for a long time that love would be Voldemorts undoing. He said so in the Penseive memory. Therefore, he could work out a theory that if Voldemort tried to kill a baby that the parent was trying to protect out of love, Voldemort would be defeated.

Dumledore had no idea about the Horcruxes then. He did not know Voldemort would come back. Also, according to the theory, Lily and James sacrificed their baby, if not his lifestyle.

Dumbledore is not infalliable. It took him five years to work up the courage to tell Harry about the Prophecy. I believe he was preparing to tell himm this, working up courage, but he died too soon.

I do not agree with this theory 100%, but I feel it is interesting possibility to bring up. Trust me, I have seen many more thread on much more far-out theories than this one. :lol:

halfbloodsnape
June 15th, 2006, 1:37 am
Lily saved his son's life with her sacrifice, but only becouse she has been offered the possibility to save her own life. Voldemort tells her to step aside and he'll let her live. She refused. How on earth was Dumbledore to know that?

FuzzyMuffins
June 15th, 2006, 1:43 am
Lily saved his son's life with her sacrifice, but only becouse she has been offered the possibility to save her own life. Voldemort tells her to step aside and he'll let her live. She refused. How on earth was Dumbledore to know that?

He did not. Dumbledore only theorized that if the bond between Lily and Harry was strong enough, the killing of one would cause the love to overwhelm the room and defeat Voldie or something along those lines.

halfbloodsnape
June 15th, 2006, 2:10 am
He did not. Dumbledore only theorized that if the bond between Lily and Harry was strong enough, the killing of one would cause the love to overwhelm the room and defeat Voldie or something along those lines.

I'm sorry to contradict you, but Dumbledore tells Harry in HBP that Lily did have a choise (when talking about whether Merope had a choise or not, sorry, I don't know the exact quote), and Jo said in the Emerson and Melissa interview that:
ES: This is one of my burning questions since the third book - why did Voldemort offer Lily so many chances to live? Would he actually have let her live?

JKR: Mhm.

ES: Why?

JKR: [silence] Can't tell you. But he did offer; you're absolutely right. Don't you want to ask me why James's death didn't protect Lily and Harry? There's your answer - you've just answered your own question - because she could have lived - and chose to die. James was going to be killed anyway. Do you see what I mean? I'm not saying James wasn't ready to; he died trying to protect his family, but he was going to be murdered anyway. He had no - he wasn't given a choice, so he rushed into it in a kind of animal way. I think there are distinctions in courage. James was immensely brave. But the caliber of Lily's bravery was, I think in this instance, higher because she could have saved herself. Now any mother, any normal mother would have done what Lily did. So in that sense, her courage too was of an animal quality but she was given time to choose. James wasn't. It's like an intruder entering your house, isn't it? You would instinctively rush them. But if in cold blood you were told, "Get out of the way," you know, what would you do? I mean, I don't think any mother would stand aside from their child. But does that answer it? She did very consciously lay down her life. She had a clear choice. -


Interview can be found here (http://www.mugglenet.com/jkrinterview.shtml):
My point is, if this has never happened before how was Dumbledore to know that Lily's love for her son would be enough, for one, and second: he'd have been wrong, becouse he had no way of knowing Lily will be offered a chanse to live. Anyways, he would've been gambling many lives with no ensurance for success. That is not very like the Dumbledore I know.

kingwidgit
June 15th, 2006, 2:10 am
He did not. Dumbledore only theorized that if the bond between Lily and Harry was strong enough, the killing of one would cause the love to overwhelm the room and defeat Voldie or something along those lines.
The prophecy didn't just endanger Lily, James, and Harry though---it endangered Neville and his parents as well. Voldemort waited a period of time before he actually acted in an attempt to kill Harry. By 'waited' I mean he waited for a long time following Harry's birth. He was debating who to kill---Neville or Harry. He didn't just go "Yeah, I'll kill the Potter brat."

According to canon [POA], he chose Harry and then decided to act upon that choice just before the Fidelius was employed. The Fidelius Charm was employed 'barely a week' before the Potters were murdered. The Potters died Halloween night, 1981---Harry was 15 months old at the time of the attack.

Again, Dumbledore would have been callously evil and reckless to do such a thing---to risk either the Potters or the Longbottoms. In short, Dumbledore would not be the Dumbledore that has been presented to us at all...

We're told by JK that Dumbledore is never far wide of the mark---and also: "I find that all the time in the book, if you need to tell your readers something...there are only two characters that you can put it convincingly into their dialogue. One is Hermione, the other is Dumbledore. In both cases you accept, it's plausible that they have, well Dumbledore knows pretty much everything anyway, but that Hermione has read it somewhere. So, she's handy."

vrlc50
June 15th, 2006, 3:01 am
Lily saved his son's life with her sacrifice, but only becouse she has been offered the possibility to save her own life. Voldemort tells her to step aside and he'll let her live. She refused. How on earth was Dumbledore to know that?
My point is, if this has never happened before how was Dumbledore to know that Lily's love for her son would be enough, for one, and second: he'd have been wrong, becouse he had no way of knowing Lily will be offered a chanse to live. Anyways, he would've been gambling many lives with no ensurance for success. That is not very like the Dumbledore I know.
If I read the theory correctly, it presumes that Dumbledore established the maternal blood protection prior to Lily's death. So based on the theory, Lily's refusal to step aside would have been done with the knowledge that Voldemort wouldn't be able to kill her son. This doesn't contradict JKR's statement that nobody knew what would happen....Lily would have only known what wouldn't happen and what wouldn't happen is that Harry would die.

There are aspects of the theory that actually work if you think it all the way through. And the author does give an excellent explanation as to how Snape, if Snape is evil, heard only the first part of the (red herring?)prophesy. And, the odd coincidences of just the right Dark Arts teacher showing up, the Sorcerer's Stone, Chamber opening via diary, animagi instruction and identification, Marauders Map, tunnels and passages to the Shrieking Shack all showing up in perfect progression just as they are needed by Harry in order to move him towards whatever task he eventually has to fulfill...these all get explained by this theory. But it does put Dumbledore in a terrible light, and it puts his parents in a horrid light also, because they would have been playing "god" so to speak....sentencing this child to a life of misfortune, and pain, and terror. Add to that the false prophesy that Harry still aims to fulfill? Add to that the numbers of deaths that will occur among the populace of wizards not organized enough in mind to willingly accept the next great adventure?

I had at first thought that I'd be disappointed if "self-sacrifice" and willingness to go on "the next great adventure," was the basis for the whole story. But as I read into the theory further, my analysis has changed. The story itself would be reduced to a story of unadulterated evil; that which has been revered as the epitome of good (Dumbledore) would be shown in true light: he would become in my eyes, the Beast. On the pretext of vanquishing that which he'd deemed dangerous to the wizarding world, Dumbledore's crimes would be shown to be greater that those of Voldemort.

That said, I like the idea that Dumbledore has been maneuvering through the lives of all the players orchestrating a multi-layered chess game. However, I hope that his manipulation of events and people and coincidences has a more benign impact...and as an aside, I must say that if the difference between losing and winning that game of chess hinges on Peter Pettigrew's loyalty to anyone, something tells me that wizards will no longer exist at the end of the septology.:D

kingwidgit
June 15th, 2006, 3:18 am
If I read the theory correctly, Dumbledore established the maternal blood protection prior to Lily's death.
Which is against canon. Lily provided a blood protection and then Dumbledore provided the 'Bond of Blood' charm.This doesn't contradict JKR's statement that nobody knew what would happen....Lily would have only known what wouldn't happen and what wouldn't happen is that Harry would die.How do you figure? If no one knew--as canon clearly states it---then no one knew, including Dumbledore and every other character in Potterverse. Thus the idea is contradicted by canon.

The idea is based upon Dumbledore knowing or guessing about something that had never once occurred in the wizarding world. About Dumbledore manipulating things behind the scenes with no care for the innocents who could have died, or those that did; and without prior knowledge of who exactly Voldemort would choose once he'd heard the 'false prophecy'---Harry or Neville; without prior knowledge of 'if' Voldermort would've offered anyone the chance to survive; without prior knowledge that there'd be any survivors at all.

silver ink pot
June 15th, 2006, 3:42 am
Let's get real - if JKR said no one knew, then no one knew! That would include Dumbledore!

According to this theory, Lily would have had no choice - she would have already known what she was going to do ahead of time - but Dumbledore and JKR both said she had a choice.

Dumbledore is not some manipulating Puppetmaster, as I say in my Signature. That isn't the Dumbledore I know from the canon. He didn't know everything in advance. He isn't making decisions about other people's lives. He always gives people a "choice" and that is his trademark.

He trusts people to make the right decisions, and sometimes they do and sometimes they don't. But he hasn't got control of everything, mainly because Dumbledore believes in free will ~ otherwise he is just another wicked Slavemaster just like Voldemort.

vrlc50
June 15th, 2006, 4:10 am
Which is against canon. Lily provided a blood protection and then Dumbledore provided the 'Bond of Blood' charm.How do you figure? If no one knew--as canon clearly states it---then no one knew, including Dumbledore and every other character in Potterverse. Thus the idea is contradicted by canon.

The idea is based upon Dumbledore knowing or guessing about something that had never once occurred in the wizarding world. About Dumbledore manipulating things behind the scenes with no care for the innocents who could have died, or those that did; and without prior knowledge of who exactly Voldemort would choose once he'd heard the 'false prophecy'---Harry or Neville; without prior knowledge of 'if' Voldermort would've offered anyone the chance to survive; without prior knowledge that there'd be any survivors at all.

I agree with you entirely...it does go in opposition to canon. I was just wordsmithing....I was trying to explain this precise point to the poster ....the theory is based on an idea that the charms had been placed on Harry prior to the whole Godric's Hollow fiasco. Now that I look back on my post, which took me about an hour and a half to write, I managed to miss copying halfbloodsnape's comment at the end of his post....which was what I was really trying to help clarify.:sigh: (I just edited my post, because obviously I've been misunderstood.)

As far as your last paragraph is concerned, I think I was very specific when I compared the Dumbledore described in the theory as the "Beast." I'd be horrified if the theory as a whole had merit!

halfbloodsnape
June 15th, 2006, 4:51 am
I agree with you entirely...it does go in opposition to canon. I was just wordsmithing....I was trying to explain this precise point to the poster ....the theory is based on an idea that the charms had been placed on Harry prior to the whole Godric's Hollow fiasco. Now that I look back on my post, which took me about an hour and a half to write, I managed to miss copying halfbloodsnape's comment at the end of his post....which was what I was really trying to help clarify.:sigh: (I just edited my post, because obviously I've been misunderstood.)

As far as your last paragraph is concerned, I think I was very specific when I compared the Dumbledore described in the theory as the "Beast." I'd be horrified if the theory as a whole had merit!

