Just suppose Snape is at the heart of it all

[arrowsmithbt]

No: HPFGUIDX 87735

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Karen Reid <karenreiduk at y...> wrote:
> 'The official record was re-labelled after Voldemort's attack on you as a child,' said 
Dumbledore.  'It seemed plain to the keeper of the Hall of Prophecy that Voldemort 
could only have tried to kill you because he knew you to be the one to whom Sybill 
was referring.'
> 
> I can't help wondering if Professor McGonagall would consider the filing of 
prophecies just as imprecise as the study of them (pg 85 UK PoA).
> 
> 'Then - it might not be me?' said Harry.
> 
> 'I am afraid,' said Dumbledore slowly, looking as though every word cost him a 
great effort, 'that there is no doubt that it is you.'  
> 
> I'm afraid this "great effort" malarkey sits just as uncomfortably with me as his 
"twinkle" did in GoF.  It's gonna be a long wait for book 6!
> 

That damn Prophesy again!
Even worse - that damn Prophesy again and having to rely on Dumbledore again!

Can you think of a worse combination of sources to derive the truth from?

OK, my first rule of HP  analysis is not to accept the unsupported word of DD as
anything but the most convenient gloss available to DD at the time. It may be
true; it may be partly true; it may be an incomplete truth; it may be a total lie or
it may be a cunningly formulated deception. Best ignore it until further evidence
comes to light that confirms or refutes. His view is not supported by the of the 
Ministry; in fact he takes things much further than the MoM is willing to go  -
'It seemed plain to the keeper of the Hall of Prophecy that Voldemort could only have 
tried to kill you because he knew you to be the one to whom Sybill was referring.'
Really? It's so plain to the Ministry that they stick a question mark in there. But that 
might be an inconvenient detail, so he slides round it. Again.

The Prophesy is also misleading, but only in our understanding of what a 'prophecy'
is and what the Ministry is doing by filing them away in the  manner it does.

I went into this in some detail a few months back, but it might be worth repeating
now that the subject has re-surfaced again. At  least it will give everyone a fresh 
opportunity to tell me my reasoning is faulty and that I'm talking a load of tripe.

Let's  list what we know:

A prophecy can only be considered to be accurate after the events it 'foretells' have 
occured *as predicted*.
It was pronouced by Trelawney, who until that moment had never produced one 
before.
It was heard in its original recitation by Dumbledore *only*. (Why does that rouse my 
suspicions?)
The Prophecy names no-one except Voldemort.
It is vague (or to be kind, obscure) to the point of incomprehensibility.

Now let's list what we can assume:

DD reported the Prophecy to the Ministry as being of interest or moment.
DD or the Ministry englobed it, presumably by transfer from the pensieve.
Since Sybill has no track record on the accuracy of her prophecies (never having 
produced one before), the MoM cannot determine how seriously it should be taken.
It is therefore stored pending developments that may or may not determine its 
accuracy.  
The Ministry decides who it refers to and thus who can access it.
Since Harry (or Neville) had yet to be born, their names weren't on it.
Something happened which decided the Ministry to put Harry's name on the label 
(albeit with a query) and not Neville.
That 'something' must be predicted in the Prophecy.
Even so, the 'something is *not* definitive otherwise the query would have been 
removed.

Are we agreed on everything so far?

Now we come to the more contentious bits.
What made the Ministry put Harry on the label?

It could be one of two things:
"..mark as his equal.." Not, you will note "mark him who will  become his equal"
Was Harry the equal of Voldy, even as a babe in arms? Since Voldy was reduced to 
magical and physical impotence it could  be argued that the answer was "yes."
Since then Voldy has regained his lost powers and Harry has started the long road to 
wizardhood, but Harry is most definitely not the equal of Voldy *as a wizard*. Sure, 
Harry has escaped his clutches a few times, more by luck than judgement, but that 
does not mean he has equal powers. 

or, more of a stretch,

"..neither can live while the other survives.."  (A possible interpretation of this is
that the "neither" could be James and Lily, the "other" being Harry. Yes, I know you 
don't agree with me, but my devious mind notes that the parents of the possible 
Voldy!Bane get an oblique reference earlier on - "..born to those.." Why not again?)

Whichever one you prefer, the Ministry is not yet totally convinced and they probably 
won't be until Voldy is brought down. Then the Prophecy will be viewed with all the 
certainty that hindsight gives. "Oh, yes! It obviously means that! It must do because 
that's what happened."

What is more interesting is that it may be Voldy  who is giving credence to the
damn prophesy after all. If he or his henchwizards had ignored hints from whoever 
overheard the Prophecy and not gone after the Potters (or the Longbottoms) then he 
would probably have been Head Honcho years ago.

But there is a chance, only a small one, I'll admit, that the Prophecy does not refer to 
Harry and his scar. For example, there is no time limit  on when the "mark as his 
equal" must occur. It could happen in the next book. To anyone. 

Alternatively the whole Prophecy thing could be Dumbledore playing mind games with 
Voldy.

Depressing, isn't it?

Kneasy