Home
Latest images
Register
Log inThe Elder Wand - Deathly Hallow #1
Page 1 of 1
The Elder Wand - Deathly Hallow #1
Mona Fri May 13, 2011 12:03 pm
The Elder Wand - Deathly Hallow #1
Kip Carter [/b]- Jul 21, 2007 6:45 am
Edited Sep 26, 2007 3:57 am
This thread is to discuss The Elder Wand - Deathly Hallow #1. It was suggested by Ollivander's Apprentice.
Kip Carter [/b]- Jul 21, 2007 6:45 am
Edited Sep 26, 2007 3:57 am
This thread is to discuss The Elder Wand - Deathly Hallow #1. It was suggested by Ollivander's Apprentice.
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 1 to 50
Mona Fri May 13, 2011 12:05 pm
sstabeler - Jul 21, 2007 7:10 am (#1 of 391)
Personally, I'm glad Harry is hiding the Elder Wand. Much as harry deserves all the Hallows, I think having an invincible character will mess things up.
Ollivander's Apprentice - Jul 21, 2007 7:28 am (#2 of 391)
Harry says that Dumbledore intended the wand to pass to Snape. Alternatively he claims Dumbledore intended to be the wand's last master. Am I missing something or is this a contradiction?
sstabeler - Jul 21, 2007 8:14 am (#3 of 391)
Dumbledore intended to be the wand's last master, but to stop Draco form getting hold of it, and letting Voldemort take it, he tried to set it up so Snape would become the master of the wand,a s Snape was his man. of course, now Draco has swapped sides........ it was quite funny that the Elder Wand was powerful enough to fix Harry's broken one.
Ollivander's Apprentice - Jul 21, 2007 9:00 am (#4 of 391)
sstabeler, I thought something like that too, but when I reread it to confirm I was unable to reconcile it so neatly.
Mare - Jul 21, 2007 1:57 pm (#5 of 391)
Dumbledore ment for himself to be the last master of the wand, even though snape had it in his posession?
Lemme see, the wand passes owner when some-one is victorious over another, but snape would not beat Dumbledore, because it was agreed upon beforehand that he would kill him. So Snape would not be the master of the wand and no-one could defeat Dumbledore again, because he was dead.
When Harry says DD intended the wand to pass to Snape, he means maybe the ownership, not the mastership. If snape would kill DD, the wand would pass but would have lost all his extra power.
Something along those lines...
Soul Search - Jul 21, 2007 4:21 pm (#6 of 391)
I am not sure I have this right, either, but my read is:
What was supposed to Happen
Snape was supposed to AK Dumbledore just before he died. Snape would be the Elder Wand's new master.
What was supposed to happen next I am not sure. Would Snape then have the power to defeat Voldemort? Or, was Voldemort, somehow, supposed to obtain the wand, but Snape would be its master? Either way, it doesn't position Harry to be the wand's master so it would rebound against Voldemort when he tried to AK Harry.
What Did Happen
Draco disarmed Dumbledore, becoming the wand's new master. I am okay with that. Harry disarmed Draco in a much later fight, but Draco had his usual wand. Harry, however, became the Elder Wand's new Master because Draco was its master. That seems a stretch to me, but okay.
Voldemort retrieved the Elder Wand from Dumbledore's tomb. It was only a regular kind of wand for him, however. Voldemort AKs Harry the first time. The wand, which knows Harry is its master, doesn't backfire, or anything, but Harry comes back. Because of Harry's sacrifice the wand doesn't work right when Voldemort uses it against anyone. For example, Neville's body bind curse lifts very soon. So, maybe, Harry didn't get a full AK. When Voldemort tries to AK Harry again, the wand won't harm its rightfull master at all, so backfires and kills Voldemort.
I have read the appropriate parts a couple of times, and I can't fully understand why the wand seemed to work, although limited, with the first AK of Harry, but not the second? Any ideas?
Ms Amanda - Jul 21, 2007 5:38 pm (#7 of 391)
The first time, Harry didn't try to defend himself. He wanted AKed. The wand wasn't doing something its master didn't want.
The second time, Harry defended himself and deliberately set a spell to work against the AK. That would be a no-go.
Mudblood and Proud - Jul 21, 2007 6:31 pm (#8 of 391)
But didn't Harry disarm Draco of his own wand? (ie not the Elder Wand) How would that make Harry the Master of the Elder Wand? Surely it is still Draco?
Ollivander's Apprentice - Jul 21, 2007 8:31 pm (#9 of 391)
At this point, I'm going to have to go with Mare. Neither Dumbledore or Harry claimed DD wished Severus to be master of the wand. Only Voldemort interpreted it this way, which I took as part of Rowling's exposition and shouldn't have done. That fits. Thanks Mare.
I don't know what Dumbledore's plan was for Harry to win. Harry seemed to figure out wand descent on his own.
Finn BV - Jul 21, 2007 10:13 pm (#10 of 391)
Mudblood and Proud, I imagine it doesn't matter what wand you're holding at the time, just the fact that Draco was indeed the Master of the Elder Wand, despite the fact that Harry didn't Disarm him of that Wand, and so the Master then becomes Harry. I dunno, it seems we're all a bit confused on that end.
sstabeler - Jul 22, 2007 4:32 am (#11 of 391)
Harry gained mastership of the wand because he had defeated Draco and taken Draco's wand. The Elder Wand somehow knew this, and made Harry his new master, as Draco had lost his wand. It is the loss if the wand that matters. As an aside, did Lucius ever get a new wand?
mysweetdar - Jul 22, 2007 7:53 am (#12 of 391)
None of the bad guys on the tower, at Dumbledore's death, seemed to know about wand descent, which is a good thing. Voldy just wanted a powerful wand, he wasn't concerned with the bloody details. The first AK worked, even tho Harry was the rightful owner, cuz the Horcrux was Voldemort....He wasn't killing Harry, he was killing himself...so, after Harry was free of that piece of Voldy....the wand wouldn't hurt its own master...cool. that Jo can really write, I tell ya!!!!!!!
The Wandless Wizard - Jul 22, 2007 3:22 pm (#13 of 391)
I am not sure that it was Voldemort's soul fragment that caused the Elder wand to work the first time and not the second. I think it was the clashing of spells. It is a lot like the situation where two wands with the same core fight. In book 4 in the graveyard, Harry and Voldemort's spells collided. Because the wands were equals, we got the whole battle of wills thing happening.
In Book 7 in Hogworts, the spells once again collided. This time, Harry's wand was dominant because he had mastery over it where Riddle did not. So Harry's spell worked. Further, Harry was also master of Riddle's wand. Therefore, the wand turned the spell against Riddle. Notice that they used the exact same spells as they did in Book 4, the only other time spells collided. JKR made sure to write that the spells collided again. I think the spells collision is important. By using the same spells as the only other time spells collided, I think we were supposed to remember that time as well.
If Harry had stood there again, the Elder Wand would not have known his wishes. It might not have killed him, but I definitely don't think it would have rebounded.
I still have questions about the whole wand mastery thing. Is this unique to the Elder wand or does it apply to any wand? Does the defeated master still have mastery over the wand? The reason I ask is that we have seen any number of people "defeated" by expelliaramus. Yet they get their wand back and we do not hear about any lost effect. This whole mastery issue seemed tacked on and not supported by the previous examples of expelliaramus.
Edit: In reply to Mare's post below- We have seen examples of someone losing their wand in a serious fight as well. Off hand, everyone in the shrieking shack in Book 3 lost their wand about 4 times...ok, well Sirius and Snape lost their wands at the least. Harry had already defeated Malfoy with Sectumsempra in the bathroom in Book 6. Wands went flying in the Ministry of Magic in Book 5 and several people were defeated by stuns, body-binds, jelly-leg curses, etc. Hermione got defeated in the MoM by the silent spell from the death eater. Her wand always worked the same after. I could go on.
Mare - Jul 22, 2007 3:24 pm (#14 of 391)
Maybe the wands can sense it when a fighter is "serious" or when he/she is just practising.
HPEnthusist - Jul 22, 2007 4:12 pm (#15 of 391)
I believe here was what was supposed to happen: Dumbledore did not anticipate Draco to disarm him or in doing so gaing mastershipof the Elder Wand. Either way I think he hopedSnape would gain mastership and thenwhen he tried to take revenge on Snape Harry would some how gain mastership.
What Iunderstand actually did happen: In Disarming DD Draco became the master of the Elder Wand. Then in the Malfoy Manor when Harry Dissarmed Draco it simbolicaly showed HArry gettinng the upper hand therfore transfering to Harry mastership of all wand Draco was master of at the time, Elder and his regular wand.
Veritaserum - Jul 22, 2007 9:01 pm (#16 of 391)
I'm thinking that one of the reasons Draco's wand worked so much better for Harry than the other Death Eater's was because he was much closer to Draco and cared about him much more than he even knew himself.
Madam Pince - Jul 22, 2007 10:50 pm (#17 of 391)
Mudblood and Proud, I have the same hang-up you do about the wands. It just reeeallly feels like a stretch to me. Wandless Wizard is correct -- this doesn't "feel" right probably because it contradicts all that we have previously seen with wands. It feels like this has been "sprung" on us.
sstabeler - Jul 23, 2007 5:31 am (#18 of 391)
I think that if someone wants to deprive a wizard of his wand (like Harry did when he disarmed Draco) then the wand changes master. If the master does not want to deprive the other person of their wand PERMENANTLY, then the master can use their own wand still. As for the fights in the MOM, I think it's that the DEs never intentioned the victims to lose their wands specifically. In the Shrieking Shack, nobody wanted to do anything but temporarily remove the wads from their rightful owners, the wands would be later returned, thus no change of master.
Esther Rose - Jul 23, 2007 12:00 pm (#19 of 391)
Okay I think I understand what happened. On the night Dumbledore died Draco disarmed Dumbledore's wand via Expillarimus. However, Draco never "claimed" (ie. touched) the Elder wand. So, the only way the Elder wand would know it's true master is by whom ever owned Draco's wand since it was the wand that disarmed Dumbledore and no other hand had touched the Elder wand.
By Harry Stealing Draco's wand in the Malfoy Manor he obtained the Hawthorn wand that disarmed Dumbledore. And since Draco never touched the Elder wand, the Elder wand recognized only the owner of the Hawthorn wand (Harry at this point) as its master. So both the owner of the Hawthorn wand and the Elder wand was transfered from Draco to Harry in the Malfoy Manor. Had Harry returned the Hawthorn wand to Draco at any point during the "war" before he touched the Elder wand, then the Elder Wand would have once again recognized Draco as it's master.
Once Harry (the owner of the Hawthorn wand) touched (claimed) the Elder Wand at the end of Voldemort's life, the Elder Wand then recognized a wizard (Harry) instead of just the "owner of the Hawthorn wand" as it's master. At this point, Harry could have returned the Hawthorn wand to Draco while still remaining the master of the Elder wand.
In otherwords, Voldemort asked the wrong Malfoy for their wand in the beginning of the book.
Certainly the book would have definitely gotten muddier at that point Madam Pince. Remember, Harry wand snapped Lucius' wand, which was snapped by Hermione's wand which who knows which Death Eater has that wand right now. LOL
Madam Pince - Jul 23, 2007 12:17 pm (#20 of 391)
In other words, Voldemort asked the wrong Malfoy for their wand in the beginning of the book.
Ooooo! I never thought of that! Wow, that was a close call, wasn't it?
septentrion - Jul 23, 2007 1:18 pm (#21 of 391)
Esther Rose, your explanation makes sense, really. For my part, I thought the Elder Wand was one of its kind, and thus not submitted to exactly the same rules as the other wands, but I may be mistaken. I've read the book quickly and won't have done my reread for a while.
Mare - Jul 23, 2007 2:22 pm (#22 of 391)
Esther Rose, I really like your explanation, I never had the feeling that I didn't understand the whole thing, but I just reasoned that the wand somehow "knew" that Harry defeated the it's previous master. But I like it much more if the Elder wand recognised Draco's wand as belonging to his master, thank you for putting it so nicely.
zelmia - Jul 23, 2007 2:24 pm (#23 of 391)
Edited Jul 23, 2007 3:26 pm
"The wand chooses the Wizard". This is extremely important.
The Elder Wand chooses the wizard who defeats it. Draco defeated the Elder Wand by successfully disarming Dumbledore. The Elder Wand was then "rightfully" his.
But Harry subsequently defeated Draco's wand simply by wresting it from Draco's hand. The Hawthorne wand chose Harry at that point over Draco because Harry had "won" it from Draco.
Wands also have memory (Priori Incatatem). The Hawthorne wand, which had defeated the Elder Wand, retained its memory of the Elder Wand's defeat. Because Harry was now the Hawthorne wand's new owner ("master"), the power the Hawthorne wand had over the Elder Wand was now in Harry's hands.
Lucius's wand didn't work for Voldemort because Voldemort did not "win" it from Lucius. He was simply using it. Harry experienced this same phenomenon with the wand Ron gave him, the wand Ron had stolen from the Snatchers. Harry hadn't won that wand so it wand never succumbed to Harry as its new owner and didn't really work that well for him.
In the Forest AK, the Hawthorne wand is not involved. There is no duel here. The Hawthorne wand is stowed inside Harry's shirt. Voldemort's spell does not backfire at this time because the Elder Wand is unopposed by the Hawthorne wand.
It is only later, in the final confrontation, that the two Wands, as much as Harry and Voldemort themselves, are facing each other. The Elder Wand, with its own memory of having already been defeated by the wand now facing it, responds according to its own inherent natural law and recognises that wand's owner as its own rightful master. And so, by its own inherent laws, it cannot harm - indeed, must protect - its Master by rebounding the spell cast against its owner back onto the caster.
The Wandless Wizard - Jul 23, 2007 6:11 pm (#24 of 391)
Any of the myriad of explanations are possible. I really like Ester's though, especially the bit about asking the wrong Malfoy for a wand. The problem is that we never got a really good explanation from the text and it was the key moment of the entire series. The whole series has been building up to Harry is the one with the power to defeat Voldemort. It turned out the power the Dark Lord doesn't know about as mentioned in the prophecy was not love, but was Harry's mastery of a wand by some complicated set of rules never mentioned until book 7 and then only explained in confusing pieces. As such, it produced a less than fully satisfying conclusion. I liked Harry's confidence, and how he called him Riddle. I just wish I got a better explanation on why the spell rebounded.
Mediwitch - Jul 23, 2007 6:24 pm (#25 of 391)
The Wandless Wizard, IMHO, it still took Harry's love for others to allow him to confront Voldemort, so although the wands played their role, they couldn't have without the love to propel Harry to that scene.
zelmia - Jul 23, 2007 6:31 pm (#26 of 391)
Actually, I think "the power the Dark Lord knows not" is humility. Harry never once believed that he was powerful enough to defeat Voldemort on his own. He has always been gratefully reliant on his friends and loved ones. This episode was no exception.
Or perhaps "the power to pay attention to small details". Harry, with the help of his friends, has always been able to piece together all of the information (at least, of what was available) that could possibly help him before the final confrontation. Voldemort only asks questions after his plans fail.
Voldemort's true downfall was his own arrogance.
TomProffitt - Jul 23, 2007 6:34 pm (#27 of 391)
Of the three Hallows, the one symbolizing Power, the Elder Wand, is actually the weakest; for it gives power over mortal enemies, but not power over Death itself.
EDIT: And it's the only one of the three Voldemort sought out.
The Wandless Wizard - Jul 23, 2007 7:06 pm (#28 of 391)
Yes, he has love and humility. And yes they helped him get to the point where he could defeat Riddle. However, a lot of other people have love and humility and would have died in Harry's place. There was one thing that Harry had that nobody else did and it was the thing that allowed him to survive that confrontation and kill Riddle. That was mastery over the Elder Wand. All the love and humility in the world wouldn't have caused Riddle's AK curse to rebound.
freshwater - Jul 23, 2007 7:34 pm (#29 of 391)
Zelmia, I like very much the explanations in your last two posts. I particulary like your idea that Voldemort was defeated by his own arrogance. He had captured Ollivander and demanded assistance, but Harry rescued Ollivander and asked the right questions. Then Harry understood the qualities and relationships among the wands and their owners, where Voldemort did not. I think he'd gotten to a point where he was so full of himself that he couldn't imagine that any information that he did not already know, could be at all important. Harry was always ready to learn --at least in real life situations, if not the classroom-[/b]- And, more than Hermione, tended to see beyond the obvious facts to implications and deeper meanings.
zelmia - Jul 23, 2007 8:01 pm (#30 of 391)
Edited Jul 23, 2007 8:58 pm
All the love and humility in the world wouldn't have caused Riddle's AK curse to rebound. - Except that that's exactly what caused his original AK on baby Harry to rebound in the first place. And nary an Elder Wand in sight!
Aw shucks... Thanks, Freshwater.
Very good point, TomProffit.
septentrion - Jul 24, 2007 1:08 am (#31 of 391)
All of this is very interesting and makes things very much clearer than Jo did. I'll now try to organise my thoughts on the matter.
The Elder Wand must be taken forcibly to recongnise its new master and works for him/her as the wondrous wand it is supposed to be. So, when LV found out that DD took it forcibly from Grindelwald, he came to the conclusion that all he had to do was to take it forcibly from DD's corpse. He never thought of Draco, even though I'm persuaded that he knew of Draco Disarming DD (he probably for a very detailed of the events of the Astronomy Tower), because Draco didn't even touch the wand, didn't take it forcibly.
So now, LV thinks he is the master of the Elder Wand. After a whlie, he's forced to acknowledged that it isn't the case. He ponders the matter, and comes to the conclusion that the wand doesn't work for him because taking it from the body didn't count. Killing DD made, in LV's mind, Snape as the new master of the Elder Wand. Once more, he's overlooked Draco's part in DD's death and consider that not touching the wand might count. With his twisted psychology, the only thing for him was to kill the one he tought to be the Elder Wand's master. He didn't even consider vanquish Snape in a duel, he went directly for the kill.
zelmia - Jul 24, 2007 1:28 am (#32 of 391)
The Elder Wand must be taken forcibly to recongnise its new master - I think it just has to be defeated, the same as any other wand.
It is explained that Harry's wand had defeated Voldemort's wand in GF. So during the escape from Privet Drive, when Harry and Voldemort cast simultaneous spells at one another (a duel), Voldemort's wand "remembered" this and recognised Harry's wand as the wand that had previously beaten it. In other words, Harry was now the new Master of Voldemort's wand [/b]- Although he obviously didn't know this at the time.
And apparently the wand cannot be made to attack its master. So the spell that Voldemort had cast at Harry and Hagrid rebounded back to him.
Dumbledore's wand (aka The Elder Wand) was not "taken forcibly" from Dumbledore by Draco, but it was the "losing" wand in that particular duel. Because of this, Draco's wand had the power over the Elder Wand. And by extension, Draco himself was the Elder Wand's new Master.
Later, when Harry defeats Draco's wand (in this case he does take Draco's wand forcibly), Draco's (now Harry's) Hawthorne wand is still the master of the Elder Wand; so by extension Harry is now the Master of the Elder Wand.
Once again, Voldemort's downfall is in overlooking/ignoring the details. "The wand chooses the wizard". The wand chooses its master. Its master is the owner of the wand (or hand) that defeated it.
He didn't even consider vanquish Snape in a duel, he went directly for the kill. - Exactly. Because Voldemort believed he had to kill the Master, when really all he had to do was "master the wand".
septentrion - Jul 24, 2007 2:55 am (#33 of 391)
Zelmia, zillion thanks for this insightful post!
Jenniffler - Jul 24, 2007 7:03 am (#34 of 391)
Good thoughts, everyone! Especially zelmia!
I don't know how to say this, if I may be excused. I think Draco went through a grueling process to earn the elder wand. By trying to out -think Dumbledore and succeeding, he gained the right to wield the wand. It scares me how close he came to attain actual possession as we are shown wizard catching disarmed wands. But because he did not want the wand itself, Draco saved himself some serious trouble. The Malfoy's were afraid of Voldemort enough without the peril of possessing the ultimate dueling weapon.
Mediwitch - Jul 24, 2007 7:08 am (#35 of 391)
zelmia, your post #32 is "an admirably succinct" summary, as Dumbledore would say. One minor detail:
It is explained that Harry's wand had defeated Voldemort's wand in GF. So during the escape from Privet Drive, when Harry and Voldemort cast simultaneous spells at one another (a duel), Voldemort's wand "remembered" this and recognised Harry's wand as the wand that had previously beaten it.
Voldemort was not using his own yew wand which Harry had defeated in GoF. He was using Lucius Malfoy's wand which he had taken in Ch. 1 of DH.
LooneyLuna - Jul 24, 2007 8:04 am (#36 of 391)
All magic leaves traces, from what we are told. Dumbledore recognized Voldemort's "style" in the cave. Maybe Harry's wand remembered Voldemort's style - didn't matter what wand he used.
I don't know if that makes any sense.
Soul Search - Jul 24, 2007 8:08 am (#37 of 391)
Dumbledore and the Elder Wand
The introduction of the "Deathly Hallows" into the last book of the series puzzled me for a bit. Until I realized that the Deathly Hallows, and particularly the Elder Wand, have been the main drive for the series from the start. Here's why I think so:
Grindelwald obtains the Elder Wand by theft from Gregorovitch. He did not defeat Gregorovitch in any way, so the Elder Wand never recognized him as its master. Grindelwald tells the young Dumbledore he is the master of the Elder Wand and this, in part, is the attraction Dumbledore has for Grindelwald and his plans for domination.
Grindelwald is a powerful wizard and, even without mastery of the Elder Wand, he uses it to become a feared dark wizard. During this time Dumbledore develops into the "noble" wizard we, a long time later, see McGonnagal acknowledge in Privet Drive. But Dumbledore also knows his limitations and the temptations of the Elder Wand. He allows Grindelwald to come to power unchecked because Dumbledore does not want to defeat Grindelwald and become master of the Elder Wand; he fears how it might change him.
The time comes, however, when Dumbledore must face Grindelwand. He defeats him and becomes the master of the Elder Wand. He swears that it will not change him and he will "destroy" the wand by dying without anyone defeating him, thereby nullifying the wand's power.
Circumstances, however, make this plan impossible. Dumbledore, foolishly, places the cursed ring on his finger and is saved from an early death by Snape. Then, Snape makes the unbreakable vow, requiring him to defeat Dumbledore or die, himself. Dumbledore trusts Severus Sanpe. He decides that Snape will be the one to defeat him and become the master of the Elder Wand, but Snape will not take the wand, so his plan for the wand will succeed when Snape dies.
So, Snape would have to kill Dumbledore.
Even this plan is thwarted when Draco disarms Dumbledore on the tower.
Now, Snape did not have to kill Dumbledore, for the Elder Wand, but still had to "appear" to kill Dumbledore to become Voldemort's most favored Death Eater. (I still can't decide if Snape actually killed Dumbledore or not.)
Now, Dumbledore is still directing Snape, via his portrait, and still has the Elder Wand foremost in his planning. True, he wants to defeat Voldemort, but that is secondary to his goal of nullifying the power of the Elder Wand.
Via the legacy of the book he leaves Hermione, Dumbledore starts Harry on a path that will make Harry the master of the Elder Wand. Dumbledore trusts Harry to complete his own goal of the destruction of the power of the Elder Wand.
This is why Dumbledore's actions have, at times, been so puzzling. We, and Harry, have thought Dumbledore's only goal was Voldemort's defeat, but it wasn't. Dumbledore's first goal was always the destruction of the power of the Elder Wand!
Remi - Jul 24, 2007 8:18 am (#38 of 391)
Sigh. I may not be the brightest bulb, but I am not unintelligent. I went to law school, passed the Bar, am able to decipher the fine print in lengthy contracts, and have even been known to explain the complexities of "X-Files" episodes to friends. Yet I find the whole concept of the elder wand's master very confusing. All your explanations have helped a lot, but it's got me wondering ---
If as Ollivander says, "where a wand has been won, its allegiance will change", and "the conquered wand will usually bend its will to its new master" and "it is not necessary to kill the previous owner", does that mean that if you duel someone once and don't win, that you will not be able to win if you duel with them again? For example, there have been a lot of Expelliarmus-es in the books; does the wand change allegiances each time?