Forgive me, but I'm still a bit confused by your comment on my post, though the edit cleared some of that up:

If I read the theory correctly, it presumes that Dumbledore established the maternal blood protection prior to Lily's death. So based on the theory, Lily's refusal to step aside would have been done with the knowledge that Voldemort wouldn't be able to kill her son. This doesn't contradict JKR's statement that nobody knew what would happen....Lily would have only known what wouldn't happen and what wouldn't happen is that Harry would die.
Yes, I know the theory says that, and what I'm saying is that he had no way of knowing since never had this happened before, with the addition that Dumbledore (and for that matter noone) could know that Voldemort will give Lily a chense to live thus creating the means for her to save her son. If Voldemort hadn't offered her the chanse her love for her son wouldn't have been enough to save Harry. Lily wouldn't know either that Harry wouldn't die, ahe has no way of knowing it. Besides, if Lily knew she had to die then she didn't have a choise...
There are aspects of the theory that actually work if you think it all the way through. And the author does give an excellent explanation as to how Snape, if Snape is evil, heard only the first part of the (red herring?)prophesy. And, the odd coincidences of just the right Dark Arts teacher showing up, the Sorcerer's Stone, Chamber opening via diary, animagi instruction and identification, Marauders Map, tunnels and passages to the Shrieking Shack all showing up in perfect progression just as they are needed by Harry in order to move him towards whatever task he eventually has to fulfill...these all get explained by this theory.
Except for the Snape part I don't really see how this theory solves all that or gives explanation to it in any way. Can you explain please?
And I must stress this: I really don't see Dumbledore as one to gamble all these lives with or without the certainty of success, and we cannot really see that a certainty. Too many things could have gone wrong in a plot that streches over years.

vrlc50
June 15th, 2006, 6:23 am
Forgive me, but I'm still a bit confused by your comment on my post, though the edit cleared some of that up:

Yes, I know the theory says that, and what I'm saying is that he had no way of knowing since never had this happened before, with the addition that Dumbledore (and for that matter noone) could know that Voldemort will give Lily a chense to live thus creating the means for her to save her son. If Voldemort hadn't offered her the chanse her love for her son wouldn't have been enough to save Harry. Lily wouldn't know either that Harry wouldn't die, ahe has no way of knowing it. Besides, if Lily knew she had to die then she didn't have a choise...

First of all, I must have misunderstood you misunderstanding....I was just trying to help clarify. That said:

Canon: Lily's choice, her refusal to step aside, her love for her son, placed a charm on Harry, the likes of which had never been seen before. No one knew of anything like this ever happening. No one knew of anything like a killing curse backfiring. This whole event was new territory to everyone.

Theory: Lily's choice had been made earlier; she agreed to some alleged plan to accept death. Dumbledore took that choice and created some kind of maternal charm which protected Harry from a killing curse when Lily's choice was finally realized. No one knew what would happen as a result of doing things this way. But Lily and Dumbledore knew that Harry wouldn't die.

(This is just a little semantical issue....just because nobody knew what would happen doesn't necessarily mean the nobody knew what wouldn't happen. If my statement bugs you, just ignore it....it's really irrelevant to how I feel about the theory anyway.)

Except for the Snape part I don't really see how this theory solves all that or gives explanation to it in any way. Can you explain please?
And I must stress this: I really don't see Dumbledore as one to gamble all these lives with or without the certainty of success, and we cannot really see that a certainty. Too many things could have gone wrong in a plot that streches over years.

This one's kind of simple to explain. Each year Harry is treated to professors, tools, opportunities, lessons, etc. necessary at that precise moment in time for him to deal with the events of that year. One can say that this is part of the literary simplicity of the story constructed by the author. Or, one can say that these coincidences should be attributed to a more complicated, underlying theme or plan that the author created but has not yet explained. And the theory, if it's basic premise weren't faulty, would support this latter idea.

Finally, I really hope you've read my original post all the way through. I believe that Dumbledore is the epitome of good and would not play fast and loose with people's lives. I do think he has had a hand in manipulating various aspects of the wizarding world; I allude to a chess game. And while that may not be canon, there are sufficient references to chess that one can consider it a possibility. But if he'd been so manipulative to have caused death and mayhem, then he'd be no better than Voldemort.

In conclusion, if you read the theory presented you can see surface areas that are plausible. If you delve into the theory, study it, compare it with canon, attack each point, you realize just how wrong it is.

dracosgirl1
June 15th, 2006, 7:58 am
Dumbledore said he did not believe in the Prophecy.

silver ink pot
June 15th, 2006, 8:35 am
Dumbledore said he did not believe in the Prophecy.
That is an excellent point! :tu: :agree:

In HBP, in the Chapter "Horcruxes," Dumbledore says:


"But Harry, never forget that what the Prophecy says is only significant because Voldemort made it so, as I told you at the end of last year (...)
You are setting too much store by the Prophecy!"

"But," spluttered Harry, "but you said the Prophecy means . . . "

"If Voldemort had never heard of the Prophecy, would it have been fulfilled? Would it have meant anything? Of course not! Do you think every prophecy in the Hall of Prophecy has been fulfilled?"

"But," said Harry, bewildered, "but last year you said one of us would have to kill the other --"

"Harry, Harry, only because Voldemort made a grave error and acted on Madame Trelawney's words! If Voldemort had never murdered your father, would he have imparted in you a furious desire for revenge? Of course not! (…) Voldemort himself created his worst enemy… (…) He heard the prophecy and he leapt into action, with the result that he (…) handpicked the man most likely to finish him…” (…)

“But, sir,” said Harry, making valiant efforts not to sound argumentative, “it all comes to the same thing, doesn’t it? I’ve got to try and kill him, or—”

“Got to?” said Dumbledore. “Of course you’ve got to! But not because of the prophecy! Because you, yourself, will never rest until you’ve tried! We both know it! Imagine, please, just for a moment, that you had never heard that prophecy! How would you feel about Voldemort now? Think!” (…)

“I’d want him finished,” said Harry quietly. “And I’d want to do it.”

“Of course you would!” cried Dumbledore. “You see, the prophecy does not mean you have to do anything! (…) In other words, you are free to choose your way, quite free to turn your back on the prophecy! But Voldemort continues to set store by the prophecy. He will continue to hunt you… which makes it certain, really, that –”

“That one of us is going to end up killing the other,” said Harry. “Yes.”

But he understood at last what Dumbledore had been trying to tell him. It was, he thought, the difference between being dragged into the arena to face a battle to the death and walking into the arena with your head held high. Some people, perhaps, would say that there was little to choose between the two ways, but Dumbledore knew –and so do I, thought Harry, with a rush of fierce pride, and so did my parents –that there was all the difference in the world.

It doesn't sound to me that Dumbledore had this master plan to make sure that Voldemort heard this Prophecy - on the contrary. Dumbledore believes things would have gone better if Harry had never heard the Prophecy, because then Voldemort wouldn't be driven to kill him.

And Dumbledore speaks of Voldemort's "grave mistake" in killing Harry's parents and insuring that Harry would have an emotional reason to fight back.

It seems to me that if Dumbledore had set up an elaborate plan with a fake prophecy, he would be glad that Voldemort heard about it and went after Harry. But Dumbledore calls it a "grave mistake." That doesn't sound like someone rejoicing in the success of his Master Plan. :no:

Unless you believe that everything Dumbledore says in that scene is a pack of lies, and Dumbledore is just forcing Harry to challenge Voldemort.

I see it the opposite way - it is inevitable that Voldemort will come after Harry because he, himself, believes the Prophecy, but that doesn't mean that Harry is just a pawn who is ruled by the Prophecy. He still has free will to choose for himself whether to walk out into the arena. I think that's what Dumbledore is saying.

vrlc50
June 15th, 2006, 2:05 pm
That is an excellent point! :tu: :agree:




"But Harry, never forget that what the Prophecy says is only significant because Voldemort made it so, as I told you at the end of last year (...)
You are setting too much store by the Prophecy!"

"But," spluttered Harry, "but you said the Prophecy means . . . "

"If Voldemort had never heard of the Prophecy, would it have been fulfilled? Would it have meant anything? Of course not! Do you think every prophecy in the Hall of Prophecy has been fulfilled?"

"But," said Harry, bewildered, "but last year you said one of us would have to kill the other --"

"Harry, Harry, only because Voldemort made a grave error and acted on Madame Trelawney's words! If Voldemort had never murdered your father, would he have imparted in you a furious desire for revenge? Of course not! (…) Voldemort himself created his worst enemy… (…) He heard the prophecy and he leapt into action, with the result that he (…) handpicked the man most likely to finish him…” (…)

“But, sir,” said Harry, making valiant efforts not to sound argumentative, “it all comes to the same thing, doesn’t it? I’ve got to try and kill him, or—”

“Got to?” said Dumbledore. “Of course you’ve got to! But not because of the prophecy! Because you, yourself, will never rest until you’ve tried! We both know it! Imagine, please, just for a moment, that you had never heard that prophecy! How would you feel about Voldemort now? Think!” (…)

“I’d want him finished,” said Harry quietly. “And I’d want to do it.”

“Of course you would!” cried Dumbledore. “You see, the prophecy does not mean you have to do anything! (…) In other words, you are free to choose your way, quite free to turn your back on the prophecy! But Voldemort continues to set store by the prophecy. He will continue to hunt you… which makes it certain, really, that –”

“That one of us is going to end up killing the other,” said Harry. “Yes.”

But he understood at last what Dumbledore had been trying to tell him. It was, he thought, the difference between being dragged into the arena to face a battle to the death and walking into the arena with your head held high. Some people, perhaps, would say that there was little to choose between the two ways, but Dumbledore knew –and so do I, thought Harry, with a rush of fierce pride, and so did my parents –that there was all the difference in the world.

It doesn't sound to me that Dumbledore had this master plan to make sure that Voldemort heard this Prophecy - on the contrary. Dumbledore believes things would have gone better if Harry had never heard the Prophecy, because then Voldemort wouldn't be driven to kill him.

.

I see it the opposite way - it is inevitable that Voldemort will come after Harry because he, himself, believes the Prophecy, but that doesn't mean that Harry is just a pawn who is ruled by the Prophecy. He still has free will to choose for himself whether to walk out into the arena. I think that's what Dumbledore is saying.

My understanding of what Dumbledore said is that because of what Voldemort had done, Harry would still feel the way he does and want to see Voldemort finished. Dumbledore doesn't believe in prophesy on its own merit, but because Voldemort does, and because Voldemort heard only part of the prophesy, Voldemort acted so as to fulfill the prophesy. As I understand it, Dumbledore gave Harry the opportunity to hear the prophesy in order to allow Harry to understand his opponent's motivations. And Dumbledore was trying to tell Harry that prophesy or no prophesy, Harry will do as Harry needs to do....not because of what the prophesy says, but because Harry will be making his own choice.

That leads me to another part of this. And that is the continuous reference to choice throughout the story. There's argument for and against Dumbledore having a grand plan. I think it's important to note here that if Dumbledore is manipulating anyone (and yes, I know it's not canon that there is a master plan...) But if it were found to be true, one should note that Dumbledore would have been manipulating the players to be in a position to make a choice....he would not be manipulating the outcomes of those choices. There's a big difference between the two. To give you an example:

In PoA, Dumbledore does not tell Hermione to go back in time. But he does give her information at a point in time when Hermione can make a choice to do so. He tells her that maybe more than one innocent life could be saved.
That's all he says. But he has actually manipulated the possibilities of action Hermione can take.

Hermione makes the choice and takes Harry and they go back in time. When they get to Hagrid's hut, Dumbledore dillydallies to give Hermione and Harry sufficient time to choose whether to risk their own necks and rescue Buckbeak. They make the choice and Buckbeak is rescued.

The remaining events of this time reversal involve other choices of action. Hermione and Harry could have made a whole series of different choices of action and the outcome would have been very different.

When they return to the present, Dumbledore has no idea what they're talking about when they claim to have set Buckbeak and Sirius free....and he wouldn't as the first go through events had never ended up happening in the first place.

But somehow, Dumbledore had manipulated the changing events just by giving Hermione a "choice."

