Professor Quirrell closed his eyes. His head leaned back into the pillow. “You were lucky,” the Defense Professor said in a soft voice, “that a unicorn in Transfigured form… did not set off the Hogwarts wards, as a strange creature… I shall have to… take this outside the grounds, to make use of it… but that can be managed. I shall tell them that I wish to look upon the lake… I will ask you to sustain the Transfiguration before you go, and it should last long enough, after that… and with my last strength, dispel whatever death-alarms were placed to watch over the herd… which, the unicorn being not yet dead, but only Transfigured, will not yet have triggered… you were very lucky, Mr. Potter.”
This is how the troll was smuggled into Hogwarts without the wards going off. In all likelihood, Quirrell had the transfigured troll on his person when Dumbledore identified to the Hogwarts wards “The Defense Professor stands within this circle”. Trolls self-transfigure as a form of regeneration, so the transfiguration would not kill the troll or be detectable.
Ok. In that case, Quirrell can be hiding on his person or in some magical ‘all-holding invisible pocket’ an army of trolls, or anything he thinks would be better suited for attack (transfigured wizards?), and Dumbledore is ultimately doomed.
I would take you up on that, but in my memory palace one of the walls is occupied by a large chalkboard covered with lines of “I will not underestimate Eliezer Yudkowsky”.
I’m not picky on definitions. “The entity Hermione called ‘Mister Incredibly Suspicious Person’ has Baba Yaga’s memories.” That definition is looser than it needs to be, but I’m giving you generous odds.
Resolution would be informal, with us PMing payment instructions to each other. The payment information I would send you would be cheap, non-sketchy, and anonymous for me. We might agree to call the bet off by February 28th 2014 if the bet is not resolved by then. If there’s somehow a definitional dispute, we work it out, possibly with someone else on the forum arbitrating. Default option is to cancel the bet.
If I lose the bet I will laugh it off. You probably should not accept unless you would do the same.
I think the most likely scenario is that we’ll hear no more about either of them. So I want to win that case; if the two are unrelated then I doubt we’ll hear anything explicit to that effect.
Rather than worry about what’s “cheap” let’s just say the loser pays $50 gross, any payment fees or the like can come out of the winnings. And I’ll stipulate that anything bitcoiny qualifies as sketchy.
And yeah, $50 is an amount that I can comfortably toss for online entertainment without checking my bank balance.
How about this stipulation: if the name Baba Yaga does not appear in the book again, and Eliezer Yudkowsky does not Word of God that Mr. Hat & Cloak is Baba Yaga, you win. I’m expecting Baba Yaga to be important, and if she’s not mentioned again or only mentioned offhandedly I will likely concede.
The latest progress report suggests that chapters will resume in February, so the story might not finish until March. Extend the bet’s expiration date to March 31st, 2015?
The latest progress report suggest that chapters will resume in February, so the story might not finish until March. Extend the bet’s expiration date to March 31st, 2015?
Are you betting that in a future chapter of HPMOR there will the explicit statement that Mr. Hat & Cloak is Baba Yaga? What happens to the bet if HPMOR ends without it being revealed who Mr.Hat&Cloak happens to be?
If I lose the bet I will laugh it off. You probably should not accept unless you would do the same.
What happens to the bet if HPMOR ends without it being revealed who Mr.Hat&Cloak happens to be?
I think Yudkowsky is enough of a non-asshole that if that’s the case, he’ll consent to say whether Baba Yaga had anything to do with Hat & Cloak. Remember, he endorses betting on beliefs.
No, I am up for betting. If unforeseen plot developments make the resolution of the bet unclear, I want determining the winner to be casual and non-adversarial. I will not argue technicalities even if they could cause me to win.
What happens to the bet if HPMOR ends without it being revealed who Mr.Hat & Cloak happens to be?
