$hiftyIceQueen said:
Do you actually know their middle names? Because people guessed that Regulus was Regulus Arcturus Black.
No, I don't know their middle names.
But that's my point. People saw the "RAB" and guessed it was Regulus, which was backed up by the fact that the "B" changed for localised translations. But
nowhere in OotP (or any other book) does it actually mention that Regulus' middle name begins with an "A", let alone it being "Arcturus". Here's proof, taken from page 104 of
Order of the Phoenix:
Sirius jabbed a finger at the very bottom of the tree at the name 'Regulus Black'. A date of death (some fifteen years previously) followed the date of birth.
And that's it. Nowhere does it mention Regulus' middle name (so there's no guarantees it's even anything beginning with "A"); nor does it give the names of Sirius' parents. The Leaky Cauldron or whoever it was, leaked that "RAB" was "Regulus Arcturus Black", but that doesn't mean it's Sirius' brother. People saw that the horcrux was a fake and jumped to the conclusion that it was Sirius's brother. If naming a child after one's parents - particularly the males - is as common as it seems, then Black Snr. is just as likely a suspect for RAB. Every time I've mentioned another of my RAB theories, I've gone and said that Regulus is too obvious a suspect. This is probably the single most important event in the Potterverse, so I'm pretty sure JKR isn't going to make it obvious. Given her sense of humour, I'd think it would be right up her alley to have everyone believe that it's Regulus, when in fact it's Black Snr. Every kid believes that Regulus is the one who's behind it all, and they're thoroughly pleased with themselves for having work it out. But it's so
obvious. Of all the theories I'd heard about the identity of the Half-Blood Prince, not one of them came close to mentioning Snape. Instead, they just ran with the obvious: Harry, Neville or Voldemort. A few even suggested McLaggen!
So let's use Occam's Razor, a law of sorts that suggests when you're faced with two conflicting possibilities, the one that is correct is probably going to be the one that requires you to stretch you imagination less than the other. So what would be easier to believe:
A) That Regulus Black somehow survived the Death Eaters,
Avarda Kedavra and Voldemort himself, faked his own death and successfully went into hiding before discovering the horcruxes all on his own as a boy of about nineteen or so?
Or that B) Black Snr. learned of his son's death and was equal parts heartbroken and outraged and so swore revenge on the Death Eaters. An older, much wiser wizard than the son who carried his name, Black Snr. somehow discovered the horcruxes?
We don't even know what Black Snr. did for a living. If Horace Slughorn - a wizard who by all appearances despises the Dark Arts - knew what horcruxes were, chances were someone else knew about them to. Black Snr. lived in what was described as a house that looked "as if it belonged to the darkest of wizards" and has plenty of Dark Artifacts. If Slughorn could know, Black Snr. could know, too, and would probably have an easier time of finding out the answer than Slughorn. Plus, he was a pure-blood wizard who held his heritage in the highest regard, just like the Death Eaters. Voldemort would never consider him to be a threat, as he proved when he attempted to kill the half-blooded Harry instead of the pure-blooded Neville.
Black Snr. had the means, the motive and the opportunity to seek out the horcruxes. It's far more likely that he's the one respnsible as opposed to his son surviving a fatal curse that no-one had survived until then (Harry probably hadn't been born at the time of Regulus' death). You have to admit that it makes far more sense.
