There was recently a change in the infobox from Slytherin to the plain one. But in Chamber of Secrets, when the trio is speculating about Draco possibly being the Heir of Slytherin, Harry says, "Look at his family... The whole lot of them have been in Slytherin, he's always boasting about it." Should the Slytherin infobox be restored? Oread 02:32, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
- That's what I thought. But I also think that it should be neutral; as you said, Harry and co. were just speculating, and as far as I know, it has never been explicitly mentioned in canon. --Cubs Fan2007 02:43, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
- I'd forgotten that comment in Chamber of Secrets, Chapter 9. Thanks for pointing me to it, Oread. I'd say that comment paired with the fact that Abraxas was a friend of Slughorn are a good indication that he was in Slytherin. But, "the whole lot of them" is kind of vague, and could potentially refer to only Draco's immediate relatives. In which case we know that his father, mother, and aunt Bellatrix were all in Slytherin. I'd suggest erring on the side of caution and opting for a neutral infobox. We could mention the evidence that Abraxas was in Slytherin in a "Behind the scenes" section (sort of like is done at Eloise Midgen).
- I think we face a similar dilemma with Slughorn's comments regarding the Black family in Half-Blood Prince, Chapter 4. I've always interpreted "The whole Black family had been in my house" and "I'd have liked the set" as meaning that all Blacks atttending Hogwarts in the 1970s, save Sirius, were in Slytherin (Bellatrix, Andromeda, Narcissa, and Regulus). I think it's stretching things to take that comment to imply that every Black in history before Sirius was in Slytherin. -Starstuff 03:22, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
- I did as Starstuff suggested and added that he was most likely a Slytherin in the Behind the Scenes section, but left the infobox neutral. Oread 01:23, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
In PS, in the Diagon Alley chapter, Draco himself says that his complete family was in Slytherin. Draco definately knew about his grandfather. The infobox should be changed.--Rodolphus 09:46, August 6, 2011 (UTC)
I agree. Draco spoke to Slughorn about his grandfather and Slughorn knows him. O. k., Slughorn also could have known him when he was in another house, but like Rodolphus said it is very possible, that Draco knew in which house his grandfather was. Harry granger 15:42, August 6, 2011 (UTC)
| This discussion is listed as an Active Talk Page.|
Please remove this template when the question has been answered.
To avoid an edit war/explosion of anger, I'd like to start a discussion so that users can weigh in on this. Simen Johannes Fagerli would like to propose the theory that Abraxas Malfoy is a Death Eater, to be placed in the behind the scenes section, based on the fact that Death Eater status usually runs in families and that his participation in a shady plot to kick the first Muggle-born Minister out of office four years after Voldemort began his uprising. I personally think this is a reasonable assumption and should be added only to the behind the scenes section, but it appears that others disagree. Please leave opinions below regarding the matter, and please do not change that part of the page until census is reached. --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 14:47, November 16, 2013 (UTC)
Please note that I in later edits wrote that he presumably was, "Aln ally, if not a Death Eater himself." I'm sure that Voldemort had allies outside the Death Eaters ranks. The Malfoy family is known for sharing Voldemort's views on Muggles and Muggle-Borns. This would be an excellent way to serve him without getting his hands dirty. In addition, the books impression that Abraxas, as his son after him, was highly regarded and influential in certain circles. In other words, If not Death Eater, it can be said that he was almost definitely play a Death Eater ally.
There's many reasons as to why Abraxas did not show up on the Graveyard when he returned. If he indeed was a Death Eater, he could have made a deal with Voldemort, if he was somewhat weakened by age and was allowed to let Lucius Malfoy to take his place. Or he might have been a ally of Voldemort rather than a Death Eater. For that reason, I think it's more reasonable to presume he was an ally, although my first theory should not be ruled out. You never know. The reason Lucius was so high ranking during the First War could possibly be, in addition to being skilled and useful, that Voldemort had high expectations to his service because his father was useful to him. Again, another theory, but the ally assumption still stands as most likely, like I see it. User:Simen Johannes Fagerli
- I disagree. Half-Blood Prince clearly contradicts the notion that Abraxas was related to the Death Eaters. Draco, who already knows that Slughorn does not want to associate with Death Eaters, tries to use his relationship to Abraxas to win Sluggy's favour, rather than his father's. Why would he do this if Abraxas supported the Death Eaters? In addition, Abraxas doing terrible things to a Muggle-born at the same time Voldemort happened to be coming into power is not necessarily related. As someone (Sirius, I think?) says: "The world is not divided up into good people and Death Eaters." -- 1337star (Drop me a line!) 16:56, November 16, 2013 (UTC)
- Exactly. The Malfoy family has been raising Pure-blood supremacists ever since they started calling themselves a family; and the thought of a Muggle-born Minister for Magic would be repulsive, with Voldemort in or out of the picture. Abraxas's involvement in Nobby Leach's ousting gives us no information, at all, about his involvement with Voldemort -- Abraxas was following his own agenda.