That really depends. If the identity of Mr. Hat & Cloak remains unclear but Harry finds a black hat in Snape’s trunk and a black cloak in Dumbledore’s office, I would probably lose. If Harry figures out that Nicholas Flamel is really Baba Yaga and she’s been hiding in Hogwarts all year, I would probably win. I’d be happy to let a mutual chosen third party arbitrate.
What happens to the bet if HPMOR ends without it being revealed who Mr.Hat&Cloak happens to be?
-
We might agree to call the bet off by February 28th 201[5] if the bet is not resolved by then. If there’s somehow a definitional dispute, we work it out, possibly with someone else on the forum arbitrating. Default option is to cancel the bet.
-
So you aren’t really up for betting?
-
If I lose the bet I will laugh it off. You probably should not accept unless you would do the same.
I believe he(?) means he will laugh off the loss of the money, in the sense of treating it as not a big deal.
I updated on the probability that something could seem strikingly obvious on a first reading, escape the notice of hundreds of very smart people, have little direct evidence, and still be true.
I didn’t realize that there were multiple Hat & Cloaks. I meant the ones that appeared to Blaize Zabini and to Hermione, if that limits them.
I’ll take that bet, if it’s still open. Though please see the possible spoiler in my previous comment if you’re basing this on your interpretation of Eliezer’s motives.
She’s mentioned in at least three chapters. In chapter 12 Quirrell describes her as the “quote undying unquote Baba Yaga”. (To my knowledge she’s not mentioned at all by Rowling.) The Law of Conservation of Detail tells us that she is going to be plot-relevant somehow.
(To my knowledge she’s not mentioned at all by Rowling.)
I can never see references to her without amusement. Bear in mind that the “canonical” Baba Yaga of Russian folklore is a cantankerous old witch who hobbles around with one leg made of bone, lives in a hut on chicken legs, and uses a giant mortar and pestle as her transport of choice. Such a character would make the likes of Hagrid and Moody seem wholly pedestrian.
Eliezer’s re-imagining of her as a Dark Lady, meanwhile, just summons the most fantastic mental images.
Maybe the author has read some theory on Russian folclore. Курьи ножки might not be chicken’s legs; some scholars think курьи means ‘made from smoke’ and so BY’s hut is actually a portal between worlds (between the world of the living, where the hero comes from, and the world where Koschey the Immortal lives—Koschey, incidentally, has something of a Horcrux—a needle hidden very thoroughly, and if you break it, he dies.)
Also, Harry’s Pet Rock was mentioned twice, so I’ve got a theory: Harry’s original Pet Rock, Harry’s father’s rock, and the Philosopher’s Stone are all the same rock. It would be really ironic.
I’ve suspected Baba Yaga would be dramatically revealed since the sentence I read her name. Since then there’s been no shortage of evidence which can be somehow contorted to confirm my theory.
EY has made a habit of throwing references to other fanfics in HPMOR. For example, David Monroe is a character in A Black Comedy. Baba Yaga appears in many fanfics, most famously in Turn Me Loose: A Harry Potter Adventure, where she is an immortal Dark Lady.
For example, David Monroe is a character in A Black Comedy.
And also a character in MoR. As are various ponies.
Baba Yaga appears in many fanfics, most famously in Turn Me Loose: A Harry Potter Adventure, where she is an immortal Dark Lady.
So by your examples’ logic, we should expect Baba Yaga to show up as a character in MoR, possibly not as an immortal Dark Lady but maybe a mortal Dark Lord.
If I understand ikacer’s theory correctly, it is that:
David Monroe’s name may be a reference to a piece of fiction Eliezer likes, but that doesn’t mean that his name will be of relevance to the plot. It is entirely credible that this name was included solely as a reference.
The existence of immortal Dark Lady Baba Yaga may be a reference to a piece of fiction Eliezer likes, but that doesn’t mean that her existence will be of relevance to the plot. It is entirely credible that she was mentioned to exist solely as a reference, and this is more probable than solipsist’s theory.