Madam Pince - Jul 24, 2007 8:20 am (#39 of 391)
Thanks, zelmia! Excellent summation. Take 50 points for your house!
Soul Search, the only thing I can see with your above post is that you say (and I agree with you) that Grindelwald stole the Elder Wand from Gregorovitch, he didn't technically "defeat" him, so therefore the wand never recognized him as its master. But if that were true, then Dumbledore would've had to defeat Gregorovitch in order to become the Wand's master -- his defeat of Grindelwald would've had no effect on the mastery of the wand, right? And thus all this time, the Elder Wand hasn't been working its "best" for Dumbledore, and then when Voldemort finally killed Gregorovitch, seems like the power would've transferred to him then.
This is either a bit of an error or murkiness on JKR's part with explaining how wand mastery transfers, or else she clearly considers "stealing" as equivalent to "defeating." In other words, Grindelwald must've been "defeating" Gregorovitch when he stole the wand, in order for the whole rest of the story to work out.
It's not very satisfying to me, but there it is. I can't see any other way around it.
I guess now we know what JKR meant when she said a lot of fans might not like how Book 7 goes. She had to know that us nit-pickers wouldn't care for how the spills were arranged on the mantlepiece. (A little Agatha Christie thrown in there, for any fans... )
Soul Search - Jul 24, 2007 8:35 am (#40 of 391)
Madam Pince,
I agree, the part about stealing the Elder Wand is a bit murky. I thought, since Voldemort "stole" the wand from Dumbledore's tomb and the wand didn't "choose" him for its master, that the Elder Wand only respected someone who won the wand in contest.
However, Dumbledore did defeat Grindelwald in a contest, so the Elder Wand decided Dumbledore was worthy and "chose" him as its master.
"The wand chooses the wizard."
Madam Pince - Jul 24, 2007 8:43 am (#41 of 391)
Yes, but I was going back further -- the wand shouldn't have recognized Grindelwald ever at all, thereby meaning that it couldn't have passed from Grindelwald to Dumbledore -- if what we're thinking about "stealing-isn't-defeating" is true.
I must be wrong -- stealing must count as defeating, or else Grindelwald would've never been the wand's master. The only reason Voldemort's "stealing" of the wand from DD's corpse didn't work was because it had already been transferred prior to the tomb-raid -- he was robbing the wrong person.
septentrion - Jul 24, 2007 8:57 am (#42 of 391)
Grindelwald stole the wand and, if my memory serves me well, Stunned Gregorovitch. Maybe it counts as defeating.
So, where Voldemort is mistaken is: it's the wand that must be defeated, not its wielder.
Soul Search - Jul 24, 2007 9:20 am (#43 of 391)
septentrion,
"Grindelwald stole the wand and ... Stunned Gregorovitch. Maybe it counts as defeating."
Good point. I think you may have cleared the "murkiness" of stealing the Elder Wand.
Voldemort didn't do anything to the current master of the wand, Draco, so the wand saw no reason to "choose" him.
Ludicrous Patents Office - Jul 24, 2007 9:26 am (#44 of 391)
The original owner of the wand had it stolen from him when he was passed out in a drunken stupor. Then the thief killed him.(p. 408 Scholastic) There was no duel. I wonder if the owner has to be alive when the theft takes place? I think we also have to consider that wands are sentient in some manner. If they choose the wizard. The Elder Wand "heard" Harry tell it he had defeated Draco(p. 743). There is also the bragging piece. The original owner and Gregorovitch bragged about owning the wand and lost it. Dumbledore kept it very quiet. LPO
zelmia - Jul 24, 2007 10:54 am (#45 of 391)
Edited Jul 24, 2007 11:25 am
Thanks, everyone!
Voldemort was not using his own yew wand which Harry had defeated in GoF. He was using Lucius Malfoy's wand which he had taken in Ch. 1 of DH. [/b]- Ah! You're right, Mediwich. I was thinking that Voldemort took Lucius's wand because of what happened during Escape from Privet Drive; but actually he did not want a repeat of GF.
The only answer I can come up with then is that Harry's wand must have come out on top the last time the two met. Perhaps at the DoM.
does that mean that if you duel someone once and don't win, that you will not be able to win if you duel with them again? - It seems so, yes. But I think that duel is actually a very specific set of conditions.
A) The spells must be cast simultaneously
B) At least one of the spells must be to disarm (Expelliarmus).
I don't think when Draco and Harry "dueled" back in CS that either of their wands became master over the other because neither boy had tried to disarm the other. They simply sent out different spells simultaneously.
But when Draco and Dumbledore "dueled" in HBP, though Dumbledore's spell was not intended for Draco, it was still cast simultaneously with Draco's disarming charm. So it seems that the "Expelliarmus" is the required element.
For example, there have been a lot of Expelliarmus-es in the books; does the wand change allegiances each time? [/b]- Apparently so, or else Lucius's wand would have been sufficient for Voldemort to use against Harry's during the Escape from Privet Drive.
And it seems that Grindelwald stealing Gregorovitch's wand still counts as "disarming", in Wandlore. The point is that Grindelwald successfully relieved Gregorovitch of his wand (even though Gregorovitch was apparently unaware of it). There doesn't have to be a duel.
Remember, Harry did precisely the same thing by wrenching Draco's wand from his hand. And the wand Ron took from the Snatchers would likely have succumbed to Ron's hand, had he chosen to use it; but he gave it to Harry, who had not actually won it, so it didn't work for Harry.
The Elder Wand "heard" Harry tell it he had defeated Draco(p. 743). - The Elder Wand did not need to "hear" this information because it could already recognise the Hawthorne wand (formerly Draco's) that had previously defeated it. It's the wand that has the power over the other [/b]- And by extension only - the wand's owner.
totyle - Jul 24, 2007 11:30 pm (#46 of 391)
Brilliant posts everyone..especially Esther Rose's and Zelmia's...beats having to fry my brain trying to follow wand mastery! Thank you.
Am I allowed a silly question? Right at the end...Harry tells DD's potrait that he is putting the Elder Wand back where it came from. He says it can stay there and that if he (Harry) dies a natural death the previous master would never have been defeated. I read this as Harry intending to return the Elder Wand back to DD's tomb. Is this correct? Is the previous master referring to DD? The Elder Wand's ownership had transferred from DD to Draco to Harry. Why does Harry returning it to DD mean the previous master(DD) would never have been defeated. If you give it back does that mean you surrender mastership of the wand? I dont get it...
legolas returns - Jul 25, 2007 12:53 am (#47 of 391)
Dumbledore was defeated. By hiding the wand so that nobody can find it means that the wand cant be defeated. If Harry dies and nobody else has fought Harry for the wand then its power will be destroyed.
nthdavid - Jul 25, 2007 2:44 am (#48 of 391)
In the Wandmaker chapter, Ollivander says that subtle laws govern wand ownership., but the conquered wand will usually bend its will to its new master. Harry took Draco's wand and was using it. In all of the practicing they did disarming, the wand owner always got their own wand back. No one took it and started using it. If they had, then wand ownership would have been changing.
"The wand chooses the wizard."
Ms Hagrid - Jul 25, 2007 6:23 am (#49 of 391)
Not sure if this is the right place for this comment, but it would be interesting to go back through books 1-6 and look at instances where people are disarmed in duels and/or using wands belonging to other people to see if these new "rules" are consistent throughout.
Just to name a few: Neville got poor results using his dad's wand, Ron got poor results using Charlie's old wand, Harry got good results using Hermione's wand (surely he had disarmed her a time or two during practice), etc.
phuze - Jul 25, 2007 6:52 am (#50 of 391)
My wife raised an interesting issue when we talked about the Elder wand - did Grindlewald really have control of the Elder wand? The reason she wondered about it is that the Elder wand was said to be undefeatable in a duel, yet Dumbledore is known to have defeated Grindlewald in... a duel. If Dumbledore defeated Grindlewald in a duel it means that Grindlewald didn't have control of the wand and so how did Dumbledore become the master of it? If Gorovitch was the last "controller" of the wand and Voldemort killed him, how did Harry have a superior claim? If there had ony been some part of the story where it turned out Dumbledore dueled Gorovitch and defeated him it would have made sense. Otherwise, I think that someday someone could take the Elder wand and control it again - even without defeating Harry. At the very least, if they got it after his death or possessed it when he died they might be able to control it.
Food for thought,
Phuze
Personally, I'm glad Harry is hiding the Elder Wand. Much as harry deserves all the Hallows, I think having an invincible character will mess things up.
Ollivander's Apprentice - Jul 21, 2007 7:28 am (#2 of 391)
Harry says that Dumbledore intended the wand to pass to Snape. Alternatively he claims Dumbledore intended to be the wand's last master. Am I missing something or is this a contradiction?
sstabeler - Jul 21, 2007 8:14 am (#3 of 391)
Dumbledore intended to be the wand's last master, but to stop Draco form getting hold of it, and letting Voldemort take it, he tried to set it up so Snape would become the master of the wand,a s Snape was his man. of course, now Draco has swapped sides........ it was quite funny that the Elder Wand was powerful enough to fix Harry's broken one.
Ollivander's Apprentice - Jul 21, 2007 9:00 am (#4 of 391)
sstabeler, I thought something like that too, but when I reread it to confirm I was unable to reconcile it so neatly.
Mare - Jul 21, 2007 1:57 pm (#5 of 391)
Dumbledore ment for himself to be the last master of the wand, even though snape had it in his posession?
Lemme see, the wand passes owner when some-one is victorious over another, but snape would not beat Dumbledore, because it was agreed upon beforehand that he would kill him. So Snape would not be the master of the wand and no-one could defeat Dumbledore again, because he was dead.
When Harry says DD intended the wand to pass to Snape, he means maybe the ownership, not the mastership. If snape would kill DD, the wand would pass but would have lost all his extra power.
Something along those lines...
Soul Search - Jul 21, 2007 4:21 pm (#6 of 391)
I am not sure I have this right, either, but my read is:
What was supposed to Happen
Snape was supposed to AK Dumbledore just before he died. Snape would be the Elder Wand's new master.
What was supposed to happen next I am not sure. Would Snape then have the power to defeat Voldemort? Or, was Voldemort, somehow, supposed to obtain the wand, but Snape would be its master? Either way, it doesn't position Harry to be the wand's master so it would rebound against Voldemort when he tried to AK Harry.
What Did Happen
Draco disarmed Dumbledore, becoming the wand's new master. I am okay with that. Harry disarmed Draco in a much later fight, but Draco had his usual wand. Harry, however, became the Elder Wand's new Master because Draco was its master. That seems a stretch to me, but okay.
Voldemort retrieved the Elder Wand from Dumbledore's tomb. It was only a regular kind of wand for him, however. Voldemort AKs Harry the first time. The wand, which knows Harry is its master, doesn't backfire, or anything, but Harry comes back. Because of Harry's sacrifice the wand doesn't work right when Voldemort uses it against anyone. For example, Neville's body bind curse lifts very soon. So, maybe, Harry didn't get a full AK. When Voldemort tries to AK Harry again, the wand won't harm its rightfull master at all, so backfires and kills Voldemort.
I have read the appropriate parts a couple of times, and I can't fully understand why the wand seemed to work, although limited, with the first AK of Harry, but not the second? Any ideas?
Ms Amanda - Jul 21, 2007 5:38 pm (#7 of 391)
The first time, Harry didn't try to defend himself. He wanted AKed. The wand wasn't doing something its master didn't want.
The second time, Harry defended himself and deliberately set a spell to work against the AK. That would be a no-go.
Mudblood and Proud - Jul 21, 2007 6:31 pm (#8 of 391)
But didn't Harry disarm Draco of his own wand? (ie not the Elder Wand) How would that make Harry the Master of the Elder Wand? Surely it is still Draco?
Ollivander's Apprentice - Jul 21, 2007 8:31 pm (#9 of 391)
At this point, I'm going to have to go with Mare. Neither Dumbledore or Harry claimed DD wished Severus to be master of the wand. Only Voldemort interpreted it this way, which I took as part of Rowling's exposition and shouldn't have done. That fits. Thanks Mare.
I don't know what Dumbledore's plan was for Harry to win. Harry seemed to figure out wand descent on his own.
Finn BV - Jul 21, 2007 10:13 pm (#10 of 391)
Mudblood and Proud, I imagine it doesn't matter what wand you're holding at the time, just the fact that Draco was indeed the Master of the Elder Wand, despite the fact that Harry didn't Disarm him of that Wand, and so the Master then becomes Harry. I dunno, it seems we're all a bit confused on that end.
sstabeler - Jul 22, 2007 4:32 am (#11 of 391)
Harry gained mastership of the wand because he had defeated Draco and taken Draco's wand. The Elder Wand somehow knew this, and made Harry his new master, as Draco had lost his wand. It is the loss if the wand that matters. As an aside, did Lucius ever get a new wand?
mysweetdar - Jul 22, 2007 7:53 am (#12 of 391)
None of the bad guys on the tower, at Dumbledore's death, seemed to know about wand descent, which is a good thing. Voldy just wanted a powerful wand, he wasn't concerned with the bloody details. The first AK worked, even tho Harry was the rightful owner, cuz the Horcrux was Voldemort....He wasn't killing Harry, he was killing himself...so, after Harry was free of that piece of Voldy....the wand wouldn't hurt its own master...cool. that Jo can really write, I tell ya!!!!!!!
The Wandless Wizard - Jul 22, 2007 3:22 pm (#13 of 391)
I am not sure that it was Voldemort's soul fragment that caused the Elder wand to work the first time and not the second. I think it was the clashing of spells. It is a lot like the situation where two wands with the same core fight. In book 4 in the graveyard, Harry and Voldemort's spells collided. Because the wands were equals, we got the whole battle of wills thing happening.
In Book 7 in Hogworts, the spells once again collided. This time, Harry's wand was dominant because he had mastery over it where Riddle did not. So Harry's spell worked. Further, Harry was also master of Riddle's wand. Therefore, the wand turned the spell against Riddle. Notice that they used the exact same spells as they did in Book 4, the only other time spells collided. JKR made sure to write that the spells collided again. I think the spells collision is important. By using the same spells as the only other time spells collided, I think we were supposed to remember that time as well.
If Harry had stood there again, the Elder Wand would not have known his wishes. It might not have killed him, but I definitely don't think it would have rebounded.
I still have questions about the whole wand mastery thing. Is this unique to the Elder wand or does it apply to any wand? Does the defeated master still have mastery over the wand? The reason I ask is that we have seen any number of people "defeated" by expelliaramus. Yet they get their wand back and we do not hear about any lost effect. This whole mastery issue seemed tacked on and not supported by the previous examples of expelliaramus.
Edit: In reply to Mare's post below- We have seen examples of someone losing their wand in a serious fight as well. Off hand, everyone in the shrieking shack in Book 3 lost their wand about 4 times...ok, well Sirius and Snape lost their wands at the least. Harry had already defeated Malfoy with Sectumsempra in the bathroom in Book 6. Wands went flying in the Ministry of Magic in Book 5 and several people were defeated by stuns, body-binds, jelly-leg curses, etc. Hermione got defeated in the MoM by the silent spell from the death eater. Her wand always worked the same after. I could go on.
Mare - Jul 22, 2007 3:24 pm (#14 of 391)
Maybe the wands can sense it when a fighter is "serious" or when he/she is just practising.
HPEnthusist - Jul 22, 2007 4:12 pm (#15 of 391)
I believe here was what was supposed to happen: Dumbledore did not anticipate Draco to disarm him or in doing so gaing mastershipof the Elder Wand. Either way I think he hopedSnape would gain mastership and thenwhen he tried to take revenge on Snape Harry would some how gain mastership.
What Iunderstand actually did happen: In Disarming DD Draco became the master of the Elder Wand. Then in the Malfoy Manor when Harry Dissarmed Draco it simbolicaly showed HArry gettinng the upper hand therfore transfering to Harry mastership of all wand Draco was master of at the time, Elder and his regular wand.
Veritaserum - Jul 22, 2007 9:01 pm (#16 of 391)
I'm thinking that one of the reasons Draco's wand worked so much better for Harry than the other Death Eater's was because he was much closer to Draco and cared about him much more than he even knew himself.
Madam Pince - Jul 22, 2007 10:50 pm (#17 of 391)
Mudblood and Proud, I have the same hang-up you do about the wands. It just reeeallly feels like a stretch to me. Wandless Wizard is correct -- this doesn't "feel" right probably because it contradicts all that we have previously seen with wands. It feels like this has been "sprung" on us.
sstabeler - Jul 23, 2007 5:31 am (#18 of 391)
I think that if someone wants to deprive a wizard of his wand (like Harry did when he disarmed Draco) then the wand changes master. If the master does not want to deprive the other person of their wand PERMENANTLY, then the master can use their own wand still. As for the fights in the MOM, I think it's that the DEs never intentioned the victims to lose their wands specifically. In the Shrieking Shack, nobody wanted to do anything but temporarily remove the wads from their rightful owners, the wands would be later returned, thus no change of master.
Esther Rose - Jul 23, 2007 12:00 pm (#19 of 391)
Okay I think I understand what happened. On the night Dumbledore died Draco disarmed Dumbledore's wand via Expillarimus. However, Draco never "claimed" (ie. touched) the Elder wand. So, the only way the Elder wand would know it's true master is by whom ever owned Draco's wand since it was the wand that disarmed Dumbledore and no other hand had touched the Elder wand.
By Harry Stealing Draco's wand in the Malfoy Manor he obtained the Hawthorn wand that disarmed Dumbledore. And since Draco never touched the Elder wand, the Elder wand recognized only the owner of the Hawthorn wand (Harry at this point) as its master. So both the owner of the Hawthorn wand and the Elder wand was transfered from Draco to Harry in the Malfoy Manor. Had Harry returned the Hawthorn wand to Draco at any point during the "war" before he touched the Elder wand, then the Elder Wand would have once again recognized Draco as it's master.
Once Harry (the owner of the Hawthorn wand) touched (claimed) the Elder Wand at the end of Voldemort's life, the Elder Wand then recognized a wizard (Harry) instead of just the "owner of the Hawthorn wand" as it's master. At this point, Harry could have returned the Hawthorn wand to Draco while still remaining the master of the Elder wand.
In otherwords, Voldemort asked the wrong Malfoy for their wand in the beginning of the book.
Certainly the book would have definitely gotten muddier at that point Madam Pince. Remember, Harry wand snapped Lucius' wand, which was snapped by Hermione's wand which who knows which Death Eater has that wand right now. LOL
Madam Pince - Jul 23, 2007 12:17 pm (#20 of 391)
In other words, Voldemort asked the wrong Malfoy for their wand in the beginning of the book.
Ooooo! I never thought of that! Wow, that was a close call, wasn't it?
septentrion - Jul 23, 2007 1:18 pm (#21 of 391)
Esther Rose, your explanation makes sense, really. For my part, I thought the Elder Wand was one of its kind, and thus not submitted to exactly the same rules as the other wands, but I may be mistaken. I've read the book quickly and won't have done my reread for a while.
Mare - Jul 23, 2007 2:22 pm (#22 of 391)
Esther Rose, I really like your explanation, I never had the feeling that I didn't understand the whole thing, but I just reasoned that the wand somehow "knew" that Harry defeated the it's previous master. But I like it much more if the Elder wand recognised Draco's wand as belonging to his master, thank you for putting it so nicely.
zelmia - Jul 23, 2007 2:24 pm (#23 of 391)
Edited Jul 23, 2007 3:26 pm
"The wand chooses the Wizard". This is extremely important.
The Elder Wand chooses the wizard who defeats it. Draco defeated the Elder Wand by successfully disarming Dumbledore. The Elder Wand was then "rightfully" his.
But Harry subsequently defeated Draco's wand simply by wresting it from Draco's hand. The Hawthorne wand chose Harry at that point over Draco because Harry had "won" it from Draco.
Wands also have memory (Priori Incatatem). The Hawthorne wand, which had defeated the Elder Wand, retained its memory of the Elder Wand's defeat. Because Harry was now the Hawthorne wand's new owner ("master"), the power the Hawthorne wand had over the Elder Wand was now in Harry's hands.
Lucius's wand didn't work for Voldemort because Voldemort did not "win" it from Lucius. He was simply using it. Harry experienced this same phenomenon with the wand Ron gave him, the wand Ron had stolen from the Snatchers. Harry hadn't won that wand so it wand never succumbed to Harry as its new owner and didn't really work that well for him.
In the Forest AK, the Hawthorne wand is not involved. There is no duel here. The Hawthorne wand is stowed inside Harry's shirt. Voldemort's spell does not backfire at this time because the Elder Wand is unopposed by the Hawthorne wand.
It is only later, in the final confrontation, that the two Wands, as much as Harry and Voldemort themselves, are facing each other. The Elder Wand, with its own memory of having already been defeated by the wand now facing it, responds according to its own inherent natural law and recognises that wand's owner as its own rightful master. And so, by its own inherent laws, it cannot harm - indeed, must protect - its Master by rebounding the spell cast against its owner back onto the caster.
The Wandless Wizard - Jul 23, 2007 6:11 pm (#24 of 391)
Any of the myriad of explanations are possible. I really like Ester's though, especially the bit about asking the wrong Malfoy for a wand. The problem is that we never got a really good explanation from the text and it was the key moment of the entire series. The whole series has been building up to Harry is the one with the power to defeat Voldemort. It turned out the power the Dark Lord doesn't know about as mentioned in the prophecy was not love, but was Harry's mastery of a wand by some complicated set of rules never mentioned until book 7 and then only explained in confusing pieces. As such, it produced a less than fully satisfying conclusion. I liked Harry's confidence, and how he called him Riddle. I just wish I got a better explanation on why the spell rebounded.
Mediwitch - Jul 23, 2007 6:24 pm (#25 of 391)
The Wandless Wizard, IMHO, it still took Harry's love for others to allow him to confront Voldemort, so although the wands played their role, they couldn't have without the love to propel Harry to that scene.
zelmia - Jul 23, 2007 6:31 pm (#26 of 391)
Actually, I think "the power the Dark Lord knows not" is humility. Harry never once believed that he was powerful enough to defeat Voldemort on his own. He has always been gratefully reliant on his friends and loved ones. This episode was no exception.
Or perhaps "the power to pay attention to small details". Harry, with the help of his friends, has always been able to piece together all of the information (at least, of what was available) that could possibly help him before the final confrontation. Voldemort only asks questions after his plans fail.
Voldemort's true downfall was his own arrogance.
TomProffitt - Jul 23, 2007 6:34 pm (#27 of 391)
Of the three Hallows, the one symbolizing Power, the Elder Wand, is actually the weakest; for it gives power over mortal enemies, but not power over Death itself.
EDIT: And it's the only one of the three Voldemort sought out.
The Wandless Wizard - Jul 23, 2007 7:06 pm (#28 of 391)
Yes, he has love and humility. And yes they helped him get to the point where he could defeat Riddle. However, a lot of other people have love and humility and would have died in Harry's place. There was one thing that Harry had that nobody else did and it was the thing that allowed him to survive that confrontation and kill Riddle. That was mastery over the Elder Wand. All the love and humility in the world wouldn't have caused Riddle's AK curse to rebound.
freshwater - Jul 23, 2007 7:34 pm (#29 of 391)
Zelmia, I like very much the explanations in your last two posts. I particulary like your idea that Voldemort was defeated by his own arrogance. He had captured Ollivander and demanded assistance, but Harry rescued Ollivander and asked the right questions. Then Harry understood the qualities and relationships among the wands and their owners, where Voldemort did not. I think he'd gotten to a point where he was so full of himself that he couldn't imagine that any information that he did not already know, could be at all important. Harry was always ready to learn --at least in real life situations, if not the classroom-[/b]- And, more than Hermione, tended to see beyond the obvious facts to implications and deeper meanings.
zelmia - Jul 23, 2007 8:01 pm (#30 of 391)
Edited Jul 23, 2007 8:58 pm
All the love and humility in the world wouldn't have caused Riddle's AK curse to rebound. - Except that that's exactly what caused his original AK on baby Harry to rebound in the first place. And nary an Elder Wand in sight!
Aw shucks... Thanks, Freshwater.
Very good point, TomProffit.
septentrion - Jul 24, 2007 1:08 am (#31 of 391)
All of this is very interesting and makes things very much clearer than Jo did. I'll now try to organise my thoughts on the matter.