- Besides, your argument that Death Eaters run in the family isn't much to hold on to. The fact Lucius was a Death Eater does not prove anything about his father -- Regulus Black was a Death Eater, and his father was not, nor was he an ally (whatever that means) even though he agreed with Voldemort's views.
- But this was just to counterargue the evidence Simen Johannes Fagerli brought up. The passage 1337star pointed out strongly underlines the fact that Abraxas wasn't associated with the Death Eaters.
-- 17:20, November 16, 2013 (UTC)
- Actually though both of you make great points, none of that really points to the fact that Abraxas isn't a Death Eater. He could've been dead by the graveyard scene. Also he could've been a Death Eater who was never discovered giving Draco no reason to hide his name from Slughorn. Personally I think it's quite possible that he was one. We don't however have any evidence supporting any association however so I have to vote against adding it to this page. You're only supposed to blow the bloody doors off! (talk) 17:59, November 16, 2013 (UTC)
- I have a hard time believing that.
- 1. Nobby Leach was not only the first ever Muggle-Born Minister for Magic, which alone would make the basis of the Malfoys' dislike and disdain towards him, but as he 'needed' removal, it stands to reason that he by no means was a supporter of Lord Voldemort. Making sure he lost his job was of direct benefit to Voldemorts and his followers. This means Abraxas would be considered as a valuable man in Voldemort's eyes.
- 2. When Nobby Leach lost his job, there would be a short periode of slight confusion when the Ministry was looking for a new one, which would be to at least some advantage for Voldemort.
- 3. The First Wizarding War had began, and Voldemort was on his way to rise to power when Abraxas made Leach lose his job.
- 4. Abraxas shared Voldemort's view on Muggle-Borns, Muggles and Blood-Traitors.
- 5. Abraxas son became one of his Death Eaters at a relatively early age.
- 6. Abraxas Malfoy knew Horace Slughorn, meaning he must have been one of his students, as it seems unlikely - considering Lucius' age - meaning he is old enough for it being fully possible that he knew young Tom Riddle, and even if he didn't, he would know of Voldemort anyway.
- 7. Summary: The war is on, Voldemort starts gaining supporters, Abraxas' views consists with those of the Dark Lord, by making sure Leach lost his job, Voldemort is a far surperior wizard, which means that a man like Malfoy would have little to gain by not being somehow affiliated with their cause, and finally, he committed an either direct or indirect act of loyalty to Voldemort by getting rid of the proclaimed filthy, unworthy head of the government and his actions benefited their quest for powers and his son became second-in-command at some point in the First Wizarding War.
- That he should follow his own agenda and that said agenda just HAPPENS to fit perfectly with Lord Voldemort's plans for conquest seems extremely far-fetched.
- User:Simen Johannes Fagerli
- The difference is of course that a Malfoy would agree with Voldemort's views regarding Pure-Blood Supremecy and most likely be willingly affiliated with him to support his cause because they essentially have the same goals and ambitions, while Fudge on the other hand, was a weak-willed and wimpy little man, who's cowardice inderectly helped Voldemort by him sitting on his butt, disliking Dumbledore for telling a truth he didn't like to listen to. With other words, if Fudge is your only argument for diregarding my arguments/evidence, whatever you want to call it, then I almost see it as my duty to inform you that those two occurances completely incomparable, making your argument baseless. User:Simen Johannes Fagerli
- Edit conflict: In response to your arguments:
- 1. Making sure Nobby Leach was removed was not only beneficial to Voldemort's cause, but also to the Malfoy family: the Malfoys had been, ever since the inception of the International Statute of Wizarding Secrecy in the 1690s, gaining influence over the new heart of power, the Ministry. A Muggle-born Minister would most definitely not respect their espousal of pure-blood values, and would seriously deter the Malfoys' power over the government.
