Haha true when you said Horcrux vs. Horcrux. I just realized the irony of fawkes saving Harry from the Basilisk. So it's really a Horcrux saving a Horcrux from a Horcrux.
@Leah Chiaravalloti I didn't say the basilisk was a Horcrux. I'm talking about the diary, not the basilisk. I'm saying Fawkes (the Horcux, even though JK Rowling says it's not) saving Harry (the Horcux) from the diary (a Horcux.
if this theory holds true, then dumbledore using fawkes to block the killing curse is him testing to see if the living vessel of a horcrux can survive a killing curse whilst the soul inside is killed. Proving to him that harry could survive.
@@DracoRubi Harry is a hororcrux though. That’s cannon. That’s why he can see into Voldemort’s mind and speak parseltongue and such. After he dies and sees the baby Voldemort in Kings Cross, then comes back through his blood running through Voldemort, he looses the connection. That’s why he can’t speak parseltongue after he dies.
@@DracoRubi but that's what a horcrux is, an object/person/animal that has a hidden piece of a dark witch/wizard's soul that was placed there by the witch/wizard
@@thexreaderspeaks Your definition is correct. And precisely because of that, Harry isn't a Horcrux. Voldemort didn't perform the spell, he didn't take his piece of soul and placed it anywhere with Dark magic.
The 2 wands represent the two sides of Dumbledore. Voldemort's wand represents his thirst for power in his early years and Harry's wand is the nice helping side of Dumbledore
I was gonna say that and also add in that Dumbledore was the man who in a sense brought them into the wizarding world and was a sense of a father figure too
Nah voldi was already evil since year 0. He was born without love his moter used love potion on his dad who eventually left after she decided to test him if he loves her without potion.
Suddenly the fact that Dumbledore's mere presence always has a calming effect on Harry, makes a whole lot of sense. I want to believe this one. I truly do.
And why Dumbledore is the only person Harry ever obeys without question or hesitation. Harry admired him from the first mentioning of his name when Hagrid mentioned it... even before ever going to Hogwarts.
I’ve always assumed that dumbledore know that nagini was a horcrux because Harry can see inside nagini’s mind (in book five when nagini attacks Arthur weasley). Dumbledore already thinks that Harry is one of Voldemort’s horcruxes, so he theorizes that Harry can see inside nagini’s mind because they both share a part of Voldemort’s soul
@@ShadowDaNet yeah. Dumbledore gives more explicit reasons for the snake. and it's implied in Order of the Phoenix very heavily. This channel produces a lot of great theories, but it seems they often forget, stretch, and twist details and misinterpret lines in the book to create theories like this. If we accepted their theory, I would argue that Dumbledore put his soul together through remorse. If at no other point than when he drank the potion of despair in the cave, and the pain of it nearly killed him. Harry's wand wouldn't have broken so easily if it were a horcrux as it is explicitly stated that physical damage is not possible on horcruxes. but if it were possible, it happened long after Dumbledore's death so it wouldn't stop dumbledore from being "alive". this theory is just an example of one of their desperately silly theories. Perhaps I should call it a Rita Skeeta theory. based on just enough truth to make you question how well you thought you knew the subject, but upon closer inspection, being utter nonsense.
Theories like these make me feel as if the readers actually understand the world and story of Harry Potter better than the author herself. It's a very strange feeling.
theyll never know it more than her. she is obviously the utmost authority. just because she hasnt touched on it doesnt mean she hasnt thought about it.
You can argue the same about any author who constructs a fantasy world. It is one of the appeals of fictional writing. GRRM has equally said that he has heard theories he wish he had thought of an incorporated into his work.
JK's writing is filled with more plot holes than Hagrid has hair, so it's pretty normal that fans try to fill these holes and in turn have more knowledge than the actual author. Good thing death of the author is a thing.
I'm sold. Given Rowling's response, I'd venture to speculate that Dumbledore created a horcrux without her knowledge. Strange to say, but that is the magic of storytelling.
This is something I very much dislike about Rowling. Most author and story tellers have the belief that any theory could be true. Rowling has the inset that she can decide for things to be canon with a simple tweet.
This explains how Dumbledore knew Harry was at the mirror and there behind the "perfect" invisibility cloak. He never appeared to do those tricks with anyone else.
While talking about how J.K. loves her Trios, check this piece out. By connecting the three of them by the wands core, Dumbledore, Voldemort, and Harry, she also mimicked the thee brother's. Dumbledore who sought the stone, Voldemort who sought the wand. And Harry, who had inherited the cloak from his father.
What if Dumbledore created the horcrux in order to confirm that he killed his sister. He was so distraught over her death that he needed to know that it was him rather than His brother or Grindlewald. He turned to dark magic for his own peace of mind but rather found that he was indeed the perpetrator of this heinous crime. This is why he feels so responsible for what happened.
Not a bad theory. It would also show Dumbledore's wisdom in choosing an immortal being as his horcrux. Nagini was the inadvisable choice because she is mortal. Fawkes is continually reborn thus Dumbledore could live forever.
If when Harry “died” in the forest I’m deathly hallows, that killed the part of Voldemort in him. I wouldn’t be surprised if when Fawkes gets reborn, the part of Dumbledores is killed as well.
I know this is an old video, but it occurs to me that your theory explains the Golden Fire spell that Harry's wand cast on its own, saving Harry from Voldemort in the battle of the 7 Potters, at the beginning of Deathly Hallows. Harry didn't know the spell, but Dumbledore did. The part of Dumbledore's soul residing within the wand knew what to do and reacted to save Harry because of the connection it had with him. Apologies if this has already been covered in the comment section.
Also another thing is that phoenix cores also act on their own sometimes to protect or just do stuff that's why some wizards don't like them I remember reading somewhere
What types of noise does the (/do) illuminati make? Is it more chase music for backgrounds, or is there an animalistic aspect, involving chittering of some sort?
How to achive immortality: Throw some avada cadavras Then use the following as horcruxes - Nokia - Grain of sand - Voldys nose - The Hulks pants Now you are immortal
Thanks to everyone who participated. I'm picking the "Nagini ate it" and the "Nobody needs such an extraneous body part" answers and combine them into "He cut it off and fed it to Nagini himself".
After having watched this video a few times, I'd say that there is a small detail worth noticing: in the 6th book, everyone comments that Dumbledore seems to have been weakened after his fight with Voldemort. It is explained afterwards that the reason he was weak was the cursed ring. But now, after a bit of thought, I seriously doubt that. Snape used a counterspell to give Dumbledore time and reduce the impact of the curse on his body. Besides his arm, he was fully functional. (Remember that in the cave, he managed to swim inside against the roaring waves. This means that even in his last moments, his body remained strong) But what if the real reason that Dumbledore had been weakened is that the part of his soul inside Fawkes died? Maybe his fight against Voldemort was really the reason of his weakness, because Voldemort destroyed (accidentally) his horcrux. The timing is perfect.
Yeah I think it's possible. Remember that phoenix come to Dumbledores in need? Well in that unfortunate fight, there wasn't just one Dumbledore, there were 3. And one of them, Ariana, was very distraught. So it might have come to her but then she was murdered by his own brother out of anger & frustration. He then unintendedly created a horcrux in Fawkes. 😯
Interesting theory, but disproven by the story in the books. Harry meets Dumbledores soul in the limbo area after dying that looks like kings cross station. Dumbledores soul is intake. Its not ripped into two, otherwise defouled or even looking a tiny bit like voldemorts soul which is completely ripped to pieces. There's nothing indicating that Dumbledore has ever made a horcrux.
JK Rowling has said that this theory is “strangely upsetting to me.” However if she did embrace this angle while writing the books and explained all this and added it to the story.. it would of made for a more interesting twist.. I personally think the idea may have crossed Dumbledore’s mind in youth but that as time passed his inclination and fear of this magic would have made him more and more repulsed by the idea. If JK Rowling added this to her books she, I’m sure, would have added the moment where Dumbledore reunited his soul. And if Fawkes survived then that would of meant Dumbledore survived as “less than spirit” and he would have undoubtedly could have guided Harry to the destruction of the Horocrux’s, making it less luck and happen stance and help from his brother and Snape, that guided Harry in the last book. Very good argument and an interesting alternative ending I would admit.
Dumbledore could possibly guide Harry through his portrait in his office but they never think of that idea, even though he was advising snape at that time
This is actually a really good theory. It also would explain how Dumbledore could seem unfazed about letting Harry be killed to get rid of Voldemort, as a Horcrux rips away part of your soul. A lot of Dumbledore's compassion might have actually been in inside Fawkes.
Orrr... He knew that his soul was in harry and so there was a 50 % chamce that Dumbledore being Dumbledore would die instead of harry. Or he knew thay Harry had 3 soul inside him and had like a 33% chance of actually dying.
He wasn't unfazed...see the "gleam of triumph" at the end of GoF and his explanation in OooP that he grew to like Harry too much to tell him unpleasant but vital info.
I actually liked the Cursed Child. There was a Potter in Slytherin, it explained psychological growth, and it gave a reason why time turners always need to create a paradox. I know people don’t like that Albus and Scorpius go back to the Goblet of Fire and it changes everything from then on, but I think when they go back to when Harry was cursed it reset everything they changed.
It probably requires some preparation, and if everything was set in place when he triggered all that (the curse backfiring) it might still have created the horcrux - the destination just defaulted to Harry instead of whatever Riddle intended to use.
His body died, but his soul could not, his soul was already damaged and this is why a part of his soul attached to the easiest host available: Harry But if you think this is cheap, there are worse gaps in the books.
Dumbledore created a Horcrux, so Dumbledore is still alive. That's why Dumbledore appears at King's Cross. It's only people who have created Horcruxes. Ariana was the victim. Fawkes is the Horcrux.
If Harry has part of Dumbledores soul, what if since in Crimes of Grindelwald when they say a Phenix will always find a Dumbledore in trouble, what if Fawkes reconized the Dumbledore in Harry's wand and came to yis need since a "Dumbledore" was in trouble? Am i crazy?
Rachel I think that since dumbledore doesn’t want to break the rules and he knows that it is against the rules that he willed fawks not to come to harry because he wanted Harry to win on his own
I think JK hates this theory because she's the only one who knows how to make one so it disturbs her to think that Dumbledore would ever do something that made her editor almost throw up
the editor clearly didnt almost threw up... if i learned one thing about JK is how this whole series inflated her EGO even more than marge. She has no idea how to make the horrocrux be something so nasty so she keeps saying is too nasty to tell and drops it. She doesnt want to be seen like she "lost her touch" or anything like that. she also hates most, if not all, theories because of the same reason, no one can add to her story but herself. Seriously, she is almost as arrogant as voldemort.
Daniel Flores seriously guys he’s ignoring several things one being that creating a Horcux is so disgusting that it would make you throw up just hearing it and it’s very difficult dark magic. Second what your saying is that it makes sense that instead of feeling remorse about the death of his sister( which he does) he looks at it as a way to prolong his life. Your saying he uses his sister death to prolong his life when he has access to the sorcerer stone that nickolas made. I don’t think so it’s much easier to use the stone to prolong life and much less of dark Magic to do so. Dark magic which is what killed his sister. Dark magic which twice he had to face stop rains of terror. Once being the only person who could stop it. But your saying that he made a hocrux this is a horrible theory I expect better from these guys
There is one issue with the theory: It states that the death of Dumbledore's sister caused his soul to split, but the soul only splits when you kill someone in cold blood. Even if Dumbledore's spell actually killed her sister and it counts to split his soul, remorse does have the ability to heal your soul and Dumbledore being so remorseful about her sister's death means that even if his soul split during that fight, it would heal from all the remorse he felt
Maybe Dumbledore didn't feel quite remorseful enough until after he made the Horcrux in an attempt to escape his growing guilt as he processed what he had done. Or maybe he killed someone else to make the horcrux which he doesn't feel remorse for
I think Dumbledore feels guilt rather then remorse, and even if he didn't kill his sister himself, he believes he did there for his soul was able to split (mind over body).
Or dumbledore, a very powerful wizard, recognized his soul had split from blaming himself for his sister's death and he refused to let it heal as some sort of self punishment. (A very dumbledore thing to do.)
@@annabellethepitty here is the thing though, remorse splitting the soul makes no sense because remorse is the very thing that heals a split soul. In the final book Harry even says to Voldermort to 'try for some remorse, it's the only thing you have left' after Nagini was killed. So it still makes no sense
@@flyntflossy3044 from memory one of the books talks about a shed snake skin in a house. Sorry for being so vague as I can't remember completely. But when Harry first sees what Voldemort is doing through his scar/dream connection. When Voldemort kills someone.
I had this thought too. But thinking deeper, now I’m wondering... It’s said that Fawkes “gave” feathers for the wands, implying choice. I wonder if Fawkes could also choose to imbibe those feathers with a bit of Dumbledore soul?
@@jenschafer269 That doesn't really make sense. When Fawke's feather's were used to make the wands, no one could have known who they would end up belonging to, which either a) means that Fawkes has no control over it, b) that if Fawkes has control over it, she's just willy nilly giving pieces of Dumbledore's soul away, or c) Fawke's isn't a horcrux and this whole theory has as many holes as a block of swiss.
Think on it, guys, Dumbledore DID use at least once the connection between Harry and him. How else would he know, that, in Chamber of Secrets, Harry was staying at the Weasley's ? Sure, it could've been just the Trace, but remember : it's _Dumbledore_ who is apparently repsonsible for changing the adress from 4 Privet Drive to the Burrow, as Arthur says it _"Dumbledore_ must know you're here, Harry. Doesn't miss a trick, that man !"
Yes, except it is owls that usually know where the recipient is even if the sender does not. (Should have made it really easy to track down Sirius Black's location)
@@DanielPschaida Fair point the owls go wherever the person is and Hedwig finds Sirius many times so how come the ministry didn't just send him an owl saying turn yourself in and follow it! Ditto for Voldemort and known Death Eaters! We've just solved all crimes in the wizarding world!
