Login  
 
 
Go Back   Chamber of Secrets > Forum Archives > Harry Potter Archives

Was Trelawney's recollection of the Prophecy night an implanted memory?



 
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old May 3rd, 2006, 6:44 am
irmapince  Female.gif irmapince is offline
Third Year
 
Joined: 4448 days
Location: Weaver's Way
Posts: 436
Was Trelawney's recollection of the Prophecy night an implanted memory?

When I first read Dumbledore say that Snape was the one who overheard the prophecy, I took it at face value and thought it was very sad that Snape did something so horrible while following Voldemort. But then I read North Tower #42 A New Light on the Prophecy and it blew my mind! This is the best editorial I have ever read! I would have never noticed this because I do not read in such detail. The one thing that struck me the most was that Trelanwey remembered Snape entering the room while she was giving the prophecy. But when she gave the prophecy she should have been in a trance and thus unable to remember anything that happened. And then I thought that perhaps DD's version of events from OotP was relatively correct and Trelanwey's version a memory implanted by Dumbledore. This is the easiest way to reconcile the two incredibly different versions of the events from that night.

When DD "confirms" to Harry that Snape was the one who overheard the prophecy, DD tries to mitigate it by saying that Snape heard and gave only half the prophecy and when Snape realized that V was going after people he knew he regretted his actions and was deeply remorseful. But what was the first half of the prophecy? That someone will be born who can destroy Voldemort and that baby will be born at the end of July by those who have thrice defied Voldemort. So what did the person who gave the first half of the prophecy to Voldemort think Voldemort would do with that child? Throw it a shower? No, the person who gave V the prophecy knew full well that V would murder all the Wizarding children born at the end of July by his enemies. So the person who gave half the prophecy to V was knowingly signing the death warrants of newborn children. This is such a loathsome thing to do in the first place. Finding out later that one of those children is that of someone you know and then regretting your actions does not mitigate the original action in any way. So the person who gave the V the prophecy was inherently amoral.

This amorality directly contradicts Dumbledore's regard for Snape. In the series, DD lets Harry say just about anything he wants to about anyone, including Dumbledore himself. But when it comes to Snape, DD immediately and absolutely vouches for Snape to the point that Harry knows that he should not continue with the subject. Most interesting is in HBP when Harry speaks ill of Snape, DD actually turns nasty towards his pet, Harry, and speaks to Harry with sarcasm. So DD's regard for Snape is so high that he will get angry with Harry, his so called favorite, if Harry insults Snape. Similarly, DD vouches for Snape with Lupin and Sirius to the point that Sirius trusts Snape based on DD's word. Most telling is the fact that McGonagall says that DD would refuse to hear ill of Snape. The fact that DD refuses to hear ill of Snape from his friend and equal (whereas with a junior he can just be using his authority) shows how much he trusts and respects Snape. The problem with Snape giving the prophecy half to V is how could DD have such a magnitude of respect for a man DD knows was capable of sending infants to their deaths?

Furthermore, DD cares for his students and holds their safety as his highest concern. How then could DD let a man who held childrens' lives in such low regard teach at his school? Similarly, Snape's actions as a teacher do not indicate that he does not care about children. Snape might not be the nicest teacher, but he does look out for the welfare of his students. In SS he is following Harry around and trying to protect him. In CS Snape is giving his students dueling lessons, shepherding then between classes, and is visibly upset when Ginny is taken into the Chamber. In PoA Snape dashes to the Willow to try and save his students. And in OotP Snape understands Harry's message, sends the Order when Harry and friends do not return, and helps heal the students after the battle. So Snape consistently shows concern for the safety of his students which is inconsistent with a man who set up newborn children to be murdered.

All this lead me to believe that DD implanted a false memory in Trelawney's mind as to what happened the night of the prophecy. But if Snape did not overhear the prophecy, who did? My guess is the original obvious one, Mundungus. Mundungus fits the profile DD gives for the person who overheard the prophecy since Dung was banned from the Hogs Head. Snape, on the other hand, seems to be able to conduct himself decently in public, as is seen in Slughorn's party, and thus should not have been banned. Moreover, Snape would not have been in the Hogs Head because Voldemort would have banned him from going. V knows that DD knows the bartender (Abeforth) and V would not want his Death Eaters discussing things within earshot of one of DD's "sources."