- 2. False. Fudge was replaced by Scrimgeour during the height of the Second Wizarding War, and Millicent Bagnold rose to power during the First Wizarding War. None of these seemed to "create confusion". Even if this was true, it proves nothing, it's circumstantial evidence.
- 3. True, Voldemort was gathering forces, but, to be precise, Nobby Leach resigned 2 years before the war "officially" started. That being said, it proves nothing about Abraxas's involvement with the Death Eaters.
- 4. He did. Then again, so did Walburga and Orion Black, and they weren't Death Eaters.
- 5. We don't know, exactly, at what age Lucius joined the Death Eaters. Either way, he graduated during the height of the First Wizarding War, and the ideals that the Death Eaters defended would've been widely known. Again, this proves nothing about Abraxas: again, Regulus Black became a Death Eater at very early age (about 17) and his parents weren't Death Eaters.
- 6. Abraxas Malfoy knew Horace Slughorn. That's all. This does not mean he must have been one of his students; the social spheres of wizards are not confined to the student-teacher relations (in fact, Slughorn's mention of "dragon pox at his age" seems to imply that Abraxas was actually older than him). Either way, I digress. Yes, it is entirely possible that Abraxas went to school with Riddle or otherwise heard of him; but unless you are saying that the whole Hogwarts student body of the 1930s/1940s became Death Eaters, or that everyone who heard of Voldemort became Death Eaters, you don't have much of an argument there.
- 7. Summary: the fact that Abraxas opposed a Muggle-born Minister for Magic; the fact that both Voldemort and Abraxas were both Pure-blood supremacists; the fact that Abraxas's son became a Death Eater; the fact that Abraxas definitely heard of Voldemort; none of these are firm evidence to suggest that Abraxas himself was a Death Eater.
- "That he should follow his own agenda and that said agenda just HAPPENS to fit perfectly with Lord Voldemort's plans for conquest seems extremely far-fetched." -- the Malfoys' agenda has been in place ever since they arrived at Britain in 1066. It's mainly about being prejudiced about Muggles and those without power, to suit their own ends. Doesn't sound that far-fetched to me. -- 19:36, November 16, 2013 (UTC)
Seriously? That's just... stupid. Come on, buddy, just think! Even if the Malfoys family had saw themselves as superior to 'lesser' wizards for centuries, that has NOTHING TO DO with Abraxas Malfoy's actions, WHAT SO EVER. However, even if you dislike someone, going on a indirict attack on a Head of State is a very bold and risky thing to do. If he had been caught trying to force a Minister to resign, he would end up in Azkaban, no doubt about it. Rregardless of how much he despised the idea of a Muggle-Born Minister, it's unlikely that he would be daring enough to take the risk unless he was sure he would come out of it without losing his status or reputation. Therefore, the only sensible assumption I can see is that he did it on Voldemort's behalf as an ally. If he didn't think he had Voldemort standing on the sideline to pick him up at some point, a Malfoy would be far to ambitious and intelligent to take that chance.
2. False. Fudge was replaced by Scrimgeour during the height of the Second Wizarding War, and Millicent Bagnold rose to power during the First Wizarding War. None of these seemed to "create confusion". Even if this was true, it proves nothing, it's circumstantial evidence.3. True, Voldemort was gathering forces, but, to be precise, Nobby Leach resigned 2 years before the war "officially" started. That being said, it proves nothing about Abraxas's involvement with the Death Eaters.
More incomparable examples, I see? Keep in mind that when Bangold replaced Leach at some point, that was a much, MUCH more different time. Remember that during the First Wizarding War was a situation of a kind which the Ministry of Magic had never been forced to deal with before. If a Minister of Magic had disappeared they would have spent the time to appoint a new one because they would have wanted to be sure that the successor could handle the situation. However, when Fudge was chased out of office for being incompetent, the Ministry and Wizarding World would rush to a conclusion about who would fit the job due to their past "experience" with Voldemort, which, of course, is why they choose Scrimgeour. "Voldemort is a Dark Wizard, and as Head of the Dark Wizard Catchers, who could be better?" But being Minister is also a politican job, which Scrimgeour handeled as poorly as Fudge. Alas, that was the result of a rush descision due to the Ministry's arrogance and belived-to-be cleverness.