David Monroe’s name may be a reference to a piece of fiction Eliezer likes, but that doesn’t mean that his name will be of relevance to the plot.
My point was that the Monroe example and the ponies show that references play roles in the plot, so even if a character once named ‘Baba Yaga’ shows up, we wouldn’t necessarily expect her/him to act exactly like the Baba Yaga in the other fic, in the same way Monroe doesn’t play the same role or the ponies play the same role in MLP, but nevertheless, the character has to do something and at this stage in MoR, there’s no room for frivolity or introducing a new character just for a throwaway gag, and all the foreshadowing suggests that the new role/character will be important—in the same way that Monroe was important for Quirrelmort’s backstory and current nature.
But now you’re expanding the set of examples… My point was mostly that his set of examples did not support his claim like he thought they did. What he should have done is not brought up Monroe etc, but the Elric brothers, Death Note, Shea etc and argued that there were many more allusions which were just allusions than there were foreshadowing of future characters and hence an allusion or two to Baba Yaga still left the probability of a future appearance at a risible 1% or something.
I agree completely, from an outside point of view. For example, there was a shoutout in the very sentence Baba Yaga was introduced.
Past Professors of Defence have included not just the legendary wandering hero Harold Shea but also the quote undying unquote Baba Yaga, yes, I see some of you are still shuddering at the sound of her name even though she’s been dead for six hundred years.
I claim Baba Yaga is important and Harold Shea is a decoy. Yes, I also think my hypothesis sounds arbitrary and a bit crazy.
I’m not sure he’d needed to do that. Until we hear otherwise, he has access to all the knowledge of Salazar, who knew enough to build Hogwarts. Which also means the source code to the wards and the means to change them.
Can you even transfigure something that transfigures itself back? Of course Quirrell can do it if it’s possible, but is it possible?
Until we hear otherwise, he has access to all the knowledge of Salazar, who knew enough to build Hogwarts.
This may be an exaggeration. First, it seems improbable that Salazar entrusted all his magical knowledge to the basilisk, if only because that would have been a ridiculous amount of magical knowledge. Salazar wouldn’t have known which pieces of knowledge from his time were going to become lost, only that some would based on existing trends, so if he was going to tell the basilisk everything he thought valuable, it would have taken forever. Also, there’s no reason to believe that basilisks have perfect memories—unless I’m misremembering, the basilisk as a species was chosen for its snakeness, deadliness and longevity rather than its intellect.
Which also means the source code to the wards and the means to change them.
Salazar was only responsible for part of Hogwarts. We don’t know that he was at all responsible for the wards, only that he had admin access to them (in order to make them ignore the basilisk), which is no surprise since he was one of the four founders. We also don’t know that Godric didn’t revoke said admin access after Salazar betrayed him and left, in which case that portion of Salazar’s knowledge would be useless. In fact, it would be downright weird if Godric hadn’t done so.
Can you even transfigure something that transfigures itself back? Of course Quirrell can do it if it’s possible, but is it possible?
Since I feel the wrathful shade of Professor McGonagall watching over my shoulder, I’m going to say “I don’t know”. But if I had to guess, a transfigured object takes on all the properties of its new form, including the property of “not having troll regenerative powers”. So if you could initially transfigure the troll faster than its regeneration kicked in, you’d have no trouble maintaining it thereafter.
First, it seems improbable that Salazar entrusted all his magical
knowledge to the basilisk, if only because that would have been a
ridiculous amount of magical knowledge.
Well, it’s not like he had to teach the Basilisk a full Hogwarts curriculum; he only had to teach it what he knew that triggered the Interdict of Merlin, which is only the top whateverth percentile of his repertoire.
Salazar wouldn’t have known which pieces of knowledge from his time
were going to become lost,
Sure he could have. All he had to do was write down the most powerful stuff he knew in descending order until he got to the point where someone else started understanding what they were reading.