Zareen Subha what if at the end of the book where he dies when fawkeas ( spelt that wrong) flies away it is to bring back dumbledore but he he is just as voldemort was after the backfire and he is just a soul spirit ghost thing
Using a Phoenix as your horcrux is a genius idea. An animal who when it dies it becomes reborn again. So under any normal circumstances he’s almost immortal
I don't believe a phoenix would make a good horcrux. Remember that the horcrux inside Harry was destroyed when he temporarily died. A phoenix will still experience death before being reborn.
@@Connor.SG-1Ringit only would have been destroyed because it was AKd. If this theory holds true and it was dumbledores soul helping harry in COS, Fawkes had already died a natural death at least once before it helped him.
@@GhnmiksGamingCorner I'm wondering if Fawkes natural 'death' process could be considered a true death though, since he goes from being full grown to a baby he continuously has a body. The way the video explained it, with Fawkes getting the AK spell, could be the only way he actually 'died' for a bit before becoming a baby bird again. Kinda makes one's head hurt a little, lol
@@meacadwell yes but if Fawkes was made into a horcrux like this theory posits then he would have been privileged with all the protection spells regular horcruxes get like Nagini but unlike Harry who was the accidental horcrux which would mean he would be immune to normal damage (obviously AK still works) but he would essentially have eternal youth and near invulnerability
I know that JK shot this theory dead but there are also a couple of interesting details that SCB missed which really bring this "headcannon" to life. Detail 1) In order to "undo" the making of a horcrux, the person has to experience intense grief that is so powerful that it might be actually be preferable to die in the first place. If we imagine that Dumbledore did indeed make Fawkes/The Elder Wand his horcrux then he would have to experience intense grief in order to truly 'undo' that act rather than just destroy the horcrux. What happens to Dumbledore moments before his death? He drinks the potion of despair and then he undergoes a process of grief so intense that he actually begs Harry to kill him. I think THAT is the moment where Dumbledore's soul finally mends itself and the horcrux is 'released'. Not destroyed in a way which destroys the portion of soul stored but truly released so that it rejoins with Dumbledore's whole soul. The drink of despair is his redemption for the sin of making a horcrux. Detail 2) Dumbledore 'waits' in King's Cross Station Limbo for Harry. If we go by the assumption that Dumbledore's soul has been healed then it makes perfect sense as to why he is healthy in Limbo unlike Voldemort whose soul is like a decrepit child unable to move on. Since Dumbledore healed his soul before death he is perfectly capable of moving on (which also explains why he knows that Harry's soul can move on if he wants), but instead Dumbledore waits for Harry to completely finish all of his work in the mortal world (or possibly as some sort of small self-punishment for making a horcrux in the first place), and then Dumbledore moves on.
Also in The Tales of Beedle the Bard, Dumbledore notes how the Warlock removing his heart is similar to horcruxes but says that it won't work the same way, HOW DOES HE KNOW? My guess is that Dumbledore did try to remove his guilt by splitting his soul in horcruxes but later realised his mistake.
I’d make one tweak to this theory, only as to what emotions Dumbledore actually detached from himself in making his horcrux. Depressed people often, as you stated, feel that they “deserve it.” Do we ever really see Dumbledore happy? Yes he can be calm, reminiscent and optimistic, but I don’t recall ever seeing him joyous. If there was any particular emotion that Dumbledore put into Fawkes, I think it would have been his love and his happiness, as we never see him loving anyone either. Maybe him and Grendelwald(?) had a thing but it was clearly broken off at some point seemingly by Dumbledore’s choice, why? Because he was so depressed and self loathing about his actions that he decided he did not deserve the love of another person anymore, and we see in fantastic beasts that he does have Fawkes at that point! Plus, Dumbledore is a MASTER of manipulation, something most commonly found in people lacking emotional empathy, a trait often associated with love. Next, what do we see from Fawkes? Certainly it’s hard for a bird to express emotion, so let’s look at his actions. Swooping into danger to fight a basilisk in defense of someone who deserves better treatment from who is basically himself (as in making amends) plus a tear that ends up healing him? And why would Fawkes cry at all? Plot convenience? Well yes, but unless Phoenixes poses the ability to understand complex situations involving concepts foreign to them (permanent death and it’s onset), it seems to me that the very small but powerful portion of Dumbledore’s soul commanded Fawkes to cry. Throughout the series every time we see Fawkes he is constantly being a saving grace, something that only someone with deep love and empathy for others would do. And finally, in swallowing the Avada Kedavra curse from Voldy, Dumbledore is killing two birds with one stone literally. His is finally killing the part of him which has love and happiness as he knows from here on out (when in war) those things will only get in the way of the sacrifices needed to win, and he tests to see how the avada kedavra spell acts when met with something unkillable (like Harry) and correctly determines that the spell will kill off anything that is not unkillable (the souls of “normal” men like himself and voldy.) From this point on we also see a drastic spiral for Dumbledore as he plummets into an emotionally dark place throughput the rest of the series, and yes the extenuating circumstances certainly help him down this path, but without his love and happiness being beside him he truly lacks anything to stop himself from the worst depression spiral he has had yet, one that ultimately leads to his death by assisted self-deletion.
OMG the part of the video saying how quotes make more sense literally sparked something in my mind. The very 1st chapter of Philosophers Stone, when Professsor McGonnagall asks whether Hagrid should be trusted to bring Harry to Privet Drive, remember what Dumbledore answered? "I would trust Hagrid with my life". I have always wondered why he said that, yet we never see any such scenario play out. A lot of what Dumbledore says has meaning or something happen later on to link to what he said. This line has nothing, at all, ever, until now. This theory opens this up and gives this line an entirely new meaning. He knows a bit of his soul is in Harry and Hagrid has Harry so Hagrid literally has a piece of Dumbledores life with him and Dumbledore is trusting him to bring Harry
ALSO- when Harry does the resurrection stone- dumbledore doesn't appear (because he's still alive in Harry) but if he was truly dead, surely he would have been there, he's proper important to Harry
+Ben Jamin That means nothing, as it is just as possible (and also theorized) that Limbo (the King's Cross-like area where Harry saw Dumbledore) is where one decides whether or not to become a ghost instead of simply passing on, suggesting Dumbledore may have just been waiting for Harry there, as he knew that Harry was a horcrux and would appear there sooner or later
Whether we agree or disagree with this theory (I love any and all theories simply because they make you really think and analyze the extended universe far more than Rowling probably ever thought someone would,) I just f*cking *love* that we even have a platform where not only this video can live and entertain but gives us a place to come a discuss other theories at length and not be made to look foolish or weird because we love the Potter-verse so much. *This was my happy place for today and every single person that has commented and added their theories is just AWESOME.* Love, A Sometimes Misunderstood Slytherin 😍🐍
Thats a great thought process! I love watching/reading Theories and conspiracies of all of my favorite books/movies. I feel like I understand plots and storylines better because of other peoples abstract thinking.
I love the trinities she does and I realized a long time ago that for the trinities there's also a quartet between Harry, Ron, Hermione, and Draco. Harry has black hair, Ron red hair, Hermione brown hair, Draco blond hair. Harry has green eyes, Ron blue eyes, Hermione brown eyes, Draco gray eyes. Although the three are in Gryffindor, Harry acts like a Gryffindor, Ron acts like a Hufflepuff, Hermione acts like a Ravenclaw, and Draco acts like a Slytherin.
Just a thought. Dumbledore in King's Cross, in Harry's dream, could show that Dumbledore is still alive, not physically though. Basically. If the part of Dumbledore's soul and Voldemort's soul was destroyed when the killing curse was shot at Harry. While the other part of the Horcrux was also destroyed by Nagini in Godrick's Hollow. The representation of Dumbledore is both the Horcrux, and showing his soul finally departing to heaven. Because Dumbledore is at King's Cross when Harry gets there, his soul is still in limbo because his whole horcrux wasn't fully destroyed until that moment. So when Harry got there, Dumbledore was only then allowed the opportunity to pass on into heaven. Make sense? :D
Also his horcruxs finally joined together once Harry's was destroyed. He now knows that the last remnants of the fight many years before were gone. So the absolute remorse he felt was able to join the rest of his soul together so he could go to heaven.
+darkydrone Not really because Voldemort had help to come back from Pettigrew, and was never actually killed due to the sheer number of horcruxes. Dumbledore had Fawkes and that piece of soul would have been killed off before he died, during the events of the order of the phoenix. So if there were small pieces of soul inside the wands, they wouldn't be strong enough to bring him back, plus no one would have known about them, nor would perform the dark magic that Pettigrew did to bring back Dumbledore.
Kim Flux We're also ignoring the fact that Dumbledore didn't have the stomach for creating one. Sure, he didn't have a problem with sending someone to their death, or setting someone up to die as a necessary evil, he wasn't one to get his hands dirty in the way required to make one. Especially not after what happened to his sister.
See that's what keeps messing me up about this whole idea. WAS it because of soul connection or was it simply Dumbledores fkn MAJOR talent and ability magically speaking that made him able to sense harry when cloaked and through the whole series
15:38 throughout the movie, whenever harry potter was under the cloak of invisibility dumbledore could sense him, this could be because of the soul connection
Breakin-Bad How real is the tale of the three brothers though? Like real folk lore, it could be rooted in reality but I doubt “death” is a real and tangible character in the Potterverse.
Dumbledore also the cloak before, plus the elder wand, maybe he could see it that way, and on top of that he can sense magic, like in the cave in half blood prince
regardless of what JK Rowling says this theory makes the most sense and fixes many plot holes. I like it. If JK Rowling can change the ethnicity of her characters and entertain the idea of killing off Ron I don't see why this is an issue. Great video and good job researching this.
Ok. I could see Dumbledore doing this. He had his dark moments and as stated this would bring additional significance to certain actions/words and it addresses certain plot holes. All of this without really tarnishing the memory of Dumbledore.
DaGaZ Rune Rowling's described he process of creating a horcrux as the most horrible thing imagined, a magic so perverted and sick that even the majority of dark magic books just describe it as something totally horrible and doesn't even bother giving details on how to do it. Voldemort had to read a lot of different books just to find out how to create a horcrux. also those who create horcruxes have a visible deformity
Maybe you didn't watch the video. I'm not going to argue his point. The video explains exactly how this could've occured, and gives ample examples as to how the creation would explain the various plot holes or gaps that the HP series has. If your want to argue the gaps in his explanation then by all means tweet, text, or simply write your own post to him.
DaGaZ Rune i did watch the video but the video gave no proof. and i am sorry but you are simply wrong. it could never have occurred dumbledore wasn't the type of guy to do something so horrible JK even said this Random guy @ JK_rowling any comments to the theory that dumbledore made fawkes a horcrux? j.k rowling response: "the idea that anybody believes this is strangely upsetting to me" another random guy Jk_rowling but... this theory does make sense at many points... right? jk response" not if you've read and understood the books"
@@jackbagdadi6117 Considering she contradics herself multiple times shows that the story she gives us isnt the correct one either, so not even she decides what is or isnt.
I always felt the way Harry’s wand saved him when he escaped private drive was never satisfactorily explained. With this theory in mind what if the piece of soul in Harry communicated with the shard in the wand producing magic that seems beyond Harry.
Didn't the wand store magic from the priori incantatum battle with Voldemort along with some of Harry's excess magic? Maybe a lot of wands store some of what is channeled through them. Which probably is discharged via sparks or something, normally.
I saw from another comment that talked about this. That comment brought up that Harry is a Parseltounge, an ability that isn't his, it's Voldemort's, which suggests that horcruxes can inherit abilities from the original soul. Dumbledore is a master of defense against the dark arts, he'd definitely have a solution for every duel he went against, ergo Harry and his wand would resonate that mastery when needed since they inherited it from Dumbledore's soul through Fawkes.
Too many comments to look. You have an interesting theory. A little updated. Dumbledore did not have a Phoenix until after The Crimes of Grindelwald. You may be correct in that Dumbledore created a horcrux, but not at the death of his sister, it would have been at the death of his unknown brother, Aurelius. Grindelwald knows how devastated Dumbledore was at the death of Arianna. When Aurelius and Dumbledore fight, Dumbledore of course wins; Grindelwald starts to laugh as a Phoenix appears before Dumbledore, lands on Aurelius, and starts to weep. The phoenix then bursts into flame, and Fawkes is born. Fawkes moves toward Dumbledore, as if he's found a new master. In that moment, Dumbledore realizes he may have killed...another Dumbledore. Grindelwald confirms his worst fear, and Dumbledore, out of extreme rage and hatred, uses the cruciatus curse on Gellert, which causes him to drop the wand. Dumbledore, weakened from his rage destroying the blood pact and simultaneous maiming of Grindelwald, holds his brother's shoulder, puts the phoenix in his robes, and picks up Grindelwald's wand. In that moment, he feels refreshed. He binds Grindelwald, calls the Aurors, and apparates away. Once safe, he accepts he killed two siblings, and it is this grief that causes him to make the phoenix, he and his brother share a connection with, a horcrux. About the image at the Kings Cross, Voldemort's form was reduced back to the form he held before his reincarnation, indicating two things. The first, when Harry leaves that place without Voldemort, that part of Voldemort's soul dies at Kings Cross; the second, the blood connection between them has been weakened. Harry no longer feels pain in his scar, and Harry's touch can now cause Voldemort pain. Dumbledore's presence at Kings Cross, is, as you said, an echo of his soul due to Voldemort's attempt on Harry's life. Once Harry left, as Dumbledore was as no longer living, the soul died on Kings Cross as well. Just my agreement to parts of your theory, with a little more added in.
This would be great if it wasn't for the fact that we know Dumbledore doesn't see Gellert Grindelwald between after the blood pact and before their duel in 1945. Also, the fact that you can split your soul from something that's not direct killing is a bit of a stretch so this would be really plausible and neat (think of all the people making horcruxes who blame themselves for the death of loved ones even if incorrectly). Now the second part of your theory - it makes total sense that if Harry was a horcrux made _after_ Voldemort's first death, that would be his form in Harry's mind. What scares me is if Harry got to King's Cross and it was Dumbledore, Voldemort in full form and Harry having a conversation. Seeing Voldemort on that platform is very intimidating to me...
