![[info]](https://www.insanejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
We all remember the great Snape debates before DH came out. About where his loyalties were as of the end of HBP, when they changed if ever, how many times they changed. I think we agree that DH settled this question (even if we don't know the exact time-point we know which events triggered the turning points in his path). Another question was how far he went as Death Eater. After DH the consensus in this forum seems to be that canon suggests either at that he did not go as far as killing, or that if he did he fully repented for such killings and healed his soul to the extent that is possible. It is clear from canon that whatever he was as a Death Eater, the man we see during Harry's Hogwarts years is a man with a strong conscience, with a clear view of right and wrong (despite having to act on the edge due to his role as a spy), who does not make light of having to commit harmful acts for a long-term beneficial goal.
But even without ever killing anyone directly, with his own hand/wand, there is much he could have done. The most obvious is the brewing of poisons and other harmful potions that were then administered to innocent victims by others. Then there is the invention of new harmful, potentially lethal spells, and teaching such spells to other DEs, thus resulting in injuries and deaths among their victims. I think the worst I have seen in fanfics is Mengele!Snape - Snape in his DE days using captives (mostly Muggles) to test properties of newly invented potions. Some scenarios get extremely gruesome, with a team of DEs at Snape's command cutting through a still living victim so that Snape could observe damage to internal organs as it took place.
So my question is, would knowing something like that change anything in your attitude to Severus Snape? Is his complete repentance enough for you as a reader to disregard anything, however cruel, he may have done in his dark period, or would the thought that this was a man who may have been capable of such horrors disturb you enough to feel you cannot forgive him completely? Do you think a man who had commited such actions is capable of abandoning them for good or would he always be at risk of backsliding?
But even without ever killing anyone directly, with his own hand/wand, there is much he could have done. The most obvious is the brewing of poisons and other harmful potions that were then administered to innocent victims by others. Then there is the invention of new harmful, potentially lethal spells, and teaching such spells to other DEs, thus resulting in injuries and deaths among their victims. I think the worst I have seen in fanfics is Mengele!Snape - Snape in his DE days using captives (mostly Muggles) to test properties of newly invented potions. Some scenarios get extremely gruesome, with a team of DEs at Snape's command cutting through a still living victim so that Snape could observe damage to internal organs as it took place.
So my question is, would knowing something like that change anything in your attitude to Severus Snape? Is his complete repentance enough for you as a reader to disregard anything, however cruel, he may have done in his dark period, or would the thought that this was a man who may have been capable of such horrors disturb you enough to feel you cannot forgive him completely? Do you think a man who had commited such actions is capable of abandoning them for good or would he always be at risk of backsliding?
Re: First War, part 2
Good point. Okay, let's assume he intended to finish school. If he was born between January and August 1961, he would have started Hogwarts in September 1972 and finished in June 1979. If he was born between September and December 1961, he would have started Hogwarts in September 1973 and been slated to finish in June 1980, and obviously not made it (he would have died either during the second or third terms of sixth year, the summer, or the first term of seventh year).
Putting it that way, I think one or the other of them would have remarked on it if Regulus had died while still going to school. So I think it's likely he had to die post-finishing (i.e. past June 1979), or he had dropped out at some earlier point. If we assume that he did not drop out, then that means his birthday has to be before August 31, or he would have died while still going to school.
In my imagination Regulus took the mark on or shortly after his 17th birthday which is the earliest time he could have done it without risking to disappoint his mother and continued school.
Kreacher tells us he was 16 when he joined. It might have been shortly before his 17th birthday, but not after.
Actually Voldemort had no need for half-trained wizards
Define "half-trained". At best Regulus had finished sixth year at the time. There's no way he can have finished seventh year as well.
Re: First War, part 2
You're right, I missed that Kreacher gave the exact age; it's been over a year since I've read the book.
