1

After the events of sometime in 1995-96 in GoF Voldemort recreated a body for himself, in the graveyard. He used Harry's blood as he thought it would strengthen him. The quote from Dumbledore is:

Your blood in his veins, Harry, Lily's protection inside both of you!
He tethered you to life while he lives!

We know that Harry could come back to life because he was tethered to life by Voldemort. If Harry could come back after the attempted killing, could he have come back indefinitely? Would Voldemort need to kill him personally for this to work? Why?

  • 2
    I feel like he could only die the once: they only had to stab each horcrux once to destroy the piece of soul; that would mean after Harry's first death he'd be completely mortal (following on from the same logic) – Mac Cooper Nov 29 '14 at 17:00
  • I don't think so, according to the FAQ question "What exactly happened when Voldemort used the Avada Kedavra curse on Harry in the forest?" on J. K. Rowling's old sitehttp://web.archive.org/web/20120214193440/jkrowling.com/textonly/en/faq_view.cfm?id=122 , but I'm not completely sure. – b_jonas Nov 29 '14 at 18:21
  • @b_jonas - I figure you weren't going to post an answer so I stole your link for my own answer. Hope you don't mind. – DVK-on-Ahch-To Nov 30 '14 at 1:00
1
  • Would Voldemort need to kill him personally for this to work? Why?

Yes. Voldemort isn't Harry's Universal Horcrux.

Having taken Harry’s blood into himself, Voldemort is keeping alive Lily’s protective power over Harry. So Voldemort himself acts almost like a Horcrux for Harry (JKR FAQs, "What exactly happened when Voldemort used the Avada Kedavra curse on Harry in the forest?")

Harry's blood in his veins ensures that Lily's protection works - and Lily's protection is very specifically against Voldemort trying to kill Harry.




  • If Harry could come back after the attempted killing, could he have come back indefinitely?

It's not known from canon. I don't see any clear indication that he wouldn't.

The closest thing we have to an answer is JKR's clear insistence that Harry's sacrifice and Elder Wand both played a role in how things turned out (from the same FAQ linked above); AND that this isn't like a repeatable scientific formula:

Voldemort is also using the Elder Wand - the wand that is really Harry’s. It does not work properly against its true owner; no curse Voldemort casts on Harry functions properly; neither the Cruciatus curse nor the Killing Curse....

It is important to state that I always saw these kinds of magic (the very deepest life and death issues) as essentially un-scientific; in other words, there is no “Elder Wand + Lily’s Blood = Assured Survival” formula. What count, ultimately, are Harry and Voldemort’s own choices. They have each been given certain weapons and safeguards, but the power of these objects and past happenings lie in how they are understood, and how they are used or enacted upon. Harry has a deeper and truer understanding of the meaning of the objects and past events, but his greatest powers, those that save him, are free will, courage and moral certainty.

Basically, if given 100% identical situation, the outcome might be the same. But if some variables change (Harry isn't choosing to sacrifice himself; OR Voldemort doesn't use Elder Wand, OR Harry looses ownership of Elder Wand, or....), then the outcome might well be Harry's death.

  • I don't see why Voldemort could't act as a Horcrux for Harry, if Voldemort is keeping alive Lily’s protective power over Harry. Am I misunderstanding this or...? If the above is true, then any magic, object ownership etc. wouldn't change the product. A Horcrux works in a way that keeps it's master from death, whatever the magic used against the original soul. – Jake Nov 30 '14 at 4:11

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.