Why did Dumbledore have James’ cloak?

On a new post on her official web site, J.K. Rowling, while talking about her recent experience appearing live in New York with Stephen King and John Irving, has admitted she made a mistake when she was asked, what question have you never been asked that you ought to have been asked? She said:

My mind went blank. Blame long years of trying not to give away the plot. But it occurred to me almost as soon as I got off stage that there IS a question I've always been surprised nobody's put to me, and that I really should have said it while I was still on-stage. I can't make amends to the girl who asked, but it is in tribute to her that I give the answer, belatedly.

Why did Dumbledore have James' invisibility cloak at the time of James' death, given that Dumbledore could make himself invisible without a cloak? There IS a significant - even crucial - answer. (www.jkrowling.com 9/13/06)

When Harry receives his father's cloak in the very first book, it was accompanied by this note:

Your Father left this in my possession before he died. It is time it was returned to you. Use it Well. (SS/PS pg. 202/148)

We know now that Dumbledore left that note. But why did he have the cloak in the first place? I never gave it much thought, but perhaps now we should, since J.K. says it's crucial to the story.

In the same book in which Harry receives his father's cloak and reads the note, in the very same chapter in fact, Dumbledore tells him he doesn't need one to be invisible:

"And it showed your friend Ron himself as head boy." "How did you know--?" "I don't need a cloak to become invisible," said Dumbledore gently. (SS/PS pg. 213/156)

So, if Dumbledore didn't need a cloak, why did he have James' cloak?

I had originally assumed that somehow Dumbledore acquired it after James and Lily's deaths, and kept if for Harry when he was old enough. But that's not exactly what the note says, is it? It says, "Your father left this in my possession before he died."

So, we come back around to J.K.'s question, the answer to which she says is significant, even crucial. Why did Dumbledore have James' cloak at the time of James's death?

I think a logical answer is that James gave it to Dumbledore for safe keeping. But why was protecting the cloak so important? Having heard the prophecy, and suspecting Voldemort might think the part that referred to "Born to those who have thrice defied him" meant them, James and Lily had already taken steps to protect themselves and Harry with a secret keeper. So, why give James' invisibility cloak the extra-special protection of removing it to Dumbledore's safe keeping? Why was the cloak so important? What made the cloak so special? Or perhaps most importantly, what about the cloak made it so important that it be kept out of the hands of Voldemort?

We've suspected for a long time that Harry is a descendant of Godric Gryffindor. We also know that Voldemort wanted to collect one keepsake that was a relic of each of the Hogwarts founders. He had Salazar Slytherin's ring and we suspect Helga Hufflepuff's cup. If James (and therefore Harry) was a descendant of Godric Gryffindor, then perhaps the cloak belonged to him as well. And maybe James was afraid Voldemort would want the cloak because it was a relic of Godric Gryffindor.

With the importance placed on them in Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, we could even suspect that James' invisibility cloak was one of Voldemort's horcruxes. But I think this is unlikely. Although Dumbledore suspected Voldemort might try to make horcruxes, he wasn't sure Voldemort was doing it until after the events in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, at the end of which Dumbledore learns Tom Riddle's diary was one of Voldemort's horcruxes. So, it's unlikely they were on the lookout for Voldemort's horcruxes 12 years earlier.

But what if it's not a Voldemort horcrux? Could it be a horcrux of someone else? Logical candidates for this would be James or Dumbledore. But Dumbledore's note to Harry strongly implies the cloak was James' property, which would point us to believe it was a James horcrux.

And if the cloak is a James horcrux, then it could be a significant, even crucial part of the final battle between Voldemort and Harry, as it could facilitate James to come back from the dead and team up with Harry to defeat Voldemort. This would explain why it would have been so important to leave the cloak in Dumbledore's safe keeping, and to keep it away from Voldemort at all costs.

The cloak could even be a Godric Gryffindor horcrux! In which case Harry would have the ultimate power of a Hogwarts founder in his corner!

These are just my thoughts. What do you think? Is there another reason James' invisibility cloak could be so important that James would want it specially protected by giving it to Dumbledore?

but to make a horcrux u have to kill someone.. it's something like that only na.. then part of ur soul will be in tht object.. so james or dumbledore must have killed someone..

tell me - can one object make 2 horcrux.. i mean one horcrux for 2 different people..???

It is not necessary to kill someone to make a horcrux. U just hv to tear a piece of ur soul n then by some charm (or any other way) u insert it into the object, which can be solid object. As per Dubmledore in HBP solid objects are preferred not the moving or alive like the snake or which can think....

OMG...i written tear a piece of soul...like tear a paper of yr notebook 😆 😆 😆

Originally posted by: mumbai_masti

OMG...i written tear a piece of soul...like tear a paper of yr notebook 😆 😆 😆

lolzzz.. so how do u ' tear ' ur soul 😆

Originally posted by: daniel_4ever

lolzzz.. so how do u ' tear ' ur soul 😆

i m searching how to make horcrux 😛

lol yeah mumbai masti is right u have to tear a piece of ur soul into 2 😛 but to do tht u have to commit an act of greatest sin n thts murder 😛
so basically rukul u were right u hv to commit murder to create a horcrux 😆
n dumbledore has killed in d past..remmbr grindelwald d dark wizard? hes mentioned in dumbly-dorr's chocolate frog card 😃
n to thrice defy lord voldy..perhaps james/lily killed sum of voldys most trusted death eaters?

Originally posted by: mumbai_masti

It is not necessary to kill someone to make a horcrux. U just hv to tear a piece of ur soul n then by some charm (or any other way) u insert it into the object, which can be solid object. As per Dubmledore in HBP solid objects are preferred not the moving or alive like the snake or which can think....

To make a Horcrux, you have to tear your soul into two. To tear your soul..you have to the most evil thing of killing someone. Killing rips the soul apart...and the wizard will use that to his advantage and he will encase the ripped and severed soul into a solid object majorly.


So, dear you have to kill a person. Now, the knowledge about Horcruxes is very rare and it is very very very Dark magic. Dumbledore and James both were very strong supporterd of the anti-dark magic brigade. Do you think they will use dark magic and that too of the worst quality?? Both of them are opposed to killing people, except in dire consequences.

To escape from death is for someone who fears death and both DD and James were not afraid of death. 👏👏👏

Also, if suppose they make a Horcrux, what purpose would it serve?
What purpose will a James or DD with half a soul in them(and the other in a horcrux) serve to Harry in the war??? DD said in HBP that people who make Horcruxes(and there are very few such people) become gaunt, with weird distorted and burned features.

Plus, DD said to Harry that:
he(Voldemort) was in such a hurry to mutilate his own soul, he never paused to understand the incomparable power of a soul that is untarnished and whole."
A whole, untarnished soul is more important than a severed one acc. to DD. Sowhy would he go against his own beliefs???

ya... wat i wanted to know wat whether can one object contain 2 different souls..???

i really doubt that its james hurcrux.. i mean, i thought only dumbledore, harry, and voldemort knew of tis... i was prety sure while reading that lily and james had no idea of hurcruxes... or instead of trying to defeat him they wouldve searched for the hurruxes


and dumbledore and the other professer were already trying to find hurcruxes so it wasnt AFTER THE GOBLET OF FIRE.. but i even wonder... why does dumbledore have james' cloak...