This theory came to me after realizing that the grammar was a bit backwards in the prophecy and, lo and behold, there's a reason. I think I've stumbled upon something but I want to know what all of you think. Is this a feasible idea? Do I have something here?

*************************

“The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches…born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies…and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have power the Dark Lord knows not and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives…the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as the seventh month dies…” (OotP37)


As can safely be assumed, we all know what this quote is. This prophecy is what drove Voldemort to kill Harry’s parents and this prophecy leaves us pondering just how the seventh book will end. J.K. Rowling, as you all know, is very particular with her words. Nothing is random in her writing and everything can mean something. This prophecy is no different.

Hermione states in the Philosopher’s Stone that witches and wizards have absolutely no logic. When she and Harry were trying to figure out the potions riddle, she claimed that a witch or wizard would be down in that chamber forever trying to figure out how to walk through the flames while a muggle could solve the problem with ease; in which she proceeded to do. We have been set up from the beginning, my friends, to watch out for riddles and puzzles that muggles should be able to deduce. This prophecy is the apex of those riddles. I believe that a vital point has been grossly overlooked. I also believe the grammatical structure of the prophecy is giving us a lot more than what we’re getting.

My point is I’ve come to the conclusion that ‘the other,’ stated twice in the prophecy, is not a reference to Voldemort or Harry but to a third party. Let me explain.

First, before I delve deeper into the words already given to us, I want to point out the stark difference between the words ‘kill’ and ‘vanquish.’ To kill someone is to take their life away so that they cease to exist. To vanquish someone is more to banish them, cast them into exile, strip them of power and destroy but not necessarily kill. A king can be vanquished yet still be alive. Voldemort was vanquished yet still existed in a meager form. That is a very important aspect of my theory.

Second, I want to look at the grammatical structure of the phrase ‘neither can live while the other survives.’ If that statement pertains to only two people, it doesn’t make any sense. Basically, it’s saying that if one comes out the victor, he’ll die anyway. This is where you’d point out that it means both Harry and Voldemort are meant to die and then use my definition against me and compare ‘live’ and ‘survive.’ Even if you define these words by a means of a pulse or to pull through something, in this case, still does not make any sense. For the purpose of this essay, I’m going to assume that Harry and Voldemort are the two in this prophecy. That statement is saying that neither Harry nor Voldemort can live while either Harry or Voldemort survives. If either one of them comes out on top, then that person will die. I beg you to think, when has Rowling ever been wholly simplistic in referencing future books? When have any of her hints ever been simple enough to deduce in the context of the stories given? And how many times did you go on to read the next book only to slap yourself on the forehead and go ‘duh’ for not reading the clues before? Do you really think Rowling would leave us with a conclusion as simple as ‘they both have to die’ without there being some kind of ridiculous twist?

This is where my theory begins.

First, take a look at when the prophecy was made. Harry hadn’t even been born yet and Voldemort was in full steam. Now, I want you to take a look at the first and last part of the prophecy—

“The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches…born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies—…the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as the seventh month dies…” (Hyphen mine)

The only reference to death here is the end of a month but the reference to Voldemort is ‘vanquish,’ not ‘kill.’ Dumbledore stated that when Snape told Voldemort the prophecy, he [Voldemort] was the one that made it come true. Now, why are we thinking this ‘vanquishing’ is going to happen in the seventh book? Why aren’t we thinking that it’s already happened, that Harry’s fulfilled his part of the prophecy already? A little more than a year later, the boy with the power to ‘vanquish’ the Dark Lord, born to parents who ‘thrice defied him,’ succeeded in vanquishing Voldemort. He had the power to do it because Lily had bestowed it upon him. Voldemort has already been vanquished. Now it’s time for him to die.