I know this is really difficult to resolve in my brain, but the more I chew on it, the more it makes sense. It does seem to indicate that somehow, Dumbledore is involved in some kind of quest to give everyone the opportunity to make choices that might not be easy, but might be the right ones needed to finally vanquish Lord Voldemort.

kingwidgit
June 15th, 2006, 5:12 pm
I know this is really difficult to resolve in my brain, but the more I chew on it, the more it makes sense. It does seem to indicate that somehow, Dumbledore is involved in some kind of quest to give everyone the opportunity to make choices that might not be easy, but might be the right ones needed to finally vanquish Lord Voldemort.

How can Dumbledore, who has zero knowledge of what might occur be manipulating 'choices'?
Dumbledore had no knowledge of which child/family Voldemort would attack prior to prophecy being made.
Dumbledore had no knowledge that Harry had something more special than Neville---Harry wasn't born yet; neither was Neville.
Dumbledore had no knowledge that the Potter's Secret Keeper, Pettigrew, was a Death Eater who would betray them.
Dumbledore had no knowledge that 'Tail was even their Secret Keeper.
Dumbledore had no idea that Voldemort would 'offer' a choice for a victim to live---something he'd never done before, something that had never occurred in wizarding history that we are aware.
Dumbledore had no knowledge that a mother's sacrifice, such as Lily's, would thereby cause the Avada Kedavra to rebound, again something that had never occurred before.
Everything that Dumbledore has done in which it appears to you he's giving choices to people within the series, he at least has a bit more knowledge than most of what is going on and what could reasonable be expected to happen pro/con.

That can't reasonably be compared with Dumbledore having zero knowledge of choices/events of that night, his having zero knowledge of the Avada Kedavra rebounding {which it had never done before}, his having zero knowledge of the method Voldemort would choose to kill with that night, his having zero knowledge of possible pro/con outcomes between as yet unnamed/unchosen players.

gavina
June 16th, 2006, 12:56 am
How can Dumbledore, who has zero knowledge of what might occur be manipulating 'choices'?
Dumbledore is an extraordinarily powerful wizard, considered the greatest of his age. This should be qualified with an assertion that it is extremely improbable, but not completely impossible for Dumbledore to manipulate situations.

As someone who has hung out on this list and many others you are surely aware of the Manipulative Dumbledore theories out there.

Back in the real world it is actually quite simple to manipulate choices, by providing a choice in the first place.

Dumbledore had no knowledge of which child/family Voldemort would attack prior to prophecy being made.
Did he not?

It is strongly inferred throughout HBP that Dumbledore has been aware for some time, and probably from before the time of the prophesy, of Tom Riddle's background. On this basis it is not unreasonable to suppose that Dumbledore, as well as LV, concluded that the half-blood wizard (The Potter's as yet unborn child) would be the greater.

My support for this is that Dumbledore would have known of the pregnancies, or at least have become aware of them shortly after the prophecy.

vrlc50
June 16th, 2006, 2:40 am
How can Dumbledore, who has zero knowledge of what might occur be manipulating 'choices'?
Dumbledore had no knowledge of which child/family Voldemort would attack prior to prophecy being made.
Dumbledore had no knowledge that Harry had something more special than Neville---Harry wasn't born yet; neither was Neville.
Dumbledore had no knowledge that the Potter's Secret Keeper, Pettigrew, was a Death Eater who would betray them.
Dumbledore had no knowledge that 'Tail was even their Secret Keeper.
Dumbledore had no idea that Voldemort would 'offer' a choice for a victim to live---something he'd never done before, something that had never occurred in wizarding history that we are aware.
Dumbledore had no knowledge that a mother's sacrifice, such as Lily's, would thereby cause the Avada Kedavra to rebound, again something that had never occurred before.
Everything that Dumbledore has done in which it appears to you he's giving choices to people within the series, he at least has a bit more knowledge than most of what is going on and what could reasonable be expected to happen pro/con.

That can't reasonably be compared with Dumbledore having zero knowledge of choices/events of that night, his having zero knowledge of the Avada Kedavra rebounding {which it had never done before}, his having zero knowledge of the method Voldemort would choose to kill with that night, his having zero knowledge of possible pro/con outcomes between as yet unnamed/unchosen players.

What has been determined to be canon that Dumbledore had zero knowledge of the choices or events to take place that night? I know it's been determined that no one had prior knowledge of what would happen if Lily refused to choose life....but what makes us believe that Dumbledore was completely in the dark? He was astute enough, and informed enough, according to Sirius (and I think Lupin) that Voldemort was going to go after the Potters. He'd even offered to be the Potters' Secret Keeper. What are the possibilities that his concern about Sirius' previous history of recklessness made him consider what would happen if Sirius handed the POtters' location over to the wrong person? Why couldn't Dumbledore have attempted to offer essential information to any number of people that would enable them to make choices that, based on odds, or probability, cause something else to happen? It seems to me that Dumbledore could logically deduce worst case scenarios and act to thwart the most threatening choices.

And maybe it wasn't just that nobody knew what would happen when Lily chose not to step aside and accepted death....maybe Dumbledore had a good idea that Voldemort was going to take specific actions, but Dumbledore just didn't know precisely WHEN those actions would take place.

silver ink pot
June 16th, 2006, 3:09 am
It seems to me that Dumbledore could logically deduce worst case scenarios and act to thwart the most threatening choices.

Dumbledore told James that using the Fidelius Charm would increase their chances against Voldemort. That was the fail-safe plan. He even offered to be their SK, so in effect, he was trying to "thwart threatening scenarios."

The reason the "worst case scenario" occurred wasn't because Dumbledore failed, but because Peter helped Voldemort triumph, only it still led to the vanquishing of Voldemort for a few years.

It was a totally mixed scenario of good and bad. The Potter's died, Sirius went to prison, we don't know where Lupin went but he lost all his friends, and Peter was thought to be dead, only he was living as a rat.

However, the one good thing is that Harry lived, and Voldemort disappeared for 12 years.

Dumbledore didn't foresee any of it - he's not a seer, and never studied Divination as he says in one of the books.

He wasn't sure which boy Voldemort would choose to attack - how could he know? When he found out that Voldemort was after the Potters, he told them the safest thing to do, and trusted that they would do it.

It was James who told him about Sirius, and Sirius who changed the plan - Dumbledore is not responsible for that.

He found "proof" that Voldemort had horcruxes when the Diary turned up in Book Two, which is what he tells Harry in Chapter 23 of HBP. Before that, he did not know for sure. Then he says he received more proof from what Voldemort said in the graveyard about going "further toward immortality."

Before then, Dumbledore didn't know what Voldemort was doing. He wasn't capable of "seeing all and knowing all." He could only guess, but Voldemort has a mind of his own.

kingwidgit
June 16th, 2006, 8:07 am
My support for this is that Dumbledore would have known of the pregnancies, or at least have become aware of them shortly after the prophecy.:rolleyes:

Yet the supposition of this thread is that Dumbledore 'manipulated the prophecy' before the pregnancies came to term...not a pregnancy---the pregnancies, of which I might add, no one had an inkling whether they would actually make it to term or the sex of their unborn child.

The idea proferred is that Dumbledore went to Lily, who would be willing to sacrifice herself for her child---which was born after the prophecy had been made, not prior to it. A child which no one knew would be a male...blah, blah, blah...there is no evidence that he did such a thing, nor that he would have done such a thing.

Last time I checked his name was Dumbledore, not Machiavelli.

Elisita
June 16th, 2006, 8:46 am
HAving a baby and not being sure about that power of love theory success, I don't think Lily would have dare to die and leave his only child alone, being brought up by her daugher, who hates all related to magic...

Tane
June 16th, 2006, 9:57 am
How would Dumbledore manage to fake a prophecy so as to have it contained in the hall of prophecies. Not to mention we saw it broke and heard its contents. Though saying that you might have a point. Remember the lake task in GoF. The egg contain a message, so it is not impossible to say Albus may have rigged the prophecy so as to make Voldemort act upon it. I doubt he would deliberatly put a childs life at risk, especially a baby unless he new about the protection Lily was going to give to Harry and exactly how that protection would work. Would he though put Lily at risk like though, no it does not make sense why would Dumbledore set Lily up to die and James for that matter.

We do know that Dumbledore set the Mirror of Erised to trap who ever was trying to get to the stone during PS/SS because Dumbledore only placed his protection there after he new someone was after it (after Christmas a whole couple of months after the stone was placed under gaurd at Hogwarts and after the troll in the dungeon incident).

So he does like setting traps but to use a baby and a mother to entice Voldemort in a kind of ambush is taking it a little to far. I know Dumbledore probably does take risks, as Gryffindors being brave probably do but unless something went tragically wrong that night and the plan did not work out the way they thought it would then I doubt Dumbledore faked the prophecy.

Then again Voldemort was winning, maybe they resorted to desperate action to lure him in but it all went wrong and Lily had to do what she could to protect her child but I'm not convinced by this idea but it would add a nice twist to those events.

I think if my maths works out Snape was said to have been spying on Voldemort prior to the attack on the Potters, so he could have informed the order as to which child Voldemort had decided to go for. Then again Dumbledore said Snape was full of remorse when he found out they died but he still would be if there was a plan and the plan wrong and he was involved in Dumbledore's plan. They might have forgotten that there was two children born on the same day and hence it messed up any possible plan they may have had and sent Snape to find out which one Voldemort was going to go for. Perhaps he told Dumbledore which child Voldemort went for but was to late in giving the information and as a result, Sirius, James, Hagrid and Dumbledore all where to late at arriving at the Potters (the plan went wrong and Lily had to act on her own instincts). James was intercepted by Voldemort and Sirius intercepted Peter close by I think so they could have been making there way to the Potter's house.

Still would Dumbledore risk a baby life, no I just can not see him doing that.

vrlc50
June 16th, 2006, 11:23 am
HAving a baby and not being sure about that power of love theory success, I don't think Lily would have dare to die and leave his only child alone, being brought up by her daugher, who hates all related to magic...

Hola! Petunia is Lily's sister. Please reassure me and let me know that the Spanish version does not call Tia Petunia Lily's "hija.":D

I don't think Lily would have made this choice either. I don't think Dumbledore had a hand in prearranging all the events so precisely.

I do, however, believe that he provided just enoughinformation and tools to the players of (as of HGP) seventeen through twenty years earlier...just as he has provided sufficient tools and information to Harry throughout his career at Hogwarts. In so doing, Dumbledore provided Harry with the tools to make a variety of choices. Depending on what choices were made, Dumbledore determined the next tool or piece of information Harry would need for the next choice Harry would have to make. If one believes that Dumbledore is really dead, then one can assume Harry has been provided with all the tools and information Dumbledore had to share with him and now Harry has to not only make final choices, he has to determine which information and tools to use to make those choices. If one believes that Dumbledore will return (in one form or another) then Dumbledore will continue to provide information and tools to Harry all the way through to the end.

And, there is a third option....if Dumbledore is truly dead, knew of his impending death, he may have established what would amount to a treasure hunt of clues and tools and information that Harry will need as he maneuvers towards Vanquishing the Dark Lord. If Harry is able to make the correct choices along his path, then he will find those tools, information and clues just when he needs them. This is the parallel to all the different mazes Harry has dealt with throughout the septology. Each maze, from Book 1 on, builds on the tools, and information, and clues Harry picked up in an earlier maze. The maze of clues, informaton and tools he faces now is the most complex of all.

