Young Dumbledore (wasRe: Why Leave Harry at HW at the End of HBP?)

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 148363

Angie wrote:
<snip> 
> Second, what do we know about the nature of DD's "defeat" of 
Grindelwald?  Did DD kill Grindewald or just capture him?  I've 
always assumed that Grindewald was the Darkest wizard of his day -- 
why else would his capture have brought DD such fame? Why else would
DD be the only man LV ever feared?  Because it was clear that DD was
powerful enough and willing to defeat a great Dark Wizard like 
Grindewald.  I don't think LV fears DD simply because DD is so 
powerful, but because LV fears death the most and he knows that DD is
willing and able to kill a Dark Wizard, if need be.  I think implicit
in this is that DD is willing and able to use Dark Magic if necessary
and has done so before (he's no novice).
> 
> I find it hard to believe that DD merely subdued Grindewald and
landed him in Azkaban, for several reasons.  First, in OOP, LV seems
surprised that DD doesn't try to kill him, which makes me think that
he expected DD to try and kill him b/c he (LV) knew that DD had 
killed Grindewald.  Second, if DD merely captured Grindewald, that 
would make Grindewald's defeat on no greater par than any Dark 
Wizard's capture. <snip>
> 
> Finally, relating this to the HBP, if DD killed Grindewald, did he
make a horcrux for himself?  <snip>


Carol responds:
We're told from the first chapter of the first book that Dumbledore is
"too noble" to use certain types of magic, and while I realize that
the narrator isn't always reliable and the characters aren't always
accurate in their assessments of other characters, I will be very
surprised if this statement is not true. For one thing, it jibes with
JKR's own assessment of Dumbledore as "the epitome of goodness."
(Granted, many of her statements in interviews are jumbled or evasive,
but this one is hard to misconstrue.)

That being the case, I'm not at all willing to assume that DD killed
Grindelvald in any way that could be considered murder or using an
Unforgiveable Curse. We're told (in an interview) that Grindelwald is
indeed dead, but the book (SS) only tells us that DD *defeated*
Grindelwald, not killed him. Since we know that both LV and DD know of
at least one wizard who made a single Horcrux, and Grindelwald's
defeat so nicely coincides with the year that Tom Riddle left
Hogwarts, it seems likely that the wizard in question is Grindelwald,
that DD's fame results from destroying Grindelwald's Horcrux and
therefore making him mortal, and that LV fears DD for exactly this reason.

But the idea that DD would make a Horcrux himself is IMO very
questionable. Both Slughorn and Dumbledore speak of Horcruxes as Dark
magic of the worst kind, so bad that DD makes sure there are no books
on the subject in the restricted section of the Hogwarts library. It
requires not only that the Horcrux maker kill, but that he commit
murder (Slughorn says something like, "Do I look like a murderer"?)
*and* that he separate the piece of soul that was split off by the
murder into an object in other to preserve his own life, theoretically
forever, at the expense of the life of the person he killed. I can't
see Dumbledore doing that at any point in his life under any
circumstances. And we know that he isn't afraid of death. Gryffindor
that he is, that was probably always the case. (Yes, I know that PP is
a Gryffindor afraid of death, but he's extremely atypical.)

Dumbledore tells Harry about the importance of keeping his soul whole
and pure, and the earnestness of this speech suggests that his own is
equally whole and pure. (I'm worried that Harry's is getting slightly
tarnished, but I won't go into that.) Dumbledore talks about the
importance of love not only to Harry but to the youngish Voldemort
(ten or twelve years out of Hogwarts) that he is wrong to consider
Dark magic more powerful than love. We see him wary of little Tom's
dishonesty and cruelty. So even there, when he's a mere hundred or so,
we see essentially the same Dumbledore that Harry sees, the same
Dumbledore who, I'm fairly certain, later destroys Grindelwald's Horcrux.

That such a man *could* make a Horcrux, I have no doubt. That he
*would* do it seems to me unlikely in the extreme.

As for what happened to Grindelwald, I think Dumbledore made it
possible for him to be killed in battle. Or possibly, he was killed in
battle by Dumbledore, but killing an enemy bent on killing you in
battle is not murder. (I have trouble accepting the possibility that
DD would use an evil curse like Avada Kedavra, but perhaps there's
some other way.)

Maybe Aberforth will enlighten us in Book 7. I do think we'll learn
about Grindelwald and why he's important enough to be introduced to us
on a chocolate frog card in the very first book. 

Carol, wondering if only good witches and wizards get put on chocolate
frogs and why Circe has one if that's the case