CHAPDISC: DH25, Shell Cottage

[Jen Reese]

No: HPFGUIDX 184022

Carol:
> Also, I think that Aussie may be right in thinking that the 
> handshake creates a magically binding contract, making it 
> impossible for Harry to keep the sword. No need for a written
> contract in those circumstances, whether Harry survives or not. But
> even that sneaky tactic, if we're correct, can't do more than take 
> the sword from Harry and place it in Griphook's possession. It 
> can't make Griphook the sword's rightful owner or undo the magic
> that binds it to come to a worthy Gryffindor at need. 

Irene:
> I wonder how Griphook reacted when the sword disappeared from his
> side (or house or cave or vault) and went to Neville's aide. That 
> would have been something to see!

Jen: I wondered how Griphook reacted too.  Not an event likely to 
help wizard-goblin relations!  Or not relations with the faction of 
goblins who are 'most prone to the belief' about treasure ownership.  
Although since Harry & Co. defeat Voldemort shortly after, giving 
control of Gringotts back to the goblins, perhaps the sword was 
forgiven (but not forgotten).

I don't see evidence for a magically binding contract in the 
handshake though, Carol.  The end point of the Harry/Griphook 
relationship is Harry realizing Griphook never did trust him to hand 
over the sword.  Griphook taking possession of the sword made it 
clear both of them had hidden clauses in the bargain they struck 
rather than a magical moment causing possession to change hands.