I think that when it came to James, Lily, Sirius, Lupin, Peter, and Severus, Dumbledore did the exact same thing. The consequences of how Dumbledore released information and tools and clues about the goings on of Lord Voldemort resulted in the events of Harry's life. Either Dumbledore provided the wrong information, tools and clues at the wrong time in the Marauders' etal lives, or the Marauders' etal made highly improbable choices which prevented Dumbledore from keeping them safe. I'd guess that it was a combination of the two...which is why Dumbledore is so cautious today about providing information to Harry at just the right time, and why he is so involved in the choices Harry makes.

Latisha
June 16th, 2006, 12:04 pm
I don't think Lily would have made this choice either. I don't think Dumbledore had a hand in prearranging all the events so precisely.

Agreed :D Dumbledore gives information on a need to know basis. Dumbledore is a very clever man as we all know and I believe that he knew that Voldemort was going after the Potters. (Well, IMO the Longbottoms didn't feel the need to go into hiding as extremely as the FC), and we do know from Sirius that they were laying very low and seemed to suspect that someone very close to the Potters was spying on them. Which to me means that they had quite a number of close calls.

But did Dumbledore manipulate the information given to each of those involved. I will stick to the fence on that one. :D Sorry, brains not functioning.

Great thread though :tu:

gavina
June 18th, 2006, 11:35 pm
Yet the supposition of this thread is that Dumbledore 'manipulated the prophecy' before the pregnancies came to term...not a pregnancy---the pregnancies, of which I might add, no one had an inkling whether they would actually make it to term or the sex of their unborn child.
Well, duh. Try another look at my response above. I state quite clearly that at the time of the prophesy Dumbledore was either aware of the pregnancies already or if he was not then shortly after the prophesy he became so aware.

At no point do I state or imply that I refer to a single pregnancy. I merely offer an opinion on how Dumbledore could manipulate choice by providing a choice.

The idea proferred is that Dumbledore went to Lily, who would be willing to sacrifice herself for her child---which was born after the prophecy had been made, not prior to it. A child which no one knew would be a male...blah, blah, blah...there is no evidence that he did such a thing, nor that he would have done such a thing.
Not espoused by me. Of course there is no canon support for it in any event and in fact the indication is that Dumbledore was not actually involved with the Potters on any deep level at the time of Harry's birth and after except to offer himself as secret keeper.

That he was apparently unaware that Peter Pettigrew had been substituted for Sirius Black at the last moment would tend to support that supposition.

Last time I checked his name was Dumbledore, not Machiavelli.
I should hope that Dumbledore never felt it apposite to write a histroy of Florence or a treatise on the various methods of government that a Prince might adopt.

Lorenzo would be turning in his grave.

Shawn_Deviron
June 19th, 2006, 3:56 am
As much as I disagree with this theory, there is one quote that keeps bothering me:

But I knew too where Voldemort was weak. And so I made my decision. You would be protected by an ancient magic of which he knows, which he despises, and which he has always, therefore, underestimated -- to his cost. I am speaking, of course, of the fact that your mother died to save you. She gave you a lingering protection he never expected, a protection that flows in your veins to this day. I put my trust, therefore, in your mother's blood. I delivered you to her sister, her only remaining relative.

~Dumbledore, OoTP(p 835-836) US ed.

Was it decided before the incident that Lily (either as apart of the plan or as a fail-safe) would die for Harry? Or does this mean that dying for someone automatically give special protection, and people can activate that protection if they know how to use it?

silver ink pot
June 19th, 2006, 7:05 am
As much as I disagree with this theory, there is one quote that keeps bothering me:


But I knew too where Voldemort was weak. And so I made my decision. You would be protected by an ancient magic of which he knows, which he despises, and which he has always, therefore, underestimated -- to his cost. I am speaking, of course, of the fact that your mother died to save you. She gave you a lingering protection he never expected, a protection that flows in your veins to this day. I put my trust, therefore, in your mother's blood. I delivered you to her sister, her only remaining relative.

~Dumbledore, OoTP(p 835-836) US ed.

Was it decided before the incident that Lily (either as apart of the plan or as a fail-safe) would die for Harry? Or does this mean that dying for someone automatically give special protection, and people can activate that protection if they know how to use it?
No, I don't believe it was "decided" upon, since the canon says that Lily didn't know what would happen, and Voldemort says Lily did it "unwittingly," and JKR said that no one knew until then that it would happen because it had never happened before.

Voldemort explains this somewhat in GoF, in the graveyard scene. He did not know that Lily's sacrifice would prevent him from killing Harry, or he wouldn't have tried it after her death.

First here is the quote from GoF, in which Voldemort speaks of the "ancient magic":



"You know, of course, that they have called this boy my downfall?" Voldemort said softly, his red eyes upon Harry, whose scar began to burn so fiercely that he almost screamed in agony. "You all know that on the night I lost my powers and my body, I tried to kill him. His mother died in the attempt to save him - and unwittingly provided him with a protection I admit I had not foreseen. ... I could not touch the boy."

Voldemort raised one of his long white fingers and put it very close to Harry's cheek.

"His mother left upon him the traces of her sacrifice. . . . This is old magic, I should have remembered it, I was foolish to overlook it... but no matter. I can touch him now."

Harry felt the cold tip of the long white finger touch him, and thought his head would burst with the pain. Voldemort laughed softly in his ear, then took the finger away and continued addressing the Death Eaters.

"I miscalculated, my friends, I admit it. My curse was deflected by the woman's foolish sacrifice, and it rebounded upon myself. Aaah . . . pain beyond pain, my friends; nothing could have prepared me for it. I was ripped from my body, I was less than spirit, less than the meanest ghost. . . but still, I was alive. What I was, even I do not know... I, who have gone further than anybody along the path that leads to immortality. You know my goal - to conquer death. And now, I was tested, and it appeared that one or more of my experiments had worked ... for I had not been killed, though the curse should have done it.

Here is the quote from JKR:



ES: This is one of my burning questions since the third book - why did Voldemort offer Lily so many chances to live? Would he actually have let her live?

JKR: Mmhm.

ES: Why?

JKR: [silence] Can't tell you. But he did offer, you're absolutely right. Don't you want to ask me why James's death didn't protect Lily and Harry? There’s your answer, you've just answered your own question, because she could have lived and chose to die. James was going to be killed anyway. Do you see what I mean? I’m not saying James wasn't ready to; he died trying to protect his family but he was going to be murdered anyway. He had no - he wasn't given a choice, so he rushed into it in a kind of animal way, I think there are distinctions in courage. James was immensely brave. But the caliber of Lily's bravery was, I think in this instance, higher because she could have saved herself. Now any mother, any normal mother would have done what Lily did. So in that sense her courage too was of an animal quality but she was given time to choose. James wasn't. It's like an intruder entering your house, isn't it? You would instinctively rush them. But if in cold blood you were told, "Get out of the way," you know, what would you do? I mean, I don't think any mother would stand aside from their child. But does that answer it? She did very consciously lay down her life. She had a clear choice -

ES: And James didn't.

JKR: Did he clearly die to try and protect Harry specifically given a clear choice? No. It's a subtle distinction and there's slightly more to it than that but that's most of the answer.

MA: Did she know anything about the possible effect of standing in front of Harry?

JKR: No - because as I've tried to make clear in the series, it never happened before. No one ever survived before. And no one, therefore, knew that could happen.

MA: So no one - Voldemort or anyone using Avada Kedavra - ever gave someone a choice and then they took that option [to die] -

JKR: They may have been given a choice, but not in that particular way.



I think that's clear. JKR said no one had ever given anyone that protection before, and no one knew it could happen. That must include Dumbledore, too. He didn't know, so he couldn't "plan" for it. There was no great plan, except for the Potters to keep Harry safe, which they couldn't do because of Peter's betrayal.

The only thing we don't know is why Voldemort offered to let Lily live. I find that more interesting than debating whether Dumbledore "planned" for Lily to sacrifice herself, which JKR clearly says isn't true.

Lily must have had some special trait that Voldemort wanted, or some skill he needed, or he wouldn't have offered her mercy for herself. She chose not to take his offer, and gave her life for Harry.

Wizard_waker
June 19th, 2006, 3:05 pm
I don't think he faked it at all. If he did, why would Voldemort have gone to kill the Potters? Also, we know from HBP, that if you try to fudge or alter a memory you get this fog. So we would've known.

Shewoman
June 19th, 2006, 6:31 pm
It doesn't work. It contradicts what Jo has said about no one knowing that Lily's sacrifice would scrunch Voldemort and it contradicts what we know of Dumbledore's character.

trickcy
June 19th, 2006, 6:35 pm
I don't think Dumbledore faked the Prophecy, so that Voldemort would know of it. As J.K.R says, nobody knew that this would happen. Not Lily, Not Dumbledore. So, nope, I don't think it's a fake.

gavina
June 19th, 2006, 10:30 pm
Last time I checked his name was Dumbledore, not Machiavelli.
Further to my earlier response and for your edification Machiavelli is often misunderstood as having given his name to those who spin byzantine plots etc.

He did not. His name was adapted by certain Jacobean playwrites as Machevill, a character that was often central to the story of the play and effectively controlled the players' actions.

This usage was later adapted into the adjective Machiavellian to indicate one who subtly manipulates often from behind the scenes. It is now widely accepted that Niccolo gave rise to this usage from his works and while he did indirectly should one care to study his works, as I have, one would realise that the adjective is somewhat off base.

Due to that and because of my familiarity with the term (and also because it is mentioned in the Penguin Classics New Edition of The Prince) I wondered why this term had arisen. Now I enlighten others who have enquiring minds.

Machiavelli himself would not have appreciated the confusion.

All the best.

Shewoman
June 20th, 2006, 12:58 am
Shawn Deviron, I think that in the quote you said bothered you, Dumbledore is describing his thought processes after Lily's death. What will he do with this baby? He'll augment the protection that he's discovered Lily's death has already given the child.

About whether Dumbledore knew who was was pregnant: we don't know exactly when the prophecy was given. I lean towards October 31, 1979--the apparent date that Harry was conceived. In general women don't start talking about their pregnancies much until they feel fairly confident that they're going to go to term, that the main danger period for miscarriage is over. If Lily and Alice were like that, that would put the prophecy in January; it probably couldn't have been much later if Trelawney was interviewing for a job at Hogwarts in the spring semester of that year.

silver ink pot
June 20th, 2006, 2:08 am
Further to my earlier response and for your edification Machiavelli is often misunderstood as having given his name to those who spin byzantine plots etc.

He did not. His name was adapted by certain Jacobean playwrites as Machevill, a character that was often central to the story of the play and effectively controlled the players' actions.

This usage was later adapted into the adjective Machiavellian to indicate one who subtly manipulates often from behind the scenes. It is now widely accepted that Niccolo gave rise to this usage from his works and while he did indirectly should one care to study his works, as I have, one would realise that the adjective is somewhat off base.

Due to that and because of my familiarity with the term (and also because it is mentioned in the Penguin Classics New Edition of The Prince) I wondered why this term had arisen. Now I enlighten others who have enquiring minds.

Machiavelli himself would not have appreciated the confusion.

All the best.
Thank you for your opinion on Machiavelli's name, but lots of us have read Machiavelli's "The Prince," and studied it due to certain essays on Mugglenet that deal with comparisons between the books and "The Prince."

I don't believe Kingwidget's usage was wrong in any way. The term "Machiavellian" has to do with people who are out for themselves, ruthless, and conniving. Dumbledore is none of those things, though it is implied on this thread that he is.

