Skip to main content

harry potter - What happens if an Unbreakable Vow is unable to be fulfilled?


In Harry Potter, the Unbreakable Vow seems to work like so:



  1. Two people consent to make an Unbreakable Vow (you can't just thrust an Unbreakable vow on someone without them knowing)


  2. One of those people tells the other to do something

  3. That person then must do the thing, or else they will die.


There's been some debate on the time-frame for an Unbreakable Vow (like if the person can just kill so-and-so a year later), but my question is: what if an Unbreakable Vow cannot be completed? If Snape made an Unbreakable Vow to kill Dumbledore and Dumbledore fell down the stairs and died before Snape could get to him, what would have happened to Snape? Would he just have been freed of the vow, or would he die?



Answer



The canon evidence on this point (as already discussed in the comments, and see the spoiler block below) is slightly ambiguous, but it seems to follow the general principle of Harry Potter magic: that it is sensitive to intent, and tends to act almost as if it were self-aware. Following this principle, I would say that it is the act of choosing to ignore your Vow that results in your death, and that therefore if the Vow becomes moot, as in your example, the spell would have no effect.


As an example of this general principle, Hedwig was able to deliver Harry's letters to Sirius even though Harry had no idea where Sirius was, and in Prisoner of Azkaban she turned up at the Leaky Cauldron five minutes after Harry moved in, even though his departure from Little Whinging was completely unplanned; at the same time, the Aurors couldn't just send an owl after Sirius and follow it, or even post him a letter spelled as a Portkey to take him back to Azkaban. This is because Harry's intent was compatible with the magic, whereas their intent would not have been.


Spoilers from The Crimes of Grindelwald:



Yusaf had made an Unbreakable Vow to track down and kill the son of Corvus Lestrange, but it turned out that Corvus's son had died as an infant. Yusaf did not suffer any obvious ill effects on screen when he learned this - he certainly didn't just drop dead - but the protagonist's (and the audience's) attention was diverted just at that point, so we can't entirely rule out the possibility that he died off-screen. Nonetheless, there was no obvious indication that anybody present expected the result to be fatal to Yusaf, so this is at least weak evidence that a Vow simply ceases to take effect when and if it becomes moot. Also, if it worked the other way, one might have expected Yusaf to have died as soon as the Vow became impossible to fulfill - decades ago - rather than when he found out about it, and we can at least be certain that didn't happen.




One additional caveat:



If I'm understanding the sequence of events correctly, Yusaf's Vow may have already been moot when it was made. It is possible that this means the spell simply never took effect, and that the magic might behave differently if the Vow becomes impossible to fulfill after it is made. That seems less likely, though; if a Vow that becomes impossible to fulfill is considered equivalent to a broken one, it is only reasonable that a Vow that was already impossible to fulfill would be considered equivalent to one you never intended to keep, and if the latter didn't result in your death (or at a minimum some sign that the spell hadn't taken effect) then that would be just too big and implausible a loophole to be taken seriously.



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...

futurama - How much time is lost in 'Time Keeps on Slippin''

In time Keeps on Slippin' , Farnsworth creates a basketball team which he matures by abusing Chronitons. This leads to time skipping forward by random, but ever increasing amounts. How much time was skipped in this way? Answer Unfortunately, I don't think a good estimate can be made for this, for two reasons: Many of the time skips move forward by an indeterminate amount of time. At one point, the Professor mentions localized regions of space skipping forward much more than others. We then see two young boys on the street below complaining about having to pay social security, only to suddenly become senior citizens and start complaining about wanting their money. Thus, each individual could have experienced a different amount of time skippage.

aliens - Interstellar Zoo story

I vaguely remember this story from my childhood: it was about an interstellar zoo that came to Earth with lots of bizarre and unusual species, and humans would file through and gape at all the crazy looking creatures from other planets. The twist came at the end when the perspective shifted to the other side of the bars and we discovered that the "creatures" were traveling through space on a kind of safari. They thought they were the visitors and we were the animals. Neither side knew that the other side thought they were the zoo creatures. Answer Got it. Zoo, by Edward D. Hoch. Published in 1958. Link to Publication History Link to PDF

tolkiens legendarium - Did Gandalf wear his Ring of Power throughout the trilogy?

After Gandalf discovered that Sauron was back and sent Frodo on his quest to Rivendell, did he continue to wear Narya (one of the Three Rings)? It seems like a huge risk to continue to wear it after the Nazgûl (Ringwraiths) started to try and reclaim the One Ring; if they managed to get the ring to Sauron, couldn't he be corrupted by his power? Whatever powers Narya bestows upon him couldn't possibly be worth the huge risk, could it? Answer When Sauron forged the one ring and put it on his finger, the other ring bearers were immediately aware of him and his intentions and removed their own rings. There is no reason why they couldn't merely do so again. As soon as Sauron set the One Ring upon his finger they were aware of him; and they knew him, and preceived that he would be master of them, and of all they wrought. Then in anger and fear they took off their rings. "Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age," Silmarillion