Bagman as Loyal Death Eater and Big Blond

[gav_fiji]

No: HPFGUIDX 141535

> Carol wrote:

> Are you sure about this (Bagman being a DE)? ... He gets off the 
charge by claiming that he didn't know that his father's old pal 
Rookwood was a Death Eater.

Goddlefrood writes:

I am currently persuaded, due to matters pointed out in my article 
that Bagman is a DE. I am, of course, as all theorists should be, 
open to contrary persuasion.

> Carol wrote:

> The chains on his chair rattle
> ominously but don't bind him... If the chair magically knows who 
is guilty and who isn't (it doesn't bind Harry
> during *his* trial in OoP), then he's telling the truth.

Goddlefrood responds:

What makes you think the chair is aware of guilt or otherwise. 
Anyway Bagman could be more skilled than we have so far been led to 
believe.

> Carol Wrote:

> True (that Bagman played Beater), but Viktor Krum is the Seeker 
for Bulgaria and no one is accusing *him* of being a Death Eater.

Goddlefrood:

That Bagman was a Beater is suggestive of his size. Beaters are 
indicated to be rather burlier than other Quidditch players, thus 
leading me to suspect that Bagman is a large man, that is apart from 
the other supporting quotes in my article.
 
> Carol:
> From the standpoint of GoF as a detective novel (who put
> Harry's name in the cup?), Bagman is one of the suspects who are
> conveniently gathered for us in "The Four Champions"

Goddlefrood:

If it accepted as a detective novel, and it has many of those 
traits, then you have a valid point. It is not entirely a detective 
novel, however, it is in fact part of an ongoing saga and I do not 
think it is unfair to take more out of it than first glimpsed, as I 
have done, and apply that to the continuing story.

> Carol:
> Sorry. No QED. 

Goddlefrood:

You represent this as the entirety of my argument, which is rather 
unfair. There are other descriptive details I refer to in my article 
that back up Bagman being the BBDE, if not as a loyal DE. The whole 
theory started off only from the basis that Bagman was the BBDE and 
grew from there, by the way.

> Carol:
> Christine has already convincingly addressed this point so I won't
> comment. I do agree that the brutal-faced DE is Yaxley (and Amycus 
and
> Alecto are the Carrows). Otherwise, why would JKR have Snape give
> those names in "Spinner's End"? Or the BBDE, as you call him, 
could be
> Yaxley.

Goddlefrood:

See my response to Cristina for an explanation of this.

> Carol:
> Why wasn't he in the
> graveyard and why haven't we heard from him since?

Goddlefrood:

Who says he was not in the graveyard? This point is far from proven. 
I do not accept that we are aware who was actually present in the 
graveyard as certain others have said. Snape in "Spinner's End" 
mentions Yaxley, the Carrows, Greyback and Rookwood, later we meet 
Gibbon (when dead admittedly). None of these, except possibly 
Rookwood, are referred to in the graveyard scene. This is suggestive 
that several DEs were present who have not yet been indentified, and 
may never be.
 
> Carol:

> And none of the DEs present showed up late and out
> of breath as Bagman would have had to do if he ran from the 
Quidditch Field to get his cloak and mask and then ran to Hogsmeade 
to apparate.

Goddlefrood:

As you yourself point out, Bagman was a sportsman. The gates of 
Hogwarts are the boundary and according to JKR's map are not far 
from the Quidditich pitch. Apparition is not shown to be an energy 
sapping process. Bagman disappeared after the third task, but it 
would be at lease half an hour or an hour before the DEs appeared in 
the graveyard. (Voldemort being reborn and talking to Harry before 
their arrival for instance).

> Carol:

> The BBDE appears to be clumsy.

Goddlefrood:

Not if you read the text closely and have some suspicion that the 
BBDE is not all bad as I do.

Of course you may be correct that Bagman is being held by goblins. 
This may or may not have come to Bill's attention, goblins are after 
all a secretive lot.

Toodle pip