It really doesn't matter what old Niccolo would have thought. The English Language marches on, and the "negative" connation of his works goes way back in the lexicon.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=machiavellian&searchmode=none

Machiavellian
1568, "cunning, deceitful, unscrupulous," from Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527), Florentine statesman and author of "Del Principe," a work advising rulers to place advantage above morality. A word of abuse in Eng. well before his works were translated ("The Discourses" 1636, "The Prince" 1640), in part because his books were Indexed by the Church, in part because of Fr. attacks on him (e.g. Gentillet's, translated into Eng. 1602).

Hinoema
June 20th, 2006, 3:06 am
Enter Snape. A young man in Voldemorts employ. At the moment, he is against Dumbledore, or he could be leaning towards his side. Either way, he is more with Voldemort than with Dumbledore.

He did not 'return' until later so at the time, as Dumbledore says, he was 'still in Lord Voldemort's employ'.

Somebody, Dumbledore’s double-agent at the time, or Dumbledore himself, tips Snape off that there is a big meeting with Dumbledore in the Hogshead. So off he goes.

There wasn't a big meeting. He was interviewing a prospective teacher for a rather unimportant subject. No one had any idea that she would deliver a prophecy mid-interview.

Now Dumbledore knows that Voldemort will hear the “prophecy”.

Do you mean after Snape was ejected? Apparently he hoped not. Before? Impossible- the prophecy was entirely unexpected.

So how does he make it look convincing?

Make what look convincing?

Trelawney reports being “lightheaded”. Sounds like Obliviate. Perhaps Dumbledore created a potion with the prophecy in it and slipped it In Trelawny’s drink.

You mean advance preparation? That couldn't happen. The prophecy did not exist until she gave it and no one knew she would, so no advance planning was possible. Also 'obviate' would not make her say anything- only imperio, and Dumbledore would not do that.

Or are you saying that Dumbledore made up the prophecy to, do what?

Dumbledore needs a new plan. Strong in his belief that love can defeat Voldemort, he finds somebody sure to sacrifice themselves for their child. Lily and James Potter. He asks them if they will put themselves in danger for the good of the wizarding world, and they agree.

Absolutely unbelievable, especially considering that Dumbledore's efforts at Godric's Hollow were to prevent the prophecy- to prevent Voldemort from marking anyone his equal- an that he has repeatedly told Harry that the prophecy doesn't matter- if neither chose to believe it, it would have been meaningless.

I recall nothing to attribute this kind of plan to Dumbledore, and far too much to suggest that he would do no such thing.

Also, how would he force Trelawney to deliver the prophecy Snape heard her say?

Also, (big one) why would a recording of the prophecy appear magically in the hall of prophecies if ti isn't real? (I really don't think Dumbledore could or would talk an Unspeakable into whipping up a fake prophecy orb that acts like a real one when broken.)

Aside from the fact that such an act would completely underrmine the story when it's far too late to redirect what is in motion sensibly.

IMHO and all.

;).

gavina
June 20th, 2006, 3:08 am
I don't believe Kingwidget's usage was wrong in any way. The term "Machiavellian" has to do with people who are out for themselves, ruthless, and conniving. Dumbledore is none of those things, though it is implied on this thread that he is.
Well, you would be correct if he had used Machiavellian and not Machiavelli.

The author of the etymology to which you refer expresses his view on the origin of the term as did I.

Refer also to http://www.sparknotes.com/drama/jewofmalta/terms/char_5.html and http://www.etymonline.com/columns/bio.htm

silver ink pot
June 20th, 2006, 5:33 am
Gavina: Thanks for the links, though one goes to something about Christopher Marlowe's version of the Prince and the other to the Biography of a website owner of the Online Etymology Dictionary.

I realize we are getting way off topic here, but a theory of "control and manipulation" can easily be compared to the theories of Machiavelli.

http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/prince/context.html

Machiavelli desperately wanted to return to politics. One of his goals in writing The Prince was to win the favor of Lorenzo de’ Medici, then-governor of Florence and the person to whom the book is dedicated; Machiavelli hoped to land an advisory position within the Florentine government. But Medici received the book indifferently, and Machiavelli did not receive an invitation to serve as an official. The public’s reaction to The Prince was also indifferent at first. But slowly, as word spread, the book began to be criticized as immoral, evil, and wicked.

Whatever the original reason or intention, the book that came from the "mind" of Machiavelli is not a pleasant read, being one of the most cynical books ever written, and has been read and quoted for centuries now by people who seek their own gain through ruthlessness.

It really doesn't matter to history whether Machiavelli believed half the things he wrote - the name is forever associated with his theory of power.

People can read "The Prince" and judge for themselves:
http://www.constitution.org/mac/prince00.htm

Here are a few quotes which seem to apply alot better to Voldemort than Dumbledore:

A prince never lacks legitimate reasons to break his promise.

Men are so simple and yield so readily to the desires of the moment that he who will trick will always find another who will suffer to be tricked.


The fact is that a man who wants to act virtuously in every way necessarily comes to grief among so many who are not virtuous.


Upon this a question arises: whether it be better to be loved than feared or feared than loved? It may be answered that one should wish to be both, but, because it is difficult to unite them in one person, is much safer to be feared than loved, . . . in general of men, that they are ungrateful, fickle, false, cowardly, covetous, and as long as you succeed they are yours entirely; they will offer you their blood, property, life and children, as is said above, when the need is far distant; but when it approaches they turn against you. And that prince who, relying entirely on their promises, has neglected other precautions, is ruined; because friendships that are obtained by payments, and not by greatness or nobility of mind, may indeed be earned, but they are not secured, and in time of need cannot be relied upon; and men have less scruple in offending one who is beloved than one who is feared, for love is preserved by the link of obligation which, owing to the baseness of men, is broken at every opportunity for their advantage; but fear preserves you by a dread of punishment which never fails.

I consider that a prince ought to reckon conspiracies of little account when his people hold him in esteem; but when it is hostile to him, and bears hatred towards him, he ought to fear everything and everybody

hpfan101
June 20th, 2006, 6:05 am
this is an interesting theory, and I give FuzzyMiffins credit for putting thought into the idea, but I can't believe that Dumbledore would knowingly choose to create a situation where a boy would be orphaned, even for the fight against Voldemort. Not only that, but Dumbledore knowing Voldemort as he does would also know that Voldemort would never rest until he finds and destroys Harry. This means that he was also condemning Harry to death by falsely relaying a prophecy that would lure Voldemort to Godric's Hollow.

The reason I can't agree with this is that too many people seem to "know" about Dumbledore's plan. There is saying: Three man can keep a secret if two of them are dead. Considering Voldemort's powers at Legilimency, I don't think Wormtail could EVER have been privy to this type of information; Voldemort would have seen through the plan at the beginning. Furthermore, I do think that Dumbledore is quite willing to sacrifice a lot for this war, even his own life, but never the life of an innocent children. Considering at the time of Voldemort's downfall, Dumbledore did not yet know about Voldemort's Horcruxes, Dumbledore never could have predicted the outcome of that night at Godric's Hollow. And I really don't think Dumbledore would have asked Lily and James to sacrifice themselves on the off chance that Voldemort would give one of them the chance to choose life or death, on the off chance that this would offer protection to their child, on the off chance that Harry would not die and the spell would rebound on Voldemort, kiling him instead. Since it had never been done before, this plan seems too unpredictable and I think it is asking too much of Lily and James.

gavina
June 21st, 2006, 2:37 am
Gavina: Thanks for the links, though one goes to something about Christopher Marlowe's version of the Prince and the other to the Biography of a website owner of the Online Etymology Dictionary.
The first should have taken you to a description of Machevill and the latter was fyi to know who had given the etymology you had previousy quoted.

To get back on topic though it is interesting to note that the way JKR has written the books practically any theory has some merit until otherwise shot down in interviews or on the official site.

I like the manipulative Dumbledore theories and upthread have posted one of my own, which I qualified by saying I really don't believe a word of it.

There is certainly far more information to come on the circumstances of the first genuine Trelawney Prophesy and we all obviously anticipate this greatly.

In the matter of the comparison between HP and The Prince I must say that I don't buy it. Niccolo basically gave his views of the types of ruler as he then saw them and indeed did want to curry favour with Lorenzo de Medici to forward hid own goals.

How what is essentially a non-fiction work can be compared to the HP books is somewhat of a misrepresentation of the theory of The Prince. It is inordinately difficult to juxtapose that on the HP universe.

One of these days I must get round to commenting on that thread if it is still up. You may see from my posting numbers that I do not spend huge amounts of time commenting, except when piqued to do so.

DA_DA
July 13th, 2006, 8:39 pm
This is a strange theory I have been working on, and it probably isn’t true, but anyway. My theory is that … Dumbledore faked the prophecy in order to lure Voldemort to Godric’s Hollow.

Before you dismiss me as crazy, which I probably am, let me explain my thinking. It is the height of Voldemorts first reign. Terror is everywhere, and people are going crazy. Dumbledore needs a new plan. Strong in his belief that love can defeat Voldemort, he finds somebody sure to sacrifice themselves for their child. Lily and James Potter. He asks them if they will put themselves in danger for the good of the wizarding world, and they agree. Step one done, two more.

Now he needs to lure Voldemort to the Potters and attempt the kill the baby first, so Lily can do the sacrifice. What is Voldemorts worst fear? To paraphrase Dumbledore “Someone who would challenge him” The only way to do this, however, is to fake a prophecy. How to do that and make Voldemort know about it.

Enter Snape. A young man in Voldemorts employ. At the moment, he is against Dumbledore, or he could be leaning towards his side. Either way, he is more with Voldemort than with Dumbledore. Somebody, Dumbledore’s double-agent at the time, or Dumbledore himself, tips Snape off that there is a big meeting with Dumbledore in the Hogshead. So off he goes.

Now Dumbledore knows that Voldemort will hear the “prophecy”. So how does he make it look convincing? Trelawney reports being “lightheaded”. Sounds like Obliviate. Perhaps Dumbledore created a potion with the prophecy in it and slipped it In Trelawny’s drink.

Now, Dumbledore has to pretend he is putting up a fight. Fidelius Charm time.He gives the job to Sirius. But Sirius says “I can’t just kill my best friend,” So he gives the job to Pettigrew. However, Pettigrew stays loyal with Voldemort when because he likes the attention, which gives Sirius a reason to track him down. Peter is scared Voldie will realize it was a trap, and becomes Scabbers.

Everything else works out as told in the story. Dumbledore sticks with the story as told in the book in order to build Harry’ s confidence.

So? Am I crazy or not?

:tu: NO NOT CRAZY NO NO NOOOOOOOO.......................................:r otfl: :rotfl:

I have had similar thoughts, have you read the thread "The book 7 trap" ?

In short, I've thought that the whole plan of the prophecy, (another good thread) was Dumbledore's means whereby to entice Voldemort into acting in a predictable manner. In HBP Snape comments on how the Dark Arts are un-predictable. This also ties in with my view that Dumbledore is alive.:clap: :gryff:

this is an interesting theory, and I give FuzzyMiffins credit for putting thought into the idea, but I can't believe that Dumbledore would knowingly choose to create a situation where a boy would be orphaned, even for the fight against Voldemort. Not only that, but Dumbledore knowing Voldemort as he does would also know that Voldemort would never rest until he finds and destroys Harry. This means that he was also condemning Harry to death by falsely relaying a prophecy that would lure Voldemort to Godric's Hollow.