Also, Snape describes Mundungus as a "sneaky, smelly thief." "Sneaky" could be about listening to the prophecy in stealth and and "thief" about "stealing" it to give to Voldemort. "Smelly" reflects how Snape slips into juvenile language when he is truly upset (as with his "hideyhole" comment at Sirius), which could be because he despises Dung for giving the prophecy half to Voldemort.

Furthermore, Dung is put in charge of watching over Harry at the beginning of OotP. But as soon as a chance to make some money comes up he abandons Harry to whatever dangers may come, which do come in the form of the Dementors. This is almost a parallel to the mentality of the person who gave the prophecy half to Voldemort, in that whoever gave the prophecy abandoned children to danger for the sake of money (I'm sure Dung would have been paid for his information).

My guess is that after V got the prophecy half from Dung, V tried to kill Dung because "two can keep a secret if one of them is dead." V wants the least amount of people to know about the prophecy so that no one will know that there is someone who could destroy him. When V comes after Dung, Dung goes to DD for refuge. This could be the "situation" with which DD helped Dung. In return Dung became an "informant" for DD. In HBP, Dung's antics were angering people too much, so DD let Dung go to Azkaban both to keep him from causing trouble and from keeping him from getting killed by V, just as DD believes that Lucius is safe in Azkaban.

So why the false memory? My guess is that if Trelawney was ever kidnapped by Voldemort's followers for the prophecy, she would say that Snape was the eavesdropper, if she cannot remember the prophecy. Then the kidnappers would go to Snape for the prophecy half and then Snape would report back to DD as to Trelawney's whereabouts. So DD creates a type of "loop" by having Trelawney remember Snape as the person who overheard the prophecy. I assume that the prophecy in Trelanwey's false memory must be fake as well, so if her kidnappers use Legilligency or extract her memory and put it in a Pensive (so as to see aspects of events Trelanwey's conscious mind cannot access) they will see a false prophecy. The false memory is not intended to fool V because V knows full well that Mundungus was the one who overheard the prophecy since Dung was the one who told it to him.

So why did DD confirm the false memory to Harry that it was Snape who overheard the prophecy? The most logical reason is because DD cannot tell Harry the real reason Snape came back to the right side. My guess is that Snape faked Regulus' death and brought him to DD to put into hiding. This parallels DD's offer to Draco near the end of HBP. Snape and Regulus at some point would have found themselves in too deep with the DE's and wanted a way out. When Regulus was given orders he refused to follow, Snape would have volunteered to kill him as a way of "showing his loyalty" to V. But then Snape would fake Regulus' death, implants false memories in witnesses that he did kill Regulus (the opposite of what TR Jr. did), and then use Occlumency to lie to V that he killed Regulus. After Snape manages to lie to V and survive, he and Regulus must have realized that they were in a lot of trouble and went to DD for help. DD put Regulus in hiding and may have offered Snape the same, in that DD may have offered to fake Snape's death and put him in hiding as well. But Snape knew that he was able to lie to V, which no one else had been able to do, and that V trusted him immensely because V believed Snape chose loyalty to V over the life of his friend. Thus Snape knows that he will make the perfect spy. So Snape volunteers to be a spy in order to help DD and to try and make amends for what he did as a DE.

Since Snape consequently became one of V's most trusted DEs, as Narcissa and Draco consistently call him in HBP, he was there when Mundungus came to sell the prophecy half. After hearing the prophecy half, Snape went to DD and told him what happened. Since DD heard the prophecy himself he will know that Snape is telling the truth. Because Snape was willing to give his life both for his friend and for doing the right thing (V would have killed Snape had he discovered Snape was lying, which Snape knew was the most probable outcome since V was a master Legillimens), that Snape volunteered to be a Spy (which was extraordinarily dangerous) when he could have gone into hiding, and that Snape gave DD the info that V had the prophecy when that leak could be traced back to him and would result in his death all give DD reason to have a strong respect for Snape.