4. He did. Then again, so did Walburga and Orion Black, and they weren't Death Eaters. Point being? In theory, just because it's confirmed that one don't necessarily have to be born by Death Eaters to be one does not mean Abrxas automatically are excluded from having been an ally of Voldemort. After all; The Malfoys of higher social status and influence, and Voldemort would have wanted to use this influence to the fullest of its potential.
5. We don't know, exactly, at what age Lucius joined the Death Eaters. Either way, he graduated during the height of the First Wizarding War, and the ideals that the Death Eaters defended would've been widely known. Again, this proves nothing about Abraxas: again, Regulus Black became a Death Eater at very early age (about 17) and his parents weren't Death Eaters.
If you would be so kind as to not make me have to repeat myself. Look above, if you please?
6. Abraxas Malfoy knew Horace Slughorn. That's all. This does not mean he must have been one of his students; the social spheres of wizards are not confined to the student-teacher relations (in fact, Slughorn's mention of "dragon pox at his age" seems to imply that Abraxas was actually older than him). Either way, I digress. Yes, it is entirely possible that Abraxas went to school with Riddle or otherwise heard of him; but unless you are saying that the whole Hogwarts student body of the 1930s/1940s became Death Eaters, or that everyone who heard of Voldemort became Death Eaters, you don't have much of an argument there.
This comment is a colourful fabrication of my words at best. What I wrote was that he might have been Slughorn's student and might have known the young Tom Riddle. In any case can one safely assume that as he was an adult during the First War and shared his son's ideals, and, as you pointed out, which was widely known by the hight of the war, and had the means to put parts of Voldemort's plan to life and had the means to do so without arousing suspicion due to his influence.
7. Summary: the fact that Abraxas opposed a Muggle-born Minister for Magic; the fact that both Voldemort and Abraxas were both Pure-blood supremacists; the fact that Abraxas's son became a Death Eater; the fact that Abraxas definitely heard of Voldemort; none of these are firm evidence to suggest that Abraxas himself was a Death Eater.
"That he should follow his own agenda and that said agenda just HAPPENS to fit perfectly with Lord Voldemort's plans for conquest seems extremely far-fetched." -- the Malfoys' agenda has been in place ever since they arrived at Britain in 1066. It's mainly about being prejudiced about Muggles and those without power, to suit their own ends. Doesn't sound that far-fetched to me.
It seems as if I would have to repeat myself yet again: The so called agenda of the Malfoy family had for centuries isn't an agenda, it's a mutual belife that they was purer and better than wizards who's veins 'carried less magical blood' than themselves, and a mutual dislike for Muggles and the other "sort". Anyway, every person has their own agenda, and while he was raised into a family with a certain conviction, that doesn't mean that this had ANYTHING to do with the plan of getting rid of Leach. As mentioned above, it's unlikely that Abraxas would risk damaging his reputation and even imprisonment if he didn't believe he had Voldemort on the sidelines. Anyway, he was suspected of being involved in a shady plot, there's no details that implies he was the brain of the operation, while the timeline and Malfoy's shared belifes with Voldemort however, and the consisting timeline, implies he did it to serve Voldemort, even if he wasn't a Death Eater himself. User:Simen Johannes Fagerli
- I quote directly from Pottermore: "Independently wealthy, with no need to work for a living, they [the Malfoys] have generally preferred the role of power behind the throne, happy for others to do the donkey work and to take the responsibility for failure. A Muggle-born Minister for Magic would mean that families like the Malfoys would be deprived of their power and influence — and that is enormously significant for Abraxas's actions.
- To your objection about being unlikely that Abraxas would be daring enough to take the risk unless he was sure he would come out of it without losing his status or reputation... well, we do know he was associated with that shady plot. In fact, the majority of the wizarding society believed it so. And did the Malfoys ever lose their reputation because of it? No! Because they had influence and wealth, they pretty much got away with their crimes (and Pottermore makes a point of it, with prime examples such as that of Nicholas Malfoy, who got away without censure by the Wizards' Council, even though he'd repeatedly commited murder) and having a Muggle-born Minister, a Minister who did not value the so-called purity of their blood, put all of that in jeopardy, hence why the need to remove Leach from power (which he eventually did and, no surprise, got away without consequence). And if you think that's stupid... well, it's the whole point of the paragraph in which Abraxas is mentioned on Pottermore.