The reason I can't agree with this is that too many people seem to "know" about Dumbledore's plan. There is saying: Three man can keep a secret if two of them are dead. Considering Voldemort's powers at Legilimency, I don't think Wormtail could EVER have been privy to this type of information; Voldemort would have seen through the plan at the beginning. Furthermore, I do think that Dumbledore is quite willing to sacrifice a lot for this war, even his own life, but never the life of an innocent children. Considering at the time of Voldemort's downfall, Dumbledore did not yet know about Voldemort's Horcruxes, Dumbledore never could have predicted the outcome of that night at Godric's Hollow. And I really don't think Dumbledore would have asked Lily and James to sacrifice themselves on the off chance that Voldemort would give one of them the chance to choose life or death, on the off chance that this would offer protection to their child, on the off chance that Harry would not die and the spell would rebound on Voldemort, kiling him instead. Since it had never been done before, this plan seems too unpredictable and I think it is asking too much of Lily and James.

I think that we've had this before.... READ MY SIGNITURE
SOMEBODY POSTED THAT EVERYBODY WENT "UNDERGROUND" AND THAT ALL WERE HIDING IN THERE:p :lol:

christinabelle
July 15th, 2006, 5:25 am
I honestly can't see Dumbledore being evil, at all. SO, in answer to your question, you are crazy

Cless
July 15th, 2006, 5:26 am
I honestly can't see Dumbledore being evil, at all. SO, in answer to your question, you are crazy
I agree, Dumbledore could never be evil. Snpae on the other hand, well I'll keep my mouth shut.

marauder1031
July 15th, 2006, 5:29 am
There is another thread which talks of Dumbledor being evil as well, which is what he would have to be in order to commit the acts of which you speak and I, for one, can not believe that Dumbledore is anything but righteous and good. I do not believe there is any canon evidence to support Dumbledore being anything but.

moonlite
July 15th, 2006, 5:34 am
Also Dumbledore said he told Harry everything, again how would Harry feel if he were completely betrayed by Dumbledore? Exactly. If this theory was true, i'd rather disappointed in Dumbledore to put such a burden on Harry, especially just after Harry had lost Sirius, and for it all to just turn out to be a scheme full of lies. That would just be cruel.

ID824
August 8th, 2006, 5:52 pm
Exactly. If this theory was true, i'd rather disappointed in Dumbledore to put such a burden on Harry, especially just after Harry had lost Sirius, and for it all to just turn out to be a scheme full of lies. That would just be cruel.

I also don't think Dumbledore is evil, but one thing does bother me about the prophecy. It states, "...the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord is born as the 7th month dies."

This is somewhat inaccurate, depending on your point of view. Was Harry born with his unconditional ability to love and feel empathy, or was it given to him by his mother through her death?

kingwidgit
August 8th, 2006, 9:34 pm
I also don't think Dumbledore is evil, but one thing does bother me about the prophecy. It states, "...the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord is born as the 7th month dies."

This is somewhat inaccurate, depending on your point of view. Was Harry born with his unconditional ability to love and feel empathy, or was it given to him by his mother through her death?Harry was born 'pure-of-heart'. This means he was born with not only the ability to love, but that he was born with 'great quantities' of the power of love.

His mother's sacrifice, the blood protection, and the bond of blood charm isn't the source of Harry's power, it is in addition to Harry's power. Just as the scar and the magical ability conveyed through it is in addition to Harry's power, not the source of it.Would Neville have had the qualities that have enabled Harry to remain strong and sane throughout all of his many ordeals? Although Dumbledore does not say as much, he does not believe so: he believes Voldemort did indeed choose the boy most likely to be able to topple him, for Harry's survival has not depended wholly or even mainly upon his scar.

Shewoman
August 9th, 2006, 3:39 am
Toddler Harry vanquished Voldemort at Godric's Hollow. Wherever he got the power from, he had it by then.

Katrocker
August 9th, 2006, 3:24 pm
Okay, i see what your saying... but i dont think the theory is right. One, why would Dumbledore make up the theory? Maybe to trick Voldemort, yea, but Dumbledore wouldnt have wanted anyone being killed in the process. Because if he did make it up, he would have to know the Voldemort would want to try to kill the boy in it. Plus, if he did make it up how would he have known that two of voldemorts enemies would have boys in the late July?

iloveemmaw
August 9th, 2006, 3:48 pm
It is a possibility and a lot of the stuff lines up right, but, I don't think that Dumbledore would have lied to Harry or sacrificed his parents loyalty to him.

ID824
August 10th, 2006, 12:58 am
Toddler Harry vanquished Voldemort at Godric's Hollow. Wherever he got the power from, he had it by then.

But that was because of the protection from his mother, not because of his own magical power.

I_love_HP
August 10th, 2006, 1:55 am
The theory is not bad except that I don't believe Dumbledore would be willing to sacrifice them like that. Plus, what about the prophecy in the Department of Mysteries that we all heard. Where did it come from if there was no real prophecy.

DA_DA
September 7th, 2006, 3:35 pm
The theory is not bad except that I don't believe Dumbledore would be willing to sacrifice them like that. Plus, what about the prophecy in the Department of Mysteries that we all heard. Where did it come from if there was no real prophecy.

In HBP we learn from Scrimgeour that "Its all perception." "It's what people believe that's important." (pg 323, Bloomsbury)

During Harry's OWLS we hear that Dumbledore could do things with a wand that were unheard of before. Besides Dumbledore has many supporters in the MoM.

Mugglewizard
September 9th, 2006, 11:06 am
This is an interesting theory but leaves a lot of gaps. Most have been mentioned before like how he would know Lilly would be given a chance to live.
gavina mentions that LV's rebirth was part of the plan, if it were then what would be the purpose of the deaths of James and Lily? Their sacrifice becomes Futile. If Harry is not really the chosen one then why did Dumbledore protect him so much? If the prophecy is not real why did he show it to Harry? It serves no purpose as Hayy would already go for Voldemort if he gets the chance (in PP and also admits it in HBP)

MrSleepyHead
September 9th, 2006, 1:40 pm
This is an interesting theory but leaves a lot of gaps. Most have been mentioned before like how he would know Lilly would be given a chance to live.
This brings us to another controversy, which shouldn't be discussed here. However, I shall give an argument to this statement: would Voldemort have even spared Lily? I believe that he wouldn't - I think he would want her to see his son die (that would be a terrible punishment) and then he would kill her. For, as Hagrid tells us, he probably just liked killing by then. Also, couldn't Lily create another threat to Voldemort? If she birthed the baby that was supposed to rival her, she must be a threat, too. Therefore, I would say that he just said that to get her out of the way and have her watch him kill Harry.

Now, I disagree completely with this theory, for a reason most have already stated: Dumbledore would simply not kill two innocent people in order for Voldemort to be killed. Even if Lily and James consented to the plan, how could Dumbledore live with himself knowing that he had just killed two great people and left their son alone without a parent? Dumbledore is not that cruel - this plan could only work if Voldemort was in Dumbledore's place.

I also disagree with the part about Pettigrew. As you say, he was already loyal to Voldemort - therefore, if he was Voldemort's man why wouldn't he tell him that it was a trap. Instead, Pettigrew gave the Potters away - since we know that Pettigrew is scared of Voldemort, why wouldn't he tell Voldemort not to do it because it was a trap? Voldemort would believe him since he was playing the double-agent...

I find this theory has too many holes to hold water.

Shewoman
September 10th, 2006, 3:14 am
JKR has said that Voldemort did offer Lily her life in the Memmerson interview of July 2005. It's possible that she had access to some object or information through her job that Voldemort wanted. He might have Imperiused her for it. I doubt that she would have lived after she had provided it.

SKasparRollins
September 10th, 2006, 3:21 am
You know, that's something I've thought before as well. I wondered, how did Snape know it was Trelawney, the granddaughter of a famous Seer, in that room when he overheard her talking about it?

The only reason, of course, that the prophecy works is because Voldemort believes in it. He believes in it because he fanatically fears death. Using this logic, couldn't one assume that ANYBODY could make a prophecy foretelling the Dark Lord's downfall?

However, I may be making a leap in logic, and to assume Dumbledore faked it, you have to assume that he

A. Gave Harry a false memory when he showed him Trelawney making the prophecy

B. Modified Trelawney's memory so that she did not remember much from the night of the prophecy, other than the fact that she was feeling light headed, and that Snape overheard part of it.

MadMagic
September 10th, 2006, 4:28 am
While interesting, I agree that this theory is flawed.
Dumbledore does not seem the type to come up with a plan that would kill two young people and leave their son an oprhan. I believe he would be much more willing to come up with a plan that would involve him sacrificing himself.

Also, I think it would work better for your theory if Snape was already loyal to Dumbledore and he knew exactly what he was doing when he related the prophecy to Voldemort. Otherwise, what exactly did he overhear if Trewlany never made the prophecy.

Pettigrew's part also confuses me. He knows that the prophecy is a fake yet he give the Potters to Voldemort anyway, even though he is a loyal follower of Voldemort. Knowing what we do about Pettigrew, I don't think that he would willingly feed Voldemort information that would lead to Pettigrew being hated. Who would chose to relay the information that you know is bad and that you know will result you having to live life as a rat. Just doesn't seem to work for me.

kingwidgit
September 10th, 2006, 5:32 am
The biggest flaw that I see with the proferred idea is that it all hinges on Dumbledore telling Lily she must sacrifice herself for her child...yet JK has specifically stated:MA: Did she know anything about the possible effect of standing in front of Harry?

JKR: No - because as I've tried to make clear in the series, it never happened before. No one ever survived before. And no one, therefore, knew that could happen. Lily didn't know that to sacrifice herself would save Harry, and no one--including Dumbledore and Voldemort---knew what would happen, as it had never occured before.

Dumbledore couldn't mastermind this, and what's more, he wouldn't have.

ID824
September 10th, 2006, 6:19 pm
JKR has said that Voldemort did offer Lily her life in the Memmerson interview of July 2005. It's possible that she had access to some object or information through her job that Voldemort wanted. He might have Imperiused her for it. I doubt that she would have lived after she had provided it.

I think Voldemort spared Lily because he held some affinity for her. When we see how troubled he is growing up, and his feelings about his own mother, I think he could actually allow her to live in the same way he wishes his own mother could have lived for him.

gavina
September 11th, 2006, 1:17 am
gavina mentions that LV's rebirth was part of the plan, if it were then what would be the purpose of the deaths of James and Lily?
First, let me repeat, I do not believe the theory. I have written a large expansion on it, which was more for fun than anything else, and this is somewhere upthread.

If, however, the theory is anywhere near the mark then it is necessary to consider the implications and possible explanations for them. I assert that if the prophecy was faked then part of the plan was for Voldemort to be reborn.

The reason would be that the renewed vessel (body) would be weakened by the manner in which it was reconstituted and therefore easier to destroy.

Lily and James's deaths would also have to have been part of the plan and certainly not for nothing.

Of course, I don't believe a word of it, but provide answers to queries that would work, even if the purpose is futile.

Majik
September 11th, 2006, 9:18 pm
I think the Prophecy is totally Legit. I think maybe D. knew certain people would inevitable overhear it, and accepted that, but that's prbably as far as it went.

Hermy_007
September 12th, 2006, 12:34 am
How could the Dumbledore we know formulate such a plan? I dont think he faked the prophecy. Dumbledore does not seem like the kind of a person who would plan something that would endanger so many lives. The prophecy was indeed made and was heard partially by Snape. Also, don't forget that Dumbledore suspected that Voldemort had considered a horcrux ( Dumbledore got the proof when he saw Riddle's diary). So, he knew that it would not be a wise option to destroy him then.

xFluerDelacourx
September 12th, 2006, 12:55 am
Interesting though.

orusxiii
October 13th, 2006, 3:56 pm
Do you trust Trelawney?
I do not really and think that it's possible that DD invented the whole lot just to make Harry get more confidence and at the same time make him trust Snape.