The problem in telling Harry about Regulus is that Harry has a mental connection to V. And if V ever found out that Regulus was alive he would know Snape betrayed him and would kill Snape. So DD sticks with Trelawney' version of the eavesdropper's identity in order to give Harry a reason for Snape switching sides. DD handled the situation more sloppily than usual, but that could be explained by the fact that they were in a rush and DD though he could elaborate upon things once they returned from the cave, which he obviously was unable to do.


Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old May 3rd, 2006, 7:14 am
Black_Squall  Undisclosed.gif Black_Squall is offline
Third Year
 
Joined: 4440 days
Location: Shrieking Shack
Posts: 308
Re: Was Trelawney's recollection of the Prophecy night an implanted memory?

I still believe Snape was the one to over hear the Prophecy. For one, it does give Dumbledore a reason to trust Snape. If, as Malaine says, Dumbledore and Snape made an Unbreakable Vow to only tell Voldy 1/2 of the Prophecy, it would bind Snape's service to him.

But I think that's unlikely. Harry's animosity with Snape is so strong, and learning that Snape gave Voldy info that led to the Potter's death increases his hatred for Snape tenfold. This use of hatred is better directed at Snape, who has already taken so much from Harry, then Dung, who we know little about and serves really no purpose. This history between Snape and Harry is much stronger than the history between Dung and Harry.

Also, Dung seems similar to Wormtail in that he sides with those that can offer him the most safety. A very good parallel. Both Wormtail and Dung are scoundrels but look who Dung sided with.

Another thought. Assuming that the Black Family Tree runs on magic (that is does not need a wizard to cast a spell to add births and deaths, especially since everyone was dead when Draco was born) Regulus is really most sincerely dead. Holding the magical quality of the Black Family Tree to be true, it seems unlikely that Regulus is (or was) alive.


__________________
  #3  
Old May 3rd, 2006, 7:40 am
ispep  Female.gif ispep is offline
Third Year
 
Joined: 4821 days
Location: USA
Posts: 414
Re: Was Trelawney's recollection of the Prophecy night an implanted memory?

I don't think her prophecy was implanted. If it was, tell me who implanted the second one years later. I think it happened just as Dumbledore told Harry.


__________________


EVERYBODY CUT FOOTLOOSE...
  #4  
Old May 3rd, 2006, 10:02 am
Friederrike18  Female.gif Friederrike18 is offline
Second Year
 
Joined: 4848 days
Posts: 199
Re: Was Trelawney's recollection of the Prophecy night an implanted memory?

First of all, good theory. Especially the inconsistency of Snape's concerns towards younger children. You've got a point saying that Snape would actually be unforgivable if he was the one who sent only one small child into certain death by telling Lord Voldemort the first part of the prophecy. So even if Snape turned out to be on the good side eventually would have he still deserved to be trusted so much by Dumbledore? It could very well be that it wasn't Snape who overheard the prophecy. Plus wasn't the time of the prophecy Lord Voldemort's high time? Meaning that he and the Death Eaters were very powerful and almost beat the Order. If Lord Voldemort was so close at that time to win wouldn't he have had better tasks to do for his best Death Eaters such as Snape than sending them after Dumbledore's interview with Trelawney? Prior to HBP I always felt that eavesdropper was a sort of good for nothing wizard who had nothing better to do than sneak around which would very well fit to Mundungus.
About Snape having something to do with Regulus and his death: There could be a connection to Regulus and it would be very intriguing to think that Regulus is indeed still alive. I mean it would make Harry's quest for the remaining Horcruxes easier if he'd got help from someone who already managed to steal one. Harry must get help with the remaining Horcruxes, he cannot possible find them all by himself, if it took Dumbledore so much time finding the cave. But if Regulus was still alive how come Harry inherited Grimauld Place plus Kreacher? I mean we are told that Kreacher does try to find loopholes not to become Harry's property but fails because Sirius was very much entitled to leave Harry everything.