The Elder Wand must be taken forcibly to recongnise its new master and works for him/her as the wondrous wand it is supposed to be. So, when LV found out that DD took it forcibly from Grindelwald, he came to the conclusion that all he had to do was to take it forcibly from DD's corpse. He never thought of Draco, even though I'm persuaded that he knew of Draco Disarming DD (he probably for a very detailed of the events of the Astronomy Tower), because Draco didn't even touch the wand, didn't take it forcibly.
So now, LV thinks he is the master of the Elder Wand. After a whlie, he's forced to acknowledged that it isn't the case. He ponders the matter, and comes to the conclusion that the wand doesn't work for him because taking it from the body didn't count. Killing DD made, in LV's mind, Snape as the new master of the Elder Wand. Once more, he's overlooked Draco's part in DD's death and consider that not touching the wand might count. With his twisted psychology, the only thing for him was to kill the one he tought to be the Elder Wand's master. He didn't even consider vanquish Snape in a duel, he went directly for the kill.
zelmia - Jul 24, 2007 1:28 am (#32 of 391)
The Elder Wand must be taken forcibly to recongnise its new master - I think it just has to be defeated, the same as any other wand.
It is explained that Harry's wand had defeated Voldemort's wand in GF. So during the escape from Privet Drive, when Harry and Voldemort cast simultaneous spells at one another (a duel), Voldemort's wand "remembered" this and recognised Harry's wand as the wand that had previously beaten it. In other words, Harry was now the new Master of Voldemort's wand [/b]- Although he obviously didn't know this at the time.
And apparently the wand cannot be made to attack its master. So the spell that Voldemort had cast at Harry and Hagrid rebounded back to him.
Dumbledore's wand (aka The Elder Wand) was not "taken forcibly" from Dumbledore by Draco, but it was the "losing" wand in that particular duel. Because of this, Draco's wand had the power over the Elder Wand. And by extension, Draco himself was the Elder Wand's new Master.
Later, when Harry defeats Draco's wand (in this case he does take Draco's wand forcibly), Draco's (now Harry's) Hawthorne wand is still the master of the Elder Wand; so by extension Harry is now the Master of the Elder Wand.
Once again, Voldemort's downfall is in overlooking/ignoring the details. "The wand chooses the wizard". The wand chooses its master. Its master is the owner of the wand (or hand) that defeated it.
He didn't even consider vanquish Snape in a duel, he went directly for the kill. - Exactly. Because Voldemort believed he had to kill the Master, when really all he had to do was "master the wand".
septentrion - Jul 24, 2007 2:55 am (#33 of 391)
Zelmia, zillion thanks for this insightful post!
Jenniffler - Jul 24, 2007 7:03 am (#34 of 391)
Good thoughts, everyone! Especially zelmia!
I don't know how to say this, if I may be excused. I think Draco went through a grueling process to earn the elder wand. By trying to out -think Dumbledore and succeeding, he gained the right to wield the wand. It scares me how close he came to attain actual possession as we are shown wizard catching disarmed wands. But because he did not want the wand itself, Draco saved himself some serious trouble. The Malfoy's were afraid of Voldemort enough without the peril of possessing the ultimate dueling weapon.
Mediwitch - Jul 24, 2007 7:08 am (#35 of 391)
zelmia, your post #32 is "an admirably succinct" summary, as Dumbledore would say. One minor detail:
It is explained that Harry's wand had defeated Voldemort's wand in GF. So during the escape from Privet Drive, when Harry and Voldemort cast simultaneous spells at one another (a duel), Voldemort's wand "remembered" this and recognised Harry's wand as the wand that had previously beaten it.
Voldemort was not using his own yew wand which Harry had defeated in GoF. He was using Lucius Malfoy's wand which he had taken in Ch. 1 of DH.
LooneyLuna - Jul 24, 2007 8:04 am (#36 of 391)
All magic leaves traces, from what we are told. Dumbledore recognized Voldemort's "style" in the cave. Maybe Harry's wand remembered Voldemort's style - didn't matter what wand he used.
I don't know if that makes any sense.
Soul Search - Jul 24, 2007 8:08 am (#37 of 391)
Dumbledore and the Elder Wand
The introduction of the "Deathly Hallows" into the last book of the series puzzled me for a bit. Until I realized that the Deathly Hallows, and particularly the Elder Wand, have been the main drive for the series from the start. Here's why I think so:
Grindelwald obtains the Elder Wand by theft from Gregorovitch. He did not defeat Gregorovitch in any way, so the Elder Wand never recognized him as its master. Grindelwald tells the young Dumbledore he is the master of the Elder Wand and this, in part, is the attraction Dumbledore has for Grindelwald and his plans for domination.
Grindelwald is a powerful wizard and, even without mastery of the Elder Wand, he uses it to become a feared dark wizard. During this time Dumbledore develops into the "noble" wizard we, a long time later, see McGonnagal acknowledge in Privet Drive. But Dumbledore also knows his limitations and the temptations of the Elder Wand. He allows Grindelwald to come to power unchecked because Dumbledore does not want to defeat Grindelwald and become master of the Elder Wand; he fears how it might change him.
The time comes, however, when Dumbledore must face Grindelwand. He defeats him and becomes the master of the Elder Wand. He swears that it will not change him and he will "destroy" the wand by dying without anyone defeating him, thereby nullifying the wand's power.
Circumstances, however, make this plan impossible. Dumbledore, foolishly, places the cursed ring on his finger and is saved from an early death by Snape. Then, Snape makes the unbreakable vow, requiring him to defeat Dumbledore or die, himself. Dumbledore trusts Severus Sanpe. He decides that Snape will be the one to defeat him and become the master of the Elder Wand, but Snape will not take the wand, so his plan for the wand will succeed when Snape dies.
So, Snape would have to kill Dumbledore.
Even this plan is thwarted when Draco disarms Dumbledore on the tower.
Now, Snape did not have to kill Dumbledore, for the Elder Wand, but still had to "appear" to kill Dumbledore to become Voldemort's most favored Death Eater. (I still can't decide if Snape actually killed Dumbledore or not.)
Now, Dumbledore is still directing Snape, via his portrait, and still has the Elder Wand foremost in his planning. True, he wants to defeat Voldemort, but that is secondary to his goal of nullifying the power of the Elder Wand.
Via the legacy of the book he leaves Hermione, Dumbledore starts Harry on a path that will make Harry the master of the Elder Wand. Dumbledore trusts Harry to complete his own goal of the destruction of the power of the Elder Wand.
This is why Dumbledore's actions have, at times, been so puzzling. We, and Harry, have thought Dumbledore's only goal was Voldemort's defeat, but it wasn't. Dumbledore's first goal was always the destruction of the power of the Elder Wand!
Remi - Jul 24, 2007 8:18 am (#38 of 391)
Sigh. I may not be the brightest bulb, but I am not unintelligent. I went to law school, passed the Bar, am able to decipher the fine print in lengthy contracts, and have even been known to explain the complexities of "X-Files" episodes to friends. Yet I find the whole concept of the elder wand's master very confusing. All your explanations have helped a lot, but it's got me wondering ---
If as Ollivander says, "where a wand has been won, its allegiance will change", and "the conquered wand will usually bend its will to its new master" and "it is not necessary to kill the previous owner", does that mean that if you duel someone once and don't win, that you will not be able to win if you duel with them again? For example, there have been a lot of Expelliarmus-es in the books; does the wand change allegiances each time?
Madam Pince - Jul 24, 2007 8:20 am (#39 of 391)
Thanks, zelmia! Excellent summation. Take 50 points for your house!
Soul Search, the only thing I can see with your above post is that you say (and I agree with you) that Grindelwald stole the Elder Wand from Gregorovitch, he didn't technically "defeat" him, so therefore the wand never recognized him as its master. But if that were true, then Dumbledore would've had to defeat Gregorovitch in order to become the Wand's master -- his defeat of Grindelwald would've had no effect on the mastery of the wand, right? And thus all this time, the Elder Wand hasn't been working its "best" for Dumbledore, and then when Voldemort finally killed Gregorovitch, seems like the power would've transferred to him then.
This is either a bit of an error or murkiness on JKR's part with explaining how wand mastery transfers, or else she clearly considers "stealing" as equivalent to "defeating." In other words, Grindelwald must've been "defeating" Gregorovitch when he stole the wand, in order for the whole rest of the story to work out.
It's not very satisfying to me, but there it is. I can't see any other way around it.
I guess now we know what JKR meant when she said a lot of fans might not like how Book 7 goes. She had to know that us nit-pickers wouldn't care for how the spills were arranged on the mantlepiece. (A little Agatha Christie thrown in there, for any fans... )
Soul Search - Jul 24, 2007 8:35 am (#40 of 391)
Madam Pince,
I agree, the part about stealing the Elder Wand is a bit murky. I thought, since Voldemort "stole" the wand from Dumbledore's tomb and the wand didn't "choose" him for its master, that the Elder Wand only respected someone who won the wand in contest.
However, Dumbledore did defeat Grindelwald in a contest, so the Elder Wand decided Dumbledore was worthy and "chose" him as its master.
"The wand chooses the wizard."
Madam Pince - Jul 24, 2007 8:43 am (#41 of 391)
Yes, but I was going back further -- the wand shouldn't have recognized Grindelwald ever at all, thereby meaning that it couldn't have passed from Grindelwald to Dumbledore -- if what we're thinking about "stealing-isn't-defeating" is true.
I must be wrong -- stealing must count as defeating, or else Grindelwald would've never been the wand's master. The only reason Voldemort's "stealing" of the wand from DD's corpse didn't work was because it had already been transferred prior to the tomb-raid -- he was robbing the wrong person.
septentrion - Jul 24, 2007 8:57 am (#42 of 391)
Grindelwald stole the wand and, if my memory serves me well, Stunned Gregorovitch. Maybe it counts as defeating.
So, where Voldemort is mistaken is: it's the wand that must be defeated, not its wielder.
Soul Search - Jul 24, 2007 9:20 am (#43 of 391)
septentrion,
"Grindelwald stole the wand and ... Stunned Gregorovitch. Maybe it counts as defeating."
Good point. I think you may have cleared the "murkiness" of stealing the Elder Wand.
Voldemort didn't do anything to the current master of the wand, Draco, so the wand saw no reason to "choose" him.
Ludicrous Patents Office - Jul 24, 2007 9:26 am (#44 of 391)
The original owner of the wand had it stolen from him when he was passed out in a drunken stupor. Then the thief killed him.(p. 408 Scholastic) There was no duel. I wonder if the owner has to be alive when the theft takes place? I think we also have to consider that wands are sentient in some manner. If they choose the wizard. The Elder Wand "heard" Harry tell it he had defeated Draco(p. 743). There is also the bragging piece. The original owner and Gregorovitch bragged about owning the wand and lost it. Dumbledore kept it very quiet. LPO
zelmia - Jul 24, 2007 10:54 am (#45 of 391)
Edited Jul 24, 2007 11:25 am
Thanks, everyone!
Voldemort was not using his own yew wand which Harry had defeated in GoF. He was using Lucius Malfoy's wand which he had taken in Ch. 1 of DH. [/b]- Ah! You're right, Mediwich. I was thinking that Voldemort took Lucius's wand because of what happened during Escape from Privet Drive; but actually he did not want a repeat of GF.
The only answer I can come up with then is that Harry's wand must have come out on top the last time the two met. Perhaps at the DoM.
does that mean that if you duel someone once and don't win, that you will not be able to win if you duel with them again? - It seems so, yes. But I think that duel is actually a very specific set of conditions.
A) The spells must be cast simultaneously
B) At least one of the spells must be to disarm (Expelliarmus).
I don't think when Draco and Harry "dueled" back in CS that either of their wands became master over the other because neither boy had tried to disarm the other. They simply sent out different spells simultaneously.
But when Draco and Dumbledore "dueled" in HBP, though Dumbledore's spell was not intended for Draco, it was still cast simultaneously with Draco's disarming charm. So it seems that the "Expelliarmus" is the required element.
For example, there have been a lot of Expelliarmus-es in the books; does the wand change allegiances each time? [/b]- Apparently so, or else Lucius's wand would have been sufficient for Voldemort to use against Harry's during the Escape from Privet Drive.
And it seems that Grindelwald stealing Gregorovitch's wand still counts as "disarming", in Wandlore. The point is that Grindelwald successfully relieved Gregorovitch of his wand (even though Gregorovitch was apparently unaware of it). There doesn't have to be a duel.
Remember, Harry did precisely the same thing by wrenching Draco's wand from his hand. And the wand Ron took from the Snatchers would likely have succumbed to Ron's hand, had he chosen to use it; but he gave it to Harry, who had not actually won it, so it didn't work for Harry.
The Elder Wand "heard" Harry tell it he had defeated Draco(p. 743). - The Elder Wand did not need to "hear" this information because it could already recognise the Hawthorne wand (formerly Draco's) that had previously defeated it. It's the wand that has the power over the other [/b]- And by extension only - the wand's owner.
totyle - Jul 24, 2007 11:30 pm (#46 of 391)
Brilliant posts everyone..especially Esther Rose's and Zelmia's...beats having to fry my brain trying to follow wand mastery! Thank you.
Am I allowed a silly question? Right at the end...Harry tells DD's potrait that he is putting the Elder Wand back where it came from. He says it can stay there and that if he (Harry) dies a natural death the previous master would never have been defeated. I read this as Harry intending to return the Elder Wand back to DD's tomb. Is this correct? Is the previous master referring to DD? The Elder Wand's ownership had transferred from DD to Draco to Harry. Why does Harry returning it to DD mean the previous master(DD) would never have been defeated. If you give it back does that mean you surrender mastership of the wand? I dont get it...
legolas returns - Jul 25, 2007 12:53 am (#47 of 391)
Dumbledore was defeated. By hiding the wand so that nobody can find it means that the wand cant be defeated. If Harry dies and nobody else has fought Harry for the wand then its power will be destroyed.
nthdavid - Jul 25, 2007 2:44 am (#48 of 391)
In the Wandmaker chapter, Ollivander says that subtle laws govern wand ownership., but the conquered wand will usually bend its will to its new master. Harry took Draco's wand and was using it. In all of the practicing they did disarming, the wand owner always got their own wand back. No one took it and started using it. If they had, then wand ownership would have been changing.
"The wand chooses the wizard."
Ms Hagrid - Jul 25, 2007 6:23 am (#49 of 391)
Not sure if this is the right place for this comment, but it would be interesting to go back through books 1-6 and look at instances where people are disarmed in duels and/or using wands belonging to other people to see if these new "rules" are consistent throughout.
Just to name a few: Neville got poor results using his dad's wand, Ron got poor results using Charlie's old wand, Harry got good results using Hermione's wand (surely he had disarmed her a time or two during practice), etc.
phuze - Jul 25, 2007 6:52 am (#50 of 391)
My wife raised an interesting issue when we talked about the Elder wand - did Grindlewald really have control of the Elder wand? The reason she wondered about it is that the Elder wand was said to be undefeatable in a duel, yet Dumbledore is known to have defeated Grindlewald in... a duel. If Dumbledore defeated Grindlewald in a duel it means that Grindlewald didn't have control of the wand and so how did Dumbledore become the master of it? If Gorovitch was the last "controller" of the wand and Voldemort killed him, how did Harry have a superior claim? If there had ony been some part of the story where it turned out Dumbledore dueled Gorovitch and defeated him it would have made sense. Otherwise, I think that someday someone could take the Elder wand and control it again - even without defeating Harry. At the very least, if they got it after his death or possessed it when he died they might be able to control it.
Food for thought,
Phuze
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 51 to 100
Mona Fri May 13, 2011 12:06 pm
Madam Pince - Jul 25, 2007 7:41 am (#51 of 391)
I think you and your wife caught a good flaw there, Phuze. I was having a problem with Grindelwald's "conquering" of the wand, too, because he stole it from Gregorovitch rather than defeating Gregorovitch in a duel.
I think, though, that Ollivander must be mistaken, or rather, maybe not crystal-clear, when he said the Elder Wand was unbeatable in a duel. Otherwise, how did Draco "beat" Dumbledore on top of the tower? Unless, well, maybe that wouldn't be technically called a "duel" but more of a surprise attack? Maybe it's that in a straight-on duel, it can't be beaten, but it can be "conquered" in other ways? (Like stealing, surprise attack, etc...)
This is a mess...
TomProffitt - Jul 25, 2007 7:46 am (#52 of 391)
I think the flaw in the Elder Wands power was pointed out in the original fable. If I remember correctly wasn't the brother murdered in his sleep? In other words, you may not be able to beat the wand strait up, but you can defeat the owner by using subterfuge.
phuze - Jul 25, 2007 7:53 am (#53 of 391)
TomProfitt,
Good point, the problem is how did Dumbledore get control of it? His conflict with Grindlewald is always described as a duel that Dumbledore barely won.
The details of that battle will hopefully be a long entry in JKR's encyclopedia!
Madam Pince, I think that Dumbledore was disarmed because he wasn't focused on his opponent behind the door, he was focused on protecting Harry. Thus, he wasn't "dueling" whoever was coming through the door.
Phuze
Ms Hagrid - Jul 25, 2007 9:19 am (#54 of 391)
Phuze,
I just occurs to me that we just did get a hint that there might be a different description of Dumbledore defeating Grindewald in Chapter Two of Deathly Hallows - remember where Rita Skeeter is being interviewed by the Prophet?
Rita (of course) makes it sound like Dumbledore did something dodgy - but perhaps this is just another case of her getting the story partially correct and twisting what facts she has into making Dumbledore look bad?
Perhaps Dumbledore (knowing he was going up against the Elder Wand) simply decided to avoid direct confrontation and employed another strategy? Perhaps an ambush and a well-aimed Expelliarmus?
septentrion - Jul 25, 2007 9:55 am (#55 of 391)
That would make sense, Ms Hagrid.
Just to let you know, Jo has said that chapter 32 title (the Elder Wand) was the alternate title for the book.
zelmia - Jul 25, 2007 10:39 am (#56 of 391)
If Dumbledore defeated Grindlewald in a duel it means that Grindlewald didn't have control of the wand and so how did Dumbledore become the master of it?
Wands apparently don't have to be "defeated in a duel" to succumb to a new Master. JKR sets this up for us by showing that Draco's wand, which Harry "defeated" not in a duel but by simply taking it away from Draco, worked nearly as well for Harry as Harry's wand.
the conquered wand will usually bend its will to its new master. "Conquered". "Defeated". The only thing that apparently needs to happen to make this true is that the wizard must be successfully relieved of his wand.
Harry's wand did not defeat Draco's in a duel, but Harry still became the Hawthorne wand's new master. Gridelwald stole the Elder Wand - he successfully relieved Gregorovitch of it in almost the same way as Harry had done with Draco's wand - so Grindelwald was the Elder Wand's new master.
Of course the legend would say that the Elder Wand could not be defeated in a duel. But we saw clear evidence that it can be in HBP. Draco's Hawthorn wand "defeated" the Elder Wand by successfully disarming Dumbledore. Though Dumbledore was not casting a spell specifically at Draco, he was casting a spell toward Draco's Hawthorn wand.
Harry, being the Elder Wand's current master, has hidden the Elder Wand back in Dumbledore's tomb. Because Harry has gone back to using his own Holly wand, it won't matter if Harry's wand is ever "defeated". The smart thing for Harry to have done would have been to snap Draco's wand while he was at it.
Madam Pince - Jul 25, 2007 7:15 pm (#57 of 391)
Oooo, thanks septentrion! I've been wondering that! I think she made the right choice for a title...
Veritaserum - Jul 25, 2007 10:47 pm (#58 of 391)
So...it was Draco's wand that was the Master of the Elder Wand, and by extension, Harry. That's why it bent to the will of the Hawthorn wand when Harry "Expelliarmus-ed" it away from Voldemort. Harry wasn't using the Hawthorn wand when Voldemort AK'ed him in the forest, so maybe that's why it was able to "kill its master" so to speak.
I think where wands changing allegiances is concerned, it has something to do with the nature of the duel. If two wizards are learning how to duel, are dueling for fun, or are practicing, it doesn't seem practical that their wands would be changing their allegiances all the time. I mean, maybe the wizard doing the Disarming has to intend to defeat his opponent through use of said spell. Or, maybe since the wands choose the wizard, the wands are able to decide whether the time is right to have a new master.
I wonder if JKR will ever map out all of this for us, there seem to be a lot of questions.
mona amon - Jul 26, 2007 2:54 am (#59 of 391)
I've just read the relevant passages and all the posts on this thread, so let me see....
Grindelwald stole the elder wand from Gregorovitch and became it's new master.
Dumbledore defeats Grindelwald in a duel and takes over.
When Dumbledore asks Snape to kill him, he thinks he is going to die undefeated, and that the elder wand's power will die with him.
But things do not work out according to his plan. Before Snape can kill him, the wand recognises a new master, Draco.
Harry wins from Draco the wand that defeated the elder wand.
When Voldemort casts his AK, the elder wand refuses to duel with the wand that has mastered it, and the spell rebounds on the caster.
Did I get that right, or am I still hopelessly confused?
Bruno Willey - Jul 26, 2007 9:54 am (#60 of 391)
No mona amon I think you are pretty much on the money with that neat little sum up.
On the topic of wands transfering owners which have been defeated even in practice, and I think it has been stated many times so far in this thread, it comes down to weather or not the victorios member chooses to take the wand.Lets also not forget that the Eldar Wand is a very special and powerful case that requires a master to be useful. Lets not forget a wands loyalty to its master, a wand does not choose the strongest Wizard it can, it chooses a Wizard that is its match and I'm sure once it has found that special someone it isn't about to give them up in a hurry. I think that the instance in the allyway in Little Whinging where Harry's wand casts the Lumos spell even though he is not even touching it is a sign of campanionship if not willingness to serve a master it clearly belongs with.
And I'm not sure who asked it, sorry, but why did Hermione's wand work reasonably well for Harry? Again it comes down to each members intention, Hermione lent it to Harry so they could be protected when he was on watch by the wand performing well it was following its owners instruction. It also, for lack of a better word, knew that Harry was not trying to clam it as his own he was merely borrowing it until its rightful master wanted it back.
Edited to add; Dumbledore's defeat of Grindewald, I think that the title of undefeatable wand is a little much. Dumbledore tells us that the three Hallows were most probably made by the three genius Prewitt brothers and it is clear that it is an extremely powerful piece of wood but just like the stone and the cloak it wasn't as perfect as the story made it out to be. I believe it was within Dumbledore's scope to defeat that wand head on with honour and it would diminish the character that he had worked hard to create after his sister’s death to go about it in a shady way. Also they say that eye witnesses said the display they put on was awe inspiring, I doubt anything but a full on duel would produce such results.
Soul Search - Jul 26, 2007 10:49 am (#61 of 391)
Do we know what the core of the Elder Wand was?
It was Dumbledore's wand. Was the core ever mentioned?
There was a scene in DH where Harry had more than one wand in his hand and cast multiple spells, producing a dramatic effect. I will look for it on my next read. We have also seen dramatic effects when multiple spells strike at the same time: the Shrieking Shack, against Snape, the Hogwarts Express, against Draco, etal, and maybe a few more.
What I am working up to is does the Elder Wand have a core element from all the magical creatures typically used to make a wand: dragon, unicorn, phoenix?
TomProffitt - Jul 31, 2007 7:03 am (#62 of 391)
We know by DD's own admission that he had wanted Severus Snape to have the Elder Wand at the end. Does anyone think it possible or probable that DD's plan involved Severus vanquishing The Dark Lord after Voldemort destroyed "The Harrycrux"?
Magic Words - Jul 31, 2007 1:43 pm (#63 of 391)
I think it would have been darn stupid not to at least acknowledge the possibility that Voldemort would kill Severus for the wand. If Severus had managed to make the wand transfer ownership to him (I'm still not convinced that would have worked, given the definition we have of "defeat") Voldemort's defeating him would have had disastrous consequences.
Mrs Brisbee - Aug 7, 2007 5:24 am (#64 of 391)
Are the Elder Wand and other Hallows indestructible? I'm curious, because if you wanted to get rid of the Elder Wand it doesn't look to be as simple as snapping it in half. What would happen if you were to pound on it awhile with Gryffindor's sword? Would that be enough to break it? The Resurrection Stone did crack after being hit with the sword, although it still worked fine despite the damage to it.
valuereflection - Aug 7, 2007 9:23 am (#65 of 391)
Interesting thought, Mrs. Brisbee. It sounds like all of the Hallows could be indestructible.
