One hypothesis is that it was actually Amelia Bones that torched her. When she believes Auror Bahry was killed seven months from retirement, she thinks “Someone would burn for this.” Perhaps she thought the same thing when, say, Lucius killed someone close to her (is her husband alive?).
I don’t know if we’re really supposed to read that much into it. But if we are, it stands to reason that Dumbledore might take the blame on Amelia’s behalf, since he would be equipped to defend himself physically and politically from Lucius’s onslaught, and since he didn’t have a daughter whose life to fear for.
Right you are. I hesitated when I wrote that, I even remember noticing myself hesitating, but then I wrote it anyway. Kind of embarrassing that it was right there in the very chapters we’re all talking about.
I can’t see how Dumbledore would defend Bones if she did that. I realize he’s a little more behind “for the greater good” than in canon, but if it really was as Draco described there’s no justification and Harry would take both Dumbledore and Amelia as his enemies.
Now, for story purposes I’m going to assume Draco and Lucius both told the truth and Dumbledore did claim to have killed Narcissa. With that presumption, I propose that Dumbledore helped to fake Narcissa’s death so she could join the light-side. Either that or Dumbledore was somehow blackmailed by another party. But Dumbledore said he doesn’t give into blackmail, so I find that unlikely.
I propose that Dumbledore helped to fake Narcissa’s death so she could join the light-side.
I’m not sure if Eliezer has read the sixth book, but Dumbledore makes this very offer to Draco:
“I can help you, Draco.”
“No, you can’t,” said Malfoy, his wand shaking very badly indeed. “Nobody can. He told me to do it or he’d kill me. I’ve got no choice.”
“He cannot kill you if you are already dead. Come over to the right side, Draco, and we can hide you more completely than you can possibly imagine.” (HBP, 591)
Dumbledore proceeds to offer protection to all of Malfoy’s family.
Daniel_Starr mentions below that Narcissa might be unwilling to leave her son with Lucius if she’s defecting. So there would have to be some pressing need to disappear in order for this theory to hold water; her life would have to be in danger, or something similar.
When Harry makes his promise with Draco, one of the conditions is that if Narcissa got her hands dirty, it wouldn’t make her murderer evil like it would if they were unprovoked. Well, if Lucius murdered Amelia’s husband or other loved one, she might kill Lucius’s loved one in enraged revenge, if she felt that she could not harm Lucius directly. That might be enough to put her on this side of Dumbledore’s moral event horizon.
But again, I don’t really subscribe to this theory. It’s just the only thing close to a legitimate hint that I’ve noticed or seen anyone else talk about.
“That depends,” Amelia said in a hard voice. “Are you here to help us catch criminals, or to protect them from the consequences of their actions?” Are you going to try to stop the killer of my brother from getting her well-deserved Kiss, old meddler? From what Amelia heard, Dumbledore had gotten smarter toward the end of the war, mostly due to Mad-Eye’s nonstop nagging; but had relapsed into his foolish mercies the instant Voldemort’s body was found.
Whoa! How did I miss that!? That certainly gives this theory a lot more credence! It also makes it a little more plausible that Amelia thought she couldn’t directly attack the one she wished to take revenge on.
Maybe I subscribe to this theory after all. The “burn” line alone isn’t that strong of evidence, but two hints in that kind of proximity to each other is too much of a coincidence to ignore.
I was referring to when he described to Harry how he didn’t give in when Voldemort took hostages. If Voldemort couldn’t blackmail him, I doubt anyone could.
Dumbledore faking Narcissa’s death: problem is this involves Narcissa leaving behind her son.
Dumbledore covering for someone else: who’d want to be covered for?
Rule of drama and crime: start with people known connected to Narcissa. Who’s connected, besides Draco?
Lucius. Could Lucius have killed Narcissa and gotten Dumbledore to take the fall in exchange for some unknown favor or threat? Sure. So that’s one option.
Who else do we know, besides Draco and Lucuius, who were connected to Narcissa?
I don’t have a clue why Dumbledore would be involved in this case, but… Bellatrix is Narcissa’s sister. And it occurs to me that a) Bella would be perfectly capable of burning her sister to death for basically any reason at all and b) Harry would be extremely reluctant to destroy her even if he knew she did it.