@ Black_Squall : Is it certain though that the Tapestry is necessary magical. When Draco was born Mrs. Black could have made this entry because she died 5 years afterwards. And when she died her own death was marked on the tapestry by Kreacher.



Last edited by Friederrike18; May 3rd, 2006 at 10:11 am.
  #5  
Old May 3rd, 2006, 1:54 pm
vrlc50  Female.gif vrlc50 is offline
Fifth Year
 
Joined: 4464 days
Location: pennsylvania
Posts: 963
Re: Was Trelawney's recollection of the Prophecy night an implanted memory?

It's an interesting and well thought out theory. But so many hypotheticals! I'm inclined, first of all, to suspect that Trelawney's memory is planted...although not in such an amateurish way that Slughorn's cut and paste memory was created. Whoever planted this memory had to have been a true expert. Seeing as how both Dumbledore and Snape delved into their own memories via a Pensieve, something none of the other wizarding teachers seem to need or have access to, I'd suspect either one of them to have done the deed. HOWEVER....Another theory has been presented that can explain some or all of the contradiction related to the prophesy...and that is that all the players in the saga are part of a giant chess game. The primary hypothesis supporting the theory is that Snape has actually been in the employ of Dumbledore since James Potter saved the boy's life. At that point in time, Dumbledore had been watching the goings on of the former Tom Riddle for a while (consider his comment to Tom during his visit to Hogwarts; Dumbledore states he'd be sorry to believe what he'd been hearing) so Way Back Then, Dumbledore saw the potential for having to bring LV down. And he enlisted Snape while Snape was still a school boy (the details of how this were done can be found in Red Hen Publications.) Anyway, it's hypothesized that when DD was listening to Trelawney and heard her prophesy, he summoned Snape to him so that Snape could bring part of the prophesy back to Voldemort, forcing Voldemort's hand so to speak...forcing Voldemort to come out in the open (which is what you try to do in chess) so that you can take him out. The hypothesis also poses the possibility that the OoTP was made up of people who had opposed LV and was formed immediately after the prophesy as a united front of mutual protection (there were two July babies expected at that time -- remember the picture the real Moody showed Harry of the original order -- the Longbottoms and the Potters were featured and neither woman's pregnancy was visible.) At any rate, Dumbledore's strategizing to force LV into an open position on the chessboard failed (Dumbledore always said that when he made mistakes they tended to be bigger than mistakes other people make.) But the chess game continued. Since his first failure the checkmate LV, DD has used the characters in the series as his pawns. Mundungus is clearly a pawn. Snape I see as the Bishop (ever take note of Snape's wardrobe?) Harry is, I think, the King (the most protected piece on a chess board.) Sirius and Lupin were/are knights (and sometimes you have to sacrifice your knights, just as you have to sacrifice some of your pawns...Cedric?) Dumbledore's death, in my opinion, equates to the loss of a queen.....but it remains to be seen whether that's altogether correct. Anyway, I think you get the idea.

So yes, I do think the memory of Snape barging into that room at the Hogs Head was planted. But I don't think Mundungus passed any info to LV. I think Mundungus is just one of the minor players....one who might have a whole lot of power if he's managed to abscond with that locket/horcrux!


  #6  
Old May 3rd, 2006, 2:13 pm
Horcrux_Hater  Undisclosed.gif Horcrux_Hater is offline
Third Year
 
Joined: 4653 days
Posts: 433
Re: Was Trelawney's recollection of the Prophecy night an implanted memory?

Interesting theory I've actually thought of another one that is very different but stranglely also based on connections between Snape, Harry and Mundungus. It relies on one assumption that there is evidence to suggest - that at at least one point in the story Sirius baldly lied to Harry.
Catch that lie and the complextion of the story changes.
I don't imagine Snape really thought ahead when he heard the prophecy - he had information that would make Voldemort favour him above other death eaters - he was so excited about this he didn't stop to think about how Voldemort would use this information. A similar mistake to Dumbledore when he admitted he didn't think of the consequences of not telling Harry the prophecy.


