The Owlery - Why Wasn't Quirrell an 8th Horcrux?
Added 2024-08-11 16:00:09 +0000 UTC
Comments
The movies aren't canon. They give you about 20% of the actual story and information.
UnfazedPhoenix
2024-11-08 02:20:51 +0000 UTCVOLDEQUIRREL!! π€£ love it. I think they have addressed this before but I can't remember, if diary Tom Riddle came back fully AND Voldemort Prime also regained his body - would they team up or be against each other?
UnfazedPhoenix
2024-11-08 02:19:35 +0000 UTCPhoenix tears. Harry didn't die, so the piece of Voldemort's soul didn't die.
UnfazedPhoenix
2024-11-08 02:17:28 +0000 UTCWhy didnβt the piece of Voldy in Harry die in COS when Harry is bitten by the Baskalith?
Amy Melsoner
2024-08-19 19:48:58 +0000 UTCI love how we stuck with gumpine ππ
Bailey M
2024-08-12 16:35:15 +0000 UTCVoldy was just "possessing" Quirrell. I don't think he was a true horcrux. Voldy could possess Nagini even when she was a horcrux, he possessed her when she attacked Arthur. It is very murky though....But I do believe living things could be killed more easily, so it's not ideal to making living things horcruxes.
Brandon Harper
2024-08-12 03:07:16 +0000 UTCYay! My question thanks for answering it you guys
Samuel Kay
2024-08-11 17:11:06 +0000 UTCYou guys are forgetting that Harry is also a Horcrux & also a living person & CAN be killed with the Killing Curse . . . π I THINK what they were TRYING to show in the movie was Ron βmissingβ Narggini, OR also the fact that Ronβs not βstrong enoughβ to become a killer; thatβs why he truly kept βmissingβ Narggini. π€ At least, thatβs the impression I always got from that scene . . . π
AHuffleClawAndASwiftie
2024-08-11 16:44:23 +0000 UTC