Note: other threads are only partly related.

mysterious
October 13th, 2006, 4:06 pm
at the same time make him trust Snape.

I mean you seriously think that to be true, I mean look at how Harry reacted when he came to know that it was Snape who overheard the prophecy and it was because of Snape that he no longer had his parents, I mean he would have argued more with Dumbledore on the Snape matter had Dumbledore not threatened him with the fact that if Harry wasn't going to calm down then he would not take Harry along. This is enough to prove that Harry never trusted Snape when he came to know of the Prophecy stuff.

And I think this thread discusses the same topic. ----> Dumbledore faked the Prophecy (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=91041) ;)

orusxiii
October 13th, 2006, 4:40 pm
What I say is not that anybody faked it but that Trelawney is not really good like her great grandma and could have been seeing something else or interpreted it the wrong way!
Unless anybody knows how this works, Trelawney herself may be the one who faked or invented the "prophecy"!

mysterious
October 13th, 2006, 6:09 pm
Trelawney herself may be the one who faked or invented the "prophecy"!

And why would she do that. :huh: I mean if she did then how come it all fitted in so well. I mean she must really have had made the prophecy otherwise how come she came up with exact details of the date of Birt and that the ones who gave birth were the ones who had defied Voldemort three time. :huh: As for the fact that she did it to impress Dumbledore to give him the Job I think that is not possible because Dumbledore isn't a fool and he could easily have detected that Sybill was faking it. Moreover whenever Sybill has tried to make a fake prophecy she has not had the usual effect (look at the fake Prophecy she tried to make for Umbridge).

Therefore I do not consider Trelawny herself making a fake Prophecy.

And there is also this Canon to support the fact that the prophecy was real

A figure rose out of it, draped in shwals, her eyes magnified to enormous size behind her glasses, and she revolved slowly, her feet in the basin. But when Sybill Trelawney Spoke, it was not in her usual ethereal, mystic voice, but in the harsh, hoarse tones Harry had heard her use once before.

I know that dosen't say anything specific but the type of tone tells us that it was a real prophecy (Refer to PoA where Sybill went into a similiar trance when she predicted that the servant of the Dark Lord would return to him....)

Kharina
October 14th, 2006, 2:07 pm
I think Dumbledore released part of the prophecy intentionally, but I don't think he faked it. I think Snape was already working for Dumbledore before the prophecy was made and Dumbledore told him to leak the first part to Voldemort. But I don't think DD faked it completely, because otherwise why would Trelawney have a memory that corresponded with what Dumbledore told HArry, and why would DD be able to show Harry a memory of Trelawney actually making the prophecy?

Good theory, though.

gertiekeddle
October 15th, 2006, 2:32 pm
He made an big work to protect the prophecy. If he tried to fake it, he could have done way easier - with destroying the prophecy by himself. (It's actually odd that the Order didn't do that before Voldemort tried to reach it according to the big danger what was included).

HP_hedgehog
October 15th, 2006, 2:38 pm
He made an big work to protect the prophecy. If he tried to fake it, he could have done way easier - with destroying the prophecy by himself. (It's actually odd that the Order didn't do that before Voldemort tried to reach it according to the big danger what was included).

Yes, I thought of that too... why not destroying it so that Voldemort could never hear it? Dumbledore knew the Pensieve-way to show it to Harry in due course, so... why protecting the Ministry-copy?

Lady_Padfoot
October 15th, 2006, 4:44 pm
I don't think that Dumbledore would sacrifice two of his former students and most trusted friends, most likely. However, it's an impressive theory!

ravenrox24
October 15th, 2006, 5:02 pm
I don't think that you are crazy. I think that that is a very good point. I mean DD has this certain air about him that makes him seem really strange and mysterious. And sometimes when Harry asks him something like the thing about his withered hand. DD says that he will tell him when the time is right. But when he tells him they're already off to fight LV and try to destroy the fake Horcrux.

The only thing that makes me believe that DD didn't do that was in the HBP. Where he and Harry go into the Pensieve ( did I spell that right?) and they learn all about LV and his family and everything and how he was having trouble with his magic gift. When DD did that then that made me think about both things that you are talking about. It made me think that you were crazy because he had told Harry all of these things. But then you weren't crazy because maybe just maybe if he told him these things he was trying to lure Harry into thinking that he really could defeat him.

dobbysfriend
April 6th, 2007, 3:56 am
Nice theory, but I doubt that Dumbledore would do that. But prophecies can be difficult to interpret.

Shewoman
April 6th, 2007, 6:58 pm
I can't agree with this theory. As others have already argued, it goes against what we know of Dumbledore as well as JKR's referring to him as "the epitome of goodness."

This theory also asks us to believe that Dumbledore intentionally endangered a young couple and their child and that these supposedly loving parents agreed to risk their child's life in a confrontation with Voldemort and to leave him an orphan if he survived? I have a hard time visualizing any parents agreeing to do that to their own son. Furthermore, this plan is based on something that NO ONE has any reason to believe will work--not Dumbledore, not Lily, not anyone. Supposing you found parents insane enough to risk their son's life and their own deaths, wouldn't they at least insist that it be based on a plan that there was good reason to believe would succeed?

Furthermore, I'm not sure that any random thing someone says about the future becomes a Prophecy if someone else believes it. Trelawney is a Seer; we know this not only because of the Prophecy under discussion but also because of the one she makes about Wormtail and Voldemort in PoA. In spite of her serious weirditude, she does have a touch of the Gift. I doubt that there's a way to put a prophecy in potion and make a Seer deliver it.

I really see no reason to believe that Peter's a good guy. He killed 12 Muggles, right? Got Sirius sent to Azkaban for 12 years for something he didn't do, in addition. I don't think those are things Dumbledore would approve of or require his agents to do.

This supposed plan of Dumbledore's has a lot of weaknesses. It requires not only the Potters' consent but also the active participation of Sirius and Peter in the deaths of their friends. The next twelve years of both those men's lives are also ruined by the plan, as one goes to Azkaban and the other lives as a rat. Snape has to be aware of the plan as well. If any of these people find themselves unable or unwilling to fulfill their part in the plan or to deal with its consequences (which seems to have been an issue for Snape) or if, like Hagrid, they get drunk and speak unwisely to a stranger--it'll all come tumbling down.

The only thing that lends any support to any of this is the stuff Dumbledore says in the Cave after drinking the potion there. But this isn't the only possible explanation of it. What's the purpose of that Potion? It certainly seems to incapacitate Dumbledore, both physically and emotionally. Someone has suggested it might be a liquid boggart, that those who drink it see their own worst fears realized. I find it much easier to believe that harm coming to those for whom Dumbledore feels responsible is something he fears rather than something in his history.

DA_DA
April 7th, 2007, 9:25 am
I can't agree with this theory. As others have already argued, it goes against what we know of Dumbledore as well as JKR's referring to him as "the epitome of goodness."

This theory also asks us to believe that Dumbledore intentionally endangered a young couple and their child and that these supposedly loving parents agreed to risk their child's life in a confrontation with Voldemort and to leave him an orphan if he survived? I have a hard time visualizing any parents agreeing to do that to their own son. Furthermore, this plan is based on something that NO ONE has any reason to believe will work--not Dumbledore, not Lily, not anyone. Supposing you found parents insane enough to risk their son's life and their own deaths, wouldn't they at least insist that it be based on a plan that there was good reason to believe would succeed?

Furthermore, I'm not sure that any random thing someone says about the future becomes a Prophecy if someone else believes it. Trelawney is a Seer; we know this not only because of the Prophecy under discussion but also because of the one she makes about Wormtail and Voldemort in PoA. In spite of her serious weirditude, she does have a touch of the Gift. I doubt that there's a way to put a prophecy in potion and make a Seer deliver it.

I really see no reason to believe that Peter's a good guy. He killed 12 Muggles, right? Got Sirius sent to Azkaban for 12 years for something he didn't do, in addition. I don't think those are things Dumbledore would approve of or require his agents to do.

This supposed plan of Dumbledore's has a lot of weaknesses. It requires not only the Potters' consent but also the active participation of Sirius and Peter in the deaths of their friends. The next twelve years of both those men's lives are also ruined by the plan, as one goes to Azkaban and the other lives as a rat. Snape has to be aware of the plan as well. If any of these people find themselves unable or unwilling to fulfill their part in the plan or to deal with its consequences (which seems to have been an issue for Snape) or if, like Hagrid, they get drunk and speak unwisely to a stranger--it'll all come tumbling down.

The only thing that lends any support to any of this is the stuff Dumbledore says in the Cave after drinking the potion there. But this isn't the only possible explanation of it. What's the purpose of that Potion? It certainly seems to incapacitate Dumbledore, both physically and emotionally. Someone has suggested it might be a liquid boggart, that those who drink it see their own worst fears realized. I find it much easier to believe that harm coming to those for whom Dumbledore feels responsible is something he fears rather than something in his history.

I am replying to your postas representing most of the posts, as you have incorperated ideas from others.:D

As reguards Dumbledore, as we know him, Dumbledore adore's knitting patterns, he says so to Slughorn, these patterns can be quite complex and intrricated, having many options (loopholes included, :lol: )

Dumbledore believes that we are defined by our choise we make in life, by taking the correct path as apposed to the easy route.

Dumbledore says in HBP to Harry that the only thing that makes the prophecy real is that Voldemort believe in it. And that Harry is free to choose, intersting that here Harry chooses to enter the arena with his head held high.
Much like his father, who some readers don't believe would have left Harry as a choice. I think we should remember that at that time in the narative, everybody was in danger, Voldemort was taking over, as Hagrid says.
James and Lily could have made the choice to paticipate in a plot to overthrough Voldemort. It was also thier choice not to accept Dumbledore as thier SK, so doing it was thier responsibility, and not Dumbledore's.
Yes I believe that the scene in the cave has relevance to remorse Dumbledore felt for all those that went in the "cause".

Wormtail a good guy? Well that would solve the problem of why he was in Gryffindor. Dumbledore said there was a spy in Voldemort's cicle, who said it was Snape? If Dumbledore was responsible for the first prophecy by Trelawney, I see no reason to not allow the second to be aswell. Interesting that it would be in Hogwarts where Dumbledore has complete control and also include the potential spy.

As for Sirius, I dont think that he became an animagus by chance. The reason he saw for this was to help his friend Lupin, who Dumbledore allowed into the school fully aware of the dangers to other students. There is reason to sumise that Dumbledore helped the Mauraders as helped Harry.

12 Muggles died? I believe this to be an illusion, only the muggles who witnessed gave testimony, and we know they don't see all. Had somebody else been involved, I would have no doubts about thier testimony.

I've posted before James and Lily were targeted trice before, untill Harry the most anybody had survived against Voldemort, I think they were quite prepared to die in defeating Voldemort.

Hagrid, lets not forget him, not all that he appears to be. In PS he does NV magic, by tapping with his umbrella. Works well enough, doesn't seem broken.
As for anyone being unwilling to fulfill thier part, the only candidate was Snape, he's suspect anyway.

As a conclusion, I think that this one solution has much to offer as it solves so many questions that seem to otherwise have contradicting solutions.