Also, there’s no reason to believe that basilisks have perfect
memories
The Basilisk may not have a perfect memory as an animal, but it “would be huge flaw in sscheme” if Salazar’s magical Parseltongue knowledge was corruptible by the limitations of any old snake’s brain.
Salazar was only responsible for part of Hogwarts. We don’t know
that he was at all responsible for the wards, only that he had admin
access to them…. We also don’t know that Godric didn’t revoke said
admin access after Salazar betrayed him and left
I think you’re extending your computer analogy too far. Salazar didn’t have a revocable password to the wards, he knew the magic that created them, and the rest of the Founders certainly did not have the power to revoke spells from the Source of Magic.
Don’t get me wrong, I think we’re meant to understand that Quirrell did smuggle in the troll as a small transfigured object that Dumbledore drew his circle around. But nevertheless, I think we should also assume until further notice that he knowswhoever got the basilisk’s knowledge got the most powerful magic that Slytherin knew.
EDIT: Hedged my last sentence, since Chapter 102′s horcrux information introduces potential ambiguity as to how Tom Riddle’s knowledge has been propagated amongst his alter egos’ bodies.
Well, it’s not like he had to teach the Basilisk a full Hogwarts curriculum; he only had to teach it what he knew that triggered the Interdict of Merlin, which is only the top whateverth percentile of his repertoire.
Fair point. I’d forgotten about the Interdict. With that said (and this applies to your second point as well), it seems unlikely that the Interdict of Merlin is the only reason for knowledge to be lost over time. For example, Riddle apparently found the horcrux ritual in a book, and that seems like powerful mostly-lost knowledge. Also, wizard society generally seems much worse at knowledge maximisation than muggle society. (side thought: is there even a single mention in either canon of wizard universities?)
The Basilisk may not have a perfect memory as an animal, but it “would be huge flaw in sscheme” if Salazar’s magical Parseltongue knowledge was corruptible by the limitations of any old snake’s brain.
True. One has to wonder, generally speaking, just how the whole thing worked, given that Parseltongue seems to blur terms for which it does not have an exact parallel (“schoolmaster”, “hourglass to move through time”), and that seems like it would be a problem for advanced spell instructions.
I think you’re extending your computer analogy too far. Salazar didn’t have a revocable password to the wards, he knew the magic that created them, and the rest of the Founders certainly did not have the power to revoke spells from the Source of Magic.
We don’t know that. The four founders came together to raise Hogwarts in the first place, suggesting that each of them knew only some of the magic necessary. There is no reason to believe that Salazar was the one who knew the magic for the Hogwarts wards, rather than, say, Rowena.
Additionally, you don’t need to revoke a spell from the Source of Magic to prevent someone else making use of it. Going back to the computer analogy, being a system’s original programmer doesn’t mean you can automatically hack into any instance of that system. It is worth remembering that once Salazar left, it would have been three magical prodigies against one in the matter of establishing Hogwarts security.
Likewise don’t get me wrong, I think it’s reasonable to assume that whoever got the basilisk’s knowledge got at least some very powerful magic from Slytherin; I just don’t think we should overestimate how much that was.
“Yes, nuclear weapons!” Professor Quirrell was almost shouting now. “Even He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named never used those, perhaps because he didn’t want to rule over a heap of ash! They never should have been made! And it will only get worse with time!” Professor Quirrell was standing up straight instead of leaning on his desk. “There are gates you do not open, there are seals you do not breach! The fools who can’t resist meddling are killed by the lesser perils early on, and the survivors all know that there are secrets you do not share with anyone who lacks the intelligence and the discipline to discover them for themselves! Every powerful wizard knows that! Even the most terrible Dark Wizards know that! And those idiot Muggles can’t seem to figure it out! The eager little fools who discovered the secret of nuclear weapons didn’t keep it to themselves, they told their fool politicians and now we must live under the constant threat of annihilation!”
