That damn Prophecy - an alternative take

[hermionegallo]

No: HPFGUIDX 77596

Here's the prophecy one more painful time:

"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, but he will 
have a power the Dark Lord knows not... and either must die at the 
hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives...the 
one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as the 
seventh month dies..."

Kneasy says in post 75035:  

"1. For successful analysis we must accept that the Prophecy is 
complete and accurate. Otherwise, forget it - we're reduced to 
guesswork.

2. Any analysis must fit the existing plot-line as we know it. Past 
as well as present and hints for the future too. No extra bits of 
wishful thinking to force it to fill in any gaps. Strict canon only.

3. It must explain Dumbledores' certainty that Harry is indeed the 
one to fight Voldemort, without any reservations."

The assumption upon first reading the prophecy is that it 
says: "...either (A or B) must die at the hand of the other (one of A 
and B), for neither (A nor B) can live while the other (one of A and 
B) survives..."  This read makes sense in light of Kneasy's 
assertions, which i agree with.

What has always stuck out to me was that the end of the prophecy 
sounds like it's referring to three people: "...either A OR B must 
die at the hand of C, for neither A NOR B can live while C 
survives..."  This could still make sense.  

Replace the pronouns similarly in Sachmet's idea, post 
75158:  "...when I first read that I understood it that Harry and 
Voldemort will die. According to my dictionary either can mean 'each 
of two'. So I took it they both die."

That would be "...either (both A AND B) must die at the hand of 
(each) other, for neither (A nor B) can live while the other (one of 
them) survives..."  This could still make sense.

The first assumption seems too simple and straightforward for most of 
us to accept, knowing JK.  But the body of the same chapter in which 
we read about the prophecy, we also learn that Dumbledore is very 
wise, but not infallible.  It's entirely possible, therefore, that 
he's overlooked something.  In light of that, the second theory could 
make sense.  It's also entirely possible, knowing Dumbledore as we 
do, that he's omitted a detail, such as Harry having to die along 
with Voldemort; and in light of that, the third theory could make 
sense.

hg