Provavelmente. (Embora isso seja bastante incomum e mágica avançada, e esses são os dois únicos exemplos no cânon.)
A melhor discussão que eu posso encontrar vem em uma entrevista na JK Rowling. 2005 com The Leaky Cauldron e Mugglenet , onde ela discute o aspecto da proteção de sacrifício, e se teria funcionado para James:
ES: This is one of my burning questions since the third book – why did Voldemort offer Lily so many chances to live? Would he actually have let her live?
JKR: Mmhm.
ES: Why?
JKR: [silence] Can't tell you. But he did offer, you're absolutely right.
Don't you want to ask me why James's death didn't protect Lily and Harry? There’s your answer, you've just answered your own question, because she could have lived and chose to die. James was going to be killed anyway. Do you see what I mean?
I’m not saying James wasn't ready to; he died trying to protect his family but he was going to be murdered anyway. He had no – he wasn't given a choice, so he rushed into it in a kind of animal way, I think there are distinctions in courage. James was immensely brave. But the caliber of Lily's bravery was, I think in this instance, higher because she could have saved herself.
Now any mother, any normal mother would have done what Lily did. So in that sense her courage too was of an animal quality but she was given time to choose. James wasn't. It's like an intruder entering your house, isn't it? You would instinctively rush them. But if in cold blood you were told, “Get out of the way,” you know, what would you do? I mean, I don't think any mother would stand aside from their child. But does that answer it? She did very consciously lay down her life. She had a clear choice—
ES: And James didn't.
JKR: Did he clearly die to try and protect Harry specifically given a clear choice? No. It's a subtle distinction and there's slightly more to it than that but that's most of the answer.
Eu acho que é a bravura e o fato de que eles escolheram morrer em vez de deixar a outra pessoa ser prejudicada, o que conferiu a proteção. Para mim, isso parece como se o sacrifício de James tivesse protegido Lily e Harry, se ele tivesse recebido essa escolha . Por isso, pode funcionar para o amor romântico.
Você pode ser capaz de ir além: talvez essa proteção seja conferida se lhe for oferecida a opção de viver, mas se sacrifique para proteger alguém que você na verdade não ama. Ou isso cairia sob o "amor de seus semelhantes"? O aspecto incomum do assassinato de Lily foi a escolha , menos seu amor maternal por Harry (embora isso certamente tenha uma participação nisso).
(Note que esta entrevista foi escrita antes da publicação de Relíquias da Morte , então o fato de que Snape amava Lily, e pediu a Voldemort para poupá-la, era então desconhecido. Pode ser por isso que ele deu a ela Se fosse a mãe de Neville na linha, tenho certeza que ela teria feito a mesma escolha, mas nunca poderia ter sido oferecida.)
Considere também que houve amor romântico entre Harry e Ginny quando ele se sacrificou em Relíquias da Morte , mas isso pode ter sido parte do "amor pelos semelhantes".
Observe também que na mesma entrevista, temos a confirmação de que este é um ramo inexplorado e desconhecido da magia:
MA: Did she know anything about the possible effect of standing in front of Harry?
JKR: No – because as I've tried to make clear in the series, it never happened before. No one ever survived before. And no one, therefore, knew that could happen.