We know that the invisibility cloak is indestructible. And hitting the Resurrection Stone with Gryffindor's sword destroyed only its Horcrux properties and not its Hallow properties. It is a good guess that the Elder Wand is indestructible, too. Evidence for this idea is that the Elder Wand is a thin piece of very, very old wood, yet it has been used for centuries in bloody duels without breaking. Other wands we've seen in the series are about as fragile as you would expect a thin piece of wood to be. (The broken wands we've seen are Hagrid's, Ron's, Neville's, Odo's, Lucius', Harry's -[/b]- Any others?) Unless perhaps the Elder Wand is made of petrified wood...
Gerald Costales - Aug 8, 2007 1:15 am (#66 of 391)
Harry's Holly Wand and the Ron’s original Wand, which previously belonged to Percy, were both broken and malfunctioning. Also, Neville’s original Wand, which previously belonged to his father Frank, was broken at the Battle at the MoM. (But, I am fairly certain that the Book doesn’t give an example of Neville’s broken Wand malfunctioning.)
Wand note: Though not mentioned again in Book 7, Neville commented that he believed that his replacement Wand was one of the last Wands sold by Mr. Ollivander before his kidnapping by Voldemort.
So, as far was we know all these three Wands were snapped or broken and malfunctioning.
But, *IMHO* an exception to a snapped or broken Wand not malfunctioning is Hagrid’s Oak Wand. (I don't recall anything that shows Hagrid's Wand work to be labeled as ineffective.) So, besides the Elder Wand, could Hagrid’s Wand also be labeled as indestructible as well?
Did encasing Hagrid’s broken Oak Wand in the shaft of Hagrid’s Umbrella; do what Spell-o-tape couldn’t do for Ron’s original Wand? Or more likely, just as Harry mended his Holly Wand with the Elder Wand, might have Dumbledore also mended Hagrid’s Wand at some time.
The timing of the mending of Hagrid’s Oak Wand, I believed had to have happened after Dumbledore became Master of the Elder Wand. If the Elder Wand was the means of the mending Hagrid’s Oak Wand.
The Elder Wand may not be just rigid and stone-like. But, *IMHO* more likely the Elder Wand could be constructed with extremely supple or flexible wood. A fresh branch of a sapling could be bent and not snap the branch. Or even the core material of the Elder Wand could provide the Elder Wand with extreme suppleness and flexibility.
I thought Lucius’ Wand was merely broken by Harry’s Holly Wand. I recall Odo’s Wand being mentioned but I don’t recall the details concerning Odo’s Wand though.
The scene where Harry held three Wands and delivered an extremely strong spell, didn’t quite work for me. If holding multiple Wands was the reason for the increased force of the spell, then Wizards or Witches of lesser ability would be walking around with bundles of Wands to increase their effectiveness.
IMHO – Couldn’t Emotional Magic have been the cause the of increase in the spell’s force rather than holding three Wands. Bellatrix did tell Harry that one needs to really mean it when casting the Crucio spell ("Cruciatus Curse").
mollis - Aug 8, 2007 6:50 am (#67 of 391)
I would have to disagree with your analysis of Hagrid's wand working properly, Gerald. I think that when Hagrid tried to use "Reparo" to mend the sidecar back onto the motorcycle and it snapped off demonstrates the unreliability of his wand. When he was expelled it was said that his wand was snapped in half. But I would guess that it was repaired, hidden in the umbrella, and he continues to use it. It don't think that the wand has near the power or effectiveness it had before it was broken.
As for the increased power when Harry used 3 wands, I think that was simply because the same spell was released from each of the three wands at the same time. Similar to when Snape was disarmed in the Shreiking Shack and knocked unconscious. I don't think most wizards would want to draw attention to their lack of power by carrying multiple wands around.
And to bring this back around to the Elder Wand - I think that it is an unbreakable wand. Period. It won't be broken. The same way you can't remove something from the wall that was put there with a permanent sticking charm.
Choices - Aug 8, 2007 10:00 am (#68 of 391)
Gerald - "So, besides the Elder Wand, could Hagrid’s Wand also be labeled as indestructible as well?"
Gerald, I suggested on another thread that perhaps Dumbledore used the Elder Wand to repair Hagrid's wand, just as Harry's holly wand was repaired later. Spell-o-tape does not work, as Ron and Lockhart can attest. I speculate that once Hagrid was proven innocent, Dumbledore repaired his wand so that it would work properly again.
zelmia - Aug 8, 2007 10:03 am (#69 of 391)
I think the pieces of Hagrid's wand are encased in his umbrella, but I don't think they were ever re-connected. Hagrid is still using his whole pink umbrella and not just his wand even after he was cleared of any wrong-doing regarding the Chamber of Secrets.
Magic Words - Aug 8, 2007 6:52 pm (#70 of 391)
I agree with Mollis that we don't exactly have evidence of Hagrid's wand working properly. I always assumed he just wasn't that talented with magic, but maybe it was the wand the whole time.
Gerald Costales - Aug 8, 2007 10:26 pm (#71 of 391)
*IMHO* Hagrid's Oak Wand may only appear to work improperly. And compared to Harry’s broken Holly Wand and Ron’s/Percy’s broken Wand; the Oak Wand functions better than those other two broken Wands.
So, maybe the Oak Wand does function correctly. And, Hagrid could be the problem and not the Oak Wand broken or whole. Hagrid was never fully trained and probably doesn’t know how to use a Wand properly.
. . . “. . . Wands are only as powerful as the wizards who use them.”
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (DH, page 415, American hardback edition)
This quote is by Hermione and Hermione is usually always right.
mollis & Magic Words - I think we may need to agree to disagree about Hagrid’s Oak Wand and if it functions properly.
But, I’m surprised that no one has mentioned the other possible names for the Elder Wand –
. . . “But how do you know,” said Harry, “that those wands -- the Deathstick and the Wand of Destiny -[/b]- Aren’t the same wand, surfacing over the centuries under different name?”
. . .“What, and they’re all really the Elder Wand, made by Death?” said Ron.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (DH, page 415, American hardback edition)
I strongly believe Harry is correct and that the Deathstick; the Wand of Destiny; and the Elder Wand are one and the same Wand.
Of course, JKR should just pen an Almanac or Encyclopedia to address some of these minor details and we’d all be happy. GC
valuereflection - Aug 9, 2007 5:10 am (#72 of 391)
I agree that Hagrid's wand was probably repaired with the Elder Wand by Dumbledore, similarly to how Harry repaired his holly wand. It is unlikely that Hagrid's wand could have been repaired through any other way. Ollivander said, "A wand that has suffered this...damage cannot be repaired by any means that I know of."(DH chapter 24)
From the examples we've seen, broken wands will not work at all if they've been repaired through using lesser means than the Elder Wand. Harry's broken wand, after being enchanted by Hermione's "Reparo," rebroke when he attempted "Expelliarmus." Ron's broken, spell-o-taped wand did not properly perform any spells which Ron or Lockhart attempted. Neville did not even attempt to repair his wand when it broke. Although his father's wand had sentimental value for Neville, he did not gather the broken pieces and treasure them as he did his mother's gumwrappers; instead he chose to kick the pieces aside. I think Neville did this because he learned, through growing up in a pureblood family, that using or repairing a broken wand is hopeless.
In contrast, Hagrid did magic successfully with his wand while it was supposedly broken. For example, in Book 1 he tapped a rowboat so that it sped to the shore without rowing, and then tapped on the bricks to enter Diagon Alley. In Book 2 he did a good engorgement charm on pumpkins.
Hagrid's less than satisfactory magical prowess was not because his wand was unreliable. It was because he was not a fully qualified wizard (PA chapter 5). His "Reparo" charm did not work because he had not been trained how to perform it. Even Hermione, the brightest student in her year, did not learn how to perform "Reparo" until her fourth year of school -- but Hagrid received only three years of magical training before he was expelled from school. (from the Lexicon entry for "Reparo")
Jo said: Hagrid...has been allowed to do magic openly ever since he became a teacher but because he was never fully trained his magic is never going to be what it should be. He is always going to be a bit inept. from "World Exclusive Interview with J K Rowling," South West News Service, 8 July 2000
After Harry taught Hagrid the Aguamenti charm in Book 6, he performed the charm with his umbrella as well as Harry did. (chapter 28)
Hagrid's replies to Ollivander's inquiries about his wand implied that he had its pieces but did not use them, but Hagrid was obviously concealing part of the truth (PS chapter 5). Perhaps he was concealing more from Ollivander than the few spells the umbrella had cast. Hagrid was technically not using his wand "in pieces," if he was performing magic by using a wand made whole again.
In Book 2 (chapter 17), Tom Riddle said Dumbledore was the only teacher at Hogwarts who thought Hagrid was innocent of the crime, but DD could not convince anyone else. Riddle believed that DD guessed he had framed Hagrid. Although this was Tom Riddle talking, everything DD said to Fudge corroborated the story (chapter 14). After Hagrid was expelled from school and his wand snapped (in 1943), I think Dumbledore did much more to help the orphaned boy Hagrid than just persuade the headmaster to allow him residence at Hogwarts and arrange for gamekeeper training.
Since he was certain of Hagrid's unjust accusation and punishment, I believe Dumbledore repaired Hagrid's wand -[/b]- And warned Hagrid not to let other wizards see him do magic, lest the Ministry of Magic snap his wand again for violating the original punishment. I suspect Dumbledore also transfigured it into a pink, flowered umbrella to disguise it even from Ollivander. Dumbledore was the transfiguration teacher, after all, and a spell for disguisement would be most effective if cast from the Elder Wand.
mollis - Aug 9, 2007 2:05 pm (#73 of 391)
Well, Gerald and valuereflection, you may be convincing me on some parts of this. (Not to abandon you, Magic Words.)I will definitely concede that Hagrid was not fully trained and that I did forget to consider that when I posted earlier. That would certainly may it more difficult for Hagrid to do some spells. But surely "Reparo" would seem like a staple spell for not only a teacher, but especially a game keeper. Think of all the critters that Hagrid "raised" and all the stuff they likely broke. But here is my main issue with DD fixing Hagrid's wand. I can see it happening and I could even see DD hiding the wand it a pink umbrella to disguise it. But after Hagrid was cleared of all charges, wouldn't DD have removed the disguise and encouraged Hagrid to get "trained up"?
Steve Newton - Aug 9, 2007 2:19 pm (#74 of 391)
Dumbledore may have encouraged Hagrid to get "trained up" after he was cleared but he was already in his 50s and seemed to like his life. He doesn't seem like the academic sort to me.
septentrion - Aug 9, 2007 11:46 pm (#75 of 391)
I remember having read in Jo's some interview that a wizard couldn't repair a computer with the Reparo spell because he wouldn't understand how the computer works. I think Hagrid couldn't repair the motorbike properly because he didn't understand how it was done.
Madam Pince - Aug 12, 2007 10:02 am (#76 of 391)
We know that the invisibility cloak is indestructible. --valuereflection
I am not doubting you, but can you point me to how we know this? My mind is drawing a blank...
I'm reading this thread over again after a long absence, and I'm still confused. I can't seem to reconcile in my brain the idea that the Elder Wand cannot be defeated, vs. the idea that the only way the Wand transfers ownership is by recognizing the new master who defeated the old master. It's the old circular "what happens when an irresistable force meets an immovable object?"
I think it almost has to be that the Elder Wand transfers ownership when the owner is defeated, not that the Wand gets defeated by another wand. In other words, I don't think the Elder Wand "bows down" to the hawthorne wand; it bows down to Draco. The hawthorne wand didn't defeat the Elder Wand -- the master of the hawthorne wand defeated the master of the Elder Wand.
Or something like that. But this contradicts the theories of zelmia (and others) which I liked so much which say it's the defeating wand that matters, not the owner.
I'm like Remi, I dislike criticizing JKR, but I have to agree with The Wandless Wizard's post #24 on this thread -- here this is supposed to be the heart of this whole series, really, and we super-fans are supposedly reasonably smart folks for the most part. Why are we still having trouble figuring this out? It bothers me a great deal. I wish JKR could've explained it better for us. I am amazed that nobody asked her about this on the webchat or any of her other post-DH interviews.
I think we should copy this entire thread (along with the "Thanks to JKR" one) and send it along to her.
TomProffitt - Aug 12, 2007 3:17 pm (#77 of 391)
If either the wand or the Master of the Wand could not be defeated, the wand would not have changed possession so many times. There are very specific circumstances when the Master of the Wand cannot be defeated, and that is when the Master is wielding a wand in combat and trying to win. In any other circumstance the Master is as mortal as anyone else.
Madam Pince - Aug 12, 2007 4:15 pm (#78 of 391)
There are very specific circumstances when the Master of the Wand cannot be defeated, and that is when the Master is wielding a wand in combat and trying to win.
You may be right, and you probably are (I can't see any other way for this whole thing to work, honestly.) But the fact remains that JKR didn't tell us this. At least, if she did, I missed it. And that disappoints me.
Choices - Aug 12, 2007 5:16 pm (#79 of 391)
Tom - "There are very specific circumstances when the Master of the Wand cannot be defeated, and that is when the Master is wielding a wand in combat and trying to win."
Now I'm confunded. I thought that was exactly how the Elder Wand was gotten - by defeating the owner in battle and taking possession of it. Grindelwald was the master of the Elder Wand (and I bet he was trying to win) and Dumbledore defeated him in battle and became the new master of the wand. Down through history the Elder Wand changed hands often - it has a very bloody history (that must be a figure of speech because we know that the AK causes no blood to flow). It must be that Sectumsentra was used a lot??? To continue....Draco became master of the Elder Wand simply by disarming Dumbledore. Just in this book alone, the Elder Wand changes hands about 4 - 5 times. Evidently, the wand has never had an owner who could not be defeated.
zelmia - Aug 12, 2007 10:06 pm (#80 of 391)
I think it almost has to be that the Elder Wand transfers ownership when the owner is defeated, not that the Wand gets defeated by another wand.
This is what Voldemort believed also, which is why he first thought he could just take the Elder Wand from Dumbledore's tomb, and why he later believes that by killing Snape he would have the Elder Wand's power.
But it all comes down to the wands. Draco's wand [/b]- And by extension Draco himself - defeated the Elder Wand, when he disarmed Dumbledore. At that point his wand [/b]- And by extension Draco - became the Master of the Elder Wand.
When Harry takes possession of Draco's wand, that wand (the Hawthorn wand) is still Master over the Elder Wand. If this had not been the case, Harry would not have been able to kill Voldemort using Draco's wand.
But Harry is able to use Draco's wand to kill Voldemort because Harry "defeated" Draco's wand - which is still Master over the Elder Wand - by physically wrenching it from Draco's hand. Draco's wand then became Harry's wand; so at that point, since Draco's wand was still Master over the Elder Wand, by extension, Harry became the Elder Wand's Master.
Simply, Draco's wand never stopped being Master over the Elder Wand even though it changed owners. Harry figured this out and was able to use it to win the final battle and become Master of the Elder Wand.
I hope this makes sense.
Luna Logic - Aug 13, 2007 12:31 am (#81 of 391)
Choices : I thought that was exactly how the Elder Wand was gotten - by defeating the owner in battle and taking possession of it.
Zelmia , your post makes great sense. But I think we have to add to our thoughts the episode Gregorovitch-Grindelwald. Grindelwald has stolen the Elder Wand from Gregorovitch, and has been waiting for him, then Stunning him. Was it a battle? (chapter 14, p. 230 Bloomsbury)
TomProfitt : There are very specific circumstances when the Master of the Wand cannot be defeated, and that is when the Master is wielding a wand in combat and trying to win.
Good idea, that would be the logical explanation... (but is it written in the Legend ? Or said by Dumbledore in Chapter 35?)
TomProffitt - Aug 13, 2007 4:02 am (#82 of 391)
I think my summation is at the least implied in the text. The first time the wand changes a Master its first Master is passed out drunk, I believe. When Draco gains the wand Dumbledore is not trying to defeat Draco, he is trying to protect Harry, which made him vulnerable.
I don't believe the wand can be gained by direct confrontation, but only by subterfuge.
Jenniffler - Aug 13, 2007 6:50 am (#83 of 391)
Aha! I think TomProffitt has detected a running pattern of the loyalty of the wand. It was tricked in to being and perhaps a wizard has to trick it to gain the loyalty of it. This appears consistent with all accounts in the text.
Edit: I reviewed my opinion about Draco and the Elder Wand way up thread about post #34 and it agrees with this. An outright confrontation with no forethought and preparation would not make the wand change loyalty. Only by using the same craftiness used by the eldest Peverell brother to get the wand made could do the job. This includes when Harry seemingly muggle wrestles the wands right out of Draco's hands. A lot of really good deception led up to that moment.
mona amon - Aug 13, 2007 9:43 am (#84 of 391)
But didn't Dumbledore defeat Grindelwald and win the elder wand in combat? How does this fit in with Tom Proffitt's pattern?
I feel there is nothing really 'undefeatable' about the wand, though it may be a powerful one. Just as the invisibility cloak can be penetrated by certain spells, and the stone does not really do what it is supposed to (it brings back only a shadow of the dead). The fact is, there is nothing infallible about the Deathly Hallows. That is why Dumbledore calls them a 'lure for fools'.
Steve Newton - Aug 13, 2007 12:15 pm (#85 of 391)
I don't recall any details of the duel between Dumbledore and Grindelwald. Subterfuge could have been involved. Or maybe he just won. Just because it is said to be undefeatable doesn't mean that it is. Of course Voldemort thought that it was unbeatable so perhaps the subterfuge idea holds with Grindelwald, too.
TomProffitt - Aug 13, 2007 12:50 pm (#86 of 391)
We are not told specifically how Dumbledore defeated Grindelwald. It would be more consistent with what we know of the Elder Wand and Dumbledore's character for Dumbledore to have won by subterfuge than a strait up confrontation. We, however, have no way of knowing for certain from canon.
Soul Search - Aug 13, 2007 1:14 pm (#87 of 391)
While I like the idea the Elder Wand recognizes a new master who has tricked its previous master, there were a lot of historicial references for the wand changing masters as a result of a duel to the death.
mona amon - Aug 13, 2007 7:26 pm (#88 of 391)
I think it is mentioned a couple of times in DH that Dumbledore duelled Grindelwald and won. Here is one quote-
"Well you know what happened next. I won the duel. I won the wand." (DH, King's Cross chapter)
No subterfuge here. But that's the whole point about the deathly hallows. They are not infalliable. The supposedly undefeatable wand has been defeated several times.
TomProffitt - Aug 13, 2007 11:17 pm (#89 of 391)
I disagree, mona amon, the quote is exceedingly vague. There is plenty of room within that brief explanation for a victory in someone way other than a direct wand-to-wand encounter.
Edited to add:
I don't disagree about the fallibility of the Elder Wand, I just disagree with how it is fallible.
Luna Logic - Aug 14, 2007 8:05 am (#90 of 391)
I agree with TomProffitt. The sentence about the duel in Chapter 35 is vague.
And when they are discussing the track of the Elder Wand in Chapter 21, I see no clear mention of a battle to won the wand.(p. 334-335 Bloosmbury)
IMO, the "duel" may be a "strategic duel", a duel of skills... Nowhere is it said that it is a battle duel.
Loxias for example, killed Deverill, but took the wand from him. We don't know if it was a "regular" duel. Xeno says that is "the way in which it passes from hand to hand" which is special. (p. 334 Bloomsbury)
Then he adds about that way : "the possessor of the wand must capture it from its previous owner, if he is to be truly master of it" (same page).
Mrs Brisbee - Aug 14, 2007 9:06 am (#91 of 391)
I've no idea how the Elder Wand thing is supposed to work. Gives me a headache. I'll just continue to read the excellent debate. But here's what Elphias Doge had to say about the duel:
"They say, still, that no Wizarding duel ever matched that between Dumbledore and Grindelwald in 1945. Those who witnessed it have written of the terror and the awe they felt as they watched these two extaordinary wizards do battle." --(DH, Ch 2, "In Memoriam")
valuereflection - Aug 14, 2007 2:33 pm (#92 of 391)
Madam Pince, you asked how we know that the invisibility cloak is indestructible. I'm sorry I've taken a few days to post my answer. The book said that it endures eternally.
From Xenophilius: "That is a children's tale, told to amuse rather than instruct. Those of us who understand these matters, however, recognize that the ancient story refers to three objects, or Hallows... Ah, but the Third Hallow is a true Cloak of Invisibility, Miss Granger! I mean to say, it is not a traveling cloak with a Disillusionment Charm, or carrying a Bedazzling Hex, or else woven from Demiguise hair, which will hide one initially but fade with the years until it turns opaque. We are talking about a cloak that really and truly renders the wearer completely invisible, and endures eternally, giving constant and impenetrable concealment, no matter what spells are cast at it. How many cloaks have you ever seen like that?" (DH chapter 21, pages 409-411 in the Scholastic edition)
The idea is reiterated in chapter 22 (page 430 in the Scholastic edition), and in chapter 35 (page 713-715 in the Scholastic edition):
From Harry: He had never seen anything to equal it in his nearly seven years in the Wizarding world. The Cloak was exactly what Xenophilius had described...
From Dumbledore: "The Hallows, the Hallows, a desperate man's dream! Real and dangerous, and a lure for fools... The Cloak...traveled down through the ages, father to son, mother to daughter... You have guessed, I know, why the Cloak was in my possession on the night your parents died. James had showed it to me just a few days previously... I could hardly believe what I was seeing...I could not resist, could not help taking a closer look....It was a Cloak the likes of which I had never seen, immensely old, perfect in every respect..."
You also asked about where JKR said this: "There are very specific circumstances when the Master of the Wand cannot be defeated, and that is when the Master is wielding a wand in combat and trying to win." (Tom Proffit, Post #77)
I interpreted the original legend in the same way Tom Proffit did. Quoting from chapter 21 again, "So the oldest brother, who was a combative man, asked for a wand more powerful than any in existence: a wand that must always win duels for its owner..."
Madam Pince - Aug 14, 2007 3:19 pm (#93 of 391)
Thanks, valuereflection! I agree -- "endures eternally" sounds like the same thing as "indestructible." It was just that word "indestructible" that didn't sound to me like anything I'd heard before, so that's why I was drawing a blank. You're right! Thanks!
I think Tom Proffitt must be onto something too -- it must be only in a straight-on duel, and when it is in the possession of its rightful master, that the Elder Wand seems undefeatable. And really, it's almost more that the master is undefeatable, isn't it? Because in the Voldemort/Harry duel, the possessor of the Wand lost, but the Master of the Wand won, so it would appear to an uninformed observer (like, me, for instance... ) that the Elder Wand "lost," when actually it didn't lose at all because it was fulfilling its Master's wishes.
I think one thing that keeps tripping me up is that sometimes the Wand seems to have changed hands by being stolen and/or wrested away, and sometimes by being beaten in a straight-on duel, and trying to reconcile my definitions of "undefeatable" with both of those concepts. One of these days when I have a couple hours I am going to compile a list of all the pertinent exchanges and their circumstances, and see if that helps me to see it.
Thanks, everyone! This is fascinating to read.
Luna Logic - Aug 15, 2007 12:57 am (#94 of 391)
Edited by Aug 15, 2007 12:59 am
Thanks, Mrs Brisbee, you have found the quote which puzzles the matter the most !! :
"They say, still, that no Wizarding duel ever matched that between Dumbledore and Grindelwald in 1945. Those who witnessed it have written of the terror and the awe they felt as they watched these two extaordinary wizards do battle." --(DH, Ch 2, "In Memoriam")- in Elphias Doge article.
Madam Pince : I think Tom Proffitt must be onto something too -- it must be only in a straight-on duel, and when it is in the possession of its rightful master, that the Elder Wand seems undefeatable.
Now I am totally lost ! How Dumbledore could won a straight-on duel against the master of an unbeatable-wand-in-a-straight-on duel ?