  #7  
Old May 3rd, 2006, 5:52 pm
Shewoman  Female.gif Shewoman is offline
Hogwarts Graduate
 
Joined: 4948 days
Location: 5 minutes behind everyone else
Age: 60
Posts: 2,720
Re: Was Trelawney's recollection of the Prophecy night an implanted memory?

I don't think it's an implanted memory. The fact that Trelawney remembers Snape at the door simply means she wasn't giving the prophecy at that moment--she told Harry she was feeling strange right before she saw Snape (who was apparently listening at the keyhole on general spyage principles), so I think the trance was coming on her. She begins the prophecy, Snape hears it, Dumbledore or Aberforth realize what's happening and hustle him out of there so he doesn't hear all of it.

OR, if we're going with the Machiavellian Dumbledore, she was giving the prophecy and, as she came out of it, Snape and Aberforth appeared at the door. This means that Snape heard the end and not the beginning, against Dumbledore's statements.


__________________
WHY DUMBLEDORE TRUSTED SNAPE: PoA 204-5, 285, 361; GoF 588, 590-91; 709-10; OotP 363, 841-3; HBP 549 (American hardbacks). It's not because he said he was remorseful, it's what he did about it.
  #8  
Old May 3rd, 2006, 9:36 pm
ReeshaLuvsHP  Female.gif ReeshaLuvsHP is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 4454 days
Location: New York! The bX!
Age: 28
Posts: 34
Re: Was Trelawney's recollection of the Prophecy night an implanted memory?

I don't think it was an implanted memory. First of all, can't you tell when a memory is implanted? Like when Slughorn had that fake memory and it was all cloudy and loud. But then again, Dumbledore is a much better wizard, and he could probably do a better job. But I mean, it's Dumebledore. I'm so biased when it comes to him, so I just can't believe he would do that.


__________________
Greatness inspire envy, envy engenders spite, spite spawns lies.
~Lord Voldemort
  #9  
Old May 3rd, 2006, 9:50 pm
hcnbedbugs's Avatar
hcnbedbugs  Female.gif hcnbedbugs is offline
Third Year
 
Joined: 4497 days
Location: In a land far far away...
Posts: 330
Re: Was Trelawney's recollection of the Prophecy night an implanted memory?

I dont personally believe that it is an implanted memory. I got the impression that DD was covering up for Snape when he tells his version of the prophecy.


__________________


These violent delights have violent ends
And in their triumph die
Like fire and powder
As they kiss
Consume
  #10  
Old May 3rd, 2006, 10:32 pm
_Horcrux_  Male.gif _Horcrux_ is offline
Second Year
 
Joined: 4452 days
Location: The Land of Oz
Age: 27
Posts: 100
Re: Was Trelawney's recollection of the Prophecy night an implanted memory?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReeshaLuvsHP
I don't think it was an implanted memory. First of all, can't you tell when a memory is implanted? Like when Slughorn had that fake memory and it was all cloudy and loud. But then again, Dumbledore is a much better wizard, and he could probably do a better job. But I mean, it's Dumebledore. I'm so biased when it comes to him, so I just can't believe he would do that.


You can tell when you are viewing someone else's memory, but who says that that is going to be the same with your own memory? Slughorns false memory was only there to stop Dumbledore getting at the real one, it didn't have to be that well done as Dumbledore would know that it was a fake anyway . Dumbledore could certainly do a better implant. It could be like cutting your hair: impossible to do to yourself but easy to someone else.


__________________
"Do you remember me telling you we are practicing nonverbal spells, Potter?"
"Yes," said Harry stiffly.
"Yes, sir."
"There's no need to call me 'sir,' Professor."


Always remember you're unique, just like everyone else.

You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you.
  #11  
Old May 5th, 2006, 2:22 pm
Horcrux_Hater  Undisclosed.gif Horcrux_Hater is offline
Third Year
 
Joined: 4653 days
Posts: 433
Re: Was Trelawney's recollection of the Prophecy night an implanted memory?

