Blood of the bystander doesn't have the same ring to it.

There was no sacrifice to give blood protection; Nathan survived by a combination of incredible luck and the prophecy.

 

You don't necessarily need to attack someone directly to be their enemy. Voldemort didn't help Harry of the goodness of his heart, he wanted a good follower at best, and a wedge driven in Potters' family at worst.

 

If Voldemort considered Harry a potential enemy he wouldn't have encouraged his leave to Durmstrang. Nathan is the only Potter twin that can be used as the enemy ingredient in the ritual at this time. Harry will only become eligible when/if he fights Voldemort at the final task.

 

Actually, I think Harry's blood could very well be used in the ritual as blood of the enemy. I say this because Lilly and James Potter are most definitely enemies of Voldemort considering the thrice defying him part in the prophecy. Since Harry and Nathan are both the sons of James and Lilly, the two boys would have their parents blood, hence making either eligible for the ritual for that fact alone. It could technically be said that the Potter family as a whole is the enemy of Voldemort.

 

I think it's more that the enemy in the ritual needs to be considered as such by the one being revived. If you only needed to consider Voldemort to be an enemy then most of Hogwarts would be eligible, there'd be no reason to trick the goblet. Cedric Diggory would work.

I don't doubt it will be Nathan that is entered, he's the one marked as Voldemorts equal.

 

Many of you forgot that Dumbledore has Marauder's map. I want to see how Santi plays this.

 

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

Oh Narureye, how I hate you.

 

Great story!

What a wonderfully written story. I can't wait to see what happens next.

 

It is mentioned every time Voldemort's resurrection is discussed.

Which is the last time it could matter I think. The first being the end of Nathan's first year, which as far as I can tell has had no effect on this story versus canon.

Even with the Resurrection it could have little effect, as someone has pointed out, Voldemort would love the symbolism of using Nathan for it.

Fifth year on Harry's status as a horcrux had more an effect on canon than Lily's sacrifice. And Nathan looks to be a horcrux in this story as well.

 

Dumbledore dispatched Quirrellmort and Nathan did not use sacrificial protection like Harry did in canon.

 

I worded that wrong, it has had no lasting effect on this story versus canon.

 

What would happen if the hallows cloak is used to hide from the Maraudar's Map? From what I believe to should hide the owner from being discovered in the map.....

 

The Cloak should do a lot of things in theory that it didn't do in canon until book 7.

 

Aren't the Hallows a retcon? Is there any evidence they existed before book 7 was written?

 

Many would argue otherwise, but that's what I believe as well. Too many things can see through Harry's cloak prior to book 7 - Dumbledore, Moody, the Map, etc.

 

I'm not sure there was ever any attempt to say that the Peverell cloak could hide you from everything, even after the Hallows revelation of book 7. It's considered "perfect" because it's gone through the years without the usual fading or wear-and-tear, and it also seems immune to being damaged by spells passing through it. And it can't be summoned (possibly another aspect of the same attribute that keeps it safe from spell damage).

But it's never worked against every magical detection method, and it's never blocked spellfire from hitting a person wearing the cloak. Dumbledore himself said that he never saw a need for the cloak, because he could "conceal [himself] well enough" without it. If the cloak offered superior - let alone perfect - concealment or protection, he might have been more interested.

edit: Actually, looking back at the text, the legend of the Peverell cloak, as told by Lovegood, claims that it grants "constant and impenetrable concealment, no matter what spells are cast at it." Perhaps that's just an exaggeration, just as the Elder Wand is said to be unbeatable.

 

I definitely agree with the idea that the legend could easily become misconstrued and embellished, but I do think it was a bit strange for Rowling to throw that in when we know it isn't true.

However, Lovegood seems to know his shit when it comes to the Hallows, and he is pretty specific that the cloak cannot be detected. With the Elder Wand it's easy for "really strong" to turn into "unbeatable", but the idea that the invisibility cloak isn't detectable has to come from somewhere, right?

It just seems like another one of Rowling's half baked retcons, to be honest.

 

Taure will probably have to weigh in and keep me honest on canon, but in the examples above at least, it seems feasible to remove inconsistency by assuming that only things enchanted by the Elder Wand can detect items hidden by the cloak Hallow. In other words, it takes a Hallow to beat a Hallow: Dumbledore would have used the wand to cast the spells to detect Harry under his cloak. He could have enchanted Moody's eye with the Elder Wand. (Said eye was apparently so special that Umbridge saw fit to mount it on her door in DH). He could have had a behind-the-scenes, not-directly-stated-in-canon role in helping create the Marauder's Map.

I like how in between chapters The Santi's story thread has become the DLP canon thread.