Quirrell couldn’t have made the troll sun resistant, since Harry touched the troll and he can’t touch Quirrell magic. Explanations include:
Quirrell legilimensed (say) Professor Sprout to jinx the troll
Hat & Cloak (who is not Quirrell) jinxed and redirected Quirrell’s troll towards Hermione. Quirrell had ulterior motives for releasing the troll (e.g. as a distraction so Snape could pull Philosopher stone mischief).
Do we know this, or is it speculation based on our knowledge of potions in general?
Also, is it safe to assume that potions work on trolls, given that trolls are constantly transfiguring into themselves (and thus automatically flushing out changes to their physical state)?
Quirrell states that sunlight freezes them in place, rather than that it petrifies them.
Quirrell states that a troll is constantly transfiguring itself into its own body, which means that the (apparently organic) form it’s normally in is its true form.
I may be pointing out the obvious, but...
This is how the troll was smuggled into Hogwarts without the wards going off. In all likelihood, Quirrell had the transfigured troll on his person when Dumbledore identified to the Hogwarts wards “The Defense Professor stands within this circle”. Trolls self-transfigure as a form of regeneration, so the transfiguration would not kill the troll or be detectable.
This suggests that the troll was known to Hogwarts as “The Defense Professor”, and so explains what the wards reported:
Ok. In that case, Quirrell can be hiding on his person or in some magical ‘all-holding invisible pocket’ an army of trolls, or anything he thinks would be better suited for attack (transfigured wizards?), and Dumbledore is ultimately doomed.
So, people did not think this was obvious?
Screw that. I am willing to bet $50 US (1:1) that Mr. Hat & Cloak is Baba Yaga.
I would take you up on that, but in my memory palace one of the walls is occupied by a large chalkboard covered with lines of “I will not underestimate Eliezer Yudkowsky”.
I’m interested in taking you up on this. Could you give a more explicit definition? How will the bet be resolved?
I’m not picky on definitions. “The entity Hermione called ‘Mister Incredibly Suspicious Person’ has Baba Yaga’s memories.” That definition is looser than it needs to be, but I’m giving you generous odds.
Resolution would be informal, with us PMing payment instructions to each other. The payment information I would send you would be cheap, non-sketchy, and anonymous for me. We might agree to call the bet off by February 28th 2014 if the bet is not resolved by then. If there’s somehow a definitional dispute, we work it out, possibly with someone else on the forum arbitrating. Default option is to cancel the bet.
If I lose the bet I will laugh it off. You probably should not accept unless you would do the same.
I think the most likely scenario is that we’ll hear no more about either of them. So I want to win that case; if the two are unrelated then I doubt we’ll hear anything explicit to that effect.
Rather than worry about what’s “cheap” let’s just say the loser pays $50 gross, any payment fees or the like can come out of the winnings. And I’ll stipulate that anything bitcoiny qualifies as sketchy.
And yeah, $50 is an amount that I can comfortably toss for online entertainment without checking my bank balance.
How about this stipulation: if the name Baba Yaga does not appear in the book again, and Eliezer Yudkowsky does not Word of God that Mr. Hat & Cloak is Baba Yaga, you win. I’m expecting Baba Yaga to be important, and if she’s not mentioned again or only mentioned offhandedly I will likely concede.
We are on the same page about payments.
Sounds fair enough. So we have a bet?
We have a bet. It’s on!
By request, I declare solipsist to have lost this bet.
The latest progress report suggests that chapters will resume in February, so the story might not finish until March. Extend the bet’s expiration date to March 31st, 2015?
Sure. Happy to push it out a bit longer actually, as I’m not confident there won’t be further slippage; how about extending until June 30th?
Sure.
The latest progress report suggest that chapters will resume in February, so the story might not finish until March. Extend the bet’s expiration date to March 31st, 2015?
Are you betting that in a future chapter of HPMOR there will the explicit statement that Mr. Hat & Cloak is Baba Yaga? What happens to the bet if HPMOR ends without it being revealed who Mr.Hat&Cloak happens to be?