Gerald Costales - Aug 15, 2007 3:34 am (#95 of 391)
“Now I am totally lost! How Dumbledore could (have) won a straight-on duel against the master of an unbeatable-wand-in-a-straight-on duel?” Luna Logic
I don't know where it was posted, but someone wrote that a Wand seems almost sentient. Which I must agree with and this sentient quality is what could be the mechanism behind who is the true Master of the Elder Wand. And, I must refer to that oft times quoted statement of Mr. Ollivander “. . . that the Wand chooses the Wizard.” ; to try to possibly explain Mastering the Elder Wand.
We have examples of a few Magical Items, though not truly alive, that almost “have a mind of their own”.
. .1. The Sorting Hat - Talks, composes its famous annual song, and “Sorts”. There is even a conversation between Harry, I believe, and the Hat when Harry is alone with the Sorting Hat. (Don't have time to locate the exact quote at this time.) But, doesn’t the Hat say that Harry would have done well in Slytherin.
. .2. The Diary of Tom Riddle - Remember Arthur Weasley's warning - Don't trust anything where you can’t see its Brain. (Again, I don't have the time to locate the exact quote at this time.)
If the Wand is sentient, then I believe the Elder Wand may have some Choice on its Master. Similar to the loyalty any living thing can shows to its owner. There are several Pets in the Series from Hedwig on that show extreme loyalty and devotion to their owners. But, Pettigrew in contrast, as Scabbers, chose to stay with the Weasley's only when convenient and then when possible Scabbers fled from Ron for his Real Master Voldemort. (Proving that Pettigrew is a Rat in more ways than mere Transfiguration.)
Fawkes displayed his loyalty and devotion to Dumbledore several times: by aiding Dumbledore during Dumbledore’s escape from his office after being confronted by Fudge; by swallowing an AK to protect Dumbledore during the Battle at the MoM; and finally Fawkes’ final “Phoenix Song” in the Series was the last time we ever hear or see of Fawkes. (And Fawkes’ presence was greatly missed in Book 7 by us Fawkes supporters.)
And don’t forget the House-Elves, Winky’s loyalty to the Crouches and Kreacher’s loyalty to first Regulus and than finally to Harry. The later showing that the Servitude of the House-Elf can be earned and that a House-Elf is bound by more than Magic to his/her Master.
Dobby of course rejected his Servitude to the Malfoys and aided Harry several times. The ultimate sacrifice of Dobby foreshadowed Harry's “Final Walk” to face Voldemort. Both Dobby’s and Harry’s acts of Courage, showed that Dobby was no mere House-Elf and Harry no mere boy Wizard. Dobby was his own Master before receiving a Sock from Lucius. And Harry was more than lucky when Harry became “the Boy that lived”. Both Dobby and Harry are Masters of their Destinies. (And isn’t the Elder Wand possibly the “Wand of Destiny”?)
During, that Epic battle between Grindelwald and Dumbledore maybe the Elder Wand recognized that Grindelwald was not a worthy Master and that Death (the Elder Wand’s Maker and True first Master) would accept Dumbledore as his Equal.
The Third Brother, finally walked with Death as Death's Equal. Dumbledore must have, as Harry ultimately did, confronted Death and a Dark Wizard with no real chance of survival. Both Dumbledore and Harry embraced their Destinies to Defeat a False and Unworthy Master of the Elder Wand and both Dumbledore and Harry became the True and Worthy Master of the Elder Wand. GC
TomProffitt - Aug 15, 2007 4:36 am (#96 of 391)
Now I am totally lost ! How Dumbledore could won a straight-on duel against the master of an unbeatable-wand-in-a-straight-on duel ? --- Luna Logic
The battle between Dumbledore and Grindelwald is not given very specific descriptions. A little hyperbole, but nothing specific. Given Dumbledore's character and past performance (actually it's things he did after, but we've seen it before) I don't think Dumbledore fought a "strait up wand-to-wand duel" with Grindelwald. I think DD knew the secret of the Elder Wand before he ever fought Grindelwald and that he was able to come up with a plan that would use it's weakness in his favor. That's how he beat LV, why treat Grindelwald any differently?
valuereflection - Aug 15, 2007 9:40 am (#97 of 391)
Of course the spectators believed that what they observed was a straight-on duel, because DD would have kept his plan secret. Secrecy would have been integral to his strategy.
I believe neither Dumbledore or Grindelwald mentioned the Elder Wand during their famous duel -- they both kept the secret. If either DD or Grindelwald had hinted about the Elder Wand, the comment would have been so very noteworthy that it would have been recalled by Elphias Doge (who related the duel in chapter 2), Xenophilius or Hermione (who both related parts of the Elder Wand's history in chapter 21), or Ollivander (who described tracing the course of the Elder Wand through history, and concluded that Gregorovitch had it, in chapter 24).
Ron and Hermione pointed out how difficult it would be to "keep your trap shut" about the Elder Wand. The fact that Dumbledore did so, and did it for many years, is a tribute to his character. He had truly mastered death, was unafraid to face it.
Grindelwald kept the secret also. When Voldemort visited him in Nurmengard, Grindelwald's first statement was, "I never had it." But after Voldemort confronted him about that lie, he replied, "Kill me, then, Voldemort, I welcome death! But my death will not bring you what you seek... There is so much you do not understand..." Voldemort still did not understand that Dumbledore had been master of the Elder Wand until several hours after he killed Grindelwald and returned to England -- Voldemort took that long to deduce it.(chapter 24).
T Vrana - Aug 15, 2007 9:54 am (#98 of 391)
Lots to catch up on. I tend to think DD was able to beat the Elder Wand in battle because Grindewald stole it. While Grindewald was able to use it, it did not perform as promised, as Undefeatable. Same thing happened when LV stole the Elder Wand. He was able to use it, but it did not live up to the its promise of extraordinary. No book handy, but LV and Snape discuss this just prior to Snape's murder. Snape mentions that LV has done extraordinary magic with the wand, LV says for him it was his ordinary greatness, not any greatness of the Wand.
I believe it was a great duel and DD won by talent against a wand that had power, but had not been properly won, so it was not Undefeatable.
Once won in battle, the Wand became DD's to Master,even though DD did not defeat Gregorovich, because he did defeat the Wand and the current owner, though not Master.
Luna Logic - Aug 15, 2007 9:55 am (#99 of 391)
TomProfitt: I don't think Dumbledore fought a "strait up wand-to-wand duel" with Grindelwald. I think DD knew the secret of the Elder Wand before he ever fought Grindelwald and that he was able to come up with a plan that would use it's weakness in his favor. That's how he beat LV, why treat Grindelwald any differently?
valuereflection :Of course the spectators believed that what they observed was a straight-on duel, because DD would have kept his plan secret. Secrecy would have been integral to his strategy. I believe neither Dumbledore or Grindelwald mentioned the Elder Wand during their famous duel -- they both kept the secret.
Your explanations (both in the same line) seems to be accorded to the Dumbledore we knew in the books (IMO). Strategy, secret... I will take it, I think!
Alas for the show of the Big Duel... but Dumbledore said once (was it in the Cave?) something, like, magic is not a matter of show, so I will not regret it.
Mattew Bates - Aug 15, 2007 10:13 am (#100 of 391)
Maybe Dumbledore secretly went to pick a fight with Gregorovich just so he would be the master of the Elder Wand when it came time to duel Grindewald.
I think you and your wife caught a good flaw there, Phuze. I was having a problem with Grindelwald's "conquering" of the wand, too, because he stole it from Gregorovitch rather than defeating Gregorovitch in a duel.
I think, though, that Ollivander must be mistaken, or rather, maybe not crystal-clear, when he said the Elder Wand was unbeatable in a duel. Otherwise, how did Draco "beat" Dumbledore on top of the tower? Unless, well, maybe that wouldn't be technically called a "duel" but more of a surprise attack? Maybe it's that in a straight-on duel, it can't be beaten, but it can be "conquered" in other ways? (Like stealing, surprise attack, etc...)
This is a mess...
TomProffitt - Jul 25, 2007 7:46 am (#52 of 391)
I think the flaw in the Elder Wands power was pointed out in the original fable. If I remember correctly wasn't the brother murdered in his sleep? In other words, you may not be able to beat the wand strait up, but you can defeat the owner by using subterfuge.
phuze - Jul 25, 2007 7:53 am (#53 of 391)
TomProfitt,
Good point, the problem is how did Dumbledore get control of it? His conflict with Grindlewald is always described as a duel that Dumbledore barely won.
The details of that battle will hopefully be a long entry in JKR's encyclopedia!
Madam Pince, I think that Dumbledore was disarmed because he wasn't focused on his opponent behind the door, he was focused on protecting Harry. Thus, he wasn't "dueling" whoever was coming through the door.
Phuze
Ms Hagrid - Jul 25, 2007 9:19 am (#54 of 391)
Phuze,
I just occurs to me that we just did get a hint that there might be a different description of Dumbledore defeating Grindewald in Chapter Two of Deathly Hallows - remember where Rita Skeeter is being interviewed by the Prophet?
Rita (of course) makes it sound like Dumbledore did something dodgy - but perhaps this is just another case of her getting the story partially correct and twisting what facts she has into making Dumbledore look bad?
Perhaps Dumbledore (knowing he was going up against the Elder Wand) simply decided to avoid direct confrontation and employed another strategy? Perhaps an ambush and a well-aimed Expelliarmus?
septentrion - Jul 25, 2007 9:55 am (#55 of 391)
That would make sense, Ms Hagrid.
Just to let you know, Jo has said that chapter 32 title (the Elder Wand) was the alternate title for the book.
zelmia - Jul 25, 2007 10:39 am (#56 of 391)
If Dumbledore defeated Grindlewald in a duel it means that Grindlewald didn't have control of the wand and so how did Dumbledore become the master of it?
Wands apparently don't have to be "defeated in a duel" to succumb to a new Master. JKR sets this up for us by showing that Draco's wand, which Harry "defeated" not in a duel but by simply taking it away from Draco, worked nearly as well for Harry as Harry's wand.
the conquered wand will usually bend its will to its new master. "Conquered". "Defeated". The only thing that apparently needs to happen to make this true is that the wizard must be successfully relieved of his wand.
Harry's wand did not defeat Draco's in a duel, but Harry still became the Hawthorne wand's new master. Gridelwald stole the Elder Wand - he successfully relieved Gregorovitch of it in almost the same way as Harry had done with Draco's wand - so Grindelwald was the Elder Wand's new master.
Of course the legend would say that the Elder Wand could not be defeated in a duel. But we saw clear evidence that it can be in HBP. Draco's Hawthorn wand "defeated" the Elder Wand by successfully disarming Dumbledore. Though Dumbledore was not casting a spell specifically at Draco, he was casting a spell toward Draco's Hawthorn wand.
Harry, being the Elder Wand's current master, has hidden the Elder Wand back in Dumbledore's tomb. Because Harry has gone back to using his own Holly wand, it won't matter if Harry's wand is ever "defeated". The smart thing for Harry to have done would have been to snap Draco's wand while he was at it.
Madam Pince - Jul 25, 2007 7:15 pm (#57 of 391)
Oooo, thanks septentrion! I've been wondering that! I think she made the right choice for a title...
Veritaserum - Jul 25, 2007 10:47 pm (#58 of 391)
So...it was Draco's wand that was the Master of the Elder Wand, and by extension, Harry. That's why it bent to the will of the Hawthorn wand when Harry "Expelliarmus-ed" it away from Voldemort. Harry wasn't using the Hawthorn wand when Voldemort AK'ed him in the forest, so maybe that's why it was able to "kill its master" so to speak.
I think where wands changing allegiances is concerned, it has something to do with the nature of the duel. If two wizards are learning how to duel, are dueling for fun, or are practicing, it doesn't seem practical that their wands would be changing their allegiances all the time. I mean, maybe the wizard doing the Disarming has to intend to defeat his opponent through use of said spell. Or, maybe since the wands choose the wizard, the wands are able to decide whether the time is right to have a new master.
I wonder if JKR will ever map out all of this for us, there seem to be a lot of questions.
mona amon - Jul 26, 2007 2:54 am (#59 of 391)
I've just read the relevant passages and all the posts on this thread, so let me see....
Grindelwald stole the elder wand from Gregorovitch and became it's new master.
Dumbledore defeats Grindelwald in a duel and takes over.
When Dumbledore asks Snape to kill him, he thinks he is going to die undefeated, and that the elder wand's power will die with him.
But things do not work out according to his plan. Before Snape can kill him, the wand recognises a new master, Draco.
Harry wins from Draco the wand that defeated the elder wand.
When Voldemort casts his AK, the elder wand refuses to duel with the wand that has mastered it, and the spell rebounds on the caster.
Did I get that right, or am I still hopelessly confused?
Bruno Willey - Jul 26, 2007 9:54 am (#60 of 391)
No mona amon I think you are pretty much on the money with that neat little sum up.
On the topic of wands transfering owners which have been defeated even in practice, and I think it has been stated many times so far in this thread, it comes down to weather or not the victorios member chooses to take the wand.Lets also not forget that the Eldar Wand is a very special and powerful case that requires a master to be useful. Lets not forget a wands loyalty to its master, a wand does not choose the strongest Wizard it can, it chooses a Wizard that is its match and I'm sure once it has found that special someone it isn't about to give them up in a hurry. I think that the instance in the allyway in Little Whinging where Harry's wand casts the Lumos spell even though he is not even touching it is a sign of campanionship if not willingness to serve a master it clearly belongs with.
And I'm not sure who asked it, sorry, but why did Hermione's wand work reasonably well for Harry? Again it comes down to each members intention, Hermione lent it to Harry so they could be protected when he was on watch by the wand performing well it was following its owners instruction. It also, for lack of a better word, knew that Harry was not trying to clam it as his own he was merely borrowing it until its rightful master wanted it back.
Edited to add; Dumbledore's defeat of Grindewald, I think that the title of undefeatable wand is a little much. Dumbledore tells us that the three Hallows were most probably made by the three genius Prewitt brothers and it is clear that it is an extremely powerful piece of wood but just like the stone and the cloak it wasn't as perfect as the story made it out to be. I believe it was within Dumbledore's scope to defeat that wand head on with honour and it would diminish the character that he had worked hard to create after his sister’s death to go about it in a shady way. Also they say that eye witnesses said the display they put on was awe inspiring, I doubt anything but a full on duel would produce such results.
Soul Search - Jul 26, 2007 10:49 am (#61 of 391)
Do we know what the core of the Elder Wand was?
It was Dumbledore's wand. Was the core ever mentioned?
There was a scene in DH where Harry had more than one wand in his hand and cast multiple spells, producing a dramatic effect. I will look for it on my next read. We have also seen dramatic effects when multiple spells strike at the same time: the Shrieking Shack, against Snape, the Hogwarts Express, against Draco, etal, and maybe a few more.
What I am working up to is does the Elder Wand have a core element from all the magical creatures typically used to make a wand: dragon, unicorn, phoenix?
TomProffitt - Jul 31, 2007 7:03 am (#62 of 391)
We know by DD's own admission that he had wanted Severus Snape to have the Elder Wand at the end. Does anyone think it possible or probable that DD's plan involved Severus vanquishing The Dark Lord after Voldemort destroyed "The Harrycrux"?
Magic Words - Jul 31, 2007 1:43 pm (#63 of 391)
I think it would have been darn stupid not to at least acknowledge the possibility that Voldemort would kill Severus for the wand. If Severus had managed to make the wand transfer ownership to him (I'm still not convinced that would have worked, given the definition we have of "defeat") Voldemort's defeating him would have had disastrous consequences.
Mrs Brisbee - Aug 7, 2007 5:24 am (#64 of 391)
Are the Elder Wand and other Hallows indestructible? I'm curious, because if you wanted to get rid of the Elder Wand it doesn't look to be as simple as snapping it in half. What would happen if you were to pound on it awhile with Gryffindor's sword? Would that be enough to break it? The Resurrection Stone did crack after being hit with the sword, although it still worked fine despite the damage to it.
valuereflection - Aug 7, 2007 9:23 am (#65 of 391)
Interesting thought, Mrs. Brisbee. It sounds like all of the Hallows could be indestructible.
We know that the invisibility cloak is indestructible. And hitting the Resurrection Stone with Gryffindor's sword destroyed only its Horcrux properties and not its Hallow properties. It is a good guess that the Elder Wand is indestructible, too. Evidence for this idea is that the Elder Wand is a thin piece of very, very old wood, yet it has been used for centuries in bloody duels without breaking. Other wands we've seen in the series are about as fragile as you would expect a thin piece of wood to be. (The broken wands we've seen are Hagrid's, Ron's, Neville's, Odo's, Lucius', Harry's -[/b]- Any others?) Unless perhaps the Elder Wand is made of petrified wood...
Gerald Costales - Aug 8, 2007 1:15 am (#66 of 391)
Harry's Holly Wand and the Ron’s original Wand, which previously belonged to Percy, were both broken and malfunctioning. Also, Neville’s original Wand, which previously belonged to his father Frank, was broken at the Battle at the MoM. (But, I am fairly certain that the Book doesn’t give an example of Neville’s broken Wand malfunctioning.)
Wand note: Though not mentioned again in Book 7, Neville commented that he believed that his replacement Wand was one of the last Wands sold by Mr. Ollivander before his kidnapping by Voldemort.
So, as far was we know all these three Wands were snapped or broken and malfunctioning.
But, *IMHO* an exception to a snapped or broken Wand not malfunctioning is Hagrid’s Oak Wand. (I don't recall anything that shows Hagrid's Wand work to be labeled as ineffective.) So, besides the Elder Wand, could Hagrid’s Wand also be labeled as indestructible as well?
Did encasing Hagrid’s broken Oak Wand in the shaft of Hagrid’s Umbrella; do what Spell-o-tape couldn’t do for Ron’s original Wand? Or more likely, just as Harry mended his Holly Wand with the Elder Wand, might have Dumbledore also mended Hagrid’s Wand at some time.
The timing of the mending of Hagrid’s Oak Wand, I believed had to have happened after Dumbledore became Master of the Elder Wand. If the Elder Wand was the means of the mending Hagrid’s Oak Wand.
The Elder Wand may not be just rigid and stone-like. But, *IMHO* more likely the Elder Wand could be constructed with extremely supple or flexible wood. A fresh branch of a sapling could be bent and not snap the branch. Or even the core material of the Elder Wand could provide the Elder Wand with extreme suppleness and flexibility.
I thought Lucius’ Wand was merely broken by Harry’s Holly Wand. I recall Odo’s Wand being mentioned but I don’t recall the details concerning Odo’s Wand though.
The scene where Harry held three Wands and delivered an extremely strong spell, didn’t quite work for me. If holding multiple Wands was the reason for the increased force of the spell, then Wizards or Witches of lesser ability would be walking around with bundles of Wands to increase their effectiveness.
IMHO – Couldn’t Emotional Magic have been the cause the of increase in the spell’s force rather than holding three Wands. Bellatrix did tell Harry that one needs to really mean it when casting the Crucio spell ("Cruciatus Curse").
mollis - Aug 8, 2007 6:50 am (#67 of 391)
I would have to disagree with your analysis of Hagrid's wand working properly, Gerald. I think that when Hagrid tried to use "Reparo" to mend the sidecar back onto the motorcycle and it snapped off demonstrates the unreliability of his wand. When he was expelled it was said that his wand was snapped in half. But I would guess that it was repaired, hidden in the umbrella, and he continues to use it. It don't think that the wand has near the power or effectiveness it had before it was broken.
As for the increased power when Harry used 3 wands, I think that was simply because the same spell was released from each of the three wands at the same time. Similar to when Snape was disarmed in the Shreiking Shack and knocked unconscious. I don't think most wizards would want to draw attention to their lack of power by carrying multiple wands around.
And to bring this back around to the Elder Wand - I think that it is an unbreakable wand. Period. It won't be broken. The same way you can't remove something from the wall that was put there with a permanent sticking charm.
Choices - Aug 8, 2007 10:00 am (#68 of 391)
Gerald - "So, besides the Elder Wand, could Hagrid’s Wand also be labeled as indestructible as well?"
Gerald, I suggested on another thread that perhaps Dumbledore used the Elder Wand to repair Hagrid's wand, just as Harry's holly wand was repaired later. Spell-o-tape does not work, as Ron and Lockhart can attest. I speculate that once Hagrid was proven innocent, Dumbledore repaired his wand so that it would work properly again.
zelmia - Aug 8, 2007 10:03 am (#69 of 391)
I think the pieces of Hagrid's wand are encased in his umbrella, but I don't think they were ever re-connected. Hagrid is still using his whole pink umbrella and not just his wand even after he was cleared of any wrong-doing regarding the Chamber of Secrets.
Magic Words - Aug 8, 2007 6:52 pm (#70 of 391)
I agree with Mollis that we don't exactly have evidence of Hagrid's wand working properly. I always assumed he just wasn't that talented with magic, but maybe it was the wand the whole time.
Gerald Costales - Aug 8, 2007 10:26 pm (#71 of 391)
*IMHO* Hagrid's Oak Wand may only appear to work improperly. And compared to Harry’s broken Holly Wand and Ron’s/Percy’s broken Wand; the Oak Wand functions better than those other two broken Wands.
So, maybe the Oak Wand does function correctly. And, Hagrid could be the problem and not the Oak Wand broken or whole. Hagrid was never fully trained and probably doesn’t know how to use a Wand properly.
. . . “. . . Wands are only as powerful as the wizards who use them.”
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (DH, page 415, American hardback edition)
This quote is by Hermione and Hermione is usually always right.
mollis & Magic Words - I think we may need to agree to disagree about Hagrid’s Oak Wand and if it functions properly.
But, I’m surprised that no one has mentioned the other possible names for the Elder Wand –
. . . “But how do you know,” said Harry, “that those wands -- the Deathstick and the Wand of Destiny -[/b]- Aren’t the same wand, surfacing over the centuries under different name?”
. . .“What, and they’re all really the Elder Wand, made by Death?” said Ron.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (DH, page 415, American hardback edition)
I strongly believe Harry is correct and that the Deathstick; the Wand of Destiny; and the Elder Wand are one and the same Wand.
Of course, JKR should just pen an Almanac or Encyclopedia to address some of these minor details and we’d all be happy. GC
valuereflection - Aug 9, 2007 5:10 am (#72 of 391)
I agree that Hagrid's wand was probably repaired with the Elder Wand by Dumbledore, similarly to how Harry repaired his holly wand. It is unlikely that Hagrid's wand could have been repaired through any other way. Ollivander said, "A wand that has suffered this...damage cannot be repaired by any means that I know of."(DH chapter 24)
From the examples we've seen, broken wands will not work at all if they've been repaired through using lesser means than the Elder Wand. Harry's broken wand, after being enchanted by Hermione's "Reparo," rebroke when he attempted "Expelliarmus." Ron's broken, spell-o-taped wand did not properly perform any spells which Ron or Lockhart attempted. Neville did not even attempt to repair his wand when it broke. Although his father's wand had sentimental value for Neville, he did not gather the broken pieces and treasure them as he did his mother's gumwrappers; instead he chose to kick the pieces aside. I think Neville did this because he learned, through growing up in a pureblood family, that using or repairing a broken wand is hopeless.
In contrast, Hagrid did magic successfully with his wand while it was supposedly broken. For example, in Book 1 he tapped a rowboat so that it sped to the shore without rowing, and then tapped on the bricks to enter Diagon Alley. In Book 2 he did a good engorgement charm on pumpkins.
Hagrid's less than satisfactory magical prowess was not because his wand was unreliable. It was because he was not a fully qualified wizard (PA chapter 5). His "Reparo" charm did not work because he had not been trained how to perform it. Even Hermione, the brightest student in her year, did not learn how to perform "Reparo" until her fourth year of school -- but Hagrid received only three years of magical training before he was expelled from school. (from the Lexicon entry for "Reparo")
Jo said: Hagrid...has been allowed to do magic openly ever since he became a teacher but because he was never fully trained his magic is never going to be what it should be. He is always going to be a bit inept. from "World Exclusive Interview with J K Rowling," South West News Service, 8 July 2000
After Harry taught Hagrid the Aguamenti charm in Book 6, he performed the charm with his umbrella as well as Harry did. (chapter 28)
Hagrid's replies to Ollivander's inquiries about his wand implied that he had its pieces but did not use them, but Hagrid was obviously concealing part of the truth (PS chapter 5). Perhaps he was concealing more from Ollivander than the few spells the umbrella had cast. Hagrid was technically not using his wand "in pieces," if he was performing magic by using a wand made whole again.
