Why the Potters? or History moves in circles

[M.Clifford]

No: HPFGUIDX 58091

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tepmurt9981" <tepmurt at h...> 
wrote:
> Ok, I'm new here and I wasn't sure where to tack this on.  Here 
> goes...
> 
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Maria" 
> <queen_amidalachic at y...> wrote:
> > 
> > I am unaware of canon-proof that James was a target of 
> > Voldemort.  We know Voldemort states Lily didn't have to die,
> > but that doesn't mean James had to die himself.  He likely died
> > defending Harry.  Harry is the threat to LV not because of the
> > bloodlines of *either* of his parents, but because of the
> > bloodline of *each* of his parents.  I think that Harry is the 
heir
> > of Gryffindor and Slytherin...
> <cut>
> ---------------------
> 
> I believe that Harry is only the heir of Gryffindor.  
<snip>
Me (Valky): 
I don't have a clue about the Heirship of any body but I have comment 
on the other points that you mention in relation to "Why the 
Potters?"  

> 1.)  Trelawney's first prediction - Now it doesn't have to be 
> Trelawney, but we've been left with a teaser.  What was the first 
> prediction?  Obviously it was something relevant to HP or it 
> wouldn't have come up at all (or we would have been told about it 
> already).
> 
Me (Valky):
See my next entry also in relation to this. Trelawneys first 
prediction is believed by many to be a prediction of the downfall of 
Voldemort by a Potter. This is a logical conclusion. Yes.  
I am of the opinion that most of the simple logical conclusions, such 
as this, that we can draw from a HP novel are Red Herrings. 
I am tending more towards a belief that Trelawney is an habitual 
doomsayer and more likely predicted the betrayal and death of all but 
one of the Potters.
I doubt, strongly, a joyous event such as the defeat of the 
terror "He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named." *sic* could be predicted by 
Trelawney.
What does everyone else think, keeping in mind that Trelawney is not 
reknowned for any *happy* premonitions what might her *first* true 
one have been.

> 2.)  Sirius in the Shrieking Shack - I apologize profusely because 
> by books are all packed at the moment, but in PoA when Sirius is 
> confronting the newly-revealed Peter, he says that Harry was "the 
> last of the Potters" (if anyone could give a page number for this I 
> would be very grateful).  Why is it important that Voldemort have 
> the last of the Potters?
> 
Me(Valky):
I looked through my copy of POA for you, but I couldn't find the 
exact statement that you have asked for. On page 275 of my book 
however, Sirius does say to Harry;
Referring to Peter "....His own stinking skin meant more to him than 
your *whole* family." 
Perhaps this is the indication that Harry was the last of the Potters 
that you refer to. 
As we know Peter was accused by Sirius of passing information to LV 
for a whole year before the night at GH. Curiously, the beginning 
coinciding with the approximate time of Harry's birth.
I suppose that, in that year, more Potters than James and Lily were, 
likely, pursued. It may have been a year where LV dedicated himself 
to destroying the entire Potter lineage. 
I am curious as to why it seems that Harry's birth could have 
triggered this paranoia from LV, however. Perhaps it was an 
astrological phenomenon that occurred at this time. JK has made 
strong reference to the use of Astrology by the WW and its creatures, 
it is canon not yet explored in great depth but strongly and 
mysteriously hinted at in PS, POA and GOF.   

> 3.)  Harry's eyes - This has nothing to do with being an heir, IMO, 
> but bear with me for a moment.  We know, from JK's comments, 
> that Harry (and therefore Lily's) eye color is significant, that it 
> might (probably will) indicate some special gift.
> 
Me (Valky):
I like this angle. There is some mysterious factor involved in the 
beauty of the GREEN Eyes shared by Harry and Lily. I am not sure 
what, though. I have a feeling that the *green* colour is a clue to 
the nature of it, though.

> 4.)  Harry's inheritance - Harry has inherited a lot of money from 
> his parents.  When James and Lily died, they were in their very 
> early twenties.  I'm not sure that this would be enough time to 
> earn that much money after they had just recently graduated.  
> Also, in PP/SS Hagrid says something along the lines of (sorry, 
> book is once again packed), "you didn't think that they'd leave 
> you without any money, did you?"
>
Me (Valky): I am not of the opinion that the Potters weren't wealthy, 
but I don't believe that this had a direct influence on Voldemorts 
targeting of them.
However the nature of their vast wealth at such a young age does 
suggest some *noble lineage* pending revelation, surely. 
Indirectly I believe that their wealth was a factor in LV's 
dissapproval of them. 
//using the term *dissapproval too lightly for want of a better 
word.// 
 

> 
> 5.)  Voldemort killed James outright and told Lily to "step aside"
> > So my theory is <snipped sorry>

Me(Valky): 
I like the theory that LV intended Lily to suffer. Perhaps Trelawneys 
prediction was made to Lily that her Husband and Child would be AKed 
by an Evil Wizard. 
I don't disagree with the elements of your theory. Pieced together 
nicely. James lineage, Lily's remarkable ability, Trelawneys 
Prediction. They are IMO definately an equation for the Why The 
Potters? question. :P 
>