Yes I'm starting to like this theory a little more it certainly fits with certain factors - though I'm concerned because other it doesn't fit with so it's confusing me a bit.


  #12  
Old May 9th, 2006, 10:27 am
cornish_pixies  Female.gif cornish_pixies is offline
Third Year
 
Joined: 4969 days
Age: 29
Posts: 335
Re: Was Trelawney's recollection of the Prophecy night an implanted memory?

You have a very interesting and well thought out theory there, irmaprince. It's very coherent and convincing.

The one problem I have is that I don't think Dumbledore would lie to Harry about Snape. Dumbledore was constantly trying to convince Harry that Snape was on their side. I don't think that if Snape was actually "on their side", Dumbledore would add fuel to the fire and lie about it to Harry who already had such a huge grudge against Snape.

Otherwise, it's a very nice theory


__________________
  #13  
Old May 9th, 2006, 1:18 pm
vrlc50  Female.gif vrlc50 is offline
Fifth Year
 
Joined: 4464 days
Location: pennsylvania
Posts: 963
Re: Was Trelawney's recollection of the Prophecy night an implanted memory?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Horcrux_Hater
Interesting theory I've actually thought of another one that is very different but stranglely also based on connections between Snape, Harry and Mundungus. It relies on one assumption that there is evidence to suggest - that at at least one point in the story Sirius baldly lied to Harry.
Catch that lie and the complextion of the story changes.
I've been meaning to get back to you this....rather than have me read three books to find the lie, can you just elaborate? Or point me to any posts you've done on this theory. It's intriguing.


  #14  
Old May 9th, 2006, 4:12 pm
steedenator  Male.gif steedenator is offline
Second Year
 
Joined: 4433 days
Location: glasgow, scotland
Age: 48
Posts: 168
Re: Was Trelawney's recollection of the Prophecy night an implanted memory?

Quote:
Originally Posted by cornish_pixies
You have a very interesting and well thought out theory there, irmaprince. It's very coherent and convincing.

The one problem I have is that I don't think Dumbledore would lie to Harry about Snape. Dumbledore was constantly trying to convince Harry that Snape was on their side. I don't think that if Snape was actually "on their side", Dumbledore would add fuel to the fire and lie about it to Harry who already had such a huge grudge against Snape.

Otherwise, it's a very nice theory
Great theory but the obvious problem, as quoted , is pretty well insurmountable in my opinion. sorry

cheers


  #15  
Old May 9th, 2006, 10:09 pm
canismajoris  Male.gif canismajoris is offline
The Forums Red Hypergiant Star
 
Joined: 4504 days
Location: əɹəɥ
Age: 34
Posts: 2,766
Re: Was Trelawney's recollection of the Prophecy night an implanted memory?

Quote:
Originally Posted by cornish_pixies
You have a very interesting and well thought out theory there, irmaprince. It's very coherent and convincing.

The one problem I have is that I don't think Dumbledore would lie to Harry about Snape. Dumbledore was constantly trying to convince Harry that Snape was on their side. I don't think that if Snape was actually "on their side", Dumbledore would add fuel to the fire and lie about it to Harry who already had such a huge grudge against Snape.

Otherwise, it's a very nice theory
Who said Dumbledore lied? He could have simply been wrong. I think people give Dumbledore way too much credit for certain skills, like Legilimency, which we know he's used (but it's such a rare talent he could be half average at it and still appear very powerful to some people). Along the same lines, people always assume Dumbledore is always right just because he's telling the truth as far as he knows it.

Things he says don't have to be lies to be incorrect--Dumbledore is human.


  #16  
Old May 10th, 2006, 7:10 am
irmapince  Female.gif irmapince is offline
Third Year
 
Joined: 4448 days
Location: Weaver's Way
Posts: 436
Re: Was Trelawney's recollection of the Prophecy night an implanted memory?