In Book 2 (chapter 17), Tom Riddle said Dumbledore was the only teacher at Hogwarts who thought Hagrid was innocent of the crime, but DD could not convince anyone else. Riddle believed that DD guessed he had framed Hagrid. Although this was Tom Riddle talking, everything DD said to Fudge corroborated the story (chapter 14). After Hagrid was expelled from school and his wand snapped (in 1943), I think Dumbledore did much more to help the orphaned boy Hagrid than just persuade the headmaster to allow him residence at Hogwarts and arrange for gamekeeper training.
Since he was certain of Hagrid's unjust accusation and punishment, I believe Dumbledore repaired Hagrid's wand -[/b]- And warned Hagrid not to let other wizards see him do magic, lest the Ministry of Magic snap his wand again for violating the original punishment. I suspect Dumbledore also transfigured it into a pink, flowered umbrella to disguise it even from Ollivander. Dumbledore was the transfiguration teacher, after all, and a spell for disguisement would be most effective if cast from the Elder Wand.
mollis - Aug 9, 2007 2:05 pm (#73 of 391)
Well, Gerald and valuereflection, you may be convincing me on some parts of this. (Not to abandon you, Magic Words.)I will definitely concede that Hagrid was not fully trained and that I did forget to consider that when I posted earlier. That would certainly may it more difficult for Hagrid to do some spells. But surely "Reparo" would seem like a staple spell for not only a teacher, but especially a game keeper. Think of all the critters that Hagrid "raised" and all the stuff they likely broke. But here is my main issue with DD fixing Hagrid's wand. I can see it happening and I could even see DD hiding the wand it a pink umbrella to disguise it. But after Hagrid was cleared of all charges, wouldn't DD have removed the disguise and encouraged Hagrid to get "trained up"?
Steve Newton - Aug 9, 2007 2:19 pm (#74 of 391)
Dumbledore may have encouraged Hagrid to get "trained up" after he was cleared but he was already in his 50s and seemed to like his life. He doesn't seem like the academic sort to me.
septentrion - Aug 9, 2007 11:46 pm (#75 of 391)
I remember having read in Jo's some interview that a wizard couldn't repair a computer with the Reparo spell because he wouldn't understand how the computer works. I think Hagrid couldn't repair the motorbike properly because he didn't understand how it was done.
Madam Pince - Aug 12, 2007 10:02 am (#76 of 391)
We know that the invisibility cloak is indestructible. --valuereflection
I am not doubting you, but can you point me to how we know this? My mind is drawing a blank...
I'm reading this thread over again after a long absence, and I'm still confused. I can't seem to reconcile in my brain the idea that the Elder Wand cannot be defeated, vs. the idea that the only way the Wand transfers ownership is by recognizing the new master who defeated the old master. It's the old circular "what happens when an irresistable force meets an immovable object?"
I think it almost has to be that the Elder Wand transfers ownership when the owner is defeated, not that the Wand gets defeated by another wand. In other words, I don't think the Elder Wand "bows down" to the hawthorne wand; it bows down to Draco. The hawthorne wand didn't defeat the Elder Wand -- the master of the hawthorne wand defeated the master of the Elder Wand.
Or something like that. But this contradicts the theories of zelmia (and others) which I liked so much which say it's the defeating wand that matters, not the owner.
I'm like Remi, I dislike criticizing JKR, but I have to agree with The Wandless Wizard's post #24 on this thread -- here this is supposed to be the heart of this whole series, really, and we super-fans are supposedly reasonably smart folks for the most part. Why are we still having trouble figuring this out? It bothers me a great deal. I wish JKR could've explained it better for us. I am amazed that nobody asked her about this on the webchat or any of her other post-DH interviews.
I think we should copy this entire thread (along with the "Thanks to JKR" one) and send it along to her.
TomProffitt - Aug 12, 2007 3:17 pm (#77 of 391)
If either the wand or the Master of the Wand could not be defeated, the wand would not have changed possession so many times. There are very specific circumstances when the Master of the Wand cannot be defeated, and that is when the Master is wielding a wand in combat and trying to win. In any other circumstance the Master is as mortal as anyone else.
Madam Pince - Aug 12, 2007 4:15 pm (#78 of 391)
There are very specific circumstances when the Master of the Wand cannot be defeated, and that is when the Master is wielding a wand in combat and trying to win.
You may be right, and you probably are (I can't see any other way for this whole thing to work, honestly.) But the fact remains that JKR didn't tell us this. At least, if she did, I missed it. And that disappoints me.
Choices - Aug 12, 2007 5:16 pm (#79 of 391)
Tom - "There are very specific circumstances when the Master of the Wand cannot be defeated, and that is when the Master is wielding a wand in combat and trying to win."
Now I'm confunded. I thought that was exactly how the Elder Wand was gotten - by defeating the owner in battle and taking possession of it. Grindelwald was the master of the Elder Wand (and I bet he was trying to win) and Dumbledore defeated him in battle and became the new master of the wand. Down through history the Elder Wand changed hands often - it has a very bloody history (that must be a figure of speech because we know that the AK causes no blood to flow). It must be that Sectumsentra was used a lot??? To continue....Draco became master of the Elder Wand simply by disarming Dumbledore. Just in this book alone, the Elder Wand changes hands about 4 - 5 times. Evidently, the wand has never had an owner who could not be defeated.
zelmia - Aug 12, 2007 10:06 pm (#80 of 391)
I think it almost has to be that the Elder Wand transfers ownership when the owner is defeated, not that the Wand gets defeated by another wand.
This is what Voldemort believed also, which is why he first thought he could just take the Elder Wand from Dumbledore's tomb, and why he later believes that by killing Snape he would have the Elder Wand's power.
But it all comes down to the wands. Draco's wand [/b]- And by extension Draco himself - defeated the Elder Wand, when he disarmed Dumbledore. At that point his wand [/b]- And by extension Draco - became the Master of the Elder Wand.
When Harry takes possession of Draco's wand, that wand (the Hawthorn wand) is still Master over the Elder Wand. If this had not been the case, Harry would not have been able to kill Voldemort using Draco's wand.
But Harry is able to use Draco's wand to kill Voldemort because Harry "defeated" Draco's wand - which is still Master over the Elder Wand - by physically wrenching it from Draco's hand. Draco's wand then became Harry's wand; so at that point, since Draco's wand was still Master over the Elder Wand, by extension, Harry became the Elder Wand's Master.
Simply, Draco's wand never stopped being Master over the Elder Wand even though it changed owners. Harry figured this out and was able to use it to win the final battle and become Master of the Elder Wand.
I hope this makes sense.
Luna Logic - Aug 13, 2007 12:31 am (#81 of 391)
Choices : I thought that was exactly how the Elder Wand was gotten - by defeating the owner in battle and taking possession of it.
Zelmia , your post makes great sense. But I think we have to add to our thoughts the episode Gregorovitch-Grindelwald. Grindelwald has stolen the Elder Wand from Gregorovitch, and has been waiting for him, then Stunning him. Was it a battle? (chapter 14, p. 230 Bloomsbury)
TomProfitt : There are very specific circumstances when the Master of the Wand cannot be defeated, and that is when the Master is wielding a wand in combat and trying to win.
Good idea, that would be the logical explanation... (but is it written in the Legend ? Or said by Dumbledore in Chapter 35?)
TomProffitt - Aug 13, 2007 4:02 am (#82 of 391)
I think my summation is at the least implied in the text. The first time the wand changes a Master its first Master is passed out drunk, I believe. When Draco gains the wand Dumbledore is not trying to defeat Draco, he is trying to protect Harry, which made him vulnerable.
I don't believe the wand can be gained by direct confrontation, but only by subterfuge.
Jenniffler - Aug 13, 2007 6:50 am (#83 of 391)
Aha! I think TomProffitt has detected a running pattern of the loyalty of the wand. It was tricked in to being and perhaps a wizard has to trick it to gain the loyalty of it. This appears consistent with all accounts in the text.
Edit: I reviewed my opinion about Draco and the Elder Wand way up thread about post #34 and it agrees with this. An outright confrontation with no forethought and preparation would not make the wand change loyalty. Only by using the same craftiness used by the eldest Peverell brother to get the wand made could do the job. This includes when Harry seemingly muggle wrestles the wands right out of Draco's hands. A lot of really good deception led up to that moment.
mona amon - Aug 13, 2007 9:43 am (#84 of 391)
But didn't Dumbledore defeat Grindelwald and win the elder wand in combat? How does this fit in with Tom Proffitt's pattern?
I feel there is nothing really 'undefeatable' about the wand, though it may be a powerful one. Just as the invisibility cloak can be penetrated by certain spells, and the stone does not really do what it is supposed to (it brings back only a shadow of the dead). The fact is, there is nothing infallible about the Deathly Hallows. That is why Dumbledore calls them a 'lure for fools'.
Steve Newton - Aug 13, 2007 12:15 pm (#85 of 391)
I don't recall any details of the duel between Dumbledore and Grindelwald. Subterfuge could have been involved. Or maybe he just won. Just because it is said to be undefeatable doesn't mean that it is. Of course Voldemort thought that it was unbeatable so perhaps the subterfuge idea holds with Grindelwald, too.
TomProffitt - Aug 13, 2007 12:50 pm (#86 of 391)
We are not told specifically how Dumbledore defeated Grindelwald. It would be more consistent with what we know of the Elder Wand and Dumbledore's character for Dumbledore to have won by subterfuge than a strait up confrontation. We, however, have no way of knowing for certain from canon.
Soul Search - Aug 13, 2007 1:14 pm (#87 of 391)
While I like the idea the Elder Wand recognizes a new master who has tricked its previous master, there were a lot of historicial references for the wand changing masters as a result of a duel to the death.
mona amon - Aug 13, 2007 7:26 pm (#88 of 391)
I think it is mentioned a couple of times in DH that Dumbledore duelled Grindelwald and won. Here is one quote-
"Well you know what happened next. I won the duel. I won the wand." (DH, King's Cross chapter)
No subterfuge here. But that's the whole point about the deathly hallows. They are not infalliable. The supposedly undefeatable wand has been defeated several times.
TomProffitt - Aug 13, 2007 11:17 pm (#89 of 391)
I disagree, mona amon, the quote is exceedingly vague. There is plenty of room within that brief explanation for a victory in someone way other than a direct wand-to-wand encounter.
Edited to add:
I don't disagree about the fallibility of the Elder Wand, I just disagree with how it is fallible.
Luna Logic - Aug 14, 2007 8:05 am (#90 of 391)
I agree with TomProffitt. The sentence about the duel in Chapter 35 is vague.
And when they are discussing the track of the Elder Wand in Chapter 21, I see no clear mention of a battle to won the wand.(p. 334-335 Bloosmbury)
IMO, the "duel" may be a "strategic duel", a duel of skills... Nowhere is it said that it is a battle duel.
Loxias for example, killed Deverill, but took the wand from him. We don't know if it was a "regular" duel. Xeno says that is "the way in which it passes from hand to hand" which is special. (p. 334 Bloomsbury)
Then he adds about that way : "the possessor of the wand must capture it from its previous owner, if he is to be truly master of it" (same page).
Mrs Brisbee - Aug 14, 2007 9:06 am (#91 of 391)
I've no idea how the Elder Wand thing is supposed to work. Gives me a headache. I'll just continue to read the excellent debate. But here's what Elphias Doge had to say about the duel:
"They say, still, that no Wizarding duel ever matched that between Dumbledore and Grindelwald in 1945. Those who witnessed it have written of the terror and the awe they felt as they watched these two extaordinary wizards do battle." --(DH, Ch 2, "In Memoriam")
valuereflection - Aug 14, 2007 2:33 pm (#92 of 391)
Madam Pince, you asked how we know that the invisibility cloak is indestructible. I'm sorry I've taken a few days to post my answer. The book said that it endures eternally.
From Xenophilius: "That is a children's tale, told to amuse rather than instruct. Those of us who understand these matters, however, recognize that the ancient story refers to three objects, or Hallows... Ah, but the Third Hallow is a true Cloak of Invisibility, Miss Granger! I mean to say, it is not a traveling cloak with a Disillusionment Charm, or carrying a Bedazzling Hex, or else woven from Demiguise hair, which will hide one initially but fade with the years until it turns opaque. We are talking about a cloak that really and truly renders the wearer completely invisible, and endures eternally, giving constant and impenetrable concealment, no matter what spells are cast at it. How many cloaks have you ever seen like that?" (DH chapter 21, pages 409-411 in the Scholastic edition)
The idea is reiterated in chapter 22 (page 430 in the Scholastic edition), and in chapter 35 (page 713-715 in the Scholastic edition):
From Harry: He had never seen anything to equal it in his nearly seven years in the Wizarding world. The Cloak was exactly what Xenophilius had described...
From Dumbledore: "The Hallows, the Hallows, a desperate man's dream! Real and dangerous, and a lure for fools... The Cloak...traveled down through the ages, father to son, mother to daughter... You have guessed, I know, why the Cloak was in my possession on the night your parents died. James had showed it to me just a few days previously... I could hardly believe what I was seeing...I could not resist, could not help taking a closer look....It was a Cloak the likes of which I had never seen, immensely old, perfect in every respect..."
You also asked about where JKR said this: "There are very specific circumstances when the Master of the Wand cannot be defeated, and that is when the Master is wielding a wand in combat and trying to win." (Tom Proffit, Post #77)
I interpreted the original legend in the same way Tom Proffit did. Quoting from chapter 21 again, "So the oldest brother, who was a combative man, asked for a wand more powerful than any in existence: a wand that must always win duels for its owner..."
Madam Pince - Aug 14, 2007 3:19 pm (#93 of 391)
Thanks, valuereflection! I agree -- "endures eternally" sounds like the same thing as "indestructible." It was just that word "indestructible" that didn't sound to me like anything I'd heard before, so that's why I was drawing a blank. You're right! Thanks!
I think Tom Proffitt must be onto something too -- it must be only in a straight-on duel, and when it is in the possession of its rightful master, that the Elder Wand seems undefeatable. And really, it's almost more that the master is undefeatable, isn't it? Because in the Voldemort/Harry duel, the possessor of the Wand lost, but the Master of the Wand won, so it would appear to an uninformed observer (like, me, for instance... ) that the Elder Wand "lost," when actually it didn't lose at all because it was fulfilling its Master's wishes.
I think one thing that keeps tripping me up is that sometimes the Wand seems to have changed hands by being stolen and/or wrested away, and sometimes by being beaten in a straight-on duel, and trying to reconcile my definitions of "undefeatable" with both of those concepts. One of these days when I have a couple hours I am going to compile a list of all the pertinent exchanges and their circumstances, and see if that helps me to see it.
Thanks, everyone! This is fascinating to read.
Luna Logic - Aug 15, 2007 12:57 am (#94 of 391)
Edited by Aug 15, 2007 12:59 am
Thanks, Mrs Brisbee, you have found the quote which puzzles the matter the most !! :
"They say, still, that no Wizarding duel ever matched that between Dumbledore and Grindelwald in 1945. Those who witnessed it have written of the terror and the awe they felt as they watched these two extaordinary wizards do battle." --(DH, Ch 2, "In Memoriam")- in Elphias Doge article.
Madam Pince : I think Tom Proffitt must be onto something too -- it must be only in a straight-on duel, and when it is in the possession of its rightful master, that the Elder Wand seems undefeatable.
Now I am totally lost ! How Dumbledore could won a straight-on duel against the master of an unbeatable-wand-in-a-straight-on duel ?
Gerald Costales - Aug 15, 2007 3:34 am (#95 of 391)
“Now I am totally lost! How Dumbledore could (have) won a straight-on duel against the master of an unbeatable-wand-in-a-straight-on duel?” Luna Logic
I don't know where it was posted, but someone wrote that a Wand seems almost sentient. Which I must agree with and this sentient quality is what could be the mechanism behind who is the true Master of the Elder Wand. And, I must refer to that oft times quoted statement of Mr. Ollivander “. . . that the Wand chooses the Wizard.” ; to try to possibly explain Mastering the Elder Wand.
We have examples of a few Magical Items, though not truly alive, that almost “have a mind of their own”.
. .1. The Sorting Hat - Talks, composes its famous annual song, and “Sorts”. There is even a conversation between Harry, I believe, and the Hat when Harry is alone with the Sorting Hat. (Don't have time to locate the exact quote at this time.) But, doesn’t the Hat say that Harry would have done well in Slytherin.
. .2. The Diary of Tom Riddle - Remember Arthur Weasley's warning - Don't trust anything where you can’t see its Brain. (Again, I don't have the time to locate the exact quote at this time.)
If the Wand is sentient, then I believe the Elder Wand may have some Choice on its Master. Similar to the loyalty any living thing can shows to its owner. There are several Pets in the Series from Hedwig on that show extreme loyalty and devotion to their owners. But, Pettigrew in contrast, as Scabbers, chose to stay with the Weasley's only when convenient and then when possible Scabbers fled from Ron for his Real Master Voldemort. (Proving that Pettigrew is a Rat in more ways than mere Transfiguration.)
Fawkes displayed his loyalty and devotion to Dumbledore several times: by aiding Dumbledore during Dumbledore’s escape from his office after being confronted by Fudge; by swallowing an AK to protect Dumbledore during the Battle at the MoM; and finally Fawkes’ final “Phoenix Song” in the Series was the last time we ever hear or see of Fawkes. (And Fawkes’ presence was greatly missed in Book 7 by us Fawkes supporters.)
And don’t forget the House-Elves, Winky’s loyalty to the Crouches and Kreacher’s loyalty to first Regulus and than finally to Harry. The later showing that the Servitude of the House-Elf can be earned and that a House-Elf is bound by more than Magic to his/her Master.
Dobby of course rejected his Servitude to the Malfoys and aided Harry several times. The ultimate sacrifice of Dobby foreshadowed Harry's “Final Walk” to face Voldemort. Both Dobby’s and Harry’s acts of Courage, showed that Dobby was no mere House-Elf and Harry no mere boy Wizard. Dobby was his own Master before receiving a Sock from Lucius. And Harry was more than lucky when Harry became “the Boy that lived”. Both Dobby and Harry are Masters of their Destinies. (And isn’t the Elder Wand possibly the “Wand of Destiny”?)
During, that Epic battle between Grindelwald and Dumbledore maybe the Elder Wand recognized that Grindelwald was not a worthy Master and that Death (the Elder Wand’s Maker and True first Master) would accept Dumbledore as his Equal.
The Third Brother, finally walked with Death as Death's Equal. Dumbledore must have, as Harry ultimately did, confronted Death and a Dark Wizard with no real chance of survival. Both Dumbledore and Harry embraced their Destinies to Defeat a False and Unworthy Master of the Elder Wand and both Dumbledore and Harry became the True and Worthy Master of the Elder Wand. GC
TomProffitt - Aug 15, 2007 4:36 am (#96 of 391)
Now I am totally lost ! How Dumbledore could won a straight-on duel against the master of an unbeatable-wand-in-a-straight-on duel ? --- Luna Logic
The battle between Dumbledore and Grindelwald is not given very specific descriptions. A little hyperbole, but nothing specific. Given Dumbledore's character and past performance (actually it's things he did after, but we've seen it before) I don't think Dumbledore fought a "strait up wand-to-wand duel" with Grindelwald. I think DD knew the secret of the Elder Wand before he ever fought Grindelwald and that he was able to come up with a plan that would use it's weakness in his favor. That's how he beat LV, why treat Grindelwald any differently?
valuereflection - Aug 15, 2007 9:40 am (#97 of 391)
Of course the spectators believed that what they observed was a straight-on duel, because DD would have kept his plan secret. Secrecy would have been integral to his strategy.
I believe neither Dumbledore or Grindelwald mentioned the Elder Wand during their famous duel -- they both kept the secret. If either DD or Grindelwald had hinted about the Elder Wand, the comment would have been so very noteworthy that it would have been recalled by Elphias Doge (who related the duel in chapter 2), Xenophilius or Hermione (who both related parts of the Elder Wand's history in chapter 21), or Ollivander (who described tracing the course of the Elder Wand through history, and concluded that Gregorovitch had it, in chapter 24).
Ron and Hermione pointed out how difficult it would be to "keep your trap shut" about the Elder Wand. The fact that Dumbledore did so, and did it for many years, is a tribute to his character. He had truly mastered death, was unafraid to face it.
Grindelwald kept the secret also. When Voldemort visited him in Nurmengard, Grindelwald's first statement was, "I never had it." But after Voldemort confronted him about that lie, he replied, "Kill me, then, Voldemort, I welcome death! But my death will not bring you what you seek... There is so much you do not understand..." Voldemort still did not understand that Dumbledore had been master of the Elder Wand until several hours after he killed Grindelwald and returned to England -- Voldemort took that long to deduce it.(chapter 24).
T Vrana - Aug 15, 2007 9:54 am (#98 of 391)
Lots to catch up on. I tend to think DD was able to beat the Elder Wand in battle because Grindewald stole it. While Grindewald was able to use it, it did not perform as promised, as Undefeatable. Same thing happened when LV stole the Elder Wand. He was able to use it, but it did not live up to the its promise of extraordinary. No book handy, but LV and Snape discuss this just prior to Snape's murder. Snape mentions that LV has done extraordinary magic with the wand, LV says for him it was his ordinary greatness, not any greatness of the Wand.
I believe it was a great duel and DD won by talent against a wand that had power, but had not been properly won, so it was not Undefeatable.
Once won in battle, the Wand became DD's to Master,even though DD did not defeat Gregorovich, because he did defeat the Wand and the current owner, though not Master.
Luna Logic - Aug 15, 2007 9:55 am (#99 of 391)
TomProfitt: I don't think Dumbledore fought a "strait up wand-to-wand duel" with Grindelwald. I think DD knew the secret of the Elder Wand before he ever fought Grindelwald and that he was able to come up with a plan that would use it's weakness in his favor. That's how he beat LV, why treat Grindelwald any differently?
valuereflection :Of course the spectators believed that what they observed was a straight-on duel, because DD would have kept his plan secret. Secrecy would have been integral to his strategy. I believe neither Dumbledore or Grindelwald mentioned the Elder Wand during their famous duel -- they both kept the secret.
Your explanations (both in the same line) seems to be accorded to the Dumbledore we knew in the books (IMO). Strategy, secret... I will take it, I think!
Alas for the show of the Big Duel... but Dumbledore said once (was it in the Cave?) something, like, magic is not a matter of show, so I will not regret it.
Mattew Bates - Aug 15, 2007 10:13 am (#100 of 391)
Maybe Dumbledore secretly went to pick a fight with Gregorovich just so he would be the master of the Elder Wand when it came time to duel Grindewald.
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 101 to 150
Mona Fri May 13, 2011 12:09 pm
T Vrana - Aug 15, 2007 10:39 am (#101 of 391)
Matthew - Ah! Interesting possibility!
mollis - Aug 15, 2007 10:50 am (#102 of 391)
Actually, we were shown very clearly, with Harry stealing Draco's wand, that you don't have to defeat the owner of the wand to win its loyalty. Simply stealing it can work. So I think that Grindelwald, and therefore, DD were true masters of the Elder Wand. I tend to think more along the lines of TomProffit. I think that there was a great and awful duel between DD and Grindelwald. But the conclusion of this duel was not as straightforward as we might like to believe. DD "defeated" Grindelwald but did not kill him. I agree that there must have been some sort of deception or trickery involved. Or maybe after they had been battling for awhile DD got close enough to simply grab the thing out of his hand. Now DD is master of the wand and Grindelwald is defeated. Just a thought.
T Vrana - Aug 15, 2007 10:55 am (#103 of 391)
mollis- Overpowering Draco and taking his wand I saw as a defeat, unlike sneaking in and taking it off a shelf, with no physical overpowering of Gregorovich.
ETA- Harry did a 'Muggle Expelliarmus' if you will. Grindewald didn't disarm Gregorovich, he just snuck in and stole it from a shelf or counter.
Madam Pince - Aug 15, 2007 11:28 am (#104 of 391)
Yes, I agree; Harry didn't steal Draco's wand. He took it by good old fashioned "muggle force" (not a duel by any means, either...)