This honestly makes a little more sense to me. Making a horcrux isn’t just as simple as killing someone. And, having a full soul means it’s stable, meaning it is next to impossible to accidentally create one. If that was the case deatheaters would have accidentally created horcruxs left and right. IF fawkes was a horcrux it wasn’t by accident
Very good theory, makes sense to me. How about this. When Dumbledore says it's inadvisable to use an animal as a horcrux it's because of the bond formed between the two. Because of the bond between Dumbledore and Fawks they share consciousness. Watching Fawks die and be reborn repeatedly has numbed him to human emotion because every time it happens he has to re-watch his sisters death. It would also explain his calm demeanor because he relies on logic and not emotional feelings.
@@flyntflossy3044 because it was people he thought of as or who were family that he kept close to his heart, the ones who love us never really leave us.
Often having pondered this question myself, I think it is safe to assume that it was Rowling’s way of illustrating Harry’s closure. After all, most of the final book is focused upon his doubts of Dumbledore as a person. It seems more mature for him to accept everything than have it confirmed by Dumbledore himself. This confirmation is also avoided in Harry’s mind-meeting with Dumbledore, as all Dumbledore could possibly tell him, disregarding the video’s theory, is what Harry himself already knew to be true.
Best Gamer doesn’t that further prove this tho? if part of dumbledore was inside harry then it would make sense that fawkes appeared to him in the chamber of secrets
Gee thanks. How about a spoiler warning or something. That's the worst kind of habit. When a movie is 10 years old who cares. But a movie that came out earlier this year. Bad form.
@@Finlandpro1 that's hardly the point now is it. Even this channel says spoiler warning before every vid. Even for the first potter movies. If I was watching one about fantastic beasts then that would be my fault. But you saying things on a completely different vid. That's a different story. There are still people who haven't seen it. Whether you think its been long enough or not. Just don't spoil movies. Its not that difficult.
Yea, so was I (taken aback). His theory actually makes the story even more complete. the magical rules of horcruxes more coherent, and Dumbledore's character even more complex and human. I think JK is upset that this theory violates Dumbledore's core personality and principles. (Here I pretend to be JK: Depressed or not, if a person is good-natured, they wouldn't go down the dark path, much like how a drunk person wouldn't go about committing crime if they don't already have that in their sober mind.) I personally don't think personality is deterministic and rigid, especially in dark times. To put simply, I like this theory.
it blows that rowling went out of her way to deny this like this and the "draco is a werewolf" theory are my favorites AND convincingly connect seemingly unrelated dots to brilliant, lore-friendly conclusions and she's just like "nah no way good try though"
To be wise you must first be foolish, to show your light you must have some darkness. What theories was she insinuating when she wrote the series? Has she ever explained it or left it unmentioned by sheer random occurrence and in that case why can she reject something she doesn't even have her own intended theories on?
I started watching this video being a skeptical and dismissing everything you said, but soon everything you said made a great deal of sense. This might actually be a true theory. Somebody get Rowling to confirm it please!
I can see where JKR would be saddened people consider this theory a possibility, no matter how fun it is. Were it that simple to unintentionally create a horcrux, they wouldn't be nearly so rare. Dumbledore is adamant that, in spending his existence obsessively trying to defeat death at any cost, Voldemort missed out on life entirely. Like Harry says in the final duel - Dumbledore was smarter than Voldemort precisely BECAUSE he accepted death as just another part of life. Despite knowing about horcruxes, Dumbledore still chose to face death head on, instead of wasting his life forever-chasing immortality.
In the movies it movies in the deathly hallows that mister voldy (Voldemort) goes to Grindelwald prison cell to ask about the elder wand, but in the books it never says if Voldemort went to Grindelwald or not
I suppose maybe when Dumbeldore fired the curse he didn’t have any remorse, he only regretted it once he thought it was himself who had killed his sister. Possibly he felt split as well as a part of him regretted what he had done and a part of him felt that he was now free from having to take care of her, maybe this division in his feelings being enough to split his soul?
when harry is being chased by voldemort in the deathly hallows, chapter: the seven potters gold flames appear and defeat voldemort i think that it was dumbledore helping him via wand
It was because of the phoenix cores in their wands . Fawks gave their cores and since their wands are technically brothers, the wand knew voldemort's wand was nearby and took action (gold sparks). Dumbledore explained this at deathly hallows .
The thing is dumbledore loved ariana and wouldn't murder her, but merely accidentaly kill her. The way of crating a horcrux is by murder ( the act of intended and planned killing)
Santiago Arce this is a very important thing! you cant create a horcrux when you are able to love and you still love the person you've accidentily killed. That doesnt make sense on the prospect that horcruxes is one of the darkest magic there is. Then i even think that it is in general not possible to create a horcrux when you are able to love. one thing here: it is said that Voldemort has never loved anything and voldemort cant possess harry because he his full of love. So that means a horcrux and love cant exist together (you can be a horcrux but you cant create a horcrux). And one other reason why dumbledore couldnt have created a horcrux is this: when voldemort created his horcruxes and experimented with the dark arts he changed his appearence. So if Dumbledore would have created a Horcrux he would seam less human.
Santiago Arce ah and one thing to add: I think creating a horcrux is just as using an unforgivable spell. You really have to mean it. You can just create a horcrux when you want to extend your live. Otherwise it isnt a horcrux at all and there ia one proof for that: If you want to have your soul whole again you have to feel remorse for that you killed a person to extend your live. So if you didnt do that because of this reason you cant regenerate your soul
Yeah i see your point, but somehow he was angry enough to kill Grindelwald. So I think it's not important WHO the curse was meant to kill, as long as it comes from the bottom of the heart. Which this curse did.
Lorenza Lo but as a matter of fact dumbledore didnt kill grindelwald. He defeated him in duell and the put him into nurmengard. But it is possible that he has once killed somebody because harry says i think in the 7th Book that Dumbledore never killed anybody if he could get around it. So yes he could have killed somebody but for a horcrux it depends on the reason why you did this. Dumbledore just killed to save his own or somebody others life. In the conversation between slughorn and riddle I understand the way of doing a horcrux like that: you kill on the purpose to become immortal. Thats the clue. The magic as Rowling describes it has much to do with how you mean it. E.g. you cant put a real Cruciatus-course on somebody if you dont really want to, if you dont enjoy your enemy to suffer horrendously. So as a horcrux is at least as dark as the cruciatus-course it is bound to the same magicalprinciples. So dont get me wrong the idea is good and there is evidence that dumbledore might have created a horcrux but as i told you it all depends on you purpose.
Lorenza Lo oh my god im so sorry now i got your message! Sorry. So forget my first one :D youve got a point there. Though i dont get why he would want to kill any of them. Because he was deeply in love with Grindelwald so he couldnt kill him but also loved ariana and Aberforth as they are his sister and brother. So maybe ariana had been hit by many powerful spells at the same time. Then you dont want to kill somebody you accidently killed someone. Yeah but please read through my first comment in yours though. It all depends on your purpose
+Ma7cus 8: Harry's wand didn't snap because of a Horcrux. "While battling a Horcrux" isn't really a spell or special circumstance that would allow a horcrux to randomly snap. Harry's wand snapped because Hermione cast a wrongly aimed Confringo. How the hell can a wand contain a small part of a horcrux, but not be a horcrux? That makes no sense.
A spell rebounding off a Horcrux likewise does not make it more potent. If it did, the grounds where the Trio were camping when they tried to destroy it using magic and Hogwarts would be completely detroyed, as would the old Potter shack, considering how many spells and curses rebounded off Horcruxes in those olocation. Please stop playing Devil's Advocate for a ridiculous theory with zero evidence, a plethora of counter-evidence and which forces one to rewrite several pieces of canon information to make it even work. This is one of the stupidest HP fan theories ever. Let's not keep it alive for any longer.
Its not the killing that make them immortal, it is the making of the Horcrux that makes them immortal. A powerful dark spell has to be used to create them, a spell that almost no ones knows and still almost no one knows about horcruxes, Hermione didn't know until she read Dumbledores books.
Yes, I always wondered how that conversation happened. Did Ollivander write to Dumbledore that he was low on phoenix feathers and would he give him one from Fawkes's tail? What did Ollivander do for Dumbledore in return other than tell him who that wand chose? Whose idea was it to give two feathers and why that number? Doesn't Ollivander make thousands of wands? I got the impression that Fawkes gave two feathers on two separate occasions. Like Ollivander was running low and twice turned to Dumbledore. I would like more detail on how that history happened.
Some might count the moving paintings as Horcruxes. The painting has a cope of someone's soul in it. The panting are alive. Just up load the person's soul into the painting after the death. That makes them no longer dead!
This is the most crackpot theory I've ever heard. Are you suggesting the moving pictures in their newspapers (like of reeta skeeta - who is STILL ALIVE) are souls?
Aden Haussmann no. The moving PICTURES were put in a painting to make them move with a little bit of personality. The moving PAINTINGS can talk, interact, and think, and we don't know how they are made
My problem with this theory is that you don't KILL someone to make a horcrux, you MURDER them. The difference between kill and murder is intent. If you drive while drunk and hit someone you KILL them, but if you deliberately aim your car at someone and run them over you MURDER them. Even if Dumbledore did kill Ariana it was an accident so it was not murder. No Murder, no horcrux. Theory denied. Additional note. I have just finished re-reading The Half-Blood Prince and Slughorn clearly states that after committing the murder you have to perform a spell to create a horcrux.
I read this part of the book too but then the question remains: How did Harry become a Horcrux for Voldemort? Voldemort obviously didn't perform some sort of spell to create the Horcrux?
@@Abhi_B That confused me too, and I can't find any explanation. It does say that the part of Voldemort's soul just attached itself to Harry without Voldemort's knowledge. Maybe the spell is only needed to make an inanimate object into a horcrux.
@@jonathanbauer2988 Maybe. Or it could be that it is because Voldemort was essentially killed that night so the bit of soul that escaped was weaker. Actually, just thought of this but was the bit of soul that split off because of killing James, Lily, or Voldemort's own death.
Yeh it's a weird one hey? I mean, Dumbledore said Voldemort would have a whole army of Inferi based on the number of people he's killed but no part of his soul seemed to have split off during any of this. So why did it split off after he murdered Lily and James? I think you may be onto something with the spell needed for inanimate objects though. Voldemort would possess other living things so perhaps his broken soul just latched onto Harry since he (or broken souls in general) can do that? I wish JK Rowling would provide more information on this haha
Insteresting theory. However, I'm not buying it. McGonagall: "Everyone knows you're the only one . . . Voldemort was frightened of." Dumbledore: "Voldemort had powers I will never have." McGonagall: "Only because you're too--well--noble to use them." Sorcerer's Stone, pg. 14
Mark Seare the question is does she know about all the intimate details of dumbledore’s life or would he still be too ashamed of such a decision from his past?
At this point the characters don't even know that Voldemort has 8 horcruxes to stay alive. So they were probably just talking about other dark magic applications. Plus even if they did, I don't think anyone would know about it if Dumbledore did have a horcrux
Dumbledore used dark magic in the fight that ended in his sister's life, otherwise he would know for sure it wasnt him that killed her. so its possible Dumbledore is straight up lying in this conversation, hiding from the shame he feels
i just realised, the symbolism of fawkes and nagini, in some aboriginal cultures they believed that phoenix symbolise rebirth and immortality, but also in some cultures snakes represent rebirth and immortality
The only thing I could think of by the end of the video and considering all the souls Harry is carrying is "that's very sora of harry." If you've ever ventured into the madness of kingdom hearts, your get what I mean.
In the Goblet of Fire (book) while fighting against Voldemort in the graveyard Harry hears a phoenix singing, which happens to represent his connection to Dumbledore. Just sayin'.
it was the Twin cores. you know, the Twin PHOENIX cores, when their wands connected and they had the Priori Encantantum effect...it had nothing, absolutely NOTHING to do with Fawkes being Dumbledores horcrux, therefore making the wands horcruxes as well. this theory is absolutely ludicrous and quite insulting to me, jk Rowling, and Harry Potter fans everywhere. do some reading, you may learn a thing or two.
Maybe Dumbledore DID use the Hard-horcrux without realizing it. How many times did Dumbledore "see" Harry while he was under the invisibility cloak. Was Dumbledore *really* that powerful of a wizard or was he able to "see" a part of himself? How long can you really hide from yourself without being seen?
There’s another time in the books where there is an unknown voice in Harry’s head. When he’s resisting the imperious curse a voice argues about jumping.
I think this theory is full of holes. Firstly, I doubt that Dumbledore had any intention of killing anyone during the duel with his brother and Grindelwald. It is certainly not mentioned. Secondly, curses other than the killing curse can lead to death. The death of Ariana was certainly accidental. This theory takes certain quotes from the books and spins interpretations around them that have little to no foundation. It also rips some quotes out of context, especially regarding Fawkes. Phoenixes differ from other pets that wizards have, such as owls, cats or toads, which are ordinary creatures. Any Potter geek knows the qualities and magical abilities phoenixes have. As Dumbledore said, a phoenix makes a VERY LOYAL pet. Because Harry showed loyalty to Dumbledore AND the feather core of his wand was from Fawkes, the bird came to him in the Chamber of Secrets. Anyway, that's just a few points.
Not really holes, more like, "there's another way to explain why all these pieces of evidence. But the fact that they're all still there (and as Jay mentioned, it wasn't nessicary whether dumbledore had any intention of killing, the point was, he believed his arrogance to kill his sister) shows that it is still a likely possibility that dumbledore has a horcrux.
TheVidBros Official I just don't think it's within Dumbledore's character. Yes, he was arrogant as a young man, and that arrogance blinded him even to the point of being willing to sacrifice some people for the sake of the "greater good". But remorse and self-blame came soon after Ariana had been killed and from the "canon" of HP books it seems that remorse and self-blame are not the kind of attitudes and feelings that lend themselves to the making of a horcrux. How would those feelings lead Dumbledore to making something that would help him to be "immortal"? I don't buy it one bit.