- "In theory, just because it's confirmed that one don't necessarily have to be born by Death Eaters to be one does not mean Abrxas automatically are excluded from having been an ally of Voldemort." True. Abraxas isn't automatically excluded from being that. However, it's you who have the burden of proof, there. Prove he was.
- "While he was raised into a family with a certain conviction, that doesn't mean that this had ANYTHING to do with the plan of getting rid of Leach." Again, you have the burden of proof. Prove your assertion. Back it up with quotes from canon. And bear in mind that conjecture, speculation and thought experiments are not valid canon sources. -- 23:33, November 16, 2013 (UTC)
- And all relevant factors, such as that we are talking about two completely different people living in two completely different times. That people got away with more in Nicholas's time because the International Statute of Secrecy did not exist, and that the three Unforgivable Curses were legal at the time, is immaterial? Like Snape said, time and space are not without significance for wizards. You can not just assume that because a person can do something, a distant relative can do the same because they are related in blood. The world is in constant flux, and it is excluded from your arguments to disprove my own. So are your assumptions and enormous time and effort of copying and pasting from Pottermore - inaccurate.
- And... Yes, as you said, being known pure-blood supremecists, they'd loose their influcence under a Muggle-Born Minister, meaning he'd have no influence to hide behind. In addition, we know for a fact that because of Tom Riddle, there was several incidents on school which people never could prove was them. That's part of how Voldemort operates. Secrecy and cleverness. Abraxas was suspected, but there was no proofe. How do we know that it wasn't a plan designed by Voldemort? And again, I find it unlikely that Abraxas, as a known relative of a second-in-command DE, would act solely on his own agenda in a time where Voldemort's forces was growing. He were most likely an ally. It would just be TOO random.
- "Too random"? You fail to grasp my point: The Malfoys have always done that sort of thing since, well, ever. That's the whole point of their Pottermore entry: to establish their collective character as, and I quote, "a slippery bunch". Rowling goes as far as saying that the Malfoys have long been using their influence to interfere in Ministry affairs ("The substantial wealth at their disposal ensured them considerable (and much resented) influence at the Ministry for generations to come [...]. They have helped finance many of their preferred candidates' election campaigns, which have (it is alleged) included paying for dirty work such as hexing the opposition."). The Malfoys have never been above using such dirty work to pursue their own goals.
- "I find it unlikely that Abraxas, as a known relative of a second-in-command DE, would act solely on his own agenda in a time where Voldemort's forces was growing. — you make a mistake here. Nobby Leach left his post in 1968, when Lucius Malfoy was around 14. Hardly a boy of 14, in his third or fourth year at Hogwarts, was Voldemort's second-in-command. He would only have an active part in the war after his graduation, in 1972 or 1973. So, Lucius's participation in the war (at least 4 whole years later, if not a few more) is proof of the Malfoys's involvement in nothing, really.
- You ask, and I quote, "How do we know that it wasn't a plan designed by Voldemort?" You tell me how you know it was — note that I'm not categorically saying that Abraxas couldn't have dealings with Voldemort (although the implication in Slughorn's line in Half-Blood Prince does strongly imply Abraxas did not associate with the Death Eaters); I'm saying we simply don't have canonical evidence to support that claim. -- 23:28, November 18, 2013 (UTC)
- What does Slughorn say that implied that he wasn't associated with Voldemort? Also, I never said Lucius was a second-in-command in 1968, I said he was a second-in-command Death Eater. Again, Voldemort was gathering his forces and preparing for war against the Ministry, and if Abraxas had gotten rid of Leach let's say... in 1962, then I'd be inclined to agree, because Voldemort was traveling and searching for objects for his Horcruxes and the Death Eater organization didn't exsist. However, the year 1968 consists with when Voldemort was gathering followers and prepared to begin the war, (which as you said 'offically' began two year later). Getting rid of Leach seems like something Voldemort would want just as much as Abraxas, if not more. There's nothing in the books speaking against the possibility of Abraxas using his influence to get Leach out of office on Voldemorts orders. If Abraxas were anything like family, and we can safely assume he was due to their ideology, then he would be inclined to take the offer of a better future for his family and the pure-bloods everywhere' in exchange for his influence in the Ministry to get rid of a common enemy. Consisting with the time periode as it does, I can't help but to think it's possible, just POSSIBLE, that a part of the reason became so high-ranking in the first place, when other Death Eaters such as Bellatrix and Dolohov apparantly was more magically skillful, could have been that Abraxas's influence proved valuable, and Voldemort got high expectations, which Lucius, proud and pure as he was, longed to satisfy to remain on the Dark Lord's right hand, which doubtlessly would have made his father proud as well. User:Simen Johannes Fagerli
- I had a poor choice of words; what I meant was Draco''s line to Slughorn, when he tries to use his relationship to Abraxas to win Slughorn's favour, rather than his father's. Either way, this can be counterargued (as General Shame pointed out), so, it's a moot point. Moving on.
