Why didn't the bond of blood break in 1993?

Talk about anything to do with Harry Potter!

Moderator: Professors

First Year Student
First Year Student
Posts: 3
Joined: January 19th, 2018, 1:35 pm
Points on hand: 50.00
Pottermore Username: stebbinsd

Why didn't the bond of blood break in 1993?

Postby stebbinsd » March 6th, 2018, 7:05 am

In the beginning of Prisoner of Azkaban, Harry loses his temper and inflates Aunt Marge like a balloon. He then takes all of his belongings and leaves the Dursley's, with the intention of moving out. In the books, he even has an inner monologue where he contemplates withdrawing all his savings from his Gringots account and beginning life as a bandit.

So in other words, although he eventually returns to the Dursleys the next summer, business as usual, Harry, at least in that moment, had every intention of moving out of the Dursleys' home for good!

In Deathly Hallows, it is explained by Mad-Eye Moody that this is the only criteria, other than turning 17, that can cause the Bond of Blood to break prematurely.

So why didn't the Bond of Blood break when Harry did that in '93, and therefore made him fair game to Voldemort and/or the Death Eaters?

Return to “Harry Potter Talk”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 6 guests