The Sixth Horcrux and the Final Confrontation

by Jay Ortiz

Finally, we are faced with the task of identifying the sixth and most significant Horcrux. It is this object, more than any other, that has aroused speculation, debate and even passion among literally thousands of readers; and virtually everything mentioned anywhere in the first six books has been suggested, analyzed, defended or rejected as a possibility. In one sense, the intensity and uncertainty of the discussions are surprising, because Ms. Rowling appears to have given us more clues about this Horcrux than about any of the others; yet, those clues have been so cleverly planted that few if any readers have detected the manner in which they interrelate and reinforce each other, or the conclusion to which they seem inevitably to lead.

The following 8-part editorial, though lengthy, presents a unique analysis of this particular question, as well as what actually happened at Godric’s Hollow. Even though the topic of the sixth Horcrux has been frequently and imaginatively explored, very few, if any, analyses have been solely limited to the actual text of the Harry Potter books.

Interestingly, when approached in this manner, there appears to be an inevitability to the conclusions which were both exciting to discover and fascinating to analyze.


* * * * *


Table of Contents


A. “The Sixth Horcrux: A Relic of Gryffindor?”

Explores the likelihood that Voldemort’s sixth Horcrux is a relic of Gryffindor.


B. “Leading Theories: Textually Deficient?”

Eliminates popular theories based on speculation and wishful thinking, and encourages and demonstrates a more literal reading of the text.


C. Godric’’s Hollow: “Myth and Reality”

Presents an overview of what we believe we know about what occurred, but points out that virtually all our information is based on hearsay accounts by third parties who were not actually present.


D. Godric’’s Hollow: “What Really Happened?” and E. Godric’s Hollow: “Creation of a Horcrux?”

Sets forth what we have actually been told by the only two surviving eyewitnesses (Harry and Voldemort). Then, discusses why Voldemort stated he did not need to kill Lily Potter and why he regarded it as essential to deposit his seventh soul fragment in Harry.


F. Godric’’s Hollow: The Avada Kedavra Curse?

Establishes that Voldemort’s wand cast only two spells at Godric’’s Hollow, and that the one that killed Lily was not the Avada Kedavra.


G. Godric’’s Hollow: Failure of a Spell and H. A Seventh Horcrux?

Establishes what spell really killed Lily, maimed Harry, destroyed the house at Godric’s Hollow, and turned Voldemort into “Vapormort.” Then, suggests what else Dumbledore learned and anticipated about Voldemort and why he might have mislead Harry about Nagini.


I. Little Hangleton: “Restoration of a Soul”

Demonstrates that, at the Little Hangleton cemetery, Voldemort’’s “rebirth” included the restoration of the seventh fragment of his soul and created the only circumstance under which Harry could “vanquish” him.


J. “Subplots and Themes” and K. “The Final Confrontation”

Explores what the preceding discussion means for other widespread questions, including Snape’s loyalties and Dumbledore’s “gleam of triumph.” Then, based on what we already have learned, presents a possible ending that would preserve Harry’s “untarnished soul” and truly “vanquish” Voldemort.


* * * * *A Note about Notes
All references to the Harry Potter books in the endnotes (presented at the end of each section) are to the first American editions:

Rowling, J.K. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. (New York: Arthur A. Levine Books 1998) (“SS”);
Rowling, J.K. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. (New York: Arthur A. Levine Books 1999) (“COS”);
Rowling, J.K. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. (New York: Arthur A. Levine Books 1999)(“POA”);
Rowling, J.K. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. (New York: Arthur A. Levine Books 2000) (“GOF”);
Rowling, J.K. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. (New York: Arthur A. Levine Books 2003) (“OOTP”);
Rowling, J.K. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. (New York: Arthur A. Levine Books 2005) (“HBP”);
Rowling, J.K. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. (New York: Arthur A. Levine Books 2007) (“DH”).

There are, literally, thousands of Internet websites and postings which have explored virtually every conceivable aspect of – or theory about – the Harry Potter books. It would be impossible to review them all, but in view of their numbers and creativity, it is not unlikely that some of them may have proposed theories similar to the analyses set forth herein. This author has – except where specifically cited – not relied upon any of them for either inspiration or content. Where, however, the author is aware that general subject matter may have been discussed in such forums, the text makes reference to such discussions or theories. These references are intended to indicate that this author is aware that the general subject matter has been explored widely, but in no such case has the author specifically relied upon any source not set forth in these Notes.