Unbreakable Vows

[Constance Vigilance]

No: HPFGUIDX 165572

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky <bartl at ...> wrote:
>
> Bart:

> There is not a lot of canon here, so I am basically using logic. I 
will, however, outline the logic I am using:
> 
<snip>

> 4) If someone breaks the Unbreakable Vow, it causes death (we only 
have hearsay for this, but there must be SOME reason why it's called 
the Unbreakable Vow. We can assume that breaking it is either 
physically impossible, or has very dire consequences.
> 

CV: My problem with the whole Unbreakable Vow thing is, how is it 
confirmed that a vow is broken? If the vow is "I will never do x" and 
the person does x, then the vow is broken. If the vow is "I will do x 
next Tuesday" and it's Wednesday and I haven't done x, then the vow 
is broken. But Snape's vow was different. He said that he vowed to 
protect Draco from harm. If Draco came to harm, the vow would be 
broken. He took the appropriate action to fulfill the vow. He 
promised to complete Draco's task should Draco fail. 

Here is my dilemma.

First, it appears that Snape does not have first-hand knowledge of 
which task it is that Draco is to perform. For that matter, neither 
do we. Is he supposed to kill Dumbledore? To provide the DE's a way 
to get into Hogwarts? We assume the task was to kill Dumbledore, but 
if that were so, then he spent a very great bit of time during the 
year to get the DE's into Hogwarts. Why would he do that if it 
weren't the primary task? Does Snape know what he is vowing to do?

Secondly, let's assume the task is to kill Dumbledore. There is no 
time specified here. If it's Tuesday and Dumbledore still lives by 
Wednesday, has the vow been violated? Snape can always kill him on 
Thursday, so I think the answer is no. If the school year ends and 
Dumbledore lives, has the vow been violated? Snape can always kill 
him at the start of next term, so again, the vow hasn't been 
violated - yet.  If Dumbledore dies of something else, has the vow 
been violated? That we can't answer because we don't know the rules 
of UV's.

But my point is that the proof of execution of this vow is very 
vague. I think that Snapey wasn't vowing to anything that could be 
concretely held up as having been violated. The magical bond of the 
vow as it was stated can be stalled indefinitely.

Now, had Snape allowed Draco to come to harm, it would have been 
curtains for Severus, so that part he took well in hand. Whether he 
actually killed Dumbledore, we can't say for certain yet. Dumbledore 
appears to be dead (although what he is doing causing JKR trouble 
from beyond is a mystery), but did Snape kill him, did he die in the 
fall or was he poisoned. (Sounds a lot like the demise of Rasputin, 
come to think of it - who was poisoned, stabbed, shot and his body 
thrown in a frozen river. When pulled out of the river, it was 
determined he died of drowning.)

CV