+TheVidBros Official (TVB) you don't just go around making horcruxes because you murdered someone. then everyone that commits murder would have one right? that's the logic he is using. dumbledore had no intention of creating one. not to mention the three of them fighting doesn't automatically mean they were "using dark magic". for all we know, a bookcase could have fallen on her. I'm guessing she just couldn't survive getting stunned or something. and you cant use voldemort trying to kill Harry as a baby as a reason. too much involved in that one, vold clearly wanting to commit murder and having the spell backfire, it's just too complicated of a scenario.
I love this theory! However I do believe (at least I hope) you got one thing wrong... Remember how hard it is to destroy a horcrux? - The object had to be damaged beyond physical or magical repair. Now in this theory the part of Dumbledore inside Harrys wand is destroyed after the attack in Godrics Hollow, but was it? - The wand was broken, yes, but the wand is not the horcrux, it's Fawkes feather inside of it! And it's clearly stated in the books that the only thing holding the wand together was the phoenix feather, the last piece of Dumbledore! This means there's still a part of Dumbledore alive inside of Harrys wand.
Also he got the whole point with Fawkes wrong Because Fawkes is a phoenix, and those show a huge loyality to the humans they trust And to trust a human they "just" need to see the absolute good, and Dumbledore came to this point after regretting Arianas Death
But it could be that there was never any part of Dumbledore's soul in the feathers in the first place. I mean, Fawkes burns his feathers off and regrows them every time he dies so it could be that the soul is only contained in the actual body of the bird. That messes up the theory a bit cos then Voldermort's wand wouldn't have a connection with Dumbledore, but it would fill the second plot hole.
I dunno, I was with all of it until then..although the idea of Harry and his wand being connectedto Dumbledore is great, just think if each of Nagini's scales had a piece of soul in them. Feathers and scales shed...well, molt.
U know I think harry potter is the only franchise where I dont care how many sequels / prequels come out "just for the money" as long as Rowling writes them! (We r not talking abt garbage like cursed child). She is a freaking genius writer and could make any series in that universe bomb!
The Dumbledore Family is special, If anyone of them was in great need, a phoenix will come into him/her to give help. Making a Horcrux doesn't mean killing only, you still have to perform different charms and cast some spells to split your soul and put it in an object, person, or what. Ariana was killed way long before Fantastic Beast, at the latest Fantastic Beast, Fawkes is not yet around.
Creating a horcrux requires intent. Magic in the Potterverse is based on intent. Crucio needs you to want to cause pain. Even a small spell like accio needs visualization and determination. Creating a horcrux requires murder. The intent to kill. He did not intend to kill his crazy sis. In addition to to that , his soul is intact in the afterlife. The cure for a split soul is remorse. Dumbledaddy not only felt remorse but lived a life of atonement. Lastly the vessel for a horcrux needs to remain intact. Faux blows up periodically. Faux is a Phoenix. They do that. Often. bad container for your soul.
I agree with you. I'm not trying to defend the theory of Dumbledore's horcrux, I think it's a bullshit. I just read that creating a horcrux without intent is impossible and I couldn't help correcting it .:)
Didn't Dumbledore die though? Oh and about that 'three' thing; it's the number 7 Rowling loves most: 7 years, books, horcruxes, players on a quidditch team, floors on hogwarts, weasley children. 7 is harry's quidditch number, there are 7 secret passages to hogsmeade, Hermione Jean Granger ( 7 syllables ) and Ron Bilius Weasley ( 7 syllables ), Voldemort tried to kill Harry 7 times, Nicholas Flamel is 7 years older than his wife, 7 is the number of lights Dumbledore put out, and lastly 7 snakes on the door to the Chamber of Secrets
Also, you said harry's wand horcrux was destroyed so Dumbledore could die, I think it's noteworthy that Harry's wand was destroyed AFTER the Astronomy tower event
I love this theory, and find it completely fitting with Dumbledore's character -- in that even Dumbledore acknowledged he had a dark past and, at one point, found Grindelwald's ideas intriguing. He ultimately rejected it, but it's wrong not to acknowledge that it was there.
Just realized rewatching this that Dumbledore being 'less of a man' would explain how he was able to care for Harry and still use him in a plan that would keep him alive just so he could die at the right moment. Even more reason I like Death of the Author.
This is all a very good theory, but it has one flaw: even if Dumbledore did kill Ariana, remorse can mend the soul back together. And Dumbledore, as the video rightly states, felt quite a lot of it. Without his soul split, he would not be able to make a horcux.
+Bekah B That's discussed in this video. Also, remorse CAN mend the soul together, but it's not specifically stated that it always does. Plus, he could have made the horcux instantaneously like Voldy did with Harry
+PaleTurquoise12 harry isn't a Horcrux Jk Rowlings specifically stated this. she said no ritual or spell was done to create a horcrux so harry isn't one
I was hoping someone would have pointed this out. And you can heal your soul even once a horcrux or pseudo-horcrux has been created. So there would be nothing to stop Dumbledore from healing his soul.
It can be mended but when that part of the soul is "trapt" in a horcrux, wouldn't you need a spell to release that part in order to mend your soul again?
![[TH] 2024 PMGC League | Survival Stage วันที่ 1 | PUBG MOBILE Global Championship](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/FVFT-PFwU80/mqdefault.jpg)
Haha true when you said Horcrux vs. Horcrux. I just realized the irony of fawkes saving Harry from the Basilisk. So it's really a Horcrux saving a Horcrux from a Horcrux.
@Leah Chiaravalloti I didn't say the basilisk was a Horcrux. I'm talking about the diary, not the basilisk. I'm saying Fawkes (the Horcux, even though JK Rowling says it's not) saving Harry (the Horcux) from the diary (a Horcux.
Please stop to many horcruxs
@@freezyonyt lol
Lol this is perfect
Lol
if this theory holds true, then dumbledore using fawkes to block the killing curse is him testing to see if the living vessel of a horcrux can survive a killing curse whilst the soul inside is killed. Proving to him that harry could survive.
You're a genius
@@Archii20 Thanks haha
@@DracoRubi Harry is a hororcrux though. That’s cannon. That’s why he can see into Voldemort’s mind and speak parseltongue and such. After he dies and sees the baby Voldemort in Kings Cross, then comes back through his blood running through Voldemort, he looses the connection. That’s why he can’t speak parseltongue after he dies.
@@DracoRubi but that's what a horcrux is, an object/person/animal that has a hidden piece of a dark witch/wizard's soul that was placed there by the witch/wizard
@@thexreaderspeaks Your definition is correct. And precisely because of that, Harry isn't a Horcrux. Voldemort didn't perform the spell, he didn't take his piece of soul and placed it anywhere with Dark magic.
The 2 wands represent the two sides of Dumbledore. Voldemort's wand represents his thirst for power in his early years and Harry's wand is the nice helping side of Dumbledore
I was gonna say that and also add in that Dumbledore was the man who in a sense brought them into the wizarding world and was a sense of a father figure too
@@nicolecelic no, dumbledore isnt really anything like a father to harry. That’d be Hagrid/Remus/Sirius
@@nicolecelic Dumbledore was a mentor figure
Nah voldi was already evil since year 0.
He was born without love his moter used love potion on his dad who eventually left after she decided to test him if he loves her without potion.
@@schnurrmaschine4179 rumus didn’t care for Harry he went 14 years without seeing him
Suddenly the fact that Dumbledore's mere presence always has a calming effect on Harry, makes a whole lot of sense. I want to believe this one. I truly do.
And why Dumbledore is the only person Harry ever obeys without question or hesitation. Harry admired him from the first mentioning of his name when Hagrid mentioned it... even before ever going to Hogwarts.
I’ve always assumed that dumbledore know that nagini was a horcrux because Harry can see inside nagini’s mind (in book five when nagini attacks Arthur weasley). Dumbledore already thinks that Harry is one of Voldemort’s horcruxes, so he theorizes that Harry can see inside nagini’s mind because they both share a part of Voldemort’s soul
Nice catch.
That is why Dumbledore tells Snape that Harry must die
This is literally what I thought too. Does it say it in the book somewhere?
Too bad cups, lockets, and diadems don't have minds.
@@ShadowDaNet yeah. Dumbledore gives more explicit reasons for the snake. and it's implied in Order of the Phoenix very heavily. This channel produces a lot of great theories, but it seems they often forget, stretch, and twist details and misinterpret lines in the book to create theories like this.
If we accepted their theory, I would argue that Dumbledore put his soul together through remorse. If at no other point than when he drank the potion of despair in the cave, and the pain of it nearly killed him. Harry's wand wouldn't have broken so easily if it were a horcrux as it is explicitly stated that physical damage is not possible on horcruxes. but if it were possible, it happened long after Dumbledore's death so it wouldn't stop dumbledore from being "alive".
this theory is just an example of one of their desperately silly theories. Perhaps I should call it a Rita Skeeta theory. based on just enough truth to make you question how well you thought you knew the subject, but upon closer inspection, being utter nonsense.
Theories like these make me feel as if the readers actually understand the world and story of Harry Potter better than the author herself.
It's a very strange feeling.
They completely do. Jk Rowling never intended to write that. But we can Infer the plot holes from the writings we have.
She created an alternate universe for us to explore. One that we can actually visit in our mind.
theyll never know it more than her. she is obviously the utmost authority. just because she hasnt touched on it doesnt mean she hasnt thought about it.
You can argue the same about any author who constructs a fantasy world. It is one of the appeals of fictional writing. GRRM has equally said that he has heard theories he wish he had thought of an incorporated into his work.
JK's writing is filled with more plot holes than Hagrid has hair, so it's pretty normal that fans try to fill these holes and in turn have more knowledge than the actual author. Good thing death of the author is a thing.
I'm sold. Given Rowling's response, I'd venture to speculate that Dumbledore created a horcrux without her knowledge. Strange to say, but that is the magic of storytelling.
what? do you even understand books?
lmfao.
Xerkun lmao
:-)
This is something I very much dislike about Rowling. Most author and story tellers have the belief that any theory could be true. Rowling has the inset that she can decide for things to be canon with a simple tweet.
This explains how Dumbledore knew Harry was at the mirror and there behind the "perfect" invisibility cloak. He never appeared to do those tricks with anyone else.
Nice catch
While talking about how J.K. loves her Trios, check this piece out.
By connecting the three of them by the wands core, Dumbledore, Voldemort, and Harry, she also mimicked the thee brother's.
Dumbledore who sought the stone, Voldemort who sought the wand. And Harry, who had inherited the cloak from his father.
And accepted death when the time came...wow!
It’s actually Voldemort, snape, and Harry Voldemort died for power snape died for love and Harry met death like a friend at the 7th book
Booooom mind blown
And Dumbledore was death. He led all three to it.
@@kailaleegibbons6143 woooow, you're so right!!
What if Dumbledore created the horcrux in order to confirm that he killed his sister. He was so distraught over her death that he needed to know that it was him rather than His brother or Grindlewald. He turned to dark magic for his own peace of mind but rather found that he was indeed the perpetrator of this heinous crime. This is why he feels so responsible for what happened.
Oooooh yes that makes sense. I like it
Makes sense!
Oh thats good
oh that is good. I like that. oh wow... that's devastatingly good
But he told Harry that he still didn't know who killed her. I don't think Dumbledore would lie about that
Not a bad theory. It would also show Dumbledore's wisdom in choosing an immortal being as his horcrux. Nagini was the inadvisable choice because she is mortal. Fawkes is continually reborn thus Dumbledore could live forever.
@S R, J.K Rowling never explains that you need to eat human flesh to make a horcrux.
The thing is, nagini might not have been immortal, but she did live quite a long time because she was there in crimes of grindelwald
Good idea
If when Harry “died” in the forest I’m deathly hallows, that killed the part of Voldemort in him. I wouldn’t be surprised if when Fawkes gets reborn, the part of Dumbledores is killed as well.
Dumledore doesn't seem to me to be the type of person who would want to live forever.
I know this is an old video, but it occurs to me that your theory explains the Golden Fire spell that Harry's wand cast on its own, saving Harry from Voldemort in the battle of the 7 Potters, at the beginning of Deathly Hallows. Harry didn't know the spell, but Dumbledore did. The part of Dumbledore's soul residing within the wand knew what to do and reacted to save Harry because of the connection it had with him.
Apologies if this has already been covered in the comment section.
They actually made a video saying the golden fire was the voldy soul inside him defending itself from danger.
Also another thing is that phoenix cores also act on their own sometimes to protect or just do stuff that's why some wizards don't like them I remember reading somewhere
Very interesting how Crimes of Grindelwald impacts this theory, with a pheonix being a bird that is connected to the Dumbledores
The plot thickens
I know right!
@Oliver Yukica that can't be, nagini was Voldemorts last hucrox, which he made after his revival in goblet of fire
@Oliver Yukica well that is actually possible because voldemort is about to be born in crimes of grindelwald
Ikr
And Dumbledore's patronus is a Phoenix...
His patronus is himself the pheonix bit that is *illuminati noises
Trent Young what
What types of noise does the (/do) illuminati make? Is it more chase music for backgrounds, or is there an animalistic aspect, involving chittering of some sort?
I have wanted so much to see Dumbledore’s patronus in the movies. 😜
@@knuckle12356 search on youtube "alien$" from the channel Lee-Coc Holder of the Light :))
How to achive immortality:
Throw some avada cadavras
Then use the following as horcruxes
- Nokia
- Grain of sand
- Voldys nose
- The Hulks pants
Now you are immortal
Amazing
A grain of sand is really the best possible idea though lol like, "wanna destroy me? Good luck."
a needle in a haysack
I would use some atoms and send it to mars
@@TestTest-nv1dc you can't go on Mars, you need a rocket ship!
The way that theory falls into place when king's cross is taken into account is INSANE
Also why Dumbledore doesn't look like his physical prime
My mind blew as soon as I saw where the theory was going
I liked this idea very much. But there is more pressing matter at hand. Where is Tom Riddle's nose?
him and Michael Jackson share it
Nobody needs such an extraneous body part.
