Harry Horcrux redux :)

[Mike]

No: HPFGUIDX 155069

>Ken wrote:

>There is certainly something odd about Harry's scar and I have a  hunch it
>goes beyond anything we have been told so far. I think we will hear a new
>revelation about it in the final book. It is tempting to think it is a
>horcrux. The Red Hen seems to believe that the horcrux spell is a special
>spell that both kills the victim and creates the horcruxin one fell swoop.
>I don't know of any canon to support, or deny,that. It is just a shrewd
>speculation. We are all pretty sure that *intended* to create a horcrux by
>means of Harry's death. I'd say that it is possible that he created one
>accidently when he tried to kill Harry at GH.
<Big snip>


Mike here:

I'm sorry to have to do this but I have to throw this wrench/spanner
into the works. I first proposed this in correspondence with the
aforementioned Red Hen. First off, the only explanation about
Horcrux creation comes in two short paragraphs from old Sluggy and
IMO we won't get any more. So we should examine his words very
carefully. Sluggy says,"the wizard *intent* upon creating a
Horcrux ..." IMO this notion of *intent* is very important. My
thought on the subject is that the wizard has to cast the "Horcrux
Encasing Spell" before committing the murder which splits the soul.
(And here I disagree with Red Hen. I see Horcrux creation as a 2-
step process. Go back and reread the 2nd paragraph and you see it is
a response to TR's question on how you encase it that Sluggy
says "there is a spell")Casting the HES first means you must also
*mark* the object to receive the soul fragment. IMO if you don't
cast the HES first then the soul my rip but the piece doesn't
seperate and eventually reforms to the core soul.

Where does this theory get us? Well, if Voldy casts the HES first at
GH then attempts to kill Harry his soul fragment is primed to
seperate and go searching for the marked object to become the soul
repository, a Horcrux. When the AK aimed at Harry rebounded it still
managed to mark Harry somehow, didn't it? So even though its Voldy's
body that gets murdered, his AK killed and his soul split and a
piece went searching for the *marked* object. And finds the *marked*
Harry.

That is my version of how one accidently creates a Horcrux. Any
takers?

>Brothergib wrote:
>And if we follow the timeline - when LV talks to DD in the
>chapter 'Lord Voldemort's request' in HBP he is not yet snakelike.

Mike again:
Actually Harry notices that LV is not *as* snakelike as when he came
out of the cauldron. But this implys that his is somewhat snakelike.

>Ken wrote:
>However, I think that you and a lot of other people are making an
>assumption about living horcruxes that may not be true at all. You do
>not necessarily destroy the soul fragment by killing the host. You do
>not necessarily kill the host if you remove/destroy the soul
>fragment.
>Assume for a moment that Nagini is a horcrux. What if the soul
>fragment is actually embeded in her skull? You can kill the snake
>without damaging the skull. Why would killing the snake destroy the
>soul fragment? Is there any canon to support this notion? Likewise if
>Harry's scar, a superficial skin condition, is surgically removed (by
>Muggle nutters?) and the soul fragment embedded in it then destroyed
>why on earth would that kill Harry?

Mike, once more:

I'm in full agreement with Ken on this point. I also think we should
consider that the soul is not a physical object, and therefore
doesn't repond like it is, say, one's heart. It exist on the spirit
plane and would only respond to magical stimuli. (and yes, a
Basilisk's fang is magical:-) Therefore a piece of soul is an
ethereal, magical entity that is not bound by the rules of physics
or anything Isaac Newton postulated.

My final thought on why Harry!Horcrux. DD says Harry is the only
known person to receive a *mark* from an AK. Maybe it wasn't just
the AK but also a soul piece. Then there is DD's answer to Minerva
back in Ch. 1, Book 1 when she asks DD if he couldn't do something
about Harry's cut on his forehead, DD answers,"I wouldn't *even if I
could*." Excuse me but *EVEN IF I COULD* Surely DD can heal a simple
cut, just like Snape did for Draco. But maybe he can't heal a
Horcrux created cut without doing damage to a child that might not
be able to survive the cure. And doesn't he also say that scars can
be useful things? Maybe scars that have a bit of soul from your soon-
to-be mortal enemy are useful when attempting to destroy other
pieces of that enemy's soul!