I should clarify, I believe that the prophecy Trelawney gave at the Hog's Head, the prophecy that was kept in the Hall of Prophecy, and the prophecy Dumbledore showed Harry at the end of HBP are all the same prophecy and is the true and accurate prophecy. The prophecy Trelawney "remembers" in the memory implanted by Dumbledore is false so that if anyone used Legilligency or put Trelawney's memory in a Pensive they would see a false prophecy, thus protecting the real one.

My main concern is that it was not Snape who overheard the prophecy half and then gave it to Voldemort. The act of giving the prophecy to Voldemort it so loathsome that no matter what Snape was thinking Dumbledore could never respect Snape the way he does nor let him teach at Hogwarts. Harry ask this question to some extent in HBP:
Quote:
AND YOU LET HIM TEACH HERE AND HE TOLD VOLDEMORT TO GO AFTER MY MUM AND DAD!
Later DD snaps at Harry
Quote:
Please do not suggest that I do not take the safety of my students seriously, Harry.
I wonder if Harry hit a nerver with DD, in that DD would not have let the person who gave the prophecy to Voldemort, and thus set children up to be murdered, teach at his school and is insulted that Harry cannot see that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Friederrike18
But if Regulus was still alive how come Harry inherited Grimauld Place plus Kreacher? I mean we are told that Kreacher does try to find loopholes not to become Harry's property but fails because Sirius was very much entitled to leave Harry everything.

@ Black_Squall : Is it certain though that the Tapestry is necessary magical. When Draco was born Mrs. Black could have made this entry because she died 5 years afterwards. And when she died her own death was marked on the tapestry by Kreacher.
One explaination could be that Regulus is "legally" dead. This happens in the real world when someone dies in a tragedy and a body cannot be recovered or when someone disappears for a certain number of years. That person can be declared legally dead so that their beneficiaries can receive life insurance, inheritence, etc. This could have been the case with Regulus.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cornish_pixies
You have a very interesting and well thought out theory there, irmaprince. It's very coherent and convincing.

The one problem I have is that I don't think Dumbledore would lie to Harry about Snape. Dumbledore was constantly trying to convince Harry that Snape was on their side. I don't think that if Snape was actually "on their side", Dumbledore would add fuel to the fire and lie about it to Harry who already had such a huge grudge against Snape.

Otherwise, it's a very nice theory
My guess is that Dumbledore was blindsided by Harry confronting him about Trelawney's false memory of Snape being the eavesdropper. Dumbledore's first priority is to protect Snape and Regulus, in that if Harry, with his mental connection to Voldemort, gets a clue that Regulus is alive (the real reason Snape came back to the good side), then Voldemort can find out that Snape betrayed him and Snape is toast. So Dumbledore decides to go with Trelawney's false recollection in order to protect Snape and Regulus, even though it does fuel the enimity of Harry towards Snape, because it is the less damaging option.


  #17  
Old May 10th, 2006, 3:28 pm
Horcrux_Hater  Undisclosed.gif Horcrux_Hater is offline
Third Year
 
Joined: 4653 days
Posts: 433
Re: Was Trelawney's recollection of the Prophecy night an implanted memory?

Quote:
Originally Posted by vrlc50
I've been meaning to get back to you this....rather than have me read three books to find the lie, can you just elaborate? Or point me to any posts you've done on this theory. It's intriguing.
OK I came up with this during the writing of my editorial but as that won't be ready for some time I'll tell you. This is the abrigdged version by the way.

After Harry goes to the Hog's Head to set up the DA Sirius contacts him and tells him they were overheard "Who overheard us"
"Mundungus of course".
Sirius says it as if it's the most obvious thing in the world so nobody doubts that it isn't true - it's not.
Snape was under the veil, Snape got banned from the Hog's head when he was at Hogewarts for attempting to aquire Bezoars by sectumsempering Aberforth's goats.
It has a spin on this I just can't see which way it goes.