Its in the Hole.
Lost to his now partial snake DNA
Thanks to everyone who participated. I'm picking the "Nagini ate it" and the "Nobody needs such an extraneous body part" answers and combine them into "He cut it off and fed it to Nagini himself".
After having watched this video a few times, I'd say that there is a small detail worth noticing: in the 6th book, everyone comments that Dumbledore seems to have been weakened after his fight with Voldemort. It is explained afterwards that the reason he was weak was the cursed ring. But now, after a bit of thought, I seriously doubt that. Snape used a counterspell to give Dumbledore time and reduce the impact of the curse on his body. Besides his arm, he was fully functional. (Remember that in the cave, he managed to swim inside against the roaring waves. This means that even in his last moments, his body remained strong)
But what if the real reason that Dumbledore had been weakened is that the part of his soul inside Fawkes died? Maybe his fight against Voldemort was really the reason of his weakness, because Voldemort destroyed (accidentally) his horcrux. The timing is perfect.
The book says that the ashes fawkes turns into had a baby fawkes in it, right?
@@bananabreadthenotsogreat9318 according to this video, although Fawkes was reborn, Dumbledore's horcrux was destroyed. My theory goes along with that
Yeah I think it's possible. Remember that phoenix come to Dumbledores in need? Well in that unfortunate fight, there wasn't just one Dumbledore, there were 3. And one of them, Ariana, was very distraught. So it might have come to her but then she was murdered by his own brother out of anger & frustration. He then unintendedly created a horcrux in Fawkes. 😯
*M I N D B L O W N*
Interesting theory, but disproven by the story in the books. Harry meets Dumbledores soul in the limbo area after dying that looks like kings cross station. Dumbledores soul is intake. Its not ripped into two, otherwise defouled or even looking a tiny bit like voldemorts soul which is completely ripped to pieces. There's nothing indicating that Dumbledore has ever made a horcrux.
JK Rowling has said that this theory is “strangely upsetting to me.” However if she did embrace this angle while writing the books and explained all this and added it to the story.. it would of made for a more interesting twist.. I personally think the idea may have crossed Dumbledore’s mind in youth but that as time passed his inclination and fear of this magic would have made him more and more repulsed by the idea. If JK Rowling added this to her books she, I’m sure, would have added the moment where Dumbledore reunited his soul. And if Fawkes survived then that would of meant Dumbledore survived as “less than spirit” and he would have undoubtedly could have guided Harry to the destruction of the Horocrux’s, making it less luck and happen stance and help from his brother and Snape, that guided Harry in the last book. Very good argument and an interesting alternative ending I would admit.
And in the process could have also repaired his soul knowing that his horcruxes would be destroyed by saving others while fighting evil.
@Allen Kara I think she tweeted it... :-\
Dumbledore could possibly guide Harry through his portrait in his office but they never think of that idea, even though he was advising snape at that time
To be fair, the changes she's done are strangely upsetting to everyone.
Which, I guess, explains why Harry’s wand acts of it own accord in the beginning of Dealthy Hallows.
This is actually a really good theory. It also would explain how Dumbledore could seem unfazed about letting Harry be killed to get rid of Voldemort, as a Horcrux rips away part of your soul. A lot of Dumbledore's compassion might have actually been in inside Fawkes.
Orrr... He knew that his soul was in harry and so there was a 50 % chamce that Dumbledore being Dumbledore would die instead of harry. Or he knew thay Harry had 3 soul inside him and had like a 33% chance of actually dying.
@@sarajain8065 That is an interesting theory as well.
He wasn't unfazed...see the "gleam of triumph" at the end of GoF and his explanation in OooP that he grew to like Harry too much to tell him unpleasant but vital info.
It's not a good theory though
Wait, Harry has two old men in him?
Oh my god man..........you changed the whole triology for me.....fuck
@Voldy Marvolo yeah, you didnt know harry is catholic?
Dude, you're embarrassing me in front of the wizards.
Harry Potter and the order of the red room
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Isn’t it already horcrux vs horcrux : harry vs diary
Matias Pena
that's exactly right
YES IT IS GENIUS
Matias Pena he made it 2 horcruxs vs 1 horcrux
Trinity again
Ayal Mashiach then it also makes more sense that Harry and Fawkes "won" bc 2 against 1 AAAND trinity again 💯
This theory is a better story than the Cursed Child ever was.
True, still a better love story than twilight
That doesn’t take very much
I actually liked the Cursed Child. There was a Potter in Slytherin, it explained psychological growth, and it gave a reason why time turners always need to create a paradox. I know people don’t like that Albus and Scorpius go back to the Goblet of Fire and it changes everything from then on, but I think when they go back to when Harry was cursed it reset everything they changed.
Oof
facts
Also, voldy didn’t technically know Harry was a horcrux, so you can make a horcrux w/o knowing
that was just because his soul was so unstable after already splitting it 6 times
@@krebtron And he already had quite a bit of practice my then
It probably requires some preparation, and if everything was set in place when he triggered all that (the curse backfiring) it might still have created the horcrux - the destination just defaulted to Harry instead of whatever Riddle intended to use.
His body died, but his soul could not, his soul was already damaged and this is why a part of his soul attached to the easiest host available: Harry
But if you think this is cheap, there are worse gaps in the books.
Dumbledore created a Horcrux, so Dumbledore is still alive. That's why Dumbledore appears at King's Cross. It's only people who have created Horcruxes. Ariana was the victim. Fawkes is the Horcrux.
If Harry has part of Dumbledores soul, what if since in Crimes of Grindelwald when they say a Phenix will always find a Dumbledore in trouble, what if Fawkes reconized the Dumbledore in Harry's wand and came to yis need since a "Dumbledore" was in trouble? Am i crazy?
And the Dumbledore in Harry! Wow! I hadn't thought of that!
Close but I feel like he would have come to Harry’s aid more than that especially in goblet of fire.
Then shouldn't he protect Voldemort aswell ?
Rachel I think that since dumbledore doesn’t want to break the rules and he knows that it is against the rules that he willed fawks not to come to harry because he wanted Harry to win on his own
I think JK hates this theory because she's the only one who knows how to make one so it disturbs her to think that Dumbledore would ever do something that made her editor almost throw up
Her editor threw up because Voldemort possessed the fetus of a woman peter got pregnant for the purpose of Voldemort possessing a fetus
@@Jasonsoloka2024 O_O wait, i didn't hear that. Where was that from? What interview or tweet did i miss?
@@Jasonsoloka2024 😱🤢
the editor clearly didnt almost threw up... if i learned one thing about JK is how this whole series inflated her EGO even more than marge. She has no idea how to make the horrocrux be something so nasty so she keeps saying is too nasty to tell and drops it. She doesnt want to be seen like she "lost her touch" or anything like that. she also hates most, if not all, theories because of the same reason, no one can add to her story but herself. Seriously, she is almost as arrogant as voldemort.
@Cennet Matiske idk man I'm just passing on the info
Me at start: this is dumb
Me at end: huh. It all makes sense.
Daniel Flores doesm’t makes sense after crimes of grinderwald
Daniel Flores seriously guys he’s ignoring several things one being that creating a Horcux is so disgusting that it would make you throw up just hearing it and it’s very difficult dark magic. Second what your saying is that it makes sense that instead of feeling remorse about the death of his sister( which he does) he looks at it as a way to prolong his life. Your saying he uses his sister death to prolong his life when he has access to the sorcerer stone that nickolas made. I don’t think so it’s much easier to use the stone to prolong life and much less of dark Magic to do so. Dark magic which is what killed his sister. Dark magic which twice he had to face stop rains of terror. Once being the only person who could stop it. But your saying that he made a hocrux this is a horrible theory I expect better from these guys
Apparently for a Horcrux to be made, the dark wizard has to ingest the body of victim, can't picture Dumbledore eating Ariana somehow...
@@alexandersanleger484 That can't be true, Voldemort's victims were found, at least some of them were so he can't have ingested them.
Daniel Flores same
There is one issue with the theory:
It states that the death of Dumbledore's sister caused his soul to split, but the soul only splits when you kill someone in cold blood. Even if Dumbledore's spell actually killed her sister and it counts to split his soul, remorse does have the ability to heal your soul and Dumbledore being so remorseful about her sister's death means that even if his soul split during that fight, it would heal from all the remorse he felt
Maybe Dumbledore didn't feel quite remorseful enough until after he made the Horcrux in an attempt to escape his growing guilt as he processed what he had done.
Or maybe he killed someone else to make the horcrux which he doesn't feel remorse for
I think Dumbledore feels guilt rather then remorse, and even if he didn't kill his sister himself, he believes he did there for his soul was able to split (mind over body).
Or dumbledore, a very powerful wizard, recognized his soul had split from blaming himself for his sister's death and he refused to let it heal as some sort of self punishment. (A very dumbledore thing to do.)
@@annabellethepitty here is the thing though, remorse splitting the soul makes no sense because remorse is the very thing that heals a split soul. In the final book Harry even says to Voldermort to 'try for some remorse, it's the only thing you have left' after Nagini was killed. So it still makes no sense
And means Dumbledore knew it was him that killed his sister
I really like this theory, but if you think about Fawkes' feathers becoming horcruxes, what about when Nagini shed her skin?
Given what she is, does she even do that?
@@flyntflossy3044 from memory one of the books talks about a shed snake skin in a house. Sorry for being so vague as I can't remember completely. But when Harry first sees what Voldemort is doing through his scar/dream connection. When Voldemort kills someone.
@@rhiannonmackenzie2527 I actually think you're correct
I had this thought too. But thinking deeper, now I’m wondering... It’s said that Fawkes “gave” feathers for the wands, implying choice. I wonder if Fawkes could also choose to imbibe those feathers with a bit of Dumbledore soul?
@@jenschafer269 That doesn't really make sense. When Fawke's feather's were used to make the wands, no one could have known who they would end up belonging to, which either a) means that Fawkes has no control over it, b) that if Fawkes has control over it, she's just willy nilly giving pieces of Dumbledore's soul away, or c) Fawke's isn't a horcrux and this whole theory has as many holes as a block of swiss.
Think on it, guys, Dumbledore DID use at least once the connection between Harry and him. How else would he know, that, in Chamber of Secrets, Harry was staying at the Weasley's ? Sure, it could've been just the Trace, but remember : it's _Dumbledore_ who is apparently repsonsible for changing the adress from 4 Privet Drive to the Burrow, as Arthur says it _"Dumbledore_ must know you're here, Harry. Doesn't miss a trick, that man !"
Yes, except it is owls that usually know where the recipient is even if the sender does not. (Should have made it really easy to track down Sirius Black's location)
@@DanielPschaida What?
@@DanielPschaida Fair point the owls go wherever the person is and Hedwig finds Sirius many times so how come the ministry didn't just send him an owl saying turn yourself in and follow it! Ditto for Voldemort and known Death Eaters! We've just solved all crimes in the wizarding world!
Sarah Glover because while he was in hiding he was the dog the whole time. Maybe he was untraceable.
@@rachelgroth7108 But he was still Snuffles when Harry sends him letters in the cave!
"But it's not just Harry and Voldemort that's there, someone else is also there"
TH-cam: *AD*
lol XD
For me it said "Dom-!"
NEW GILLETTE ANTIPERSPIRANT
An audiobook?
Same
Also after Dumbledore’s funeral, Harry sees a Phoenix fly from the flames into the sky..
dubledore being so "torn" about the issue is the event to tear his soul apart.
+TheSingingGummyBear
there is more....
+TheSingingGummyBear ???
Oh, and Dumbledore's patronus is a Pheonix
Zareen Subha I forgot all about that. dude. mind blown.
Zareen Subha Phoenix* sorry.
Zareen Subha what if at the end of the book where he dies when fawkeas ( spelt that wrong) flies away it is to bring back dumbledore but he he is just as voldemort was after the backfire and he is just a soul spirit ghost thing
What if you try using capitalizations in the correct places? It could help.
I think dumbledore is Fawkes horkrux
Using a Phoenix as your horcrux is a genius idea. An animal who when it dies it becomes reborn again. So under any normal circumstances he’s almost immortal
I don't believe a phoenix would make a good horcrux. Remember that the horcrux inside Harry was destroyed when he temporarily died. A phoenix will still experience death before being reborn.
@@Connor.SG-1Ringit only would have been destroyed because it was AKd. If this theory holds true and it was dumbledores soul helping harry in COS, Fawkes had already died a natural death at least once before it helped him.
The whole thing about a horcrux is an item becomes extremely resilient when it becomes a horcrux but Fawkes dies a natural death earlier in that book
@@GhnmiksGamingCorner I'm wondering if Fawkes natural 'death' process could be considered a true death though, since he goes from being full grown to a baby he continuously has a body. The way the video explained it, with Fawkes getting the AK spell, could be the only way he actually 'died' for a bit before becoming a baby bird again.
Kinda makes one's head hurt a little, lol
@@meacadwell yes but if Fawkes was made into a horcrux like this theory posits then he would have been privileged with all the protection spells regular horcruxes get like Nagini but unlike Harry who was the accidental horcrux which would mean he would be immune to normal damage (obviously AK still works) but he would essentially have eternal youth and near invulnerability
I know that JK shot this theory dead but there are also a couple of interesting details that SCB missed which really bring this "headcannon" to life.
Detail 1) In order to "undo" the making of a horcrux, the person has to experience intense grief that is so powerful that it might be actually be preferable to die in the first place. If we imagine that Dumbledore did indeed make Fawkes/The Elder Wand his horcrux then he would have to experience intense grief in order to truly 'undo' that act rather than just destroy the horcrux. What happens to Dumbledore moments before his death? He drinks the potion of despair and then he undergoes a process of grief so intense that he actually begs Harry to kill him. I think THAT is the moment where Dumbledore's soul finally mends itself and the horcrux is 'released'. Not destroyed in a way which destroys the portion of soul stored but truly released so that it rejoins with Dumbledore's whole soul. The drink of despair is his redemption for the sin of making a horcrux.