So you aren’t really up for betting?
I think Yudkowsky is enough of a non-asshole that if that’s the case, he’ll consent to say whether Baba Yaga had anything to do with Hat & Cloak. Remember, he endorses betting on beliefs.
No, I am up for betting. If unforeseen plot developments make the resolution of the bet unclear, I want determining the winner to be casual and non-adversarial. I will not argue technicalities even if they could cause me to win.
That really depends. If the identity of Mr. Hat & Cloak remains unclear but Harry finds a black hat in Snape’s trunk and a black cloak in Dumbledore’s office, I would probably lose. If Harry figures out that Nicholas Flamel is really Baba Yaga and she’s been hiding in Hogwarts all year, I would probably win. I’d be happy to let a mutual chosen third party arbitrate.
-
-
-
I believe he(?) means he will laugh off the loss of the money, in the sense of treating it as not a big deal.
Edits: I meant February 28th 2015.
How do you go from the old Quirrel troll-in-pocket theory to Hat & Cloak == Baba Yaga? And which Hat & Cloak?
I updated on the probability that something could seem strikingly obvious on a first reading, escape the notice of hundreds of very smart people, have little direct evidence, and still be true.
I didn’t realize that there were multiple Hat & Cloaks. I meant the ones that appeared to Blaize Zabini and to Hermione, if that limits them.
I’ll take that bet, if it’s still open. Though please see the possible spoiler in my previous comment if you’re basing this on your interpretation of Eliezer’s motives.
Sorry, I gave lmm priority. Really we should have used your interest to obtain better market odds.
It’s too late now, but does anybody have a recommendation of practical mechanisms for ad hoc predictions markets?
Why Baba Yaga?
She’s mentioned in at least three chapters. In chapter 12 Quirrell describes her as the “quote undying unquote Baba Yaga”. (To my knowledge she’s not mentioned at all by Rowling.) The Law of Conservation of Detail tells us that she is going to be plot-relevant somehow.
I can never see references to her without amusement. Bear in mind that the “canonical” Baba Yaga of Russian folklore is a cantankerous old witch who hobbles around with one leg made of bone, lives in a hut on chicken legs, and uses a giant mortar and pestle as her transport of choice. Such a character would make the likes of Hagrid and Moody seem wholly pedestrian.
Eliezer’s re-imagining of her as a Dark Lady, meanwhile, just summons the most fantastic mental images.
Maybe the author has read some theory on Russian folclore. Курьи ножки might not be chicken’s legs; some scholars think курьи means ‘made from smoke’ and so BY’s hut is actually a portal between worlds (between the world of the living, where the hero comes from, and the world where Koschey the Immortal lives—Koschey, incidentally, has something of a Horcrux—a needle hidden very thoroughly, and if you break it, he dies.)
I’ll add “The Massacre of Albania in the Fifteenth Century”, a book title which triggered my brain’s foreshadowing alarm in chapter 26.
The “undying” Witch Formerly Known As Baba Yaga has gone by many names, including Nicholas Flamel.
Also, Harry’s Pet Rock was mentioned twice, so I’ve got a theory: Harry’s original Pet Rock, Harry’s father’s rock, and the Philosopher’s Stone are all the same rock. It would be really ironic.
She appears in the Prisoner of Azkaban video game.
As a little info card, according to a wikia entry, no? Not much of an appearance even for a distant licensing spinoff.
I’ve suspected Baba Yaga would be dramatically revealed since the sentence I read her name. Since then there’s been no shortage of evidence which can be somehow contorted to confirm my theory.
I have some evidence opposing your theory.
EY has made a habit of throwing references to other fanfics in HPMOR. For example, David Monroe is a character in A Black Comedy. Baba Yaga appears in many fanfics, most famously in Turn Me Loose: A Harry Potter Adventure, where she is an immortal Dark Lady.
