View Full Version : The other Necklace ...
I'm not 100% sure on that being the locket you know ... I think it is fav thou ...
As obvious as it is - would suggest it isnt the one - but I like the one that was Merope's, was spotted by Hermione in Spinner's End ... used by Rosemata/Draco later to attack Katie Bell ... I was saving this for a thread but you forced my hand ...
When Katie touched it - read how she reacted .... sounds a bit like later on and another possible horcrux location :p
Could help put the B in RAB as well ;) :D
I hate to disagree, Blaise, but I found something INTERESTING in my current read of CoS. When Harry visits Borgin and Burkes (chapter 4, page 52 US Paperback):
Draco paused to examine a long coil of hangman's rope and to read, smirking, the card propped on a magnificent necklace of opals, Caution: Do Not Touch. Cursed -- Has Claimed the Lives of Nineteen Muggle Owners to Date
If you remember the chapter in HBP, it was called Silver and Opals. It was described, thus (page 250 US)
An ornate opal necklace was visible, poking out of the paper.
And Harry remembered it from B&B. Coincidentally, Hermione had asked about the same one when she followed Draco in earlier that book.
OR am I misinterpreting your post?
As you will see from both these posts in the Jumper thread - could it be that the Necklace Horcrux was and still in right under the noses of the Dumbledore and Harry?
Many believe the necklace Ginny finds in Sirius house (OoTP) to be the possible missing necklace- but taking the above into consideration ... thoughts please? :D
NICE ONE halliemei for the awesome follow up!
Fortescue
26-08-2005, 13:05
The necklace in B & Bs was a completely different kind of necklace. The one in Grimmauld Place was described as being a heavy locket and had a snake on it, whereas the one on the island Harry noticed immediately when he picked it up from beside Dumbledore's dead body that it was not as large or fancy as the one Harry saw in the Pensieve memory. (I don't have the exact wording but he did say he realized it wasn't the same one.)
The necklace in B&B had a completely different description. That's not to say that because of the curses already in place on the necklace that Voldemort might not have put a bit of his soul into the necklace when he worked at the shop. He probably would have thought it an honor to put a bit of his soul in something that had killed nineteen Muggles, and he would believe the necklace was safe as who ever touched it would immediately die.
OK - let me clear up my initial post here ...
What I was suggesting was that much of the community felt the Horcrux necklace was the one in OoTP and Sirius house ..
What I was suggesting - as much as it seemed obvious - and as such would suggest it wasnt - but the other necklace - sold by Merope, bought by B&B's - Saw by Hermione in Draco's Detour - was later used by Draco to try and kill Dumbledore - but in fact fell into the hands of Katie Bell - which was then passed to Filch?
What I was initially suggesting was perhaps this was the real Horcrux necklace ...
What made it even better was the post from halliemei - that seemed to add more weight ...
Forte - are you suggesting that it isnt Morope's necklace or what - I am a little confused.
The reason I liked halliemei post so much was because 19 people had died while touching it - suggesting that could be a protection :p
Fortescue
26-08-2005, 13:46
The necklace Morope sold to Burke was the Slytherin necklace.
Lord Voldemort's Request - HBP, pg 437
"I think you'll like this even more, Tom," she whispered. "Lean in a little, dear boy, so you can see . . . Of course, Burke knows I've got this one, I bought it from him, and I daresay he'd love to get it back when I'm gone. . . "
She slid back the fine filigree clasp and flipped open the box. There upon the smooth crimson velvet lay a heavy golden locket.
Voldemort reached out his hand, without invitation this time, and held it up to the light, staring at it.
"Slytherin's mark," he said quietly, as the light played upon an ornate, serpentine S.
"That's right!" said Hepzibah, delighted, apparently, at the sight of Voldemort gazing at her locket, transfixed. "I had to pay an arm and a leg for it, but I couldn't let it pass, not a real treasure like that, had to have it for my collection. Burke bought it, apparently, from a ragged-looking woman who seemed to have stolen it, but had no idea of its true value -"
Morope sold the locket to Burke and Hepzibah bought it for her collection. Voldemort killed her and took the Hufflepuff cup and the necklace, then quit his job at the shop and disappeared. The necklace that Draco purchased that injured Katie Bell was a different necklace that Burke once had on display in his shop.
What I said before was that it would seem like such a dark and dangerous necklace as the one that injured Katie Bell would also be looked upon as a good and powerful item for Voldemort to hide a bit of his soul in simply because of what it could do to anyone who touched it and how many Muggles it had killed.
It supports my theory for Voldemort to have had something to do with the necklace Katie had.
I think though that the Horcrux is in the Slytherin locket that Hepzibah had.
The necklace Katie had wasn't a locket was? It was opal...
I am actually confused about the necklaces now.
Was the locket found at Sirius' house the Slytherin locket? Because that is the one I believe the Horcrux is in.
Oooh...here in Aus, it is thought to be bad luck to wear opals as jewellery....i don't know anyone who actually cares, though. I am sure Katie would appreciate that though.
Snuffles
26-08-2005, 16:04
Hm. :cool:
Let me rearrange the facts. ;)
There are: the "necklace" and the "locket."
The "locket," as far as we know, is Hufflepuff's, and is very likely to be a Horcrux.
The "locket" was golden, and had a serpentine shape.
The "necklace" was silver and opal.
The "necklace" was what got sent to Dumbledore, but accidentally intercepted by Katie Bell.