Detail 2) Dumbledore 'waits' in King's Cross Station Limbo for Harry. If we go by the assumption that Dumbledore's soul has been healed then it makes perfect sense as to why he is healthy in Limbo unlike Voldemort whose soul is like a decrepit child unable to move on. Since Dumbledore healed his soul before death he is perfectly capable of moving on (which also explains why he knows that Harry's soul can move on if he wants), but instead Dumbledore waits for Harry to completely finish all of his work in the mortal world (or possibly as some sort of small self-punishment for making a horcrux in the first place), and then Dumbledore moves on.
Omg Ur so smart unlike me
Wow! It actually fits.. and Rowling did not actually disprove it, right? She just said this theory upsets her. Hmmm..
Hmmm indeed
Grim Productions did you watch the video. He explained that.
***** During the part where Fawkes sang the song of lament, he was no longer a Horcrux. It was explained in the video. :)
She just doesn't want Dumbledore to live, because it serves the narrative better.
dumbledore wasnt actually on 'the other side'. he was in harry's head, he said so.
Also in The Tales of Beedle the Bard, Dumbledore notes how the Warlock removing his heart is similar to horcruxes but says that it won't work the same way, HOW DOES HE KNOW? My guess is that Dumbledore did try to remove his guilt by splitting his soul in horcruxes but later realised his mistake.
I’d make one tweak to this theory, only as to what emotions Dumbledore actually detached from himself in making his horcrux. Depressed people often, as you stated, feel that they “deserve it.” Do we ever really see Dumbledore happy? Yes he can be calm, reminiscent and optimistic, but I don’t recall ever seeing him joyous. If there was any particular emotion that Dumbledore put into Fawkes, I think it would have been his love and his happiness, as we never see him loving anyone either. Maybe him and Grendelwald(?) had a thing but it was clearly broken off at some point seemingly by Dumbledore’s choice, why? Because he was so depressed and self loathing about his actions that he decided he did not deserve the love of another person anymore, and we see in fantastic beasts that he does have Fawkes at that point! Plus, Dumbledore is a MASTER of manipulation, something most commonly found in people lacking emotional empathy, a trait often associated with love. Next, what do we see from Fawkes? Certainly it’s hard for a bird to express emotion, so let’s look at his actions. Swooping into danger to fight a basilisk in defense of someone who deserves better treatment from who is basically himself (as in making amends) plus a tear that ends up healing him? And why would Fawkes cry at all? Plot convenience? Well yes, but unless Phoenixes poses the ability to understand complex situations involving concepts foreign to them (permanent death and it’s onset), it seems to me that the very small but powerful portion of Dumbledore’s soul commanded Fawkes to cry. Throughout the series every time we see Fawkes he is constantly being a saving grace, something that only someone with deep love and empathy for others would do. And finally, in swallowing the Avada Kedavra curse from Voldy, Dumbledore is killing two birds with one stone literally. His is finally killing the part of him which has love and happiness as he knows from here on out (when in war) those things will only get in the way of the sacrifices needed to win, and he tests to see how the avada kedavra spell acts when met with something unkillable (like Harry) and correctly determines that the spell will kill off anything that is not unkillable (the souls of “normal” men like himself and voldy.) From this point on we also see a drastic spiral for Dumbledore as he plummets into an emotionally dark place throughput the rest of the series, and yes the extenuating circumstances certainly help him down this path, but without his love and happiness being beside him he truly lacks anything to stop himself from the worst depression spiral he has had yet, one that ultimately leads to his death by assisted self-deletion.
This is a VERY good addition.
OMG the part of the video saying how quotes make more sense literally sparked something in my mind. The very 1st chapter of Philosophers Stone, when Professsor McGonnagall asks whether Hagrid should be trusted to bring Harry to Privet Drive, remember what Dumbledore answered? "I would trust Hagrid with my life". I have always wondered why he said that, yet we never see any such scenario play out. A lot of what Dumbledore says has meaning or something happen later on to link to what he said. This line has nothing, at all, ever, until now. This theory opens this up and gives this line an entirely new meaning. He knows a bit of his soul is in Harry and Hagrid has Harry so Hagrid literally has a piece of Dumbledores life with him and Dumbledore is trusting him to bring Harry
ALSO- when Harry does the resurrection stone- dumbledore doesn't appear (because he's still alive in Harry) but if he was truly dead, surely he would have been there, he's proper important to Harry
+Ben Jamin OMG that is brilliant! Great point!
+Ben Jamin That means nothing, as it is just as possible (and also theorized) that Limbo (the King's Cross-like area where Harry saw Dumbledore) is where one decides whether or not to become a ghost instead of simply passing on, suggesting Dumbledore may have just been waiting for Harry there, as he knew that Harry was a horcrux and would appear there sooner or later
Whether we agree or disagree with this theory (I love any and all theories simply because they make you really think and analyze the extended universe far more than Rowling probably ever thought someone would,) I just f*cking *love* that we even have a platform where not only this video can live and entertain but gives us a place to come a discuss other theories at length and not be made to look foolish or weird because we love the Potter-verse so much.
*This was my happy place for today and every single person that has commented and added their theories is just AWESOME.*
Love,
A Sometimes Misunderstood Slytherin 😍🐍
Amen!
Thats a great thought process! I love watching/reading Theories and conspiracies of all of my favorite books/movies. I feel like I understand plots and storylines better because of other peoples abstract thinking.
Life story
Realmrsolo s
What qualifies a murder to one differs from person to person.
I love the trinities she does and I realized a long time ago that for the trinities there's also a quartet between Harry, Ron, Hermione, and Draco. Harry has black hair, Ron red hair, Hermione brown hair, Draco blond hair. Harry has green eyes, Ron blue eyes, Hermione brown eyes, Draco gray eyes. Although the three are in Gryffindor, Harry acts like a Gryffindor, Ron acts like a Hufflepuff, Hermione acts like a Ravenclaw, and Draco acts like a Slytherin.
And, 3+4=7, which is another very common number throughout the series!
I like the idea that dumbledore lives through fawkes, not that he could come back alive but that fawkes is the last remaining piece, forever living
"the order of the Phoenix"..... Think about it
AAAA
Dumbledore's Army prototype/version 0?
0-0
It is called that because of Faux it always leads to the Phoenix
Mind=Blown
I will give half of my soul for a "JK Rowling Reacts To This Video"-video
She reacted to my video by trying to get it taken down.
th-cam.com/video/66DDT8auY1k/w-d-xo.html
Koen de Swart
You would be selling your soul cheaply. And you would regret it the rest of your life.
Koen de Swart she did
She disproved this theory
You’d be willing to split your soul for that video...
So you’d kill to see that video.
I see what you did there.
Just a thought. Dumbledore in King's Cross, in Harry's dream, could show that Dumbledore is still alive, not physically though.
Basically. If the part of Dumbledore's soul and Voldemort's soul was destroyed when the killing curse was shot at Harry. While the other part of the Horcrux was also destroyed by Nagini in Godrick's Hollow. The representation of Dumbledore is both the Horcrux, and showing his soul finally departing to heaven.
Because Dumbledore is at King's Cross when Harry gets there, his soul is still in limbo because his whole horcrux wasn't fully destroyed until that moment. So when Harry got there, Dumbledore was only then allowed the opportunity to pass on into heaven.
Make sense? :D
Also his horcruxs finally joined together once Harry's was destroyed. He now knows that the last remnants of the fight many years before were gone. So the absolute remorse he felt was able to join the rest of his soul together so he could go to heaven.
If he had a horcrux he would be alive as a shade just like voldemort was.
No, because they already said that anyone who splits their soul doesn't get to move on, they're stuck in purgatory.
+darkydrone Not really because Voldemort had help to come back from Pettigrew, and was never actually killed due to the sheer number of horcruxes. Dumbledore had Fawkes and that piece of soul would have been killed off before he died, during the events of the order of the phoenix. So if there were small pieces of soul inside the wands, they wouldn't be strong enough to bring him back, plus no one would have known about them, nor would perform the dark magic that Pettigrew did to bring back Dumbledore.
Kim Flux We're also ignoring the fact that Dumbledore didn't have the stomach for creating one. Sure, he didn't have a problem with sending someone to their death, or setting someone up to die as a necessary evil, he wasn't one to get his hands dirty in the way required to make one. Especially not after what happened to his sister.
"You must have shown me real loyality down in the chamber. Nothing but that could have called Fawkes toward you. "
-Albus Dumbledore
See that's what keeps messing me up about this whole idea. WAS it because of soul connection or was it simply Dumbledores fkn MAJOR talent and ability magically speaking that made him able to sense harry when cloaked and through the whole series
I don't even care that JK has said this is wrong, this is so freaking genius. Headcanon SUPER FREAKING ACCEPTED!
where is the reponse from jk rowling please?
She's just triggerd because they improved on her story in a way she can only dream lol
Part of creating a horcrux is eating the person you murdered. I don't think albus ate his sister.
Lane Stapp but Voldemort didn't eat harry or nagini, and both were horcruxes.
He also never ate the ring. It's not the horcrux itself, but person murdered for it.
15:38 throughout the movie, whenever harry potter was under the cloak of invisibility dumbledore could sense him, this could be because of the soul connection
Dumbledore can "sense" magic. Like in the cave in the sixth book.
or he is just the most powerful wizard and isn’t fooled by some cloak that he gave to Harry in the first place
Breakin-Bad How real is the tale of the three brothers though? Like real folk lore, it could be rooted in reality but I doubt “death” is a real and tangible character in the Potterverse.
No man im sorry
Dumbledore also the cloak before, plus the elder wand, maybe he could see it that way, and on top of that he can sense magic, like in the cave in half blood prince
regardless of what JK Rowling says this theory makes the most sense and fixes many plot holes. I like it. If JK Rowling can change the ethnicity of her characters and entertain the idea of killing off Ron I don't see why this is an issue.
Great video and good job researching this.
+DaGaZ Rune you have to do a specific ritual to create a horcrux
Ok. I could see Dumbledore doing this. He had his dark moments and as stated this would bring additional significance to certain actions/words and it addresses certain plot holes. All of this without really tarnishing the memory of Dumbledore.
DaGaZ Rune Rowling's described he process of creating a horcrux as the most horrible thing imagined, a magic so perverted and sick that even the majority of dark magic books just describe it as something totally horrible and doesn't even bother giving details on how to do it. Voldemort had to read a lot of different books just to find out how to create a horcrux. also those who create horcruxes have a visible deformity
Maybe you didn't watch the video. I'm not going to argue his point. The video explains exactly how this could've occured, and gives ample examples as to how the creation would explain the various plot holes or gaps that the HP series has. If your want to argue the gaps in his explanation then by all means tweet, text, or simply write your own post to him.
DaGaZ Rune i did watch the video but the video gave no proof. and i am sorry but you are simply wrong. it could never have occurred dumbledore wasn't the type of guy to do something so horrible
JK even said this
Random guy @ JK_rowling any comments to the theory that dumbledore made fawkes a horcrux?
j.k rowling response: "the idea that anybody believes this is strangely upsetting to me"
another random guy Jk_rowling but... this theory does make sense at many points... right?
jk response" not if you've read and understood the books"
Might also explain how the letters in books 1 and 2 were so easily addressed to the correct locations for Harry.
Gilet Grindenwald. Wow, just imagine if he said that in 2019
Ermahgerd I was looking for this comment.... Love these brothers but I'm disappointed.................
Paxton Hunt Disappointed because he messed up a name🤣
@@internalizedscreaming yep multiple times on a series he supposedly read and listened to many times
Paxton Hunt or he’s just a human being that made a mistake🤔
@@internalizedscreaming yeah multiple times on series he is very familiar with 🤔
My head hurts because my mind was just blown.
Jay: "Guys I really think we're onto something here"
J.K.Rowling: I'm about to destroy this guys whole career.
People have stopped caring about Rowling's opinion and matters overall at this point.
Considering only she can decide what is or isn’t this doesn’t make sense
@@jackbagdadi6117 Considering she contradics herself multiple times shows that the story she gives us isnt the correct one either, so not even she decides what is or isnt.
@@gromimomi8486 dude,yes she does,she is LITTERALLY the one who created the Harry Potter universe.
Shes just mad cause she didnt think of it first. How Rowling created the stories is beyond me.
I always felt the way Harry’s wand saved him when he escaped private drive was never satisfactorily explained. With this theory in mind what if the piece of soul in Harry communicated with the shard in the wand producing magic that seems beyond Harry.
Didn't Olivander explain that Harry's wand recognised Voldemort and attacked him but Lucius wand wasn't strong enough and broke?
@@angrymario8259 yup but no other wand recognises an enemy. The twin cores was a good explanation
Didn't the wand store magic from the priori incantatum battle with Voldemort along with some of Harry's excess magic?
Maybe a lot of wands store some of what is channeled through them. Which probably is discharged via sparks or something, normally.
I saw from another comment that talked about this. That comment brought up that Harry is a Parseltounge, an ability that isn't his, it's Voldemort's, which suggests that horcruxes can inherit abilities from the original soul. Dumbledore is a master of defense against the dark arts, he'd definitely have a solution for every duel he went against, ergo Harry and his wand would resonate that mastery when needed since they inherited it from Dumbledore's soul through Fawkes.
14:25
“The baby is disgusting and nasty...” -J talking excitedly
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Too many comments to look. You have an interesting theory. A little updated. Dumbledore did not have a Phoenix until after The Crimes of Grindelwald. You may be correct in that Dumbledore created a horcrux, but not at the death of his sister, it would have been at the death of his unknown brother, Aurelius.
Grindelwald knows how devastated Dumbledore was at the death of Arianna. When Aurelius and Dumbledore fight, Dumbledore of course wins; Grindelwald starts to laugh as a Phoenix appears before Dumbledore, lands on Aurelius, and starts to weep. The phoenix then bursts into flame, and Fawkes is born. Fawkes moves toward Dumbledore, as if he's found a new master. In that moment, Dumbledore realizes he may have killed...another Dumbledore. Grindelwald confirms his worst fear, and Dumbledore, out of extreme rage and hatred, uses the cruciatus curse on Gellert, which causes him to drop the wand. Dumbledore, weakened from his rage destroying the blood pact and simultaneous maiming of Grindelwald, holds his brother's shoulder, puts the phoenix in his robes, and picks up Grindelwald's wand. In that moment, he feels refreshed. He binds Grindelwald, calls the Aurors, and apparates away.
