but Riddle’s adult memories are also stashed away for later use and the latter are the “dark side”.
I agree with everything you said except that. Look at this line from chapter 17 after Harry picked up Neville’s remembrall:
The Remembrall was glowing bright red in his hand, blazing like a miniature sun that cast shadows on the ground in broad daylight.
It makes it pretty clear that the second spell Voldemort cast on baby-Harry was Obliviate. Since we know that obliviated memories can not be recovered only Riddle’s thought-patterns are left in Harry, and that’s his dark side.
Not necessarily—infants brains are to plastic to retain memory, so it’s entirely possible it just erased itself all on it’s own.
Uhm. I’ve been entertaining the idea that Slytherin did something to his descendants to make them immune to memory magics. In which case, maybe the entire point of horcruxing an infant was to get a fork of his mindstate without his memories, because the direct approach would not cut it.
On the other hand, this chain of inferences is getting a wee bit longer than I am at all comfortable with.
I agree with everything you said except that. Look at this line from chapter 17 after Harry picked up Neville’s remembrall:
It makes it pretty clear that the second spell Voldemort cast on baby-Harry was Obliviate. Since we know that obliviated memories can not be recovered only Riddle’s thought-patterns are left in Harry, and that’s his dark side.
Not necessarily—infants brains are to plastic to retain memory, so it’s entirely possible it just erased itself all on it’s own.
Uhm. I’ve been entertaining the idea that Slytherin did something to his descendants to make them immune to memory magics. In which case, maybe the entire point of horcruxing an infant was to get a fork of his mindstate without his memories, because the direct approach would not cut it.
On the other hand, this chain of inferences is getting a wee bit longer than I am at all comfortable with.
Yes, that’s very plausible.