  #18  
Old May 25th, 2006, 6:55 am
irmapince  Female.gif irmapince is offline
Third Year
 
Joined: 4448 days
Location: Weaver's Way
Posts: 436
Re: Was Trelawney's recollection of the Prophecy night an implanted memory?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Horcrux_Hater
I don't imagine Snape really thought ahead when he heard the prophecy - he had information that would make Voldemort favour him above other death eaters - he was so excited about this he didn't stop to think about how Voldemort would use this information. A similar mistake to Dumbledore when he admitted he didn't think of the consequences of not telling Harry the prophecy.
But why would Dumbledore let someone who had such a hidious lack of judgement teach at his school? Snape is extremely intelligent and knew Voldemort well, so he must have known what Voldemort would do with the prophecy, if Snape was the one who overheard half of the prophecy and gave it to Voldemort.


  #19  
Old May 25th, 2006, 12:03 pm
Latisha's Avatar
Latisha  Female.gif Latisha is offline
Zonko's Employee
 
Joined: 4446 days
Location: Rarotonga, Cook Islands
Age: 37
Posts: 3,293
Re: Was Trelawney's recollection of the Prophecy night an implanted memory?

Okay, I'll admit that I haven't fully read the above posts but rather skimmed to see if anyone made this connection.

We see two memories using the pensieve where rather than enter the memory or look into the pensieve, the observers sit back and a memory a one person rises from the basin, the memory of the person is also rotating. Harry gives us no description of background so we can assume that he does not see any.

I am talking about Trelawney reciting the prophecy to Dumbledore and Burke (I think), one of them anyway, telling Dumbledore about buying the locket from the girl (Merope).

It is possible that viewing it this way rather than going into the memory or looking directly into the pensieve, can give you a limited view of the memory. We know that the pensieve was DDs so he would know this. He also knows Harry very well and knows how Harry would react if he saw that Snape had been eavedropping.

It it possible that Trelawney only knew about Snape listening in from a comment from Aberforth (H's H bartender) and then assumed that Snape was only trying to get tips for getting the job as she does state in HBP.

So, in short, no I think that Trelawney's recollection is not an implanted memory, but just her putting 2 and 2 together and getting 3.


__________________
Behind every great man, stands an amazing woman.
  #20  
Old May 25th, 2006, 3:48 pm
canismajoris  Male.gif canismajoris is offline
The Forums Red Hypergiant Star
 
Joined: 4504 days
Location: əɹəɥ
Age: 34
Posts: 2,766
Re: Was Trelawney's recollection of the Prophecy night an implanted memory?

Quote:
Originally Posted by irmapince
I should clarify, I believe that the prophecy Trelawney gave at the Hog's Head, the prophecy that was kept in the Hall of Prophecy, and the prophecy Dumbledore showed Harry at the end of HBP are all the same prophecy and is the true and accurate prophecy. The prophecy Trelawney "remembers" in the memory implanted by Dumbledore is false so that if anyone used Legilligency or put Trelawney's memory in a Pensive they would see a false prophecy, thus protecting the real one.
I don't think Trelawney remembers giving the prophecy at all, so why would Dumbledore implant a false one? She thought she was having a normal job interview, she never made any mention of a prophecy (well, not in reference to that night anyway).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Horcrux_Hater
OK I came up with this during the writing of my editorial but as that won't be ready for some time I'll tell you. This is the abrigdged version by the way.

After Harry goes to the Hog's Head to set up the DA Sirius contacts him and tells him they were overheard "Who overheard us"
"Mundungus of course".
Sirius says it as if it's the most obvious thing in the world so nobody doubts that it isn't true - it's not.
Snape was under the veil, Snape got banned from the Hog's head when he was at Hogewarts for attempting to aquire Bezoars by sectumsempering Aberforth's goats.
It has a spin on this I just can't see which way it goes.
Haha! That's a hilarious theory, and it just might be true. Snape would certainly be a candidate for being banned from the Hog's Head. But I still think Mundungus was actually there when Sirius said so... Harry had been being followed by Dung for a while, hadn't he? It certainly wouldn't be the first time he turned up in Hogsmeade.


 
Go Back  Chamber of Secrets > Forum Archives > Harry Potter Archives

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:23 pm.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Original content is Copyright MMII - MMVIII, CoSForums.com. All Rights Reserved.
Other content (posts, images, etc) is Copyright its respective owners.