Once safe, he accepts he killed two siblings, and it is this grief that causes him to make the phoenix, he and his brother share a connection with, a horcrux.
About the image at the Kings Cross, Voldemort's form was reduced back to the form he held before his reincarnation, indicating two things. The first, when Harry leaves that place without Voldemort, that part of Voldemort's soul dies at Kings Cross; the second, the blood connection between them has been weakened. Harry no longer feels pain in his scar, and Harry's touch can now cause Voldemort pain. Dumbledore's presence at Kings Cross, is, as you said, an echo of his soul due to Voldemort's attempt on Harry's life. Once Harry left, as Dumbledore was as no longer living, the soul died on Kings Cross as well.
Just my agreement to parts of your theory, with a little more added in.
Nah i think Aurelius himself is The horcrux and Not Dumbledore s Brother
You've just written FB5, now just wait for the phone call!
This would be great if it wasn't for the fact that we know Dumbledore doesn't see Gellert Grindelwald between after the blood pact and before their duel in 1945. Also, the fact that you can split your soul from something that's not direct killing is a bit of a stretch so this would be really plausible and neat (think of all the people making horcruxes who blame themselves for the death of loved ones even if incorrectly).
Now the second part of your theory - it makes total sense that if Harry was a horcrux made _after_ Voldemort's first death, that would be his form in Harry's mind. What scares me is if Harry got to King's Cross and it was Dumbledore, Voldemort in full form and Harry having a conversation. Seeing Voldemort on that platform is very intimidating to me...
This honestly makes a little more sense to me. Making a horcrux isn’t just as simple as killing someone. And, having a full soul means it’s stable, meaning it is next to impossible to accidentally create one. If that was the case deatheaters would have accidentally created horcruxs left and right. IF fawkes was a horcrux it wasn’t by accident
Sarah Glover seriously tho that could save the FB series.
J: Did Dumbledore create a horcrux?
Me: Oh, yes, he DumbleDID.
Can’t believe he’d Dumbledo what he Dumbledid
Jemma The Artist smooth
Oh Dumbledammit
Dumbledo or dumbledont
He Dumblenot made a horcrux
Very good theory, makes sense to me. How about this. When Dumbledore says it's inadvisable to use an animal as a horcrux it's because of the bond formed between the two. Because of the bond between Dumbledore and Fawks they share consciousness. Watching Fawks die and be reborn repeatedly has numbed him to human emotion because every time it happens he has to re-watch his sisters death. It would also explain his calm demeanor because he relies on logic and not emotional feelings.
Also, why was Dumbledore not present when Harry used The Resurrection Stone.
That's on Harry. I don't think he was needed there
@@flyntflossy3044 because it was people he thought of as or who were family that he kept close to his heart, the ones who love us never really leave us.
Because he will soon meet Dumbledore. If he meet Dumbledore twice, would that make the meeting less interesting ? Yes
Dumbledore soul is still partially alive in Harry.So he couldn't have appeared
Often having pondered this question myself, I think it is safe to assume that it was Rowling’s way of illustrating Harry’s closure. After all, most of the final book is focused upon his doubts of Dumbledore as a person. It seems more mature for him to accept everything than have it confirmed by Dumbledore himself. This confirmation is also avoided in Harry’s mind-meeting with Dumbledore, as all Dumbledore could possibly tell him, disregarding the video’s theory, is what Harry himself already knew to be true.
I want to see him cry at this when he sees the new FBAWTFT movie.
A phoenix comes to a Dumbledore in need.
Best Gamer doesn’t that further prove this tho? if part of dumbledore was inside harry then it would make sense that fawkes appeared to him in the chamber of secrets
Gee thanks. How about a spoiler warning or something. That's the worst kind of habit. When a movie is 10 years old who cares. But a movie that came out earlier this year. Bad form.
@@nathanbrooks2581 The Beasts 2 came out in 2018
@@Finlandpro1 that's hardly the point now is it. Even this channel says spoiler warning before every vid. Even for the first potter movies. If I was watching one about fantastic beasts then that would be my fault. But you saying things on a completely different vid. That's a different story. There are still people who haven't seen it. Whether you think its been long enough or not. Just don't spoil movies. Its not that difficult.
I don’t think credence is a dumbledore
"in case you haven't re-read the books this year" um.... you did not have to call me out like that
Late to the show but could Harry’s wand acting of it’s own accord in the Battle of the 7 Harrys be a piece of Dumbledor protecting him?
No. Harry’s wand recognized itself in Voldemort’s wand and had to protect it.
A really interesting theory, I thought it was well thought about. I was a bit taken aback by J.K Rowling's response, I just felt it was a bit rude.
Tasoq what was the response?
Ida Säntti twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/727814857702178817
Yea, so was I (taken aback). His theory actually makes the story even more complete. the magical rules of horcruxes more coherent, and Dumbledore's character even more complex and human.
I think JK is upset that this theory violates Dumbledore's core personality and principles. (Here I pretend to be JK: Depressed or not, if a person is good-natured, they wouldn't go down the dark path, much like how a drunk person wouldn't go about committing crime if they don't already have that in their sober mind.)
I personally don't think personality is deterministic and rigid, especially in dark times.
To put simply, I like this theory.
Damn Rowling that came outta left field
well, she didn't say it's wrong...
it blows that rowling went out of her way to deny this
like this and the "draco is a werewolf" theory are my favorites AND convincingly connect seemingly unrelated dots to brilliant, lore-friendly conclusions and she's just like "nah no way good try though"
I'm actually with her in this. Dumbledore making a horecrux doesn't make sense and Draco is a werewolf is reaching.
To be wise you must first be foolish, to show your light you must have some darkness. What theories was she insinuating when she wrote the series? Has she ever explained it or left it unmentioned by sheer random occurrence and in that case why can she reject something she doesn't even have her own intended theories on?
That it's disturbing isnt the same as saying it's false. I think she was just denying that she intended it that wat.
I started watching this video being a skeptical and dismissing everything you said, but soon everything you said made a great deal of sense. This might actually be a true theory. Somebody get Rowling to confirm it please!
He also said Grindenwald. What gives J????
sodapopTL well not technically she just said that it saddened her people thought that
sadly, she disconfirmed it...
I can see where JKR would be saddened people consider this theory a possibility, no matter how fun it is. Were it that simple to unintentionally create a horcrux, they wouldn't be nearly so rare. Dumbledore is adamant that, in spending his existence obsessively trying to defeat death at any cost, Voldemort missed out on life entirely. Like Harry says in the final duel - Dumbledore was smarter than Voldemort precisely BECAUSE he accepted death as just another part of life. Despite knowing about horcruxes, Dumbledore still chose to face death head on, instead of wasting his life forever-chasing immortality.
But you need to have “killed without regret or remorse” to create a horcrux...
well then use his fight with grindalwald and this is for the books and the movies chang things they just use movie clips to help
In the movies it movies in the deathly hallows that mister voldy (Voldemort) goes to Grindelwald prison cell to ask about the elder wand, but in the books it never says if Voldemort went to Grindelwald or not
@@ryanbrown5141 Actually it does, it also tells that Grindelwald expected Voldemort to come to him eventually
I suppose maybe when Dumbeldore fired the curse he didn’t have any remorse, he only regretted it once he thought it was himself who had killed his sister. Possibly he felt split as well as a part of him regretted what he had done and a part of him felt that he was now free from having to take care of her, maybe this division in his feelings being enough to split his soul?
I think he had the intent of doing so without remorse as he fired his spells in his fight, but it hit the wrong person
when harry is being chased by voldemort in the deathly hallows, chapter: the seven potters gold flames appear and defeat voldemort i think that it was dumbledore helping him via wand
Jacob Dalton Did we ever get a real explanation as to why that happened? I haven't read that book since 2007.
this is exactly what i was thinking tbh
That is EXACTLY what I thought too!
I was thinking that
It was because of the phoenix cores in their wands . Fawks gave their cores and since their wands are technically brothers, the wand knew voldemort's wand was nearby and took action (gold sparks). Dumbledore explained this at deathly hallows .
The thing is dumbledore loved ariana and wouldn't murder her, but merely accidentaly kill her. The way of crating a horcrux is by murder ( the act of intended and planned killing)
Santiago Arce this is a very important thing! you cant create a horcrux when you are able to love and you still love the person you've accidentily killed. That doesnt make sense on the prospect that horcruxes is one of the darkest magic there is. Then i even think that it is in general not possible to create a horcrux when you are able to love. one thing here: it is said that Voldemort has never loved anything and voldemort cant possess harry because he his full of love. So that means a horcrux and love cant exist together (you can be a horcrux but you cant create a horcrux). And one other reason why dumbledore couldnt have created a horcrux is this: when voldemort created his horcruxes and experimented with the dark arts he changed his appearence. So if Dumbledore would have created a Horcrux he would seam less human.
Santiago Arce ah and one thing to add: I think creating a horcrux is just as using an unforgivable spell. You really have to mean it. You can just create a horcrux when you want to extend your live. Otherwise it isnt a horcrux at all and there ia one proof for that: If you want to have your soul whole again you have to feel remorse for that you killed a person to extend your live. So if you didnt do that because of this reason you cant regenerate your soul
Yeah i see your point, but somehow he was angry enough to kill Grindelwald. So I think it's not important WHO the curse was meant to kill, as long as it comes from the bottom of the heart. Which this curse did.
Lorenza Lo but as a matter of fact dumbledore didnt kill grindelwald. He defeated him in duell and the put him into nurmengard. But it is possible that he has once killed somebody because harry says i think in the 7th Book that Dumbledore never killed anybody if he could get around it.
So yes he could have killed somebody but for a horcrux it depends on the reason why you did this. Dumbledore just killed to save his own or somebody others life. In the conversation between slughorn and riddle I understand the way of doing a horcrux like that: you kill on the purpose to become immortal. Thats the clue. The magic as Rowling describes it has much to do with how you mean it. E.g. you cant put a real Cruciatus-course on somebody if you dont really want to, if you dont enjoy your enemy to suffer horrendously. So as a horcrux is at least as dark as the cruciatus-course it is bound to the same magicalprinciples.
So dont get me wrong the idea is good and there is evidence that dumbledore might have created a horcrux but as i told you it all depends on you purpose.
Lorenza Lo oh my god im so sorry now i got your message! Sorry. So forget my first one :D youve got a point there. Though i dont get why he would want to kill any of them. Because he was deeply in love with Grindelwald so he couldnt kill him but also loved ariana and Aberforth as they are his sister and brother. So maybe ariana had been hit by many powerful spells at the same time. Then you dont want to kill somebody you accidently killed someone. Yeah but please read through my first comment in yours though. It all depends on your purpose
dumbledore s sister Ariana had a horcrux. she is a pop singer now...
+milica jovanovic www.thestorypedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Ariana_Dumbledore_Hogs_Head.jpg
This actually makes sense because now we have the Fantastic Beasts’ movies and Dumbledore says that a Phoenix will come to any Dumbledore in need.
Why would he have to know? Voldemort didn't know when he made Harry a horcrux
Yessss
additionally JK.rowling makes it very clear that it's difficult to destroy a horcrux.
+Nick momo So that means Harry's wand isn't part of a horcrux then. It snapped pretty easy.
+Ma7cus 8: Harry's wand didn't snap because of a Horcrux. "While battling a Horcrux" isn't really a spell or special circumstance that would allow a horcrux to randomly snap. Harry's wand snapped because Hermione cast a wrongly aimed Confringo. How the hell can a wand contain a small part of a horcrux, but not be a horcrux? That makes no sense.
A spell rebounding off a Horcrux likewise does not make it more potent. If it did, the grounds where the Trio were camping when they tried to destroy it using magic and Hogwarts would be completely detroyed, as would the old Potter shack, considering how many spells and curses rebounded off Horcruxes in those olocation.
Please stop playing Devil's Advocate for a ridiculous theory with zero evidence, a plethora of counter-evidence and which forces one to rewrite several pieces of canon information to make it even work.
This is one of the stupidest HP fan theories ever. Let's not keep it alive for any longer.
I swear that if killing someone and feeling sad or angry creates a horcrux then lots of wizards and witches would be partly immortal
hmm look at their ages... are they not?
Its not the killing that make them immortal, it is the making of the Horcrux that makes them immortal. A powerful dark spell has to be used to create them, a spell that almost no ones knows and still almost no one knows about horcruxes, Hermione didn't know until she read Dumbledores books.
It's stated very dramatically in Half-Blood Prince that murder splits the soul, allowing one to create a Horcrux.
When Harry's wand moves on its own it is Dumbledore protecting him
I like that! Dumbledore would have known that fire spell it's probably similar to what he used on the Inferi!
Sooo, dumbledore’s horcrux is Harry’s wand?
@@_Myrhl No his soul is!
Zachary Hess oh my god, I never thought of that before. That’s the best thing I’ve ever heard.
Though it is said that wands with a pheonixfeather as its core are likely to sometimes cast on their own due to their ~independency~trait
Apologies if I missed this in the video, but if Dumbledore knows Fawkes is his horcrux, why would he allow Fawkes feathers to be used for wands?
Yes, I always wondered how that conversation happened. Did Ollivander write to Dumbledore that he was low on phoenix feathers and would he give him one from Fawkes's tail? What did Ollivander do for Dumbledore in return other than tell him who that wand chose? Whose idea was it to give two feathers and why that number? Doesn't Ollivander make thousands of wands?
I got the impression that Fawkes gave two feathers on two separate occasions. Like Ollivander was running low and twice turned to Dumbledore. I would like more detail on how that history happened.
