Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
Is the name "Marvolo Gaunt's Ring" official or descriptive? If it's merely descriptive, Horcrux Ring is the only official name I know of, and it should be moved to that. -- 1337star (Drop me a line!) 21:48, January 4, 2014 (UTC)
The Ring was passed down from Cadmus Peverell to his descendants (eventually to those in the Gaunt Family). It would have eventually belonged to Corvinus Gaunt and ultimately Marvolo. But Marvolo died and the ring was passed to Morfin. Morfin was the last owner of the ring who had inherited it without theft. Noting that Voldemort stole the ring from his uncle rather than having acquired it after his uncle's death and having no role in it (which he did- by framing him for murder and leading to his death in Azkaban).
- My vote would be to simply call it the "Gaunt Family Ring" or the "Ring of the Gaunts." It is a bit misleading to call it Morfin Gaunt's ring as it was just as much Marvolo Gaunt's ring and so on back up the Gaunt family tree. Also, I don't think it is correct to say that the ring belonged to Cadmus Peverell. To use the stone, it had to be turned over three times in the hand. It is perhaps possible that Cadmus placed it in a ring to deter his descendents from actually using it after his negative experience. So while it is clear that the Resurrection Stone belonged to Cadmus, I don't think the evidence is as clear that the ring belonged to him. It is possible that his descendents placed it in the ring long after he died. Wva (talk) 14:37, July 15, 2016 (UTC)
A few points
1) On the effects of the curse: Snape suggests that Dumbledore used the Sword of Gryffindor on the ring to protect him from the curse. Dumbledore responds "somthing like that." Since it is clear that Dumbledore refused to tell Snape - or anyone else besides the treo - about horcruxes, it is fairly clear that Dumbledore used the Sword not to stop the curse, but rather to destroy the horcrux. However, he could/would not tell Snape that and he was content to let Snape think he used the Sword on the stone to stop the curse. Also, a close reading of the story shows that Dumbledore did not belive the curse would lead to a "painful and humiliating death." Rather, he clearly states this would be the effect if he was to be killed by Bellatrix or Greyback, as opposed to Snape.
2) Marvolo Gaunt wore the ring on his middle finger. To wear a ring on the middle finger is very rarely done, is done only with very small and simple rings, and is done to emphasize "manly" virtues. The fact that JKR places the ring on Marvolo's middle finger likely indicates both his aggresiveness, as well as his ignorance of social norms.
3) Albus Dumbledore wore the ring for several days. This is very uncharacteristic, and given his clear warning to Harry not to let anyone know they were hunting Horcruxes, it must have been done for a very specific reason. In their meeting, Dumbledore specifically shows the ring to Slughorn, who then stares at it for several seconds. We must assume that Slughnorn recognized the ring as having belonged to Riddle, and that Dumbledore intended him to do so. We may speculate that Dumbledore did this to indicate his success in learning about Voldemorts past, hopefully to encourage Slughorn to teach at Hogwarts and to turn over the true version of the memory.
4) It is not said that Harry willingly dropped the Ressurection Stone in the Forbidden Forest. It says "the Resurrection Stone slipped between his numbed fingers." The use of the word "numbed" clearly implies that he did not have control over his fingers and thus did not voluntarily drop the stone - certainly he did not voluntarily drop it there to keep it hidden. He did however, later make the decision not to search for it, knowing that there was virtually no chance of anyone else being able to find it.
5) This should probably be a board decision, however, I do not think it is necessary to tell the entire story in every article. If someone is viewing these pages, then they almost certainly know the complete story by heart. Therefore, there is need only to tell the specific aspects of the topic under consideration, not to tell the complete story surrounding the topic. Wva (talk) 17:24, April 19, 2015 (UTC)