- Picking apart your assertion, one can see that you are, in actuality, incurring in two logical fallacies: argument from ignorance and cum hoc ergo propter hoc:
- The first, "There's nothing in the books speaking against the possibility of Abraxas using his influence to get Leach out of office on Voldemorts orders." I repeat myself: nothing says he was not on Voldemort's orders, then again, nothing tells us he was. Your argument is based on the fact that removing Leach would benefit Voldemort as well as Malfoy but, as it's been discussed, that proves nothing at all. Again, you are shifting the burden of proof -- if you want to uphold that position, you'll have to prove it.
- The second, when you say that Abraxas "would be inclined to take the offer of a better future for his family and the pure-bloods everywhere' in exchange for his influence in the Ministry to get rid of a common enemy". Sure, but what proof have you got that there was ever a relationship between Abraxas and Voldemort? What if, by chance, Voldemort never approached Abraxas? A temporal relation between two events does not allow us to come to a conclusion about if one caused another or if one is connected to the other in any way. Unless there is any additional proof that would establish a connection between Abraxas and Voldemort in that timeframe, you cannot conclude anything from that.
- Lucius's involvement with the Death Eaters clearly can't serve as evidence as a) he didn't join the Death Eaters until a few years later, as I've demonstrated and b) there could be multiple reasons why Lucius was such a high-ranking Death Eater during the First War. You said it yourself, the scenario you presented is "possible, just POSSIBLE" — and one needs a solid, certain foundation if one is to extrapolate possible consequences from there to even begin to call it an argument. -- 19:05, November 19, 2013 (UTC)
- It would in that case be a pretty small chance. Lucius ended up as second-in-command because his influence in the Ministry made him so immensly valuable for Voldemort. As the Malfoys are known to be influencal and Pure-Blood Supremecists, how likely is it that Voldemort WOULDN'T use it to his advantage? Through, Nott is, I think, about Abraxa's age, a Death Eater and the families share common values about blood purity and had been on good terms for centuries. By the time Voldemort returned to his body, both families was in his ranks. Knowing that both was elderly wizards and both was Pure-Blood Supremecists, why wouldn't Abraxas like to assist Voldemort when Nott, considering they were friends, joined him? It almost seems now as if it's possible Nott introduced Abraxas to Voldemort and they reached a mutual understanding? User:Simen Johannes Fagerli
- "As the Malfoys are known to be influencal and Pure-Blood Supremecists, how likely is it that Voldemort WOULDN'T use it to his advantage?" Erm... Lucius became a Death Eater after Abraxas's shady plot against Nobby Leach. You still have provided no proof whatsoever that Abraxas and Voldemort ever looked at one another, even less so plotted to overthrow the Ministry.
- As for the rest of your reasoning, the one including Nott, I find several flaws:
- "Nott is, I think, about Abraxas's age". I find no evidence in canon to support this. They are both old, sure, but how can we be certain that they are of a similar age? In fact, given that they had children 26 years apart (that's a whole generation, right there) their age difference might be considerable, even if one considers both to be elderly. At any rate, even though this was brought up, I cannot see how any considerations about their age is of any relevance to the matter being discussed.
- "The families [...] had been on good terms for centuries." And your source for this is?