Isn’t Baba Yaga a folk tale character?
1) Baba Yaga, an existing fictional character, appears in a fanfic as an immortal Dark Lady.
2) Eliezer Yudkowsky makes a reference to the Baba Yaga from that fanfic in his own work.
And also a character in MoR. As are various ponies.
So by your examples’ logic, we should expect Baba Yaga to show up as a character in MoR, possibly not as an immortal Dark Lady but maybe a mortal Dark Lord.
If I understand ikacer’s theory correctly, it is that:
David Monroe’s name may be a reference to a piece of fiction Eliezer likes, but that doesn’t mean that his name will be of relevance to the plot. It is entirely credible that this name was included solely as a reference.
The existence of immortal Dark Lady Baba Yaga may be a reference to a piece of fiction Eliezer likes, but that doesn’t mean that her existence will be of relevance to the plot. It is entirely credible that she was mentioned to exist solely as a reference, and this is more probable than solipsist’s theory.
My point was that the Monroe example and the ponies show that references play roles in the plot, so even if a character once named ‘Baba Yaga’ shows up, we wouldn’t necessarily expect her/him to act exactly like the Baba Yaga in the other fic, in the same way Monroe doesn’t play the same role or the ponies play the same role in MLP, but nevertheless, the character has to do something and at this stage in MoR, there’s no room for frivolity or introducing a new character just for a throwaway gag, and all the foreshadowing suggests that the new role/character will be important—in the same way that Monroe was important for Quirrelmort’s backstory and current nature.
But why would you not expect Baba Yaga to be like, say, the Elric brothers, mentioned solely as background detail?
But now you’re expanding the set of examples… My point was mostly that his set of examples did not support his claim like he thought they did. What he should have done is not brought up Monroe etc, but the Elric brothers, Death Note, Shea etc and argued that there were many more allusions which were just allusions than there were foreshadowing of future characters and hence an allusion or two to Baba Yaga still left the probability of a future appearance at a risible 1% or something.
Ah, now I see. I didn’t understand that this is what you were driving at in previous posts. Thanks for the clarification.
I agree completely, from an outside point of view. For example, there was a shoutout in the very sentence Baba Yaga was introduced.
I claim Baba Yaga is important and Harold Shea is a decoy. Yes, I also think my hypothesis sounds arbitrary and a bit crazy.
That is a nice theory.
I’m not sure he’d needed to do that. Until we hear otherwise, he has access to all the knowledge of Salazar, who knew enough to build Hogwarts. Which also means the source code to the wards and the means to change them.
Can you even transfigure something that transfigures itself back? Of course Quirrell can do it if it’s possible, but is it possible?
This may be an exaggeration. First, it seems improbable that Salazar entrusted all his magical knowledge to the basilisk, if only because that would have been a ridiculous amount of magical knowledge. Salazar wouldn’t have known which pieces of knowledge from his time were going to become lost, only that some would based on existing trends, so if he was going to tell the basilisk everything he thought valuable, it would have taken forever. Also, there’s no reason to believe that basilisks have perfect memories—unless I’m misremembering, the basilisk as a species was chosen for its snakeness, deadliness and longevity rather than its intellect.
Salazar was only responsible for part of Hogwarts. We don’t know that he was at all responsible for the wards, only that he had admin access to them (in order to make them ignore the basilisk), which is no surprise since he was one of the four founders. We also don’t know that Godric didn’t revoke said admin access after Salazar betrayed him and left, in which case that portion of Salazar’s knowledge would be useless. In fact, it would be downright weird if Godric hadn’t done so.
Since I feel the wrathful shade of Professor McGonagall watching over my shoulder, I’m going to say “I don’t know”. But if I had to guess, a transfigured object takes on all the properties of its new form, including the property of “not having troll regenerative powers”. So if you could initially transfigure the troll faster than its regeneration kicked in, you’d have no trouble maintaining it thereafter.
