Ancient Magic – sacrifice, blood-protection and such (very long)

[laylalast]

No: HPFGUIDX 96236

Note: All books quoted from are UK paperback editions.

PoA pg. 311: `This is magic at its deepest, its most impenetrable
..'

There are three types of ancient magic that we know of in the books 
so far:

1)	Sacrifice;
2)	Blood-protection;
3)	Life debt.

As these have been discussed a lot lately, but always separate from 
each other, I decided to compare them. In doing so I noticed that 
these types of ancient magic have a similar trait. DD gives us in 
OotP (pg. 737) an important clue with regard to this:

`I thought,' said Dumbledore, inclining his head slightly, `that she 
might need reminding of the pact she had sealed by taking you. 
'

So 
 Petunia sealed a pact. If we look at all the three forms of 
ancient magic, can these all be considered as pacts? Let's see.

1) The pact of sacrifice
When LV finally faced Lily as last step to be taken before killing 
Harry, Lily begged LV to kill her instead of that of Harry. She 
offered LV her life in exchange for Harry's. When LV killed her, he 
acted as in agreement with her request.  Looking at this in a more 
simplified manner, it can be concluded that a pact was made. LV was 
to take Lily's life in exchange for that of Harry. 

Next, based on that pact, LV had to spare Harry. But LV broke the 
pact immediately after it was sealed. LV broke the `laws of magic' 
involved with the pact. Not the written laws of magic, the legal 
system, but the unwritten laws of magic.  
It seems likely to me that as the pact of sacrifice is about the 
basic matter of our existence, life and death, it claimed the life 
of LV instead of that of Harry. The only reason why LV managed to 
continue to exist, albeit as Vapor!mort, was due to his meddlings to 
become immortal. And LV, as Tom Riddle, admitted himself that it 
was `a powerful counter-charm'.

A necessity for the pact to come about, is that the life that will 
be sacrificed must be offered consciously. Conscious in the sense 
that both parties must be aware that an exchange is made. It must be 
offered to the `killer' in exchange for the life of another. And 
the `killer' must make the choice to accept it. Merely standing in 
the way of the intended victim to protect him is not sufficient, the 
offer of exchange must be made and accepted.

And Lily most clearly offered her life in exchange for that of Harry:

PoA pg.  134: `Not Harry, please no, take me, kill me instead –`

It does not even matter whether Lily or LV were aware that they were 
*activating* an ancient magic, as long as they were aware of the 
exchange: Lily's life, instead of Harry's. As we later find out both 
in CoS and in GoF, LV did know about the ancient magic, but had at 
that moment unfortunately (for him) forgotten.

Later Harry and LV met again in PS/SS and the pact was still in 
force. When Quirrell, sharing his body with LV tried to kill Harry, 
he could not touch him. In fact LV was, again,  trying to break the 
pact but found out, to his dismay and at the cost of Quirrell's 
life, that he still could not kill Harry. The pact still worked 
against him.
DD may have explained this in a more poetical manner to Harry (PS/SS 
pg. 216) but this can also be read as follows: `
.to have been loved 
so deeply, 
' (loved so much that the other is willing to die in 
your stead) `
even though the person who loved us is gone,
' (the 
sacrifice) `
will give us some protection for ever.' (the pact is 
still in force).

 It has been questioned why the sacrifice of James did not invoke 
this ancient magic or why other children have not survived before, 
although their parents died to protect them. In the case of James, 
he fought to protect his wife and child but he did not offer his 
life in *exchange* for theirs. In other cases it is a) likely that 
such offer has not been made either or b) the killer kept his side 
of the bargain.

Neither does this ancient magic require any further spells or 
charms. The beauty lies in its simplicity. Sometimes things are just 
that simple.

2) The pact of blood-protection
As mentioned at the beginning of this post, this is the first time 
that we learn of ancient magic as a pact. If so, in what manner is 
it a pact then?

Although it is explained by DD that this ancient magic is connected 
to Lily's sacrifice, it is a pact within it's own rights and 
continues to exist after the pact of sacrifice is no longer in force 
(see below).

What does this pact consist of? A conscious choice of a blood-
relation (Petunia) to offer a home to the object of a sacrifice 
(Harry), in order that a third party (LV) cannot touch him there. 
Although DD placed the charm on Harry (made the pact possible) it 
apparently does not involve DD but only Petunia, Harry and LV. (On a 
side-note: one could argue that this is the reason that DD does not 
interfere with the way in which the Dursleys treat Harry, as DD is 
then the one to break the pact)

Once Petunia has taken Harry in, can she break the pact? It could be 
possible but with dire consequences. In fact, I presume that this is 
what DD reminded her of when she received his howler:

OotP pg 41: `Remember my last, Petunia.'
Aunt Petunia looked as though she might faint. She sank into the 
chair beside Dudley, her face in her hands.
(
) She raised her head. She was still trembling. She 
swallowed. `The boy – the boy will have to stay, Vernon,' she said 
weakly.

If Petunia was told in that famous letter of DD what the 
consequences were of LV's breach of the pact of sacrifice, it is not 
unlikely that she, when reminded, does not want to find out what 
happens if she breaks the pact between her and Harry. So Harry does 
not get thrown out of the house. Petunia must provide a home to him 
until Harry wishes to leave.

3) The pact of life-debt
The life-debt that we know for certain that exists is the one 
between Harry and Pettigrew (PoA pg. 311) Could this be considered a 
pact also?

DD describes it as follows (PoA pg 311): `
 When one wizard saves 
another wizard's life, it creates a certain bond between them 
 .'. 
If it is a bond, how did it come about?