Then again I'm a believer that Dumbledore isn't dead, so what do I know..:rotfl:

bmichael71105
April 7th, 2007, 9:44 am
Your crazy :p KIDDING but I don't know if that sounds likely, but you've got the whole scenario figured out so I have to give you credit for that. Likely or not though, unless there's solid proof (canon) that proves you wrong (I have no clue I'm not good at remembering all this stuff like all of you, so there could be) then you could be just as right about this as anyone else. Good stuff, it's an outside the box kind of thing I think :D .

Hinoema
April 7th, 2007, 10:16 am
My main problem is that if both Dumbeldore and Trelawney's accounts of the night of the prophecy are false, then Jo has deliberately mislead her readers as far as the central plot line, and harry is essentially on a false quest. I don't see it.

ComicBookWorm
April 7th, 2007, 10:16 am
12 Muggles died? I believe this to be an illusion, only the muggles who witnessed gave testimony, and we know they don't see all. Had somebody else been involved, I would have no doubts about thier testimony. Theories work better when they don't expect us to turn everything in the stories upside down. They work better when they don't run counter to what JKR has posted on her website and stated in interviews. They work better when they don't take everything we know about most of the characters and throw it out the window.

It really isn't enough to have a novel theory. It also has to have canon support and hold up to logical examination. Authors don't rip the guts completely out of what they have written in order to surprise us. Every surprise that JKR has given has not invalidated other canon. It has added to it and explained things, but it hasn't inverted it.

BTW there isn't going to be one revelation or theory that explains everything in the story (especially when it negates so much of what we already know). That would be too simplistic. JKR has written a far richer and more complex story than that.

Shewoman
April 7th, 2007, 5:24 pm
I am replying to your postas representing most of the posts, as you have incorperated ideas from others.:D

Me: Most of what I posted I've already posted on this thread or others.

As reguards Dumbledore, as we know him, Dumbledore adore's knitting patterns, he says so to Slughorn, these patterns can be quite complex and intrricated, having many options (loopholes included, :lol: )

Me: Which means what?

Dumbledore believes that we are defined by our choise we make in life, by taking the correct path as apposed to the easy route.

Me: Yes.

Dumbledore says in HBP to Harry that the only thing that makes the prophecy real is that Voldemort believe in it. And that Harry is free to choose, intersting that here Harry chooses to enter the arena with his head held high.
Much like his father, who some readers don't believe would have left Harry as a choice. I think we should remember that at that time in the narative, everybody was in danger, Voldemort was taking over, as Hagrid says.
James and Lily could have made the choice to paticipate in a plot to overthrough Voldemort. It was also thier choice not to accept Dumbledore as thier SK, so doing it was thier responsibility, and not Dumbledore's.
Yes I believe that the scene in the cave has relevance to remorse Dumbledore felt for all those that went in the "cause".

Me: Yes. And I doubt that parents would choose to make their toddler an orphan on the off-chance that something no one had any reason to believe would destroy Voldemort would, in fact, do so. We have canon saying no one knew what would happen. We don't even have canon saying the Potters knew about the Prophecy.

Wormtail a good guy? Well that would solve the problem of why he was in Gryffindor. Dumbledore said there was a spy in Voldemort's cicle, who said it was Snape? If Dumbledore was responsible for the first prophecy by Trelawney, I see no reason to not allow the second to be aswell. Interesting that it would be in Hogwarts where Dumbledore has complete control and also include the potential spy.

Me: Gryffindors are brave, which is not the same thing as good. Dumbledore did say that Snape became a spy for him while Voldemort was still powerful, which has to be before Godric's Hollow ("The Pensieve," GoF). And we have no reason to believe that Dumbledore was responsible for either of Sibyll's prophecies.

As for Sirius, I dont think that he became an animagus by chance. The reason he saw for this was to help his friend Lupin, who Dumbledore allowed into the school fully aware of the dangers to other students. There is reason to sumise that Dumbledore helped the Mauraders as helped Harry.

Me: Dumbledore didn't know James, Peter, and Sirius were Animagi until PoA ("Owl Post Again").

12 Muggles died? I believe this to be an illusion, only the muggles who witnessed gave testimony, and we know they don't see all. Had somebody else been involved, I would have no doubts about thier testimony.

Me: What reason do you have to believe this didn't happen? Fudge is one of the ones who tells the story, and he was one of the first on the scene ("The Marauder's Map," PoA). The Muggles' memories were wiped, which indicates that they HAD those memories. You're suggesting that something they couldn't see killed 12 people? What? Peter obviously didn't die there, as everyone assumed. It was how he managed to shift responsibility for the Potters' betrayal onto Sirius (who knew Peter was the S-K and that his animagus form was a rat). Without this, he would have had a harder time escaping.

I've posted before James and Lily were targeted trice before, untill Harry the most anybody had survived against Voldemort, I think they were quite prepared to die in defeating Voldemort.

Me: And to risk their child's life? That's not the act of loving parents. They could have sent him somewhere else and allowed Voldemort to think he was at the house in GH.

Hagrid, lets not forget him, not all that he appears to be. In PS he does NV magic, by tapping with his umbrella. Works well enough, doesn't seem broken.
As for anyone being unwilling to fulfill thier part, the only candidate was Snape, he's suspect anyway.

Me: Not sure I get this.

As a conclusion, I think that this one solution has much to offer as it solves so many questions that seem to otherwise have contradicting solutions.

Then again I'm a believer that Dumbledore isn't dead, so what do I know..:rotfl:

Me: JKR has said he is.

DA_DA
April 7th, 2007, 10:43 pm
Theories work better when they don't expect us to turn everything in the stories upside down. They work better when they don't run counter to what JKR has posted on her website and stated in interviews. They work better when they don't take everything we know about most of the characters and throw it out the window.

It really isn't enough to have a novel theory. It also has to have canon support and hold up to logical examination. Authors don't rip the guts completely out of what they have written in order to surprise us. Every surprise that JKR has given has not invalidated other canon. It has added to it and explained things, but it hasn't inverted it.

BTW there isn't going to be one revelation or theory that explains everything in the story (especially when it negates so much of what we already know). That would be too simplistic. JKR has written a far richer and more complex story than that.

If you have canon that negates anything I posted in this idea, please refer me to it, as I would like to follow your line of thought.

If you reject my idea because of what you belive or not believe that JKR has written, then it is still your belief. I don't think that we the reader can decide as what JKR intends to do. Maybe we will have to wait till 21/7.

Gracezilla06
April 7th, 2007, 10:45 pm
Dumbledore faking it?? That would be a plot twist I don't want to see.

toonmili
April 8th, 2007, 1:53 am
sorry but I don't believe it. It will make DD too mean.

AL_Patterson
April 8th, 2007, 2:16 am
Dumbledore would never ask the Potters to put their life in danger so he could possibly capture Voldemort. DD would have thought of a better plan where other people aren't in danger, other than himself.

Carb_King
April 8th, 2007, 2:18 am
I can't beleive this.
I just can't.

Shewoman
April 8th, 2007, 5:59 am
From JKR: "I loved writing Dumbledore and Dumbledore is the epitome of goodness."
J.K. Rowling Interview," CBCNewsWorld: Hot Type, July 13, 2000

It's hard to see that work with this theory.

Canon says that a number of Muggles were killed the day after the Potters' deaths. Because of Peter's frame job, it was thought that Sirius killed them, but the deaths themselves are part of canon.

MA: Did she [Lily] know anything about the possible effect of standing in front of Harry?
JKR: No - because as I've tried to make clear in the series, it never happened before. No one ever survived before. And no one, therefore, knew that could happen.
Interview with Memmerson, July 2005

Also difficult to square with this theory.

forgetmenot
April 8th, 2007, 6:09 am
Dumbledore faking it?? That would be a plot twist I don't want to see.

That would be...I don't even know how to put that into words. :no:

sorry but I don't believe it. It will make DD too mean.

That and Dumbledore is the kind of guy that gives people second chances, trusts them where others don't, and he really seems to think things through. I don't think he'd do something as extreme as sacrificing people on a mere whim, if that's what it would have been.

ComicBookWorm
April 8th, 2007, 7:01 am
If you have canon that negates anything I posted in this idea, please refer me to it, as I would like to follow your line of thought.

If you reject my idea because of what you belive or not believe that JKR has written, then it is still your belief. I don't think that we the reader can decide as what JKR intends to do. Maybe we will have to wait till 21/7.
This entire theory is based on the wholesale denial of canon that is well-established, both in the text and from JKR's website and interviews. I really don't have to provide canon to disprove the theory, since none has been provided in support of the theory, because the theory, itself, makes a point of running counter to, and invalidating, canon. I cannot disprove something that offers no proof.

Step by step, along the way, the theory makes assertion after assertion that disputes what is already in print. The theory is based on the contention that it would all be a big surprise for us to learn this. The reason why I can maintain that JKR wouldn't do it is based on simple logic that authors don't deliberately gut their works and turn them inside out, since it would infuriate the readers. How would any of us feel to find that she has been deliberately lying in interviews and on her website.

You are going to provide canon supporting this idea before I even try to disprove it. Right now all we have are a string of assertions that all run counter to the printed page (and you know that). I don't need to provide canon disproving your ideas since it is all in the text already.

fireboltwiccan
April 8th, 2007, 7:06 am
No way. We also "saw" in DD's interview with Trelawney [sp?] how she actually said word for word the prophecy in that trance like manner. I doubt even DD could make anyone go in that kinda state and say what he wanted them to say. Imperius curse in possible but thats a UC and considered evil so I don't think he would have used it.

Alastor
April 8th, 2007, 7:15 am
Let's not have another fight over canon here now. :)

Hinoema
April 8th, 2007, 7:29 am
From what I'm seeing, I highly doubt that the events we see have could have been arranged by Dumbledore to follow a fabricated prophecy.

From what I recall, no one knew Snape would overhear and betray only half of an unexpected prophecy. No one knew that Voldemort would take it seriously. No one knew Voldemort's response would be to try to kill one of two infants. No one knew he would choose Harry and not Neville. No one knew that Peter would betray the Potters' hiding place. No one knew that Voldemort would offer Lily a chance to live. No one knew that her refusal and her choice to die rather than allow him to kill Harry would invoke an ancient magic. No one knew that Harry would be given powers and a "Power He Knows Not". No one knew he would survive to adulthood. No one knows even now if Harry is capable of vanquishing Voldemort.

Dumbledore could not have, as far as I see, 'given' Sybill the prophecy as a means to any end, because that end has been completely dependent on far too many factors that could neither have been predicted nor controlled.

get_sirius
April 8th, 2007, 8:02 am
I dont think dumbledore would really have somone sacrifice their selves for the welfare of dumbledore he even sacrificed himslef (maybe) for snape

vivekgk
April 8th, 2007, 10:15 am
This is a strange theory I have been working on, and it probably isn’t true, but anyway. My theory is that … Dumbledore faked the prophecy in order to lure Voldemort to Godric’s Hollow.

I've read through it, but I think I'll stick to my existing views. :p

I don't think that Jo would have someone she described as the 'Epitome of Goodness' do something like this. Basically, you're saying that he orchestrated a double murder, risked the life of a baby, and left an innocent man in the worst place in the world for twelve years, and that he could predict the entire sequence of events beforehand. Can't agree wih it at all. We're talking about a man who gave his life, so that Draco and Snape could live.

Half_Blood26
April 10th, 2007, 10:30 pm
Why would Dumbledore fake the prophecy? and what about the meeting with Proffesor Trelawny and Snape overhearing it, why would you fake that?