The Smiths must still have the Hufflepuff Cup

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 156505

Abergoat wrote:
<snip>
> While posting thoughts about Eileen Prince and her possible
connection to the Ravenclaw relic it hit me: the Hufflepuff Cup must
still be with the Smiths. Hepizbah clearly says her family cannot wait
to get their hands on it, so if the cup wasn't in the house after she
died they would have thrown a collective fit. Precisely the situation
that Tom Riddle wanted to avoid. 
> 
> But the Smith family didn't know Hepizbah HAD the locket. Only
Burkes (or was it Borgin?) knew that because he sold it to her.
Hepizbah clearly states this distinction between the two artifacts. I
suspect we will find that Mr B met an untimely demise very quickly
after Hepizbah's death. Which gives a nice reason why Tom Riddle gave
up his post at Borgin and Burkes shortly thereafter. 
> 
> So my point is Dumbledore COULD NOT handle the cup without tipping
his hand - the Smith family would be involved. And I think we can
safely say that the cup is not hidden or even dangerous to handle,
although destroying the horcrux it contains is a different story I'm sure.
> 
> So the cup should be relatively easy, either ask the Smith family
for it or have a true Hufflepuff pull it out of the hat. But it
probably needs to be done last because Voldemort is likely to find out
about the 'problem' from the howls of the Smith family.

Carol responds:
I don't see how the Smith family could still have the cup since
Voldemort stole both it and the locket to turn them into Horcruxes
after he murdered Hepzibah (and framed poor Hokey). He would have
hidden it just as he hid the locket and the ring, probably with
elaborate magical protections including curses to harm or kill anyone
clever and powerful enough to find it.

I do think that the Smith family will play a part in finding the
Hufflepuff Horcrux, unless the Hepzibah Smith/Zacharias Smith
similarity is a Mark Evans. (I think not; why mention Zacharias's
"haughty father" unless it's to suggest that he's a member of an old
pureblood family with links to Helga Hufflepuff? And the long biblical
[Hebrew] first names of both Hepzibah and Zacharias suggest a family
tradition similar to that of the Blacks naming their children for
stars or constellations.)

BTW, I think the Ravenclaw Horcrux is the tiara that Harry used to
mark the spot where he hid the HBP's Potions book and that he'll catch
a glimpse of himself in the Mirror of Erised holding the tiara when he
goes to retrieve the book--Snape or no Snape, I think he'll realize
that it's useful and will want it back. (And maybe Luna will play a
part in understanding the secret of the Ravenclaw Horcrux. She seems
to have a bit of Seer in her, and her eyes are like the powerfully
magical Ollivander's.)

As for Agnes the dog-faced woman being Snape's mother, I certainly
thought that when I first read OoP--the Healer mentioning that Agnes's
son would be visiting her for Christmas just screamed "Snape" to me
(what fun it would have been if Harry had encountered Snape visiting
her!)--but I don't see how such a scene can happen now even if Harry
has a reason to revisit St. Mungo's closed ward--Snape is in hiding as
Sirius Black was in GoF, the new most wanted man in the WW (next to LV). 

JKR has enough plot complications to sort out, and even if the
dog-faced woman does turn out to be Snape's mother despite the name, I
think it will have to do with his motivation for hating Voldemort, not
with a Horcrux, Ravenclaw or otherwise.

BTW, it was Caractacus Burke who paid poor Merope ten galleons for the
locket. Borgin is the surviving partner, whom we've seen twice in
connection with the Malfoys.

Carol, who thinks that the locket and the tiara will be relatively
easy to find, if not to destroy, but that the cup will be more of a
challenge