Tapestry as evidence (Was Re:Locket swapped, Regulus dead)

[Goddlefrood]

No: HPFGUIDX 165763

> Goddlefrood, earlier:
> The tapestry clinches this for me. The dates of birth and death of
> Black family members are recorded. Walpurga's date of death is noted
> as 1985. I propose that the tapestry, being itself magical, records
> the deaths of the family as they come up, and this would be the case
> even if no one is around to tell the tapestry.
 
> Debbie:
> The tapestry is *evidence* that Regulus is dead.  However, it 
> doesn't clinch it.  Evidence can be unreliable.  Barty Crouch Jr.'s 
> grave was evidence that he was dead, but it was a lie.

Goddlefrood:

Perfectly true, and unfortunately, I know this as well as anyone on 
the list, being a lawyer by profession. I said it clinced it for me 
and were I asked to argue the point, as I did, I would suggest it as 
compelling, though not irrefutable, evidence.

I feel I should expand on my previous somewhat, now challenged. 
Here's roughly how I put it together:

The tapestry hung and hangs in the Black household at Grimmaud Place. 
As at the time Mrs. Black died there were (a fair assumption) no 
others apart from Kreacher living at the house. Her date of death 
appeared on the tapestry as 1985. For that to be the case without 
someone around to sew it on, and I really can't see Kreacher doing it 
as he gives the impression that he still can't believe his old 
Mistress is deceased (and psychologically would be unable to sew the 
date on due to this being too final for him), then there has to be 
some method by which the tapestry enters these things itself.

If I'm right, and I'm often not (quite deliberately sometimes), then 
the tapestry entered the date itself somehow (unless this is a slip 
by JKR). That being the conclusion I then concluded that Regulus's 
death would have been entered by the tapestry itself, notwithstanding 
the fact that Mummy was still alive when he died.

Oh, here's where I throw in the possibility that Sirius gave his 
house to the Order to use well before the end of GOF, but they were 
unable to use it due to the enchantments on it until he (a Black, 
even if a blood traitor) entered the house himself. That would all 
tie back to the manipulative Dumbledore theory, but I am not about to 
expand further here.

> Debbie continued (after some arbitrary snipping):
> But there is no direct evidence; in addition, the fact that the 
> tapestry didn't regenerate itself when Mrs. Black blasted people 
> off it may be evidence that it was not enchanted (or at least that 
> it doesn't tell the whole truth).  We just don't know.

Goddlefrood:

That's absolutely correct, it is just a theory, but quite a 
reasonable one. I don't think it needs confirming either way because 
after DH we will know for sure whether Regulus is alive or dead (even 
if he doesn't appear at all).

> Debbie (quoting the hallowed canon, the bit after the snip):
<SNIP> 

> Dumbledore states:
> "While his will makes it perfectly plain that he wants you to have 
> the house, it is nevertheless possible that some spell or 
> enchantment has been set upon the place to ensure that it cannot be 
> owned by anyone other than a pure-blood." . . . "And if such an 
> enchantment exists, then the ownership of the house is most likely 
> to pass to the eldest of Sirius' living relatives, which would mean 
> his cousin, Bellatrix Lestrange."

Goddlefrood:

Doesn't alter the fact that the main purpose was to see if the will 
held. It's the terms you see, not the mechanics of what might happen 
if an enchantment were in place, that was being tested, which was my 
point. It's a fine distinction, but necessary to make.

Finally, thanks to Debbie for agreeing with my point of Regulus being 
dead, even if the conclusion was arrived at differently.

Goddlefrood, who better check some of those pending probates tomorrow.