What seemed like a "golden locket with serpentine shape" was found, earlier on, in Grimmauld Place.
That makes it suspiciously to sound like the locket from the Grimmauld Place was THE locket, as many people believe, but.. that makes it too simple. When has JKR ever made anything simple? :p
The "necklace," if ever a horcurx, would also imply that Dumbledore was wrong about Voldemort making Hufflepuff's locket one of his Horcrux....
This is my point - a necklace is just that - the same as a locket - there is nothing to suggest that they arent both the same - a necklace can have a locket - the locket is just the part that sits at the frount of the neck near the middle ...
I assume then as I do know that the locket and the necklace are indeed one item - just reffered to in different ways to confuse maybe - a locket is usually found on a necklace :p
Also - Tom putting his Horcrux on especially powerful objects - that would be the Slytherin locket and also something that belonged to Riddle's Mum.
I have to disagree. I think that the necklaces are different.
Just to be nitpicky, you don't usually have a locket on a necklace with other jewels like opals. Lockets are usually on single chains with no other things around them.
Also, I just don't think it would have escaped someone's notice if Slytherin's locket was just resting there right in the middle of a bunch of opals. First, the necklace would have looked very odd with a locket in the middle of the jewels, and then you'd just hope that it wouldn't have gone without being inspected.
The opal necklace has been mentioned before in the books - when Harry ends up in B&B while using Floo powder for the first time . . . that's also when Draco finds out that it killed so many Muggles - he may have thought that would be a good alternative to actually going up to Dumbledore and killing him - to just use the necklace as intermediary.
As for it being obvious that the locket is the one at Grimmauld Place, I'd like to know how many people actually thought of that on their own . . . If they did, that's incredible. I happened to stumble across it looking up something else, but to actually remember a small detail like that that was lumped in with a whole bunch of other items found is pretty incredible. I'd have to think that most people who are embracing that theory are doing so because someone else pointed it out . . . I really didn't think it was that obvious at all. Of course, maybe that's just because I personally didn't notice it, but I just can't imagine that so many other people did take note of it. I think it was a cleverly hidden mention by JKR.
.. you know in the UK they have a term for that - it is called stroppy - it means moody ;)
:rolleyes: No-one was suggesting it was a 'gimmie' Boing - what I was suggesting was since that comment made it onto the board many people have subsequently nailed it as the one Harry needs to find - so chill and stop being so defensive :rolleyes:
Clever - you want to see clever huh ....
I hate to disagree, Blaise, but I found something INTERESTING in my current read of CoS. When Harry visits Borgin and Burkes (chapter 4, page 52 US Paperback):
Draco paused to examine a long coil of hangman's rope and to read, smirking, the card propped on a magnificent necklace of opals, Caution: Do Not Touch. Cursed -- Has Claimed the Lives of Nineteen Muggle Owners to Date
If you remember the chapter in HBP, it was called Silver and Opals. It was described, thus (page 250 US)
An ornate opal necklace was visible, poking out of the paper.
And Harry remembered it from B&B. Coincidentally, Hermione had asked about the same one when she followed Draco in earlier that book.
That is JKR class clever to have a major clue span 2 books and even name a chapter after it ;)
Fortescue
27-08-2005, 15:55
I'm sure the cursed necklace that ended up with Katie Bell was taken to Dumbledore after Snape was through with it. Dumbledore would have know if it was a Slytherin object - he would have tested the curse to see if there was anything else hidden there, like a soul bit maybe :rolleyes:
Blaise, that's exactly what I am saying!! :D When I said that the necklace was mentioned in CoS, that's the part I was talking about - when Harry is hiding in the Vanishing Cabinet (which, btw, was also brought back in this book . .. ) . . . at any rate, I was not implying that JKR wasn't clever, merely that we aren't as clever as she is! :p
It was exactly my point that JKR is very clever and throws things into random places and we just overlook them or take little note of them and then they come back - and I think that the locket in Grimmauld Place is one of those things that she quite cleverly put in there. I was defending JKR by trying to say that some people might say it is quite obvious now that we can go back and examine every word she has put to paper, but that I didn't think it was an obvious connection at all to make.
Does that make sense? It sounds like we are in agreement that JKR is quite clever, but are just disagreeing over whether or not the opal necklace is the same as the locket. And I'm sure when Book 7 comes out, we'll find out that you are right as always, but I'll still hold my ground until then . . . :p
BTW, saw what you said in shoutbox and you know that's not the way I meant the other post!!! :p I didn't even remember about the locket in the first place and only found it by accident - I really just meant that it seems that because people are widely accepting the locket at Grimmauld Place to be the same as the horcrux, others are then saying it was too obvious. I was just trying to point out how much smarter JKR is than me . . . :p
I'm sure the cursed necklace that ended up with Katie Bell was taken to Dumbledore after Snape was through with it. Dumbledore would have know if it was a Slytherin object - he would have tested the curse to see if there was anything else hidden there, like a soul bit maybe :rolleyes:
Last news on that necklace was ...
"Take this necklace to Professor Snape at once, but be sure not to touch it, keep it wrapped in the scarf!"
That was McGonagall to Filch - we have to assume it may have got as far as Snape - but no mention of it getting to Dumbledore :p
I'm not giving up hope here - the fact that the necklace kills on contact suggests that it displays more characteristics than something shoved in a drawer ;)
vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.