"Fidelius" etymology (Was: MuggleNet - Godrics Hollow Theory)

[Mike]

No: HPFGUIDX 163550

Mike:
I think Lilygale might have hit on something. Before I get there 
I'd like to put forth my understanding of the mechanics of 
the "Fidelius Charm".
<pay no attention to that Ministry pamphlet on your table ;-)> 

The Potters themselves were the (attempted) object of the charm, that 
is, their location was to be the secret. As long as they had 
propriety over the location of their hiding place, they could cast 
the charm to hide themselves there. After the charm is cast (if done 
properly) the Potters would be hidden, not the house they are hiding 
in. Only the Secret Keeper could reveal *where the Potters are 
hiding", thereby allowing that person or persons to see the Potters. 
These same person or persons could always see the house the Potters 
were in, they just could not see the Potters in it until the secret 
was revealed to them.

On a side note; 12 GP is not hidden by the "Fidelius", imo it was 
hidden by the charms that the elder Blacks placed on the location. 
Dumbledore hid the location of the HQ of the OotP, that's why Snape 
cannot speak the location to Bella. Sirius, as owner of the house, 
gives Dumbledore the propriety to establish HQ there and thereby 
gives Dumbledore the authority to reveal the houses location and 
existance to whomever he chooses. Bella probably knew and knows where 
the Blacks lived, but she doesn't and won't know where the HQ was and 
is hidden. FWIW, I think the Blacks protections excluded Bella along 
with everyone else from entering the house, once they realized what 
was going on with Voldemort and realized what a rabid supporter Bella 
had become.

There is a subtlety, which I love, to this charms application.
Now, for what inspired this response.

--- In HPforGrownups/message/163461, "Lilygale" wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> Is there something about the Fidelius Charm itself that 
> recognizes an enemy of the people for whom the Charm is cast?
> But if that were the case, how did the traitor Pettigrew become 
> Secret Keeper in the first place?

--- In HPforGrownups/message/163542, "justcarol67" wrote:
> Carol responds:
> <snip>
> To be sure, [PP] was never "trusty, steadfast, faithful," or at 
> least he had ceased to be so long before the Secret was concealed 
> in him,  <snip>
> Far from acting "faithfully" and enabling the Potters to live 
> "securely, without danger," he destroyed their safety and 
> security by his breach of confidence and trust.

Mike now:
What if Lilygale is right? What if part of the "Fidelius" requirement 
includes the faithfulness/loyalty of the SK to exist for the charm to 
*take hold*? Maybe the "Fidelius" never took, maybe the Potters were 
never hidden, they just thought they were. In fact everyone thought 
they were hidden. PP thought he was revealing the secret to Voldemort 
when in fact he was only revealing an unhidden but not well known 
location of the Potters. Voldemort thought he was receiving SK 
information from PP, how would he tell the difference, he didn't know 
the Potters location beforehand either way.

Dumbledore may have realized that he still knew the Potters location, 
assuming he knew in advance, and attributes this to his belief that 
the Potters' SK, Sirius Black, was not faithful but was instead the 
spy they had all known existed. He did know the Potters had planned 
to employ the "Fidelius" and had planned to use Sirius as SK.

You know, this wouldn't be the first time JKR let a planted 
perception exist for a while before finally revealing the true story. 
Didn't we all assume that Tom Riddle had jinxed the diary to do it's 
dirty deeds, only to find out he put a soul piece in it? Didn't we 
all assume Harry had to live with the Dursleys because they were his 
only relatives, then to find that Dumbledore had employed a blood 
protection with Lily's and Petunia's blood? Subtle, but significant 
difference, especially after Sirius had established himself at 12 GP 
and could offer Harry an alternate home.

Just a possibility, not sold on it myself, just thought I'd throw it 
out there and see what others thought.

> Carol continues:
>  
> So the betrayal itself, the revelation of the Potters in their 
> hiding place (I'm sure that PP brought Voldemort to the spot, said 
> something like "There they are; that's their house," and 
> transformed into a rat to watch the action) may have been enough to 
> break the Fidelius Charm (and alert Dumbledore to their danger). 
> What I'm sure of is that the Charm was broken, enabling DD not only 
> to know where they were but to inform Hagrid of the address, either 
> by the betrayal or by the deaths of the adult Potters and the 
> exposure of Harry to danger, or by the destruction of the house. By 
> the time Voldemort had exploded, taking the house with him, there 
> was no Secret to keep. Etymology suggests that it was the betrayal 
> that broke the charm.
> 
> Carol, not really arguing with Kemper but trying to understand how 
> the charm works in relation to its name

Mike:
Well... I think you are disagreeing with Kemper, Carol, and I think 
you are right. :-) If the "Fidelius" was properly cast and in place, 
then I think your explanation of why and how it was broken is spot 
on. 

Mike, wondering if JKR is going to fiddle with the Fidelius in DH 
<groan>