Well, it’s not like he had to teach the Basilisk a full Hogwarts curriculum; he only had to teach it what he knew that triggered the Interdict of Merlin, which is only the top whateverth percentile of his repertoire.
Sure he could have. All he had to do was write down the most powerful stuff he knew in descending order until he got to the point where someone else started understanding what they were reading.
The Basilisk may not have a perfect memory as an animal, but it “would be huge flaw in sscheme” if Salazar’s magical Parseltongue knowledge was corruptible by the limitations of any old snake’s brain.
I think you’re extending your computer analogy too far. Salazar didn’t have a revocable password to the wards, he knew the magic that created them, and the rest of the Founders certainly did not have the power to revoke spells from the Source of Magic.
Don’t get me wrong, I think we’re meant to understand that Quirrell did smuggle in the troll as a small transfigured object that Dumbledore drew his circle around. But nevertheless, I think we should also assume until further notice that
he knowswhoever got the basilisk’s knowledge got the most powerful magic that Slytherin knew.EDIT: Hedged my last sentence, since Chapter 102′s horcrux information introduces potential ambiguity as to how Tom Riddle’s knowledge has been propagated amongst his alter egos’ bodies.
Fair point. I’d forgotten about the Interdict. With that said (and this applies to your second point as well), it seems unlikely that the Interdict of Merlin is the only reason for knowledge to be lost over time. For example, Riddle apparently found the horcrux ritual in a book, and that seems like powerful mostly-lost knowledge. Also, wizard society generally seems much worse at knowledge maximisation than muggle society. (side thought: is there even a single mention in either canon of wizard universities?)
True. One has to wonder, generally speaking, just how the whole thing worked, given that Parseltongue seems to blur terms for which it does not have an exact parallel (“schoolmaster”, “hourglass to move through time”), and that seems like it would be a problem for advanced spell instructions.
We don’t know that. The four founders came together to raise Hogwarts in the first place, suggesting that each of them knew only some of the magic necessary. There is no reason to believe that Salazar was the one who knew the magic for the Hogwarts wards, rather than, say, Rowena.
Additionally, you don’t need to revoke a spell from the Source of Magic to prevent someone else making use of it. Going back to the computer analogy, being a system’s original programmer doesn’t mean you can automatically hack into any instance of that system. It is worth remembering that once Salazar left, it would have been three magical prodigies against one in the matter of establishing Hogwarts security.
Likewise don’t get me wrong, I think it’s reasonable to assume that whoever got the basilisk’s knowledge got at least some very powerful magic from Slytherin; I just don’t think we should overestimate how much that was.
Chapter 20:
A wizard university seems out of the question.
Speculative:
Quirrell couldn’t have made the troll sun resistant, since Harry touched the troll and he can’t touch Quirrell magic. Explanations include:
Quirrell legilimensed (say) Professor Sprout to jinx the troll
Hat & Cloak (who is not Quirrell) jinxed and redirected Quirrell’s troll towards Hermione. Quirrell had ulterior motives for releasing the troll (e.g. as a distraction so Snape could pull Philosopher stone mischief).
Alternatively there are some magic portions that can be used to make the troll sun resistant.
Do we know this, or is it speculation based on our knowledge of potions in general?
Also, is it safe to assume that potions work on trolls, given that trolls are constantly transfiguring into themselves (and thus automatically flushing out changes to their physical state)?
Hmm… Trolls are rocks (sort-of), the Philosopher’s Stone is a rock, can the Philosopher’s Stone turn you into a troll?
(This is probably a stupid theory, but maybe it’s related to something more workable.)
I don’t think that Eliezer’s trolls are rocks.
Quirrell states that sunlight freezes them in place, rather than that it petrifies them.
Quirrell states that a troll is constantly transfiguring itself into its own body, which means that the (apparently organic) form it’s normally in is its true form.
The troll Harry kills doesn’t turn to stone.
Thanks. I was getting them confused with Middle Earth trolls.