Oh, thank you, that’s it, that’s the answer: Bellatrix is Narcissa’s sister, and of course Lucius would be more comfortable blaming Dumbledore than Bellatrix, not only for family reasons but for fear of Voldemort.
Plus, consider the Law of Dramatic Efficiency: Bellatrix is one of the few people we’ve met who would fully trigger Harry’s oath (to take Narcissa’s killer as an enemy) yet Harry wouldn’t want to kill. Because Bellatrix wasn’t “tricked” into killing Narcissa. Brainwashed, yes, but not tricked.
Bellatrix meets all the conditions for Narcissa’s killer:
If it’s not Dumbledore, it has to be someone Lucius would rather not name to Draco.
Bellatrix: sister-in-law and Voldemort’s chief lieutenant.
It has to be someone Lucius has been in no position to take revenge on in the intervening years.
Bellatrix: in Azkaban.
It ought, dramatically, to be someone within the oath yet very uncomfortable for Harry to go after.
Bellatrix: in Harry’s mind, brainwashed into her evil, but not tricked into the murder of Narcissa.
So Bellatrix fits perfectly. Lucius blames Dumbledore, knowing Draco won’t trust Dumbledore claiming the contrary, and knowing how dangerous it would be for Draco to go after Bellatrix—or for Draco not to accept Bellatrix as an ally, if Voldemort returns.
Lucius lied about the killer so that Draco wouldn’t want revenge on someone so unsafe to want revenge on.
Voldemort himself is another one Lucius would lie to Draco about, but Voldemort would probably not have burned Narcissa alive, and it doesn’t have the storytelling punch, because Harry has far less problem taking Voldemort as an enemy than Bellatrix.
So I think you’ve got it. It’s Bellatrix, and Lucius lied about it to keep his son from a dangerous revenge, and Harry will have a huge problem once he finds out.
Oh, I just realized—this makes Lucius’ reaction to Harrymort make much more sense. Previously I was confused as to why he wasn’t either ingratiating or fearful, but instead was all “my son is the last worthwhile thing I have in the world” complete with threats of vengeance. Of course he would react like that if this had happened.
It’s a very nice theory, but Dumbledore’s (and the other characters’) reactions to Lucius proposing the deal don’t quite seem to match. Lucius also seems sincere about considering it a real blood debt from Dumbledore comparable to an attempt on his son, I don’t think he’s a high-level enough player to have even the narrator not mention anything suspicious about it if he were faking it.
One hypothesis is that it was actually Amelia Bones that torched her. When she believes Auror Bahry was killed seven months from retirement, she thinks “Someone would burn for this.” Perhaps she thought the same thing when, say, Lucius killed someone close to her (is her husband alive?).
I don’t know if we’re really supposed to read that much into it. But if we are, it stands to reason that Dumbledore might take the blame on Amelia’s behalf, since he would be equipped to defend himself physically and politically from Lucius’s onslaught, and since he didn’t have a daughter whose life to fear for.
Susan is Amelia’s niece, not daughter. She might not have ever married, canon doesn’t say. (Bones is her maiden name, though.)
ETA: No, I’m sorry, grand-niece:
Right you are. I hesitated when I wrote that, I even remember noticing myself hesitating, but then I wrote it anyway. Kind of embarrassing that it was right there in the very chapters we’re all talking about.
I can’t see how Dumbledore would defend Bones if she did that. I realize he’s a little more behind “for the greater good” than in canon, but if it really was as Draco described there’s no justification and Harry would take both Dumbledore and Amelia as his enemies.
Now, for story purposes I’m going to assume Draco and Lucius both told the truth and Dumbledore did claim to have killed Narcissa. With that presumption, I propose that Dumbledore helped to fake Narcissa’s death so she could join the light-side. Either that or Dumbledore was somehow blackmailed by another party. But Dumbledore said he doesn’t give into blackmail, so I find that unlikely.
I’m not sure if Eliezer has read the sixth book, but Dumbledore makes this very offer to Draco:
Dumbledore proceeds to offer protection to all of Malfoy’s family.
Daniel_Starr mentions below that Narcissa might be unwilling to leave her son with Lucius if she’s defecting. So there would have to be some pressing need to disappear in order for this theory to hold water; her life would have to be in danger, or something similar.