Luna's comment Now I am totally lost ! How Dumbledore could won a straight-on duel against the master of an unbeatable-wand-in-a-straight-on duel? is what trips me up, too. Someone said something earlier about how perhaps subterfuge had to be involved somehow -- trickery, deception, etc. That's a possibility. As Mollis said, maybe DD tricked Grindelwald during the duel -- some way that the observers did not notice.
Again, the thing that's most bothersome to me is that we're left to speculate and fill in holes and hash this out ourselves, making stuff up as we go. For a plot point that's as crucial to the series as this is, it ought to be clearer.... IMHO... Sorry, Jo....
T Vrana - Aug 15, 2007 11:31 am (#105 of 391)
Think I should clarify my thoughts. DD said the true power of the Elder Wand would be broken if its Master died unvanquished. We know it is possible to own the Wand without Mastering it (DD's intent for Snape, though I doubt he ever meant him to actually physically possess it). So if DD had not been overpowered by Draco, the power of the Elder Wand would have been ended, becasue he was the last to defeat and Master the Wand at his death.
The difference with Gregorovich/Grindelwald/DD is that, IMO, Grindewald was owner, but not Master, because he did not defeat Gregorovich, he simply snuck in and stole the Wand. But DD did defeat THE WAND, while the old Master still lived, and so Mastership passed to DD because he defeated the Wand.
I think.....
TomProffitt - Aug 15, 2007 11:35 am (#106 of 391)
... because he did not defeat Gregorovich, he simply snuck in and stole the Wand. --- T Vrana
I tend to go with Sun Tzu on this, "A true Master of Warfare wins without fighting." In my opinion stealing the wand is defeating its master.
Xenophilius - Aug 15, 2007 11:40 am (#107 of 391)
I assumed the stunning spell that Grindewald shot at Gregorovich hit. That would leave Gregorovich defeated and the wand ownership passed to Gindewald.
T Vrana - Aug 15, 2007 12:06 pm (#108 of 391)
Xeno- I agree that ownership passed. But I think Owning and Mastering are distinct and seperate issues.
Tom- LV stole the Wand. Even though Draco did not know he was Master, it was still stolen, so why would that theft not be a defeat? The Master must know it is being stolen from him?
zelmia - Aug 15, 2007 12:31 pm (#109 of 391)
I agree with Tom that "stealing is defeating".
Even though Draco did not know he was Master, it was still stolen, so why would that theft not be a defeat? - Because it was Draco's wand, that had become Master over the Elder Wand at that point. Draco is only Master of the Elder Wand because his Hawthorn Wand is.
When Harry takes Draco's Hawthorn Wand, the Hawthorn Wand is still Master of the Elder Wand. So when the Hawthorn Wand changes loyalties to Harry, Harry becomes the Elder Wand's Master only because he has become the Hawthorn Wand's new owner. "The Wand chooses the Wizard".
Luna Logic - Aug 15, 2007 1:22 pm (#110 of 391)
Edited by Aug 15, 2007 1:24 pm
Xenophilius: I assumed the stunning spell that Grindewald shot at Gregorovich hit. That would leave Gregorovich defeated and the wand ownership passed to Grindewald. . Yes, it seems that Grindelwald was waiting Gregorovitch, to Stun him. So, why exactly?..
Now there is something else I absolutly don't understand :
Zelmia: it was Draco's wand, that had become Master over the Elder Wand at that point. Draco is only Master of the Elder Wand because his Hawthorn Wand is.
When Harry takes Draco's Hawthorn Wand, the Hawthorn Wand is still Master of the Elder Wand. So when the Hawthorn Wand changes loyalties to Harry, Harry becomes the Elder Wand's Master only because he has become the Hawthorn Wand's new owner. "The Wand chooses the Wizard".
My questions:
The Hawthorn Wand is an ordinary wand. But, there is not such thing as "mastering" a wand, concerning ordinary wands? Because I understood that is was only the Elder Wand which has special ways of beeing mastered.
May a wand be the master of another wand, or is it the wizard who is the master of the wand(s)?
I don't understand the part "the Hawthorn Wand changes loyalties to Harry". How can an ordinary wand have loyalties ?
And I don't understand the part "The Wand chooses the Wizard" : I had understood it hapenned only in the wandmakers shops...
Are these changing of loyalties something new we learned about wands in Book 7?
(I don't know if my questions are understandable )
T Vrana - Aug 15, 2007 1:40 pm (#111 of 391)
zelmia- I'm not sure that that is true. Draco is Master because he disarmed DD. Harry became Master because he disarmed Draco. I'm don't think a wand can Master the Elder Wand, only a wizard or witch. The Wand chooses the Wizard, not another wand. And Harry was chosen because he defeated the former Master, Draco, by disarming him. Defeat is key, as we know the Wand switched ownership and Mastery when a Master was murdered in his sleep.
Now the Elder Wand would not perform properly against the Hawthorn because Harry was master of both. But that doesn't give the Hawthorn wand Mastery over the Elder.
Back to stealing. Draco did not have the Wand, neither did Harry. It was stolen. If stealing is the same as defeating, then LV should be Master. But stealing and ownership appear not to be enough to Master. Or LV could have said, once he realized what had happened, "Look, Harry, I've stolen your wand from DD's grave, so now I'm Master".
I can agree that perhaps the stunning spell covers defeat.
zelmia - Aug 15, 2007 10:19 pm (#112 of 391)
But that doesn't give the Hawthorn wand Mastery over the Elder. - Then how is it that Harry was able to kill Voldemort using the Hawthorn Wand when Voldemort had the Elder Wand? Harry was only Master of the Elder Wand at that point because he had taken ownership of the Hawthorn Wand - which had previously defeated the Elder Wand.
Gerald Costales - Aug 16, 2007 12:18 am (#113 of 391)
(re: post #112)
. . .“The true master of the Elder Wand was Draco Malfoy.”
. . .“But what does it matter?” he said softly. “Even if you are right, Potter, it makes no difference to you and me. You no longer have the phoenix wand: We duel on skill alone . . . and after I have killed you, I can attend to Draco Malfoy . . . . ”
. . .“But you’re too late” said Harry. “You’ve missed your chance. I got there first. I overpowered Draco weeks ago. I took this wand from him.”
. . . “So, it all comes down to this, doesn’t it?” whispered Harry. “Does the wand in your hand know its last master was Disarmed? Because if in does . . . I am the true master of the Elder Wand.”
. . . . . . . . Harry heard the high voice shriek as he too yelled his best hope to the heavens, pointing Draco’s wand.
. . . “Avada Kedavra!”
. . . “Expelliarmus!”
. . . The bang was like a cannon blast, and golden flames that erupted between them, at the dead center of the circle they had been treading marked the point where the spells collided. Harry saw Voldemort’s green jet meet his own spell, saw the Elder Wand fly high, dark against the sunrise, spinning across the enchanted ceiling like the head of Nagini, spinning through the air toward the master it would not kill, who had come to take full possession at last. And Harry, with the unerring skill of the Seeker, caught the wand in his free hand as Voldemort fell backward, arms splayed, the slit pupils of the scarlet eyes rolling upward. Tom Riddle hit the floor with a mundane finality, his body feeble and shrunken, the white hands empty, the snakelike face vacant and unknowing. Voldemort was dead, killed by his own rebounding curse, and Harry stood with two wands in his hand, staring down at his enemy’s shell.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (pages 743 & 744, DH, American hardback edition)
The way I read it is that Draco became Master of the Elder Wand when Draco’s cast “Expelliarmus!” and disarmed Dumbledore.
And when Harry overpowered Draco to disarm and possess the Hawthorn Wand, then both the Mastery of the Hawthorn Wand and the Elder Wand passed to Harry.
So, whether by Magic or Force disarming a Wand from a Wizard changes both the Mastery and Ownership of the captured Wand to the Wizard taking control of the Disarmed Wand. Draco never possessed the Elder Wand, but Draco had Mastery of the Elder Wand. GC
wynnleaf - Aug 16, 2007 5:24 am (#114 of 391)
Can someone point me to where these questions are answered (either in the books or in an earlier post where it's addressed)?
1. If DD was the master of the wand in previous books, why didn't LV have any problem with his own wand when dueling with DD in OOTP?
2. Since neither Harry nor LV are master of the Elder Wand early in DH, why does LV's wand (he's using Lucius' I think), have any problem against Harry in the escape from Privet Drive?
3. The Elder Wand wasn't destroyed at the end of the book, but only returned to DD's tomb. Since Harry announced to everyone at his final confrontation with LV that he, Harry, was the master of the Elder Wand, what's to stop anyone from attempting to defeat Harry in some way, thereby gaining mastery of the wand, and going to DD's tomb to steal it?
T Vrana - Aug 16, 2007 6:36 am (#115 of 391)
zelmia- Yes, but Harry is Master, not the hawthorn wand. He gained 'Mastership', by taking the Hawthorn Wnad from Draco by force, when Draco was Master of teh Elder Wand.
Wynnleaf- Why would LV have trouble with his own wand against the Elder?
DD explains number 2 in Kings Cross.
3. Nothing, but would you go after the Chosen One? The wizard who defeated LV? Plus, only certain types of wizards actively pursue the Elder Wand, it seems. And, how well known is the Elder Wand? Apparently only kooks like Xenophilius believe in it. I doubt any of the witches or wizards in the Hall want to go after Harry and break into DD's tomb. But, there is the risk....perhpas Jo left herself an out to write more books someday!
Nathan Zimmermann - Aug 16, 2007 6:39 am (#116 of 391)
Wynnleaf, I ascribe the destruction of Lucius wand to the fact that he is a less powerful wizard than Voldemort and that Lucius Malfoy's wand shattered because it was not able to channel the increased power.
Likewise I would argue that Hermione is potentially a more powerful witch than Harry because, her wand shatters Harry's..
T Vrana - Aug 16, 2007 6:48 am (#117 of 391)
Nathan- Sort of. DD told Harry his wand contained both his power and some of LV's power and the combined power of the two destroyed "Lucius's poor stick'.
wynnleaf - Aug 16, 2007 8:34 am (#118 of 391)
I don't understand how that meshes with Harry dueling other people (prior to being master of the Elder Wand) and nothing happens to their wands. It's just because he was dueling LV and LV was, in effect, kind of dueling against a part of himself? Okay, I can accept that.
T Vrana - Aug 16, 2007 9:25 am (#119 of 391)
Think DD said that...that the wand recognized LV,,,,,its in the Kings Cross chapter....can't keep the logic of that one straight.
mollis - Aug 16, 2007 10:26 am (#120 of 391)
To bring in a thought from TomProffitt from another thread: TomProffitt, "Plot Inconsistency or Red Herring: Which Is It?" #18, 16 Aug 2007 4:43 am
He says: “I'm starting to think JKR goofed in her rules. Grindelwald stole the Elder Wand from Gregorovich and gained apparent Mastery. Didn't LV essentially steal the Elder Wand from Draco when he took it from Dumbledore's tomb? We can save the details of this question for the Elder Wand thread, but does anyone else think that this might be an inconsistency on Rowling's part? “
Maybe when Voldy took the Elder wand from DD’s tomb, Master-ship didn’t transfer to him because the wand didn’t have a physical master yet. It still only recognized the master of the Hawthorne wand as master, not Harry. If Voldy had disarmed Harry, instead of AK-ing him, he would have then become Master of the Elder Wand. Maybe:
And wynleaf said (in that other thread): “…regarding LV and DD's duel in OOTP and why we see LV having no problem using his wand against DD (even though he can't kill him)…”
I don’t think this is a problem. You can still duel against the Edler Wand, you just won’t win the duel. DD had a great duel with Grindelwald when he was master of the wand. Somehow he was able to defeat him and become master himself. Then when Voldy dueled him, DD would have been undefeatable in the straight-up duel.
Wynleaf said (in this thread): “I don't understand how that meshes with Harry dueling other people (prior to being master of the Elder Wand) and nothing happens to their wands. It's just because he was dueling LV and LV was, in effect, kind of dueling against a part of himself? Okay, I can accept that.”
The thing with Harry’s wand does seem a little fishy upon close examination. But it has nothing to do with the Elder Wand (so maybe it doesn’t belong here). According to DD in King’s Cross, Harry’s wand had absorbed some of Voldemort’s yew wand’s powers during priori incantatem (in GOF). When Harry’s wand recognized Voldemort close by, it reacted against him by emitting the flames and (maybe inadvertently) destroying Lucius’ wand (which wouldn’t be near as powerful as Voldemort’s own yew wand). So apparently a wand can recognize a wizard in close proximity, even if the wizard has never touched the wand.
zelmia - Aug 16, 2007 11:28 am (#121 of 391)
If Voldy had disarmed Harry, instead of AK-ing him, he would have then become Master of the Elder Wand. - Exactly.
But once again Voldemort fails to acknowledge that the devil is in the details, as they say. He was so bent on killing Harry [/b]- And so arrogant as to think that he, and not Harry, had figured out the right path to the Elder Wand - that he wouldn't even listen to Harry's "and now before I kill you Mr Bond" speech.
And he paid for it in the end.
T Vrana - Aug 16, 2007 11:33 am (#122 of 391)
Not sure LV could disarm Harry. Because Harry was Master of both wands, the Hawthorn and the Elder, I still think he would have won no matter what spell LV cast.
zelmia - Aug 16, 2007 12:45 pm (#123 of 391)
True, TVrana. But if Voldemort had been able to disarm Harry, then yes, he would have become the Master of the Elder Wand.
legolas returns - Aug 16, 2007 12:51 pm (#124 of 391)
Voldemort is usually so intent on killing the person in front of him. I doubt he has ever disarmed.
Xenophilius - Aug 16, 2007 1:01 pm (#125 of 391)
The thing is even if Voldy had been able to gain mastery of the wand it still wouldn't have been able to kill Harry. The deck was stacked against Voldy in this duel. Harry was master of both wands and he was protected as long as Voldy was alive.
Madam Pince - Aug 16, 2007 4:00 pm (#126 of 391)
You know, I'm liking this emphasis on "disarming." Early on in the book, JKR points out to us (via Lupin) that disarming has become sort of Harry's specialty, and Lupin chides him about it, but Harry is stubbornly insistent that he'll keep using it. If this Elder Wand / disarming thing is true, then it turns out that Harry's specialty might be the only way to win the Wand.
Hmmmm... more thought is required. Oh joy.
legolas returns - Aug 16, 2007 4:06 pm (#127 of 391)
Can you block someone from disarming you? Didnt the wand have a bloody history in the pass. Gregovitch/Dumbledore/Draco Malfoy disarmed. I wonder if Dumbledore disarmed Grindlewald because he did not kill him. I cant see people thinking it was the greatest fight in history if the two of them started to fling fists because they were not getting anywhere with wands.
Xenophilius - Aug 16, 2007 4:09 pm (#128 of 391)
Wasn't that Ron's recommendation to Harry in PS/SS when Draco challeged him to a wizards duel?
legolas returns - Aug 16, 2007 4:13 pm (#129 of 391)
Ron suggested throwing away your wand and punching Draco in the nose if you could not get your wand to work. Helpful suggestion that
Allison R - Aug 16, 2007 4:53 pm (#130 of 391)
Can you block someone from disarming you?
Wouldn't "protego!" protect you from being disarmed - Assuming you could get it cast before your opponent got out "expelliarmus!"??
mona amon - Aug 16, 2007 8:04 pm (#131 of 391)
The battle between Dumbledore and Grindelwald is not given very specific descriptions. A little hyperbole, but nothing specific. Given Dumbledore's character and past performance (actually it's things he did after, but we've seen it before) I don't think Dumbledore fought a "strait up wand-to-wand duel" with Grindelwald. (TomProffitt)
I disagree. We are never given a single hint in cannon that there was subterfuge involved. And in what way is it important to the plot for Dumbledore to have won the wand by doing something dodgy instead of with superior duelling skills?
Grindelwald had the most powerful wand. But Dumbledore was the more powerful wizard. In the end, the wand is only as powerful as the wizard that weilds it. So while the Elder Wand will give you an advantage in battle, a lot still depends on your own skill and power.
The wand can become truly undefeatable (in battle) only when the most powerful wizard is its master. I think this is what happened when Dumbledore became master of the wand. He was never defeated till the very end when, greatly weakened and busy petrifying Harry, he was not able to defend himself against Draco's Expelliarmus.
Gerald Costales - Aug 17, 2007 2:41 am (#132 of 391)
“The wand can become truly undefeatable (in battle) only when the most powerful wizard is its master. I think this is what happened when Dumbledore became master of the wand. He was never defeated till the very end when, greatly weakened and busy petrifying Harry, he was not able to defend himself against Draco's Expelliarmus.” mona amon
But, if the plan was for Snape to AK Dumbledore then both Dumbledore and Snape needed Dumbledore’s death to look convincing. We know that Dumbledore knew it was Malfoy behind the Opal Necklace and probably the Poisoned Mead that ended up with Prof. Slughorn. So, I wouldn’t discount the possibly that Dumbledore let Draco disarm him.
Dumbledore probably knew that Voldemort would go after another Wand after the Yew Wand and Holly Wand locked in the Graveyard. Dumbledore could have wanted to transfer Mastership of the Elder Wand to Draco. Who would suspect cowardly Draco of being the Master of the Elder Wand? Draco couldn’t AK a wandless Dumbledore. Also, since Draco never showed any great Magical abilities; Voldemort would never want Draco’s Hawthorn Wand. Voldemort would want the Wand of a Great Wizard.
We saw at least two hand-me-down Wands; Bill Weasley’s first Wand and Frank Longbottom’s Wand. Being buried with your Wand could be the exception and not the rule. So, Voldemort would be suspicious of Dumbledore wanting to be buried with the Elder Wand. And Voldemort probably remembered what a Powerful Wand the Elder Wand was when Voldemort and Dumbledore dueled at the MoM. Voldemort had to run because the Yew Wand could not defeat the Elder Wand.
Another flaw in the plan would have been the Two Vanishing Cabinets that allowed the Death Eaters to enter Hogwarts. Dumbledore wasn’t pleading with Snape when Dumbledore said, “Severus . . . please . . .” before being AK’ed. Dumbledore was asking Snape to AK him. GC
TomProffitt - Aug 17, 2007 4:27 am (#133 of 391)
The wand can become truly undefeatable (in battle) only when the most powerful wizard is its master. --[/b]- Mona amon
This definition (explanation) works somewhat better than the one I have been using. The confusing part for me is that Rowling doesn't give us a clear definition that fits well with the known facts. mona amon's definition works, but is further from the explanation given in the text.
While Jo understands broad complexities well, I think on the Elder Wand she has made one or more errors in the fine details.
Luna Logic - Aug 17, 2007 4:54 am (#134 of 391)
Edited by Aug 17, 2007 4:55 am
The wand can become truly undefeatable (in battle) only when the most powerful wizard is its master. --[/b]- Mona amon
Then, what would be the purpose of such a magical item?
I had understood the Legend as following: a rather ordinary wizard could become the most powerful wizard in duel, if he could become master of this unique Elder Wand.
But if mona amon sees right, then the Elder Wand is only good for the most powerful wizard of the moment.
Thus all the wizards whose names were in the history of the Wand would be the most powerful wizard of their time... And only the next “most powerful wizard” could have defeated them…
That idea seems now rather simple to me… rather JKR like ?
mona amon - Aug 17, 2007 6:06 am (#135 of 391)
The way I see it, it is a very powerful wand, the most powerful wand in fact, and if you are master of it, it will definitely give you an edge in battle. However, in battle it is not the wand alone that matters. The skill of the wizard who owns the wand is also important, perhaps more important.
But if mona amon sees right, then the Elder Wand is only good for the most powerful wizard of the moment
No, if you are master, it will help to improve your performance whatever your level of skill may be. But you can still be defeated by someone with superior skill.
mona amon's definition works, but is further from the explanation given in the text. (Tom Profitt)
Tom, I don't think I understand. We are given various explanations in the text about what the wand is supposed to do, the children's tale, the legend of the Peverell Brothers, etc. Which explanation do you mean?
T Vrana - Aug 17, 2007 6:31 am (#136 of 391)
Dumbledore could have wanted to transfer Mastership of the Elder Wand to Draco.
DD told Harry in King's Cross that he had planned for Snape to end up with the wand.
I still think DD was able to defeat Grindewald because of the manner in which Grindewald took the wand. He didn't win it, he snuck it.
megfox* - Aug 17, 2007 7:03 am (#137 of 391)
I have a thought about the idea of "defeating" and "mastering" the Elder Wand. If its true that the wand chooses the wizard, what if that is all that is needed in order to become Master of the Wand? The wand decides when it wants to change alliances to another wizard. Sometimes, a Stunning Spell is all that is needed, sometimes, just stealing it, sometimes, you need to kill the owner. The wand decides that the person who has taken control of it is worthy enough to become Master. With something like the Elder Wand, which would be heavily guarded and protected (hopefully) and make the holder more powerful, it should be hard for it to change hands, and therefore, anyone who could defeat the old Master, by whatever means, would be the Master. This is why Harry can take the "Elder Wand" from Draco and defeat Voldemort - even though Voldemort has the Elder Wand in his possession, he didn't defeat Draco so he wasn't the master of the Wand, which I think we have sort of confirmed. But Harry did defeat Draco, and so the wand chooses to be aligned with Harry.
Okay, in my head this made a lot more sense. I can't get it down properly. Any ideas on this?
TomProffitt - Aug 17, 2007 7:05 am (#138 of 391)
mona amon, the text implies, to my perspective, the wand providing the "Unbeatable" attribute. Your interpretation implies the wizard providing that attribute. You follow, Hermione "The wizard not the wand." The action in the text implied the opposite to me.
Xenophilius - Aug 17, 2007 8:11 am (#139 of 391)
T Vrana I still think DD was able to defeat Grindewald because of the manner in which Grindewald took the wand. He didn't win it, he snuck it.
But then DD would not have become the wand's master, because the wand's master would still have been Gregorovitch. DD defeated Grindelvald not Gregorovitch.
tandaradei - Aug 17, 2007 8:41 am (#140 of 391)
From the tales of Beadle the Bard on, stories on the Elder Wand (in JKR canon) IMO generally agree on how transference of ownerships occurs: the Elder Wand accepts new owners who manage to overcome previous owners by some – perhaps mischievous? – demonstration. The Elder Wand provides power, but not cleverness. As to such demonstrations, for example, I would be quite intrigued over how Dumbledore overcame Grindelwald in that famous duel, when Grindelwald had the superior wand and nearly equal talent; I must assume Dumbledore proved himself the trickier or cleverest. As to Grindelwald’s possession of the wand, he simply stole it from Gregorovitch, but he did it with cleverness: he left unexpectedly through a high window (with a mischievous grin). In sum, the Elder Wand chooses the cleverest master, which is proved by deeds and not power.
As to transference from Dumbledore. Dumbledore was supremely clever but Snape was less so IMO – though I must eat crow on everything else I have predicted about Snape (sniff, sniff). However, in an unexpected moment (wherein Draco had proven himself extremely clever throughout a previous year), Draco used an Expelliarmus spell to disarm Dumbledore. Dumbledore was otherwise employed at that moment stunning Harry, but the Elder Wand must have sensed that Draco used the situation to his advantage. Too, Expelliarmus is a bare bones and fundamental "declaration" of who-gets-to-have-what in dueling, and here could easily regard ownership of wands in the Elder Wand’s view of things.
I'm thinking that two things were generally well known about the Elder Wand, for those who studied such legends from Beadle the Bard on: (1) that wands pick their wizard in ideal situations; and (2) that the Elder Wand chooses the cleverest wizard in any ultimate confrontation. I'm thinking Dumbledore knew this full well, and intended on transferring the Elder Wand to Snape, because Snape was merely following orders and not proving himself most clever in any real sense; and thus, that the unbroken line of transference through cleverness would be broken … and thus that it could not be fully effective in Voldemort's hands.
I'm thinking Draco upset Dumbledore's plans here with a bit of cleverness in his own right. I'm wondering if the wand – perhaps in survival mode and knowing DD's intentions? – chose Draco as the cleverest of the moment. I'm thinking that when Draco did not take immediate possession of the Elder Wand, it nonetheless "pined" for its new master, much like a House Elf is always aware of its new master and master’s "situation." I'm thinking the Elder Wand deemed Voldemort an illegitimate usurper then; since Voldemort gained not it by overcoming its current master by cleverness; but rather by brute force. In another forum I used to attend we'd argue forever about whether Voldemort was truly clever anyway, and I’m thinking here the Elder Wand was declaring he was not. At least this part of Dumbledore’s plan had survived.