Now take a look at the middle section of the prophecy—

“…and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have power the Dark Lord knows not and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives…”

This is where you say Voldemort already marked Harry as his equal with his scar. And this is where I say Harry is not Voldemort’s equal. Let’s face it. Harry is a seventeen-year-old boy going into his seventh year at Hogwarts. Voldemort is rightly in his eighties and has seen and done things no wizard can ever imagine and the only person that could rightly compete and match Voldemort was Dumbledore. Harry’s strong will to carry on, coupled with Dumbledore’s good timing, got him through the numerous obstacles he’s come across. Harry only knows spells taught in books thanks to Hermione (save Sectumsempra and Levicorpus), he can’t perform any of the Unforgivable Curses (as much as he hated Bellatrix, he didn’t have it in him to use the Cruciatus Curse correctly, which I will get back to) and Harry has had to rely on outside help in every book (Dumbledore’s knowledge of the Mirror of Erised, Fawkes, Dumbledore and the Time Turner, Priori Incantatem and Dumbledore, Snape and McGonagall, Dumbledore and the Order and Dumbledore, the D.A. and the aurors). Harry cannot take on Voldemort on his own and come out on top.

So who does Voldemort mark as his equals? Death Eaters. While he is their Lord, he has branded them with his mark, making them equal to him in purpose, mentality and disdain for muggles. The ‘he’ is a Death Eater. ‘He has the power the Dark Lord knows not.’ Remember the time the prophecy was given. This ‘him’ was marked as an equal yet held power no one knew about because he kept it hidden. Can you see where I’m going with this, who I’m alluding to? ‘The other’ is a third person; the same person marked as an equal by Voldemort and possesses hidden powers.

Severus Snape.

At the time the prophecy was made, Snape was still quite young and still working for Voldemort. I believe we haven’t seen Snape’s full potential magical abilities. We know he’s a potions master and a skilled Occlumens but surely that can’t be it. And we’ve only seen Snape through the Harry filter, a somewhat unreliable viewpoint of things or people he doesn’t like. Snape is also very well known for keeping to himself and I think Snape has abilities that he even kept from Dumbledore. I don’t think Severus reached his full potential until he was an adult and working at Hogwarts so it’s highly likely that Voldemort didn’t know what Severus could do. I don’t even think Severus knew what Severus could do at that point.

The most important aspect is that ‘the other’ will kill ‘either.’ Harry doesn’t have the power to kill. We’ve seen that. Coming back to Bellatrix, Harry performed the Cruciatus Curse on her in the fifth book but to no avail. As much as he hated her, he didn’t want to really torture her. Bellatrix said it herself at the Ministry in the fifth book—you have to really want to hurt the person in order for the Cruciatus Curse to work. I think it’s safe to assume the same is true for Avada Kedavra. I believe Harry can hate someone with every inch of his being but when it comes down to causing serious pain or death, he can’t do it. That’s where ‘the other,’ whom I believe is Snape, comes in.

Snape has the power to kill a person. It’s proven not only by the Dark Mark he bears (I doubt Voldemort would brand someone that couldn’t kill a muggle) but by his ability to kill Dumbledore. It’s here that I come to my conclusion.

The prophecy, as stated by Sybill Trelawney, is a two-part prophecy. Part one (book-ending the second part) speaks of a boy who wasn’t born at the time the prophecy was given, who had to vanquish the Dark Lord. The second part speaks of ‘the other’ who was marked as Voldemort’s equal and has the ability to kill him.

The first part has been satisfied. A boy born at the end of July had vanquished Voldemort already. It doesn’t say it’s going to happen again. The second part has yet to be fulfilled since Voldemort is still alive. It takes two people to destroy Voldemort, Harry and Snape, each playing their specific roles in the prophecy.

[either must die at the hand of the other]—Either Harry or Voldemort must die at the hand of Snape.

[for neither can live while the other survives]—This last part can go a couple of ways but to top my theory, it only goes one—Snape must die for one of them to survive so he dies killing Voldemort, thus saving Harry.

Harry is hell-bent on destroying all the horcruxes so Voldemort can be killed. Harry succeeds in destroying them and then Snape can successfully kill Voldemort. Rowling has spoken of a character getting a reprieve. This would redeem Snape in Harry’s eyes, and everyone else’s for that matter. It’s his ultimate redemption. Snape sacrifices himself to save Harry and kill Voldemort, satisfying the whole of the prophecy.

