Runes, Arithmancy, Divination, etc.

[Hillman, Lee]

No: HPFGUIDX 19287

Sara asked:
 
> 	1) What Ancient Runes do you think Hermione has studied 
> in the class?

Jenny said:
> Norse and Celtic runes aren't that different (depends of course at 
> what time you compare them) but I don't think Egyptians get into this 
> class because hieroglyphs are so faraway from runes. They are based 
> on the same thought, yes, but I just don't think so. Or then there 
> must be chinese (sorry, my dictionary just failed me) letters too. 
> But then I would suspect the whole class would be named differently. 
> When I read this from the book, I thought immediately how 
> Scandinavians (I live in Finland) use to predict future with runes, 
> there was very much magic in them. So I just wondered what Hermione 
> thinks about that? Does she think it's just history?


Gwen says:
I think the Norse runes are definitely a subject of study, but I wouldn't
rule out the others. I also think Oggam (which is Celtic, and has no
relation to Norse runes) script is a possibility, since the Oggams were used
as a form of magic and star lore by the bards (c.f. Robin Williamson). I
don't necessarily think that Hieroglyphics or eastern pictograms should be
ruled out, just because they are also languages. After all, the runes in
western cultures also made up alphabets that were later used to begin
writing words, instead of using them alone as symbols. (And that's the
difference, really, between a rune and a letter: one also has a use as a
specific symbol, such as wealth, health, death, etc.; the other symbolizes a
sound, but has no intrinsic meaning of its own.) But there are many forms of
Runes both western and eastern, and they all have similar uses. One major
use of runes was divination. More on this later.


Sara again:
> 	2) What math form do you think Arithmancy is most like? 

And Joe responded:
> Daer Hermoine, I read that Arithmancy is the prediction of the future
through 
> numbers and number charts. However, though this was the actual use of the 
> subject a long time ago, this does not sound like something hermoine would

> like, I was under the impression that she hated divination in all forms. I

> agree however that the word Vector implies the use of (muggle?) numbers.


Now Gwen will state:

I agree with Joe, as well, that it seems too improbable to me that there are
actually 3 totally separate tracks of classes that include at their root
some form of divination. (I posted something to this effect before, but I
think it was during the Abanes debacle, and no one picked up on my subtle
attempt to change that subject.) Think about it: Runes get used to prophesy;
Divination seems to be about various methods of discerning possible futures;
and Arithmancy is yet another methodology based purely on math?

I don't think so. 

It seems more likely to me that the Ancient Runes does include certain early
alphabet systems, like Oggam, Norse runes (Tolkeinesque), and possibly runes
from non-human cultures, such as Giants or other intelligent species
(Goblins?), but focuses more on deciphering them than using them. We know
what Trelawney covers in divination, and presumably they will eventually
study things like Tarot and I-Ching, so she may also include a unit on using
runes.

By contrast, I propose that "Arithmancy" is not merely divination by numbers
(is that like paint by numbers?), but rather a study of more traditional,
so-called ceremonial magic. This is one area of magic we have NOT seen
represented in any other kind of class. It would be my guess that ceremonial
magic differs from other types of magic in that it combines two or more
components from those other tracks: a charm or incantation said over a
potion, for example, or a conjuration that requires specific items which can
be obtained through herbology or transfiguration. The "mathematical"
component comes into play because, generally, ceremonial or "sympathetic"
magic is highly precise. That is, the placement of the cauldron must be at
exactly 11 feet from the edge of the carefully traced sigil on the floor,
there must be exactly 7 candles on pedestals set precisely 5 feet apart in a
trapezoidal formation, and the final incantation must be uttered at the
exact moment that the lunar eclipse in Madagascar reaches its zenith....
Well, you get the idea. A simpler example is the ceremonial magic Wormtail
performs to bring Voldemort back in the graveyard.

That's my theory and I'm sticking to it. Yes, I know there are definitions
out there which specify that Arithmancy is divination through numbers. But
as Joe points out, that's the kind of bunk Hermione sees through in
Trelawney; why on earth would she believe in it simply because it's a little
more scientific? More to the point, why would the school waste time on a
track of classes that is nearly duplicated in not one, but two other
classes? I think Rowling uses Arithmancy in a less literal connotation than
the sites we've found to explain its theories. I think this is the one place
at Hogwarts where students can learn about more traditional, complicated
forms of magery. When I read the name Vector, I immediately thought about
drawing angles on the floor as in arcane symbols and patterns of power
within which to set up complex and highly theatrical spells.

Any takers on this theory this time?

Back to Sara's questions:
> 	
> 	3) Could Professor Trelawney's first true prediction 
> have been about
> 	Voldemort?
> 	
> 	4) Does Dumbledore keep Trelawney around in hopes she will have
> 	predictions about Voldemort?

Yes and no. I think it's highly likely that her first true prediction was
about Voldemort, since it's obviously something that has come true before
now. But I don't think Dumbledore keeps her around _just_ in case she says
something more about Voldemort.

There's an incident in a comic book of which I am fond, called the Sandman,
where an envoy of Faerie is a guest in a royal household. While at dinner,
the character drops his fork on his plate, says something like, "Oh, no,"
and rises. A halo of light appears around him and he proceeds to
prophesy--in verse, no less.

The character, who is providing a first-hand narration, says of the incident
something like, "I don't prophesy often, but when I do, it's a doozey."

I think this is precisely the case with Sybill. She does have a true gift,
but no control over when it surfaces, and it seems that the only predictions
which she makes that are "true" predictions are the huge, earth-shatteringly
important ones. Thus, the question from chapter 8-9 about Lavender's bunny
falls under coincidence. Similarly, the thing with Neville breaking the
teacup also reminds me (as someone else paralleled) of the Oracle in the
Matrix: "What's really going to bake your noodle later is, would you have
broken it if I hadn't said anything."

It's also significant that she has no recollection of having channeled her
big prediction. So unlike the faerie in my earlier example, she doesn't seem
to have any forewarning that she's about to predict something important.
That's also typical of a lot of precognitives: for example, I have precog
dreams all the time. They mean nothing to me and I tend not to even remember
dreaming them until I find I am in the situation I dreamed. Then I get a
feeling of deja vu, realize I dreamed it, and move on. But it's rarely
anything important. Things like, "I had a dream the other day I was rooting
in my car for my umbrella, wearing this skirt," and there I am in the middle
of doing so. It doesn't mean anything, no children or small dogs will die if
I don't find the umbrella, but nevertheless, there's the dream. 

If she doesn't remember and she doesn't feel it coming on, the only way
anyone would know her track record is if they witnessed an episode, as Harry
did. 

Getting back to the answer (sorry I'm so rambling today), I don't think
Albus hopes she will make accurate predictions about Voldemort alone. There
are a number of things she could accurately predict, each of which might be
earth-shattering in its way. I think he keeps her because he knows that,
faulty though it might be, and buried under a ton of schtick, Trelawney
really does have the Sight, and that is of value to anyone who can see
beyond his nose the way Dumbledore can do.

Gwen