Some might count the moving paintings as Horcruxes. The painting has a cope of someone's soul in it. The panting are alive. Just up load the person's soul into the painting after the death. That makes them no longer dead!
Donovan Delaney I think the paintings aren't the actual people's souls but only a memory of the dead people
This is the most crackpot theory I've ever heard. Are you suggesting the moving pictures in their newspapers (like of reeta skeeta - who is STILL ALIVE) are souls?
Aden Haussmann no. The moving PICTURES were put in a painting to make them move with a little bit of personality. The moving PAINTINGS can talk, interact, and think, and we don't know how they are made
Sour Mango I know that. That does not make them souls
but that shit would be awesome no one would expect a moving painting from itself as a horcrux
My problem with this theory is that you don't KILL someone to make a horcrux, you MURDER them. The difference between kill and murder is intent. If you drive while drunk and hit someone you KILL them, but if you deliberately aim your car at someone and run them over you MURDER them. Even if Dumbledore did kill Ariana it was an accident so it was not murder. No Murder, no horcrux. Theory denied.
Additional note. I have just finished re-reading The Half-Blood Prince and Slughorn clearly states that after committing the murder you have to perform a spell to create a horcrux.
I read this part of the book too but then the question remains: How did Harry become a Horcrux for Voldemort? Voldemort obviously didn't perform some sort of spell to create the Horcrux?
@@Abhi_B That confused me too, and I can't find any explanation. It does say that the part of Voldemort's soul just attached itself to Harry without Voldemort's knowledge. Maybe the spell is only needed to make an inanimate object into a horcrux.
so its because voldemort had already split his soul so many times that it was unstable
@@jonathanbauer2988 Maybe.
Or it could be that it is because Voldemort was essentially killed that night so the bit of soul that escaped was weaker.
Actually, just thought of this but was the bit of soul that split off because of killing James, Lily, or Voldemort's own death.
Yeh it's a weird one hey? I mean, Dumbledore said Voldemort would have a whole army of Inferi based on the number of people he's killed but no part of his soul seemed to have split off during any of this. So why did it split off after he murdered Lily and James?
I think you may be onto something with the spell needed for inanimate objects though. Voldemort would possess other living things so perhaps his broken soul just latched onto Harry since he (or broken souls in general) can do that?
I wish JK Rowling would provide more information on this haha
Insteresting theory. However, I'm not buying it.
McGonagall: "Everyone knows you're the only one . . . Voldemort was frightened of."
Dumbledore: "Voldemort had powers I will never have."
McGonagall: "Only because you're too--well--noble to use them."
Sorcerer's Stone, pg. 14
Mark Seare the question is does she know about all the intimate details of dumbledore’s life or would he still be too ashamed of such a decision from his past?
@@johnfarley7074 She wouldn't know.
At this point the characters don't even know that Voldemort has 8 horcruxes to stay alive. So they were probably just talking about other dark magic applications. Plus even if they did, I don't think anyone would know about it if Dumbledore did have a horcrux
@@clementchen5351 are you counting quirrell as a horcrux?
Dumbledore used dark magic in the fight that ended in his sister's life, otherwise he would know for sure it wasnt him that killed her. so its possible Dumbledore is straight up lying in this conversation, hiding from the shame he feels
i just realised, the symbolism of fawkes and nagini, in some aboriginal cultures they believed that phoenix symbolise rebirth and immortality, but also in some cultures snakes represent rebirth and immortality
The only thing I could think of by the end of the video and considering all the souls Harry is carrying is "that's very sora of harry."
If you've ever ventured into the madness of kingdom hearts, your get what I mean.
In the Goblet of Fire (book) while fighting against Voldemort in the graveyard Harry hears a phoenix singing, which happens to represent his connection to Dumbledore. Just sayin'.
This
it was the Twin cores. you know, the Twin PHOENIX cores, when their wands connected and they had the Priori Encantantum effect...it had nothing, absolutely NOTHING to do with Fawkes being Dumbledores horcrux, therefore making the wands horcruxes as well. this theory is absolutely ludicrous and quite insulting to me, jk Rowling, and Harry Potter fans everywhere. do some reading, you may learn a thing or two.
+jessicat36 actually the feather in their core was Fawkes' but agreed its ludicrous and ridiculous.
+Obsidius Nightbrother Hey man, calm down. She was just stating her opinion. (And I have to say I agree with her.)
+Obsidius Nightbrother yes yes so much yes!!
otherwise, no one else deserves a response. lol.
Maybe Dumbledore DID use the Hard-horcrux without realizing it. How many times did Dumbledore "see" Harry while he was under the invisibility cloak. Was Dumbledore *really* that powerful of a wizard or was he able to "see" a part of himself? How long can you really hide from yourself without being seen?
Thomas Moeller you’re right. And as a deathly hallow you can’t penetrate the cloak
Yes yes he is that powerful
Wow, I was thinking exactly the same when watching this video.
if i read this seeing this means harry sees himself so harry is dumbaldore by travvelling back in time but oviously thats not true
I don't think dumbledore see's him, i think he can just "sense his presence", similarly to how you can still be heard or felt under the cloak.
There’s another time in the books where there is an unknown voice in Harry’s head. When he’s resisting the imperious curse a voice argues about jumping.
I think this theory is full of holes. Firstly, I doubt that Dumbledore had any intention of killing anyone during the duel with his brother and Grindelwald. It is certainly not mentioned. Secondly, curses other than the killing curse can lead to death. The death of Ariana was certainly accidental.
This theory takes certain quotes from the books and spins interpretations around them that have little to no foundation. It also rips some quotes out of context, especially regarding Fawkes. Phoenixes differ from other pets that wizards have, such as owls, cats or toads, which are ordinary creatures. Any Potter geek knows the qualities and magical abilities phoenixes have. As Dumbledore said, a phoenix makes a VERY LOYAL pet. Because Harry showed loyalty to Dumbledore AND the feather core of his wand was from Fawkes, the bird came to him in the Chamber of Secrets.
Anyway, that's just a few points.
it also what???
well said. ton of holes and lots of stretching of facts to try to support his arguments
Not really holes, more like, "there's another way to explain why all these pieces of evidence. But the fact that they're all still there (and as Jay mentioned, it wasn't nessicary whether dumbledore had any intention of killing, the point was, he believed his arrogance to kill his sister) shows that it is still a likely possibility that dumbledore has a horcrux.
TheVidBros Official I just don't think it's within Dumbledore's character. Yes, he was arrogant as a young man, and that arrogance blinded him even to the point of being willing to sacrifice some people for the sake of the "greater good".
But remorse and self-blame came soon after Ariana had been killed and from the "canon" of HP books it seems that remorse and self-blame are not the kind of attitudes and feelings that lend themselves to the making of a horcrux. How would those feelings lead Dumbledore to making something that would help him to be "immortal"? I don't buy it one bit.
+TheVidBros Official (TVB) you don't just go around making horcruxes because you murdered someone. then everyone that commits murder would have one right? that's the logic he is using. dumbledore had no intention of creating one. not to mention the three of them fighting doesn't automatically mean they were "using dark magic". for all we know, a bookcase could have fallen on her. I'm guessing she just couldn't survive getting stunned or something. and you cant use voldemort trying to kill Harry as a baby as a reason. too much involved in that one, vold clearly wanting to commit murder and having the spell backfire, it's just too complicated of a scenario.
I love this theory! However I do believe (at least I hope) you got one thing wrong... Remember how hard it is to destroy a horcrux? - The object had to be damaged beyond physical or magical repair. Now in this theory the part of Dumbledore inside Harrys wand is destroyed after the attack in Godrics Hollow, but was it? - The wand was broken, yes, but the wand is not the horcrux, it's Fawkes feather inside of it! And it's clearly stated in the books that the only thing holding the wand together was the phoenix feather, the last piece of Dumbledore! This means there's still a part of Dumbledore alive inside of Harrys wand.
+Patrick Swenman Good point.
Also he got the whole point with Fawkes wrong
Because Fawkes is a phoenix, and those show a huge loyality to the humans they trust
And to trust a human they "just" need to see the absolute good, and Dumbledore came to this point after regretting Arianas Death
But it could be that there was never any part of Dumbledore's soul in the feathers in the first place. I mean, Fawkes burns his feathers off and regrows them every time he dies so it could be that the soul is only contained in the actual body of the bird. That messes up the theory a bit cos then Voldermort's wand wouldn't have a connection with Dumbledore, but it would fill the second plot hole.
I dunno, I was with all of it until then..although the idea of Harry and his wand being connectedto Dumbledore is great, just think if each of Nagini's scales had a piece of soul in them. Feathers and scales shed...well, molt.
Yeah but if the snake had bitten the wand or something like that the snake poison could have destroyed it or something like that
So, when is J.K writing a 7 book series on Dumbledore in his teens? PLEEEEEEEAAAAAASSSSSSSSSEEEEEEE!
joeli fische I would rather have a marauders book serie!
She's to busy with sjw politics. Probably trying to retcon harry being trans or having a secret lover relationship with Ron or something.
Rickard Rakkoon true
Um Fantastic Beasts
U know I think harry potter is the only franchise where I dont care how many sequels / prequels come out "just for the money" as long as Rowling writes them! (We r not talking abt garbage like cursed child).
She is a freaking genius writer and could make any series in that universe bomb!
The Dumbledore Family is special,
If anyone of them was in great need, a phoenix will come into him/her to give help.
Making a Horcrux doesn't mean killing only, you still have to perform different charms and cast some spells to split your soul and put it in an object, person, or what.
Ariana was killed way long before Fantastic Beast, at the latest Fantastic Beast, Fawkes is not yet around.
Creating a horcrux requires intent. Magic in the Potterverse is based on intent. Crucio needs you to want to cause pain. Even a small spell like accio needs visualization and determination. Creating a horcrux requires murder. The intent to kill. He did not intend to kill his crazy sis. In addition to to that , his soul is intact in the afterlife. The cure for a split soul is remorse. Dumbledaddy not only felt remorse but lived a life of atonement. Lastly the vessel for a horcrux needs to remain intact. Faux blows up periodically. Faux is a Phoenix. They do that. Often. bad container for your soul.
Voldemort created a horcrux without intent - when he tried to kill Harry, he made him his horcrux.
Usługi Budowlane but what about the remorse and the intact container?
I agree with you. I'm not trying to defend the theory of Dumbledore's horcrux, I think it's a bullshit. I just read that creating a horcrux without intent is impossible and I couldn't help correcting it .:)
Didn't Dumbledore die though? Oh and about that 'three' thing; it's the number 7 Rowling loves most:
7 years, books, horcruxes, players on a quidditch team, floors on hogwarts, weasley children. 7 is harry's quidditch number, there are 7 secret passages to hogsmeade, Hermione Jean Granger ( 7 syllables ) and Ron Bilius Weasley ( 7 syllables ), Voldemort tried to kill Harry 7 times, Nicholas Flamel is 7 years older than his wife, 7 is the number of lights Dumbledore put out, and lastly 7 snakes on the door to the Chamber of Secrets
Also, you said harry's wand horcrux was destroyed so Dumbledore could die, I think it's noteworthy that Harry's wand was destroyed AFTER the Astronomy tower event
...and 8 movies
seven DADA teachers, 7 required subjects
nekaana Dayum 👌🏽
7 and 3 are both very symbolic numbers in their own right. Safe to say she likes the symbolism of both?
This is an amazing Analysis.
dude ikr
Even if JK says no, it still makes sense.
+George Weilenmann I TOTALLY agree!
yeah definitely
This actually makes a lot of sense!
This would kind of explain why Dumbledore finds the magic that Voldemort used to hide his locket.
Start of the vid: PFFT!! Yeah right!!!
END IF THE VID: THIS HAS GOT TO BE TRUE!! 🤯🤯🤯🤯
I love this theory, and find it completely fitting with Dumbledore's character -- in that even Dumbledore acknowledged he had a dark past and, at one point, found Grindelwald's ideas intriguing. He ultimately rejected it, but it's wrong not to acknowledge that it was there.
This is so solid!
Oh, hey there Cody!
didn't expect to see you here
(^__^)
I-is that a pun?
+Cody'sLab The fact that you're watching these videos brings me joy. Love your channel bro.
+Cody'sLab why would voldemorts wand choose him cause tom riddle and dumbledore dont have a connection before this
Just realized rewatching this that Dumbledore being 'less of a man' would explain how he was able to care for Harry and still use him in a plan that would keep him alive just so he could die at the right moment. Even more reason I like Death of the Author.
We should revisit this after seeing Crimes of Grindlewald
According to J it's Grindenwald
Paxton Hunt According to the whole world it’s Grindelwald.
@@jumblemcpebbles8739 you completely missed the point of my comment
Paxton Hunt Then you completely made it unclear to me.
@@jumblemcpebbles8739 did you watch the video? J mispronounced Grindelwalds name multiple times
This is all a very good theory, but it has one flaw: even if Dumbledore did kill Ariana, remorse can mend the soul back together. And Dumbledore, as the video rightly states, felt quite a lot of it. Without his soul split, he would not be able to make a horcux.
+Bekah B That's discussed in this video. Also, remorse CAN mend the soul together, but it's not specifically stated that it always does. Plus, he could have made the horcux instantaneously like Voldy did with Harry
+PaleTurquoise12 harry isn't a Horcrux Jk Rowlings specifically stated this. she said no ritual or spell was done to create a horcrux so harry isn't one
I was hoping someone would have pointed this out. And you can heal your soul even once a horcrux or pseudo-horcrux has been created. So there would be nothing to stop Dumbledore from healing his soul.
It can be mended but when that part of the soul is "trapt" in a horcrux, wouldn't you need a spell to release that part in order to mend your soul again?
Erik Joosten No it Hermione specifically says mending the soul releases the soul
So then Dumbledore's Army and The Order of the Phoneix are technically the same name.
*Phoenix
By your logic Harry potter and prisoner of azkaban should be Tom riddle and prisoner of azkaban
Yup
The big problem is remorse is how one puts their soul back together. Dumbledore obviously felt a lot of it. His soul probably wasn't ripped.