So that means, in the end, Snape is good and the prophecy is speaking of three different people, not two.

Author's note: This theory has been purely deduced from the grammatical reasoning stated in the prophecy and assumptions made by myself. I'm not trying to state fact but what I think may be true based on the words and particular wording of the prophecy. The pieces that I've used to put this puzzle together happen to fit together nicely but if anyone has any other pieces that could be used, please feel free to use them. Questions, comments and criticisms are all welcome. It makes me proud to think that my Bachelor's of English wasn't earned in vain.

Awesome theory its starting to make my head turn to the snape is good theory but I always assumed that Snape would do some explaining to Harry before he died or something like that. Also the part about a third party was interesting, i'd never thought of it being like that before, your right your bachelors of english was in no way earned in vain lol im actually doing a bachelors in english lit now
But I do reckon snape is slightly redeemed in the 7th book or he'll be worse cos whenever JKRowling talked about Snape in interviews she always dislikes him saying how horrible it would be for snape to be in love and for us to keep an eye on old severus snape for we like him too much.
But I always assumed that the prophecy was all about choice, Voldemort chose to mark harry, none of the strife between harry and LV would have happened if he had never heard about the prophecy or took it so that it had to happen.

I LOVE IT!

I can see your theory being very close to what happens in book 7. I think Snape will play a big role and help Harry and you've tied it together so nicely!

I love Harry but I have always felt his is not Voldemort's equal in magic ability. Harry isn't as gifted and gets a lot of help from talented friends. We know Harry isn't a killer. He is not going to be able to defeat the greatest Dark Wizard of all time on pure luck only.

Your theory just makes soo much sense to me...everything in it! Bravo! I think I'm going to read it again!

My dear Sissa, I wholeheartedly agree with your infinite wisdom...(I knew there was a reason we were "bestest internet buddies"....lol) I have always felt Snape to be on the good side and your theory makes a great deal of sense to me. It would also make me to better understand why JKR has informed Alan Rickman about the character of Snape in full detail..and why he alone knows his character's fate.....

Once I thought about the word "vanquish"......it made lots of sense. I totally believe that Snape will be the key character in Book 7, and that he will have to somehow work with Harry to kill the Dark Lord....(Here again, I must add that I think Snape's love for Lily, plays a part in this scenario)

A nicely argued theory, but I still prefer the Orthodox theory that Harry will kill Voldemort.

1 The Dark Mark is the token of Voldie's minions not his equals.

2 Patronus must be powered by a happy memory. Riddikulus must be powered by a comedic imagination. This was shown again and again.

3 Bellasays that Crucio must be powered by Lust for pain. I believe that she tells the truth, but she might be lying.

4 There is no evidence that Aveda Kedavra needs an emotional trigger. GoF, confrontation, Voldy says "Kill the spare." Peter AKs Cedric. It is impossible to have any emtional commitment to "the spare". HpB, Bella AKs the fox. GoF fake Moody AKs the spider. Neither of them care about their victims.

I never would have thought of that, that is totally possible and makes wayyy more sense

Rhemus, I'm not talking about emotional commitment to anything. What I'm saying is that in order to perform an Unforgiveable Curse, the curser needs to really want to perform that curse. They have to have the will behind it. They don't necessarily have to have any kind of emotion to kill a particular person but they need the will to perform the curse itself. Wormtail could perform Avada Kedavra because he had the heart to do it. Cedric was nothing to him which is probably one of the reasons why he could kill him. It's not the want to perform a curse on that particular person but a want to perform the curse in general. You have to have a large amount of hate and want to perform pain in order for Crucio to work. It doesn't matter who's on the receiving end of it.