- "Knowing that both was [sic] elderly wizards and both was [sic] Pure-Blood Supremecists, why wouldn't Abraxas like to assist Voldemort when Nott, considering they were friends, joined him?". First, how can you possibly say that Abraxas and Nott were friends? When are we made privy to that information? As far as I know, Rowling never said anything of the sort, and this is an unproved assertion. We don't even know if Abraxas knew the man, much less if they were friends! Then again, even if you could prove Abraxas and Nott were as thick as thieves, you continue to fail to prove that Abraxas himself allied himself to the Death Eaters — association with a Death Eater does not make one a Death Eater, and I repeat myself when I use Orion Black and Regulus Black as an example.
- "It almost seems now as if it's possible Nott introduced Abraxas to Voldemort and they reached a mutual understanding?" It is possible, I'm not saying it isn't. What I am saying is that you provide no cold, hard, canon evidence to back that claim, and prove it based on speculation and unwarrantable assumptions. I could also say, using that very same reasoning, that Abraxas Malfoy was a cross-dresser. Ridiculous? Well, the books don't say he wasn't and, heck, even the timing fits - he was alive in the late '60s! Of course this is absurd. You get my point.
- Unless you can present concrete evidence that Abraxas was a Death Eater, then I personally think there is little more to discuss. -- 02:16, November 20, 2013 (UTC)
- Are you still believing... *Sigh* it's more than six posts ago that we laid the idea of Abraxas = DE to rest. We're talking about him as an ally. If you're gonna discuss this, try to keep up.
- The profe is presented many, many times, you just choose to ignore it time and time again because Rowling haven't puked it in our faces, but all information given in canon points towards it..
- 1. The Malfoy Family was Supporters of Voldemort.
- 2. The time periode Abraxas did Voldemort the favour of getting rid of Nobby Leach, consists with the time Voldemort began to rise to power. Again, it fits, both in the Malfoy family's priorities and timeline.
- 3. They was on terms with Pure-Blood families, where EVERY SINGLE FAMILY: Nott, Crabbe, Goyle, Yaxley, Rosier, Selwyn, ect. became Death Eaters, even the Head of the family ended up as high ranking Death Eater after graduating from Hogwarts. The likelihood is so great that it almost can be called a fact, based on what we know about the Malfoy-psyche from the books and Pottermore. User:Simen Johannes Fagerli
- I used the term "Death Eater" sensu lato, meaning one of Voldemort's wizard allies. If I used the term vaguely, I am sorry. It doesn't matter, really, because you haven't presented a shred of convincing evidence that Abraxas was just an associate of Voldemort, either way.
- In relation to your "proof"... well, it's getting repetitive.
- "The Malfoy family was [sic] supporters of Voldemort". We know Lucius was a supporter of Voldemort. Kindly provide evidence that, before Lucius came along, the Malfoy family was in any way connected to Voldemort.
- "The time periode Abraxas did Voldemort the favour of getting rid of Nobby Leach, consists with the time Voldemort began to rise to power." You are jumping to a conclusion about causation based on a correlation between two events which, as I already pointed out, is an informal fallacy. Would it be impossible that, suiting his own ends, Abraxas Malfoy engaged in the shady plot that saw Nobby Leach be removed from office, while, in a completely unrelated environment, Voldemort was gathering forces? Prove that this scenario is impossible.
- "They was on terms with Pure-Blood families, where EVERY SINGLE FAMILY: Nott, Crabbe, Goyle, Yaxley, Rosier, Selwyn, ect. became Death Eaters". How exactly do you know that the Malfoys were on good terms with any of these families during Abraxas's time? Lucius sure was connected to most of these families during the Second Wizarding War, and we've seen that most of the people from Lucius's generation were Death Eaters, but it's Abraxas we're talking about, here. Anyway, that is beside the point. As I've already said (probably too many times, now), a relationship with someone known to be a Death Eater or an ally of Voldemort, does not make that person one of Voldemort's allies themselves.
- I think it comes down to this, really: prove that Abraxas was connected to Voldemort. Something is only canon once Rowling has "puked it in our faces", like it or not; your method of induction is fallacious and speculative, at best. -- 18:25, November 20, 2013 (UTC)
- Simen, please remember: #1) as a matter of convenience, always sign your posts with four tildes. #2) as a matter of convenience AND courtesy, refrain from insulting people you're in disagreement with. Should you be able to make a good point, you will not be able to push it through, if you don't. MinorStoop 20:00, November 21, 2013 (UTC)