PoA pg. 275: "NO!'Harry yelled. He ran forwards, placing himself in 
front of Pettigrew, facing the wands. (
) `Harry!' gasped Pettigrew, 
and he flung his arms around Harry's knees. `You – thank you – it's 
more than I deserve – thank you –`

Harry went to stand between Pettigrew and Sirius/Lupin, to prevent 
the latters killing Pettigrew. Harry made a conscious choice to do 
this, and in doing so, offered Pettigrew a chance to live. Pettigrew 
could have rejected this (although very, very few people would do so 
I guess) if he had pushed Harry aside and said to 
Sirius/Lupin `Better dead than in Azkaban!'. But, as we see, he did 
not do this but made the *conscious* choice to accept Harry's 
interference on his behalf. He accepted Harry's offer. One can 
conclude even here that Pettigrew indeed sealed a pact.

And again, they do *not* make the conscious choice to activate an 
ancient magic, but they do make the consious choice to rescue and be 
rescued.

The debt of this particular pact is that, when given the 
opportunity, Pettigrew must do something similar for Harry, although 
this is rather surfacely explained by DD:

PoA pg. 311: `Pettigrew owes his life to you. You have sent 
Voldemort a deputy who is in your debt.  (
) 
 and I'm much mistaken 
if Voldemort wants his servant in the debt of Harry Potter.'

What will happen to Pettigrew if he does not try to pay the life-
debt is at this moment a mystery, but if this is a pact like the 
others then, considering the outcome of the broken pact of 
sacrifice, he may better try.

When looking at Harry saving Ginny from Tom Riddle in CoS, or DD 
slowing Harry's drop from his broomstick in the Quidditch game in 
PoA I would say, based on this reasoning, that there is no life-debt 
pact as neither could make the choice to be saved and thus become 
indebted to their rescuer. 

Having now considered that the three types of ancient magic can be 
seen as pacts, a few questions arise.

Can pacts be overcome?
>From DD's reaction we learn that the protection of Lily's sacrifice 
ceased to exist once LV had Harry's (Lily's) blood in his veins:

GoF pg 566: ` 
 but no matter. I can touch him now.'
Harry felt the cold tip of the long white finger touch him, and 
thought his head would burst with the pain.
Voldemort laughed softly in his ear, then took the finger away (
)

In PS/SS LV, through Quirrell, could not `touch' Harry as the pact 
was still in force. Harry was still the protected party and LV the 
killing party of the pact of sacrifice. But apparently the pact can 
now no longer identify which party is which (who must be protected 
against whom) and therefore cannot work anymore. This explains why 
LV so much wanted Harry's blood, because the blood is an identifying 
factor.

But if this is the case, does this also count for the blood-
protection? If LV has Harry's blood in his veins, doesn't he become 
the protected too?
No, he does not - entirely. An additional condition is required in 
the pact of blood-protection: providing a home to the protected. 
This means that as long as Petunia will not provide a home to LV, he 
will not be recognized as the protected party in this particular 
pact.

The gleam of DD can also be seen as proof of this, as his 
realisation that the pact of sacrifice had been overcome but the 
pact of blood-protection was still intact. LV had not managed to 
overcome that too, and Harry was still safe at Privet Drive. 

Can pacts be transferred to third parties?
The information that we have with regard to this question is 
limited. If we presume that blood is an identifying factor in these 
types of ancient magic, than all that can be said is that if Harry 
owns a life debt to someone, LV now owns that life debt too. As he 
shares the same blood as Harry, he will be identified as a party. 
In the case of blood-protection, this is not a transferral of the 
pact of sacrifice bu an entirely new pact. Although the pact is made 
possible because of the blood connection between Lily, Petunia and 
Harry. 

That would mean that a pact only exists between the parties 
concerned. This seems logical to me. The transfer of a pact to a 
third party (not already involved), if possible at all, must be done 
with approval of the other party concerned.

If we look at the life-debt, this pact only exists between 
the `rescuer' and the `rescued'. Should Pettigrew die without having 
fulfilled his debt to Harry, how can he transfer it to his child 
(for the sake of this argument assuming that he has one) as this 
child is not involved in the pact? 
Also, if pacts could be transferred from parent to child, it would 
mean that generations later such a pact can still rebound on an 
unaware descendant. Rather a nasty surprise if it is the pact of 
sacrifice that is inherited.
Neither did Harry inherit the pact of sacrifice through his mother, 
as Harry's life was the object of the pact in the first place. He 
was already involved in the pact.

What then about the pact of life-debt between Snape and Harry's 
father? Is this not inherited?
First of all, there is no actual evidence that it is inherited by 
Harry. DD calls it a debt:

PS/SS pg 217: `Professor Snape couldn't bear being in your father's 
debt 
 I do believe he worked so hard to protect you this year 
because he felt that would make him and your father quits. (
)

But it is not made clear whether this is a life-debt that DD refers 
to, or a debt of honour.  However DD's phrasing `couldn't bear', `he 
felt' and `him and your father quits' are stronger points in the 
direction of a debt of honour. Considering the enmity between Snape 
and James and Snape's strong feelings in this matter, Snape would 
continue to feel to be in James's debt even after James was gone. It 
was Snape's choice to make himself quits of this debt by doing all 
that was possible to save James' son.  He still *felt* it as a debt. 
But he felt it as a debt to James, not to Harry. He felt that it 
would make him, Snape, and James quits, not him and Harry.
And why not? There are people who consider themselves honour-bound 
to pay off a debt, some even the more when it is an enemy to whom 
they own it.

All my humble opinion of course,
Lilian