I don't think the Death Eaters are his minions. V definately gets his hands dirty so if he had minions, why would he bother to do anything? I do believe that there are levels within the Death Eaters and say, Bella is at a higher level than Goyle. Besides, the Mark is V marking people with similar values as he has. The Dark Mark shows that this person values the Dark Arts, has disdain for muggles and, essentially, wants them dead and strives for a pureblooded world. Those are all values he holds which makes those with that Mark equal.

What does a patronus and ridikkulus have to do with anything I was talking about? Did I even mention them in my theory? That was out of the blue to me.

This is slightly oxymoronic. How can you think she's telling the truth but be lying about it? She's either telling the truth or she's lying. She can't do both at the same time. She might just explode. I think Bella is one of the supreme rulers on how to perform one of the Unforgiveable Curses so I have a tendency to believe it when she says that one needs to really want to cause pain (again, just the act of causing pain, not causing pain to a particular person. The Unforgiveables aren't prejudiced) in order to perform Crucio. What I was saying was that even though Harry felt so much hate and so much rage and anger, he didn't have it in him to cause Bella pain. It doesn't necessarily make him weak, just not the torturing type.

By the way, thanks GinnyWeasley! I was afraid that my theory was just a bunch of rambling and I twisted things around so that it only made sense to me.

In the flight scene in HBP, Harry didn't have the capability to even slow Snape down. How could he entertain the thought of defeating LV now that that problem with the wands has been identified. I think your theory could be very real. Harry may have a lot of power, but he won't be in the league with the big boys until he learn how to use it. Since this is going to be the last book, I don't think he will have time to learn.

Wow. That's a really great theory and really thought-out. I would have never thought of that. It makes so much sense though. So much. I can't wait to read the book and really see what's going to happen. Maybe you'll be right. And from what this theory shows, you very well could be.

I had never thought of this, but after reading your theory, I must agree that it is a sound possibility. Oh course, we can only surmise what might be in Rowling's mind, but you bring up some interesting points that seem quite valid. I, personally, would like to see it end in this way!

This is a great possibility. Being in Slytherin house myself, it would help gain the respect we deserve if Snape truly gave his life for Harry. (Ok, I know thats a little IC)

As for OOC I would love to see this happen. I like the way you explained the prophecy. We shall have to wait and read..... *can't wait for book 7*

Just a thought, but I believe Lilly would qualify as "the other".

Care to elaborate a bit?

Harry would not have survived the AK if Lilly had still been alive. Once Lilly died, it set the stage for what happened to LV. The only thing that saved him was that his soul was split.

Its "Lily" you dolt.
>_>

Anyway; I love this theory. As you know, I love to play with words. Mostly adjectives and nouns...but dude...all of this past/present/and future tenses are blowing my mind!!!

You analization of the prophesy is perfect; I know it is just a theory, but a very, very likely one.

Although I know it would be wishful thinking, I do hope that somehow we will get to see Lucius in "Deathly Hallows". Somehow...

Well, it's a nice thought but not all that viable in conjunction with where my theory goes. The prophecy only speaks of "him." And what iIm pointing out in my theory is that the "Dark Lord marked him as his equal" [the one that has the power to kill him] (italics mine). Lily wasn't a Death Eater and unless we're being left out of a wicked secret, Lily isn't a man either. Besides, Voldemort didn't die at Lily's hand. He was vaporized by her magic by proxy. She may have set in motion the chain of events that lead to his actual demise but it wasn't/won't (impossible at this point since she's dead) be by her hand.

Wow! That is a really solid, well thought out theory. Good to see one that has a lot of evidence supporting it. I was thinking that Snape was always good and as always, abiding by Dumbledore's orders when he killed him. I can definately see him being a key, that part noone can really guess until we've read it. Whether he kills Voldemort himself or whether he sacrifices himself so Harry can we'll have to wait and see.
The only part i'm not convinced with is the Dark Mark on the Death Eaters marking them as his equal. As always, he orders them as to what to do and talks to them as though they are most definantly inferior in his eyes. But in the end its what you want to class as 'his equal'. Is it equal to him in magical abilities, equal in 'evilness', or what i think, equal in position and influence on the opposite side.
I don't think Voldemort was marking someone as his 'equal' in the sense that we think of it in that the 'marked' one is equal to him in abilities, but equal in greatness on their respective sides (obviously good and evil here). So V is the undeniably leader and Lord of the dark side, and Harry is marked as the 'leader' of the good side for lack of a better word, the same position as V, just opposed. So therefore i see Harry as the only one that can kill V, but who will die and who will survive is anyones guess.
Maybe the prophecy is only talking about two people and both will die. Can't wait to read book 7!!!!!