When Harry makes his promise with Draco, one of the conditions is that if Narcissa got her hands dirty, it wouldn’t make her murderer evil like it would if they were unprovoked. Well, if Lucius murdered Amelia’s husband or other loved one, she might kill Lucius’s loved one in enraged revenge, if she felt that she could not harm Lucius directly. That might be enough to put her on this side of Dumbledore’s moral event horizon.
But again, I don’t really subscribe to this theory. It’s just the only thing close to a legitimate hint that I’ve noticed or seen anyone else talk about.
Close, but no cigar:
Narcissa’s sister murdered Amelia’s brother.
Whoa! How did I miss that!? That certainly gives this theory a lot more credence! It also makes it a little more plausible that Amelia thought she couldn’t directly attack the one she wished to take revenge on.
Maybe I subscribe to this theory after all. The “burn” line alone isn’t that strong of evidence, but two hints in that kind of proximity to each other is too much of a coincidence to ignore.
Why would anyone admit to giving in to blackmail?
I was referring to when he described to Harry how he didn’t give in when Voldemort took hostages. If Voldemort couldn’t blackmail him, I doubt anyone could.
Dumbledore faking Narcissa’s death: problem is this involves Narcissa leaving behind her son.
Dumbledore covering for someone else: who’d want to be covered for?
Rule of drama and crime: start with people known connected to Narcissa. Who’s connected, besides Draco?
Lucius. Could Lucius have killed Narcissa and gotten Dumbledore to take the fall in exchange for some unknown favor or threat? Sure. So that’s one option.
Who else do we know, besides Draco and Lucuius, who were connected to Narcissa?
I don’t have a clue why Dumbledore would be involved in this case, but… Bellatrix is Narcissa’s sister. And it occurs to me that a) Bella would be perfectly capable of burning her sister to death for basically any reason at all and b) Harry would be extremely reluctant to destroy her even if he knew she did it.
Oh, thank you, that’s it, that’s the answer: Bellatrix is Narcissa’s sister, and of course Lucius would be more comfortable blaming Dumbledore than Bellatrix, not only for family reasons but for fear of Voldemort.
Plus, consider the Law of Dramatic Efficiency: Bellatrix is one of the few people we’ve met who would fully trigger Harry’s oath (to take Narcissa’s killer as an enemy) yet Harry wouldn’t want to kill. Because Bellatrix wasn’t “tricked” into killing Narcissa. Brainwashed, yes, but not tricked.
Bellatrix meets all the conditions for Narcissa’s killer:
If it’s not Dumbledore, it has to be someone Lucius would rather not name to Draco. Bellatrix: sister-in-law and Voldemort’s chief lieutenant.
It has to be someone Lucius has been in no position to take revenge on in the intervening years. Bellatrix: in Azkaban.
It ought, dramatically, to be someone within the oath yet very uncomfortable for Harry to go after. Bellatrix: in Harry’s mind, brainwashed into her evil, but not tricked into the murder of Narcissa.
So Bellatrix fits perfectly. Lucius blames Dumbledore, knowing Draco won’t trust Dumbledore claiming the contrary, and knowing how dangerous it would be for Draco to go after Bellatrix—or for Draco not to accept Bellatrix as an ally, if Voldemort returns.
Lucius lied about the killer so that Draco wouldn’t want revenge on someone so unsafe to want revenge on.
Voldemort himself is another one Lucius would lie to Draco about, but Voldemort would probably not have burned Narcissa alive, and it doesn’t have the storytelling punch, because Harry has far less problem taking Voldemort as an enemy than Bellatrix.
So I think you’ve got it. It’s Bellatrix, and Lucius lied about it to keep his son from a dangerous revenge, and Harry will have a huge problem once he finds out.
If this is true, I’m looking forward to the inevitable Draco+Neville team-up.
Oh, I just realized—this makes Lucius’ reaction to Harrymort make much more sense. Previously I was confused as to why he wasn’t either ingratiating or fearful, but instead was all “my son is the last worthwhile thing I have in the world” complete with threats of vengeance. Of course he would react like that if this had happened.
It’s a very nice theory, but Dumbledore’s (and the other characters’) reactions to Lucius proposing the deal don’t quite seem to match. Lucius also seems sincere about considering it a real blood debt from Dumbledore comparable to an attempt on his son, I don’t think he’s a high-level enough player to have even the narrator not mention anything suspicious about it if he were faking it.
This fits very well. Nice job!