'Half-trained'in the meaning of a school drop-out who e.g. can't apparate. If he continued school he's 'in training', not ready for full time service, but his name looks prestigious on the list. Joining at sixteen is more of a formal statement of alliance. Regulus enthusiasm about Voldemort's request for Kreacher may be a hint that this was actually the first time he could be of real use which would also explain his ignorance about Voldemort's cruelty.
I have wondered about how much Walpurga knew; I think it's possible that she believed to her dying day that the OotP was involved in Regulus' disappearance and death. The Death Eaters knew they haven't killed him and probably told her. If he had run into aurors, the manner of his death had been public. This leaves only the Order as suspects or some weird accident. Her last years must have been horrible, one son presumably killed by the Order and later the other abandoned by the same Order to imprisonment in Azkaban. As a mother she knew her older son well enough to be sure that he never changed sides.
Re: First War, part 2
That's an interesting point.
Her last years must have been horrible, one son presumably killed by the Order and later the other abandoned by the same Order to imprisonment in Azkaban.
And according to the drawing of the tree, her husband Orion also died in 1979, same as Regulus (a coincidence which has had me wondering exactly why Orion died -- 50 years is rather young for a wizard; was it violent? sudden illness? what?). 1975/76 (depending on when Sirius's sixteenth birthday was -- although if with our reasoning here we really have narrowed Regulus's birthday to Jan-Aug 1961, Sirius is more likely to have an autumn 1959 birthday I think) to 1985 must really have been some hell for her. No wonder she went insane.
Re: First War, part 2
What I'm saying is that it is possible Walburga heard from Bellatrix that Regulus had defected and was killed on Voldemort's order.
Re: First War, part 2
Unlikely, because Kreacher firmly believed Regulus died loyal to the Dark Lord, so Walpurga in all those years never hinted at the possibility of a defection or disappointment about Regulus. She kept up the legend of her brave little hero in front of Kreacher.
During the 'short while' between Kreacher's return from the cave and Regulus death Voldemort might have suspected defection, but when he suddenly died, the only logical assumption is he was killed by the enemy or in doing something stupid to impress his master. Regulus may be one of the 'three dead in my service' Voldemort mentioned in GoF, Rosier, Wilkes and ? .
Sirius' conclusion is also perfectly logical from the opposite POV. Regulus disappeared, neither the Order or the aurors were involved, he was a soft idiot likely to chicken out, so it must have been Voldemort or one of his Death Eaters.
Regulus left his farewell note in the cave, pointless, if his defection was already known.
Re: First War, part 2
Huh? He was a direct witness to Regulus's betrayal. Unless you suppose Kreacher thinks Regulus ordering him to destroy the locket was also Voldemort's idea (?!) ?
Re: First War, part 2
Re: First War, part 2
Re: First War, part 2
Regulus may be one of the 'three dead in my service' Voldemort mentioned in GoF, Rosier, Wilkes and ?
I used to think so too, but changed my mind. Voldemort was planning to be immortal, but had no intention of sharing immortality with his followers. Leaving spots of dead followers empty for ever is bad policy in the long term - it would have emphasized to the DEs that they were mortal while their master wasn't. So at the very least I would expect him to use the empty spots as places for new recruits when he could. I also find it unreasonable that with a Ministry policy of shoot to kill before asking questions Rosier and Wilkes were the only ones killed by Aurors. Also, Sirius mentions other deaths in Azkaban (besides Barty, who was actually his sick mother) - "Most go mad in there, and plenty stop eating in the end. They lose the will to live. You could always tell when a death was coming, because the dementors could sense it, they got excited."
I think that after Regulus died in 1979 his place in the circle was given to some new recruit in 1980 or 1981, maybe even young Barty (if so then Regulus' original place may have been next to Severus'). Since all the way to the end the belief in the Wizarding World was that Voldemort was winning it should have been easy to find willing recruits to fill the gaps. The circle in GOF should have had 30+ DEs and places for 10 Azkaban prisoners, 3 absentees (Igor, Severus and Barty) and IMO more than 3 spots for DEs that died after the last recruitment effort (summer 1981). I don't know how many gaps there can be in such a circle with it still appearing as a circle.