The way I see it, Voldemort marks his minions as being equal in purpose. They all share the same ideals and convictions regarding mudbloods and muggles so that mark is signifying that they all feel the same way.

I definitely think your theory is completely plausible! As you mentioned, JKR does not put things out there in the open for everyone to figure out. There has to be some big twist and I fully support that Snape may very well be the twist. After all, she did entitle the 6th book after HIM...

thanks I never would have thought about that until now i read and listen to the books to get clues i'm goin to ponder on this for a while

After rereading a couple of times and pulling out a few books, I would have to say this makes a lot of sense to me. Theres just one thing I don't get. Why would Snape kill Voldemort for Harry. Look, Snape made the unbreakable vow and part of it was to let no harm come to Draco. If Snape does break his part of the vow he may die from it. The Dark Lord charged Draco with killing Dumbledore, Draco failed in doing that. Draco is indirectly responsable for Dumbledore's death but did not kill him himself. Draco was sent to kill Dumbledore only for his fathers disgrace in Voldemorts eyes. I don't think Voldemort really belived Draco would be on the winning end of that little mission. Dumbledore was killed by Snape not Draco. So, what happens to people who fail Voldemort? I'm sure theres a few one-time Deatheaters that could tell you, if they were alive to do so. So, now Draco has to face Voldemort and tell him he was not the one to kill Dumbledore. As Snape has made the the unbreakable vow, it is Snape to kill Voldemort, but not for Harry but to save Draco in order to satisfy his own end of the vow. The first chapter of HBP is entitled Spinners End. The name of the street Snape lives on outside Hogworts. But if Snape is a spinster, telling lies and such, then the end of Snape spinning tales came to an end through the vow which he took at Spinners End. Just a thought.

Snape would kill Voldemort not only to save Harry and Draco but to save the entire wizarding world from the wrath of Voldemort. One character gets a reprieve in the end and I believe that to be Snape. He can kill Voldemort, satisfying him end of the Unbreakable Vow with Narcissa, redeeming himself in Harry's eyes and saving the rest of the wizarding world to boot. I don't think Snape brought Draco back to Voldemort after they fled the tower but I think he brought Draco somewhere else to hide him.

I think your theory about Snape is awesome. The first line in the prophecy "The one with the power to vanquish the dark lord approaches..." could be referring to Snape. We know that Snape was the one who heard the prophecy as he stood outside the door listening. I am not going to make any guesses as to whom Snape would be protecting if/when he kills LV, but I don't think it is out of the question to consider Draco. We dont know if Draco was born late july, so he could fit there, Draco has been marked by LV as an equal according to your theory about the Dark Mark and his parents have also thrice defied LV. First by Lucius not seeking out LV after he lost his powers, then by Lucius again by not destroying Harry when he had the chance. The third time that Draco's parents defied LV was at the beginning of HBP when Narcissa made the Unbreakable Vow to Snape. It was not her place to interfere with LV's plans for Draco. In a round about way Draco fits the description of the one born from parents who thrice defied LV and we don't know whether Draco was born in late July or not. I am taking into account that JK Rowling like to throw curve balls in her stories and this could be another surprise for readers. I wholeheartedly support your theory about Snape, and will be extremely impressed if it turns out to be true.

According to Lexicon, Draco was born June 5, 1980 so the prophecy can't pertain to him, only those "born as the seventh month dies." I'm also inclined to have that as a play on words though because, originally, September was the seventh month (sept-- is the prefix for seven). It's a long shot, I know but in original calendars, September was the original seventh month.