Skip to main content

harry potter - Are Fidelius charms stackable?


When the Order of the Phoenix fears that Snape will reveal Grimauld Place to the Death Eaters, they have to evacuate, leaving rather shaky defences behind.


Why could they not have cast another Fidelius charm, which would protect them?


Surely if you cast another charm, it would hide it from people that already know, since you can hide a house from people that already know (otherwise it'd be useless - surely Voldemort/a Death Eater would have known where James Potter's house was before the Fidelius Charm was set up).



Answer




I think that, on the whole, it wouldn't be possible to stack multiple Fidelius Charms onto a single location (although it doesn't happen in canon so we don't know for sure). Firstly, that idea doesn't seem to be compatible with what the books tell us happens to Fidelius Charms once they are broken. And, secondly, the Charm is so complicated that I'm not sure it would be possible.



The mechanics of broken Fidelius Charms are important here. It seems that a Fidelius Charm ceases to exist when the people which it's protecting die.



He could see it; the Fidelius Charm must have died with James and Lily.
(Deathly Hallows, Chapter 17, Bathilda's Secret).



The Fidelius Charm continues to exist if the Secret Keeper dies - but everyone they've told also becomes a Secret Keeper.



Mr Weasley had explained that after the death of Dumbledore, their Secret Keeper, each of the people to whom Dumbledore had confided Grimmauld Place's location had become a Secret Keeper in turn.
"And as there are around twenty of us, that greatly dilutes the power of the Fidelius Charm. Twenty times as many opportunities for the Death Eaters to get the secret out of somebody. We can't expect it to hold much longer."
(Deathly Hallows, Chapter 6, The Ghoul in Pyjamas).




And, of course, the Fidelius Charm can partially break if the Secret Keeper reveals the secret to another person. This has to be done voluntarily, not under duress, and does not mean that that new person then becomes a Secret Keeper themselves (as per Pottermore).


Note that in the second and third instances the Fidelius Charm remains active and operational. It is just weakened by the secret being revealed to more and more people when obviously it is designed not to be revealed at all (or only to a small group of trusted people). Only once the people being protected die is the Fidelius Charm said to "die" itself. It could also be that Fidelius Charms elapse after a designated period but this is speculation and we don't know this.


All this means that, when someone who you wish didn't know your protected location finds out the secret, casting another Fidelius Charm is unlikely to keep them out. Why? Because the first Fidelius Charm is still operational. It has been weakened by the secret being shared but not terminated. Which means that the layering of Fidelius Charms is going to cause a lot of unknown and possibly chaotic side-effects.


Think about the practicalities involved. It's possible that the second Fidelius Charm would be rendered ineffective by the first, meaning that nothing would change and the person you wanted to keep out would still have access. It's possible that the confusion around the location would cause some kind of magical paradox, rendering the location visible at some times but not at others. It's even possible that the Charm may only show the location to people who know one secret but not the other - locking you out of your own house but granting access to the person you wanted to keep out! The consequences would be unforeseeable, which is hardly where you want to be with security. A far safer way forwards would be to evacuate and cast a fresh Fidelius Charm on a new location.


Anyway, multiple Fidelius Charms may not be possible.


Flitwick stresses the complexity of the magic involved when he describes the Charm.



"How does that work?" said Madame Rosmerta, breathless with interest. Professor Flitwick cleared his throat.
"An immensely complex spell," he said squeakily, involving the magical concealment of a secret inside a single, living soul."

(Prisoner of Azkaban, Chapter 10, The Marauder's Map).



Since casting one Fidelius Charm is an "immensely complex" feat you can imagine how complicated it might be to cast multiple Fidelius Charms on the same place. It may even be beyond the skills of someone of Dumbledore's calibre to pull off. As with other complex spells, like the Horcrux-creating spell, it seems that duplication multiplies complexity. This is tricky, tricky magic. Casting one Fidelius Charm would be beyond most. Casting multiple Charms on the same location may be impossible.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

harry potter - Did Dolores Umbridge Have Any Association with Voldemort (or Death Eaters) before His Return?

I noticed that Dolores Umbridge was born during the first Wizarding War, so it's very likely she wasn't a Death Eater then (but she is pretty evil -- who knows?). After that Voldemort was not around in a way that could affect many people, and most wouldn't know he was planning to rise again. During that time, and up through Voldemort's return (in Goblet of Fire ), did Umbridge have any connection with the Death Eaters or with Voldemort? Was she doing what she did on her own, or was it because of an association with Voldemort or his allies? Answer Dolores Umbridge was definitely not a good person. However, as Sirius points out, "the world isn't split into good people and Death Eaters". Remember that he also says that he doesn't believe Umbridge to be a Death Eater, but that she's evil enough (or something like that). I think there are two strong reasons to believe that: Umbridge was proud to do everything according to the law, except when she trie...

What is the etymology of Doctor Who?

I recently decided to watch Doctor Who, and started viewing the 2005 version. I have the first two episodes from the first season, and I can't help but wonder what is the etymology of the name "Doctor Who"? And why does the protagonist call himself "the Doctor" (or is it "the doctor")? Answer In the very first episode of Doctor Who (way back in 1963), the Doctor has a granddaughter going by the name "Susan Foreman", and the junkyard where the TARDIS is has the sign "I.M. Foreman". Barbara, who becomes one of the Doctor's companions, calls him "Doctor Foreman" (probably assuming that is his name given his relationship to Susan), and Ian (another early companion) does the same in the second episode, to which the Doctor says: Eh? Doctor who? What's he talking about? "Foreman" is most likely selected as a convenient surname for Susan to use because it happened to be on display near where the TARDIS landed....

story identification - Animation: floating island, flying pests

At least 20 years ago I watched a short animated film which stuck in my mind. The whole thing was wordless, possibly European, and I'm pretty sure I didn't imagine it... It featured a flying island which was inhabited by some creatures who (in my memory) reminded me of the Moomins. The island was frequently bothered by large winged animals who swooped around, although I don't think they did any actual damage. At the end one of the moomin creatures suddenly gets a weird feeling, feels forced to climb to the top of the island and then plunges down a shaft right through the centre - only to emerge at the bottom as one of the flyers. Answer Skywhales from 1983. The story begins with a man warning the tribe of approaching skywhales. The drummers then warn everybody of the hunt as everyone get prepared to set "sail". Except one man is found in his home sleeping as the noise wake him up. He then gets ready and is about to take his weapon as he hesitates then decides ...