Be that as it may. I'm thinking the Elder Wand knew when Harry had usurped Draco's wand; compare this to how House Elves "know" when they acquire new masters (HBP, Chap 3). I'm thinking Harry gradually was working all this theory out, from the moment of his wand-conversation with Ollivander, on nearly to the end and including his talk with Dumbledore at "King's Cross." I do think Harry's force of will, to some degree, may have "insisted" that the Elder Wand into following its normal course of choosing the cleverest wizard; and that he specifically used the Expelliarmus spell to disarm Voldemort, because that was what Draco had also used to disarm Dumbledore. I’m thinking Harry had guessed, that when the wand knew its master it would protect that master, unless the pretended usurper truly demonstrated superior cleverness.
Now I'm guessing the Elder Wand had already understood this and made its choices, however, since it only killed the horcrux part of Harry’s soul when Voldemort AK-d him in the forest, and didn’t hurt him with Voldemort’s Cruciatus Curse after that moment. I’m thinking Harry pieced much of this together when he wasn’t affected much by Voldemort’s Cruciatus Curse. I’m also thinking that Harry was intuiting Dumbledore’s original (foiled) plans for this Elder Wand; and it was why he said what he said in front of Dumbledore’s portrait.
megfox* - Aug 17, 2007 11:48 am (#141 of 391)
Brava, tandaradei - you said what I wanted to say, only I was too thick to figure out how to say. And you were very eloquent! I think that you have done a very good job describing how the Elder Wand changes ownership. Thank you!
T Vrana - Aug 17, 2007 11:54 am (#142 of 391)
xeno- I don't think so. Because DD rightfully won it from its new owner, he became Master. The old Master, Gregorovich lost ownership when he carelessly let it be stolen, but the thief, Grindewald, didn't really master it, he just stole it. Does that make sense?
Could be wrong....
Xenophilius - Aug 17, 2007 12:33 pm (#143 of 391)
T Vrana xeno- I don't think so. Because DD rightfully won it from its new owner, he became Master. The old Master, Gregorovich lost ownership when he carelessly let it be stolen, but the thief, Grindewald, didn't really master it, he just stole it. Does that make sense?
What seems to be missed on the Gregorovich-Grindelvald transfer is that Grindelvald shot a stunning spell at Gregorovich. It is also Gregorovich's last memory of the incident. If that spell knocked out Gregorovich, which I think it did, then Gregorovich would have been defeated by Grindelvald making Grindelvald master of the wand.
Nathan Zimmermann - Aug 17, 2007 12:50 pm (#144 of 391)
Tandaradei, while I agree that Voldemort was illegitimate usurper of the Elder Wand.
I would argue that Voldemort lacked true mastery of the wand because, he did not confront Draco Malfoy before Harry overpowered Draco.
Further I would argue that Harry outwitted Draco by overpowering him using the means a Muggle would, a manner which caught Draco by surprise because, Draco had been expecting an attack using rudimentary non-verbal magic. By the time Voldemort stole the wand from Dumbledore's grave the mastership of the wand had been transferred to Harry
Madam Pince - Aug 17, 2007 1:11 pm (#145 of 391)
We are never given a single hint in cannon that there was subterfuge involved. And in what way is it important to the plot for Dumbledore to have won the wand by doing something dodgy instead of with superior duelling skills?
We aren't told in canon that there wasn't, either. This is all just pure speculation trying to reconcile some things that don't seem to jibe in the story. The "dodgy" thing vs. "superior duelling skills" only comes up as we're trying to explain how the Wand changed masters when it was stolen instead of being defeated in battle, which by definition of "undefeatable" shouldn't even happen anyway. (Man, this makes my head hurt....)
The wand can become truly undefeatable (in battle) only when the most powerful wizard is its master. I think this is what happened when Dumbledore became master of the wand. He was never defeated till the very end when, greatly weakened and busy petrifying Harry, he was not able to defend himself against Draco's Expelliarmus.
So you're saying Draco was a "more powerful" wizard than Dumbledore? It's hard for me to see that. And I think Luna Logic has a good point -- if that were the case, and we are discounting the use of subterfuge, why would there even need to be such a magical item as an Elder Wand? The most powerful wizard would win anyway, right?
Luna Logic - Aug 17, 2007 2:24 pm (#146 of 391)
Edited by Aug 17, 2007 2:27 pm
T Vrana #142 DD rightfully won it from its new owner, he became Master. The old Master, Gregorovich lost ownership when he carelessly let it be stolen, but the thief, Grindewald, didn't really master it, he just stole it. Does that make sense? Could be wrong....
Xenophilius #143 Grindelvald shot a stunning spell at Gregorovich. It is also Gregorovich's last memory of the incident. If that spell knocked out Gregorovich, which I think it did, then Gregorovich would have been defeated by Grindelvald making Grindelvald master of the wand.
I think Xenophilius is right, because, why would Grindelwald had to wait for Gregorovitch ? I think he knew he had to let a small chance to Gregorovitch to take his wand.
We should examin one by one all the "passing" of the mastering of the Elder Wand we have in DH, to see if that chance existed for the defated wizard. (who says the Forum will stop?)
Concerning Madam Pince post, and the problem of the "most powerfull wizard"...
I'm thinking now it could be possible that Draco was really, at the moment, more powerfull than the Dumbledore-on-the-Tower (who was weaken, and distracted by the obligation of immobilizing Harry).
Sorry Madam Pince, to contradict myself - indeed on that matter, I have no opinion, only questions ! also!
Esther Rose - Aug 17, 2007 2:32 pm (#147 of 391)
The thing about Draco becoming the master of the Elder Wand was that he disarmed Dumbledore and Dumbledore died before he could claim the Elder Wand again. So you could only argue that the power of the Elder Wand if anything had died with Dumbledore. But since Dumbledore had been disarmed and had died a short time after, the Elder Wand had changed it's loyalty to whomever disarmed its previous master who, obviously, once dead no longer has very much power.
tandaradei - Aug 17, 2007 3:51 pm (#148 of 391)
Well, for the moment I'm sticking to the premise that The Elder Wand represents an ultimate kind of Power; and therefore that it chooses the wizard who seems best able to utilize its power -- i.e., the cleverest. The point being that the wand is not so interested in talent as in "street-smarts" for its next owner: such things that would ensure winning in a duel, which seems to be its ultimate reason for being. I'm thinking Grindelwald's stealing of the wand was perfectly OK from the wand's perspective, since it measured everything apparently by "jungle rules" instead of codes of conduct.
So many things to discuss here! (1) The Talking Hat and how it "chooses" Houses for folks -- like a wand does for a wizard? (2) House Elves and how they "recognize" new masters (Ch 3/HBP) -- do these examples parallel wand transfers? (3) erm, I have to get off.
mona amon - Aug 17, 2007 7:50 pm (#149 of 391)
mona amon, the text implies, to my perspective, the wand providing the "Unbeatable" attribute. Your interpretation implies the wizard providing that attribute. You follow, Hermione "The wizard not the wand." The action in the text implied the opposite to me. (TomProffitt)
TomProffitt, as far as I can make out, the text implies that the wand can be defeated, and in many different ways. It is only rumour and tradition that say the wand will win the owner any duel. I only remember Ron, who is clueless really, calling it 'unbeatable'. But the text does imply that it is a very powerful wand.
Xenophilius describes the way it passes from hand to hand- "The possessor of the wand must capture it from its previous owner, if he is truly to be master of it." If we trace its history in DH starting from Gregorovitch who had it,
Grindelwald captures it from Gregorovitch (stealing)
Dumbledore from Grindelwald (defeats him in a duel)
Draco from Dumbledore (expelliarmus)
Harry from Draco (by wresting the wand that defeated the Elder Wand from his hand)
I feel it was important for plot purposes to show Grindelwald becoming the master by stealing the wand, because Voldemort 'sees' him doing it, and later thinks he can become master by stealing it from Dumbledore's tomb. It does not work because Dumbledore is no longer the master. He has stolen it from the wrong person, just as later he will murder the wrong person in an attempt to gain mastery.
In short, when I consider the role of the wand in the plot, I conclude that JKR needed
1) A wand that was rumoured to be more powerful than any other, so that Voldemort could go seeking after it when he found that his own and other wands were not working properly against Harry.
2) A wand that could be defeated in various ways (so that Harry, without really trying, would eventually become its master.
So you're saying Draco was a "more powerful" wizard than Dumbledore? (Madam Pince)
At that moment, yes, as Luna Logic has pointed out.
Gerald Costales - Aug 18, 2007 1:50 am (#150 of 391)
Grindelwald captures it from Gregorovitch (stealing)
Dumbledore from Grindelwald (defeats him in a duel)
Draco from Dumbledore (expelliarmus)
Harry from Draco (by wresting the wand that defeated the Elder Wand from his hand)
mona amon
I think this is a good summary of the Elder Wand exchanges in DH. But, I think that the first exchange listed should be as follows –
Grindelwald captures it from Gregorovitch (stunning)
I believe that if Grindelwald hadn’t stunned Gregorovitch, then the true Master of the Elder Wand would have remained Gregorovitch. And, we have another example in DH of a similar exchange that could support this point of view. Voldemort stole the Wand from the Tomb but was never Master of the Elder Wand. (I know that Draco was Master of the Elder Wand at this time. But even if Dumbledore remained the Master of the Elder Wand by dieing a natural death. I don’t think the Elder Wand would accept the Tomb Raider as its true Master. (And cleverness or some other trait could be a factor as well.)
But, what wand did Dumbledore use to defeat Grindelwald? I believe for Dumbledore to have defeated Grindelwald that only two other Wands could have been used by Dumbledore –
. . . 1. Antioch Peverell’s (the oldest brother) previous Wand before acquiring the Elder Wand or
. . . 2. Grindelwald’s previous Wand before acquiring the Elder Wand
Harry owned two Wands at one time, his broken and damaged Holly Wand and the Hawthorn Wand that Harry had wrest from Draco.
I think that with what we can gleam of Wand Ownership and Mastery; that Dumbledore armed with either of these two Wands would have won a duel with Grindelwald with the Elder Wand. GC
Matthew - Ah! Interesting possibility!
mollis - Aug 15, 2007 10:50 am (#102 of 391)
Actually, we were shown very clearly, with Harry stealing Draco's wand, that you don't have to defeat the owner of the wand to win its loyalty. Simply stealing it can work. So I think that Grindelwald, and therefore, DD were true masters of the Elder Wand. I tend to think more along the lines of TomProffit. I think that there was a great and awful duel between DD and Grindelwald. But the conclusion of this duel was not as straightforward as we might like to believe. DD "defeated" Grindelwald but did not kill him. I agree that there must have been some sort of deception or trickery involved. Or maybe after they had been battling for awhile DD got close enough to simply grab the thing out of his hand. Now DD is master of the wand and Grindelwald is defeated. Just a thought.
T Vrana - Aug 15, 2007 10:55 am (#103 of 391)
mollis- Overpowering Draco and taking his wand I saw as a defeat, unlike sneaking in and taking it off a shelf, with no physical overpowering of Gregorovich.
ETA- Harry did a 'Muggle Expelliarmus' if you will. Grindewald didn't disarm Gregorovich, he just snuck in and stole it from a shelf or counter.
Madam Pince - Aug 15, 2007 11:28 am (#104 of 391)
Yes, I agree; Harry didn't steal Draco's wand. He took it by good old fashioned "muggle force" (not a duel by any means, either...)
Luna's comment Now I am totally lost ! How Dumbledore could won a straight-on duel against the master of an unbeatable-wand-in-a-straight-on duel? is what trips me up, too. Someone said something earlier about how perhaps subterfuge had to be involved somehow -- trickery, deception, etc. That's a possibility. As Mollis said, maybe DD tricked Grindelwald during the duel -- some way that the observers did not notice.
Again, the thing that's most bothersome to me is that we're left to speculate and fill in holes and hash this out ourselves, making stuff up as we go. For a plot point that's as crucial to the series as this is, it ought to be clearer.... IMHO... Sorry, Jo....
T Vrana - Aug 15, 2007 11:31 am (#105 of 391)
Think I should clarify my thoughts. DD said the true power of the Elder Wand would be broken if its Master died unvanquished. We know it is possible to own the Wand without Mastering it (DD's intent for Snape, though I doubt he ever meant him to actually physically possess it). So if DD had not been overpowered by Draco, the power of the Elder Wand would have been ended, becasue he was the last to defeat and Master the Wand at his death.
The difference with Gregorovich/Grindelwald/DD is that, IMO, Grindewald was owner, but not Master, because he did not defeat Gregorovich, he simply snuck in and stole the Wand. But DD did defeat THE WAND, while the old Master still lived, and so Mastership passed to DD because he defeated the Wand.
I think.....
TomProffitt - Aug 15, 2007 11:35 am (#106 of 391)
... because he did not defeat Gregorovich, he simply snuck in and stole the Wand. --- T Vrana
I tend to go with Sun Tzu on this, "A true Master of Warfare wins without fighting." In my opinion stealing the wand is defeating its master.
Xenophilius - Aug 15, 2007 11:40 am (#107 of 391)
I assumed the stunning spell that Grindewald shot at Gregorovich hit. That would leave Gregorovich defeated and the wand ownership passed to Gindewald.
T Vrana - Aug 15, 2007 12:06 pm (#108 of 391)
Xeno- I agree that ownership passed. But I think Owning and Mastering are distinct and seperate issues.
Tom- LV stole the Wand. Even though Draco did not know he was Master, it was still stolen, so why would that theft not be a defeat? The Master must know it is being stolen from him?
zelmia - Aug 15, 2007 12:31 pm (#109 of 391)
I agree with Tom that "stealing is defeating".
Even though Draco did not know he was Master, it was still stolen, so why would that theft not be a defeat? - Because it was Draco's wand, that had become Master over the Elder Wand at that point. Draco is only Master of the Elder Wand because his Hawthorn Wand is.
When Harry takes Draco's Hawthorn Wand, the Hawthorn Wand is still Master of the Elder Wand. So when the Hawthorn Wand changes loyalties to Harry, Harry becomes the Elder Wand's Master only because he has become the Hawthorn Wand's new owner. "The Wand chooses the Wizard".
Luna Logic - Aug 15, 2007 1:22 pm (#110 of 391)
Edited by Aug 15, 2007 1:24 pm
Xenophilius: I assumed the stunning spell that Grindewald shot at Gregorovich hit. That would leave Gregorovich defeated and the wand ownership passed to Grindewald. . Yes, it seems that Grindelwald was waiting Gregorovitch, to Stun him. So, why exactly?..
Now there is something else I absolutly don't understand :
Zelmia: it was Draco's wand, that had become Master over the Elder Wand at that point. Draco is only Master of the Elder Wand because his Hawthorn Wand is.
When Harry takes Draco's Hawthorn Wand, the Hawthorn Wand is still Master of the Elder Wand. So when the Hawthorn Wand changes loyalties to Harry, Harry becomes the Elder Wand's Master only because he has become the Hawthorn Wand's new owner. "The Wand chooses the Wizard".
My questions:
The Hawthorn Wand is an ordinary wand. But, there is not such thing as "mastering" a wand, concerning ordinary wands? Because I understood that is was only the Elder Wand which has special ways of beeing mastered.
May a wand be the master of another wand, or is it the wizard who is the master of the wand(s)?
I don't understand the part "the Hawthorn Wand changes loyalties to Harry". How can an ordinary wand have loyalties ?
And I don't understand the part "The Wand chooses the Wizard" : I had understood it hapenned only in the wandmakers shops...
Are these changing of loyalties something new we learned about wands in Book 7?
(I don't know if my questions are understandable )
T Vrana - Aug 15, 2007 1:40 pm (#111 of 391)
zelmia- I'm not sure that that is true. Draco is Master because he disarmed DD. Harry became Master because he disarmed Draco. I'm don't think a wand can Master the Elder Wand, only a wizard or witch. The Wand chooses the Wizard, not another wand. And Harry was chosen because he defeated the former Master, Draco, by disarming him. Defeat is key, as we know the Wand switched ownership and Mastery when a Master was murdered in his sleep.
Now the Elder Wand would not perform properly against the Hawthorn because Harry was master of both. But that doesn't give the Hawthorn wand Mastery over the Elder.
Back to stealing. Draco did not have the Wand, neither did Harry. It was stolen. If stealing is the same as defeating, then LV should be Master. But stealing and ownership appear not to be enough to Master. Or LV could have said, once he realized what had happened, "Look, Harry, I've stolen your wand from DD's grave, so now I'm Master".
I can agree that perhaps the stunning spell covers defeat.
zelmia - Aug 15, 2007 10:19 pm (#112 of 391)
But that doesn't give the Hawthorn wand Mastery over the Elder. - Then how is it that Harry was able to kill Voldemort using the Hawthorn Wand when Voldemort had the Elder Wand? Harry was only Master of the Elder Wand at that point because he had taken ownership of the Hawthorn Wand - which had previously defeated the Elder Wand.
Gerald Costales - Aug 16, 2007 12:18 am (#113 of 391)
(re: post #112)
. . .“The true master of the Elder Wand was Draco Malfoy.”
. . .“But what does it matter?” he said softly. “Even if you are right, Potter, it makes no difference to you and me. You no longer have the phoenix wand: We duel on skill alone . . . and after I have killed you, I can attend to Draco Malfoy . . . . ”
. . .“But you’re too late” said Harry. “You’ve missed your chance. I got there first. I overpowered Draco weeks ago. I took this wand from him.”
. . . “So, it all comes down to this, doesn’t it?” whispered Harry. “Does the wand in your hand know its last master was Disarmed? Because if in does . . . I am the true master of the Elder Wand.”
. . . . . . . . Harry heard the high voice shriek as he too yelled his best hope to the heavens, pointing Draco’s wand.
. . . “Avada Kedavra!”
. . . “Expelliarmus!”
. . . The bang was like a cannon blast, and golden flames that erupted between them, at the dead center of the circle they had been treading marked the point where the spells collided. Harry saw Voldemort’s green jet meet his own spell, saw the Elder Wand fly high, dark against the sunrise, spinning across the enchanted ceiling like the head of Nagini, spinning through the air toward the master it would not kill, who had come to take full possession at last. And Harry, with the unerring skill of the Seeker, caught the wand in his free hand as Voldemort fell backward, arms splayed, the slit pupils of the scarlet eyes rolling upward. Tom Riddle hit the floor with a mundane finality, his body feeble and shrunken, the white hands empty, the snakelike face vacant and unknowing. Voldemort was dead, killed by his own rebounding curse, and Harry stood with two wands in his hand, staring down at his enemy’s shell.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (pages 743 & 744, DH, American hardback edition)
The way I read it is that Draco became Master of the Elder Wand when Draco’s cast “Expelliarmus!” and disarmed Dumbledore.
And when Harry overpowered Draco to disarm and possess the Hawthorn Wand, then both the Mastery of the Hawthorn Wand and the Elder Wand passed to Harry.
So, whether by Magic or Force disarming a Wand from a Wizard changes both the Mastery and Ownership of the captured Wand to the Wizard taking control of the Disarmed Wand. Draco never possessed the Elder Wand, but Draco had Mastery of the Elder Wand. GC
wynnleaf - Aug 16, 2007 5:24 am (#114 of 391)
Can someone point me to where these questions are answered (either in the books or in an earlier post where it's addressed)?
1. If DD was the master of the wand in previous books, why didn't LV have any problem with his own wand when dueling with DD in OOTP?
2. Since neither Harry nor LV are master of the Elder Wand early in DH, why does LV's wand (he's using Lucius' I think), have any problem against Harry in the escape from Privet Drive?
3. The Elder Wand wasn't destroyed at the end of the book, but only returned to DD's tomb. Since Harry announced to everyone at his final confrontation with LV that he, Harry, was the master of the Elder Wand, what's to stop anyone from attempting to defeat Harry in some way, thereby gaining mastery of the wand, and going to DD's tomb to steal it?
T Vrana - Aug 16, 2007 6:36 am (#115 of 391)
zelmia- Yes, but Harry is Master, not the hawthorn wand. He gained 'Mastership', by taking the Hawthorn Wnad from Draco by force, when Draco was Master of teh Elder Wand.
Wynnleaf- Why would LV have trouble with his own wand against the Elder?
DD explains number 2 in Kings Cross.
3. Nothing, but would you go after the Chosen One? The wizard who defeated LV? Plus, only certain types of wizards actively pursue the Elder Wand, it seems. And, how well known is the Elder Wand? Apparently only kooks like Xenophilius believe in it. I doubt any of the witches or wizards in the Hall want to go after Harry and break into DD's tomb. But, there is the risk....perhpas Jo left herself an out to write more books someday!
Nathan Zimmermann - Aug 16, 2007 6:39 am (#116 of 391)
Wynnleaf, I ascribe the destruction of Lucius wand to the fact that he is a less powerful wizard than Voldemort and that Lucius Malfoy's wand shattered because it was not able to channel the increased power.
Likewise I would argue that Hermione is potentially a more powerful witch than Harry because, her wand shatters Harry's..
T Vrana - Aug 16, 2007 6:48 am (#117 of 391)
Nathan- Sort of. DD told Harry his wand contained both his power and some of LV's power and the combined power of the two destroyed "Lucius's poor stick'.
wynnleaf - Aug 16, 2007 8:34 am (#118 of 391)
I don't understand how that meshes with Harry dueling other people (prior to being master of the Elder Wand) and nothing happens to their wands. It's just because he was dueling LV and LV was, in effect, kind of dueling against a part of himself? Okay, I can accept that.
T Vrana - Aug 16, 2007 9:25 am (#119 of 391)
Think DD said that...that the wand recognized LV,,,,,its in the Kings Cross chapter....can't keep the logic of that one straight.
mollis - Aug 16, 2007 10:26 am (#120 of 391)
To bring in a thought from TomProffitt from another thread: TomProffitt, "Plot Inconsistency or Red Herring: Which Is It?" #18, 16 Aug 2007 4:43 am
He says: “I'm starting to think JKR goofed in her rules. Grindelwald stole the Elder Wand from Gregorovich and gained apparent Mastery. Didn't LV essentially steal the Elder Wand from Draco when he took it from Dumbledore's tomb? We can save the details of this question for the Elder Wand thread, but does anyone else think that this might be an inconsistency on Rowling's part? “
Maybe when Voldy took the Elder wand from DD’s tomb, Master-ship didn’t transfer to him because the wand didn’t have a physical master yet. It still only recognized the master of the Hawthorne wand as master, not Harry. If Voldy had disarmed Harry, instead of AK-ing him, he would have then become Master of the Elder Wand. Maybe:
And wynleaf said (in that other thread): “…regarding LV and DD's duel in OOTP and why we see LV having no problem using his wand against DD (even though he can't kill him)…”
I don’t think this is a problem. You can still duel against the Edler Wand, you just won’t win the duel. DD had a great duel with Grindelwald when he was master of the wand. Somehow he was able to defeat him and become master himself. Then when Voldy dueled him, DD would have been undefeatable in the straight-up duel.
Wynleaf said (in this thread): “I don't understand how that meshes with Harry dueling other people (prior to being master of the Elder Wand) and nothing happens to their wands. It's just because he was dueling LV and LV was, in effect, kind of dueling against a part of himself? Okay, I can accept that.”
The thing with Harry’s wand does seem a little fishy upon close examination. But it has nothing to do with the Elder Wand (so maybe it doesn’t belong here). According to DD in King’s Cross, Harry’s wand had absorbed some of Voldemort’s yew wand’s powers during priori incantatem (in GOF). When Harry’s wand recognized Voldemort close by, it reacted against him by emitting the flames and (maybe inadvertently) destroying Lucius’ wand (which wouldn’t be near as powerful as Voldemort’s own yew wand). So apparently a wand can recognize a wizard in close proximity, even if the wizard has never touched the wand.
zelmia - Aug 16, 2007 11:28 am (#121 of 391)
If Voldy had disarmed Harry, instead of AK-ing him, he would have then become Master of the Elder Wand. - Exactly.
But once again Voldemort fails to acknowledge that the devil is in the details, as they say. He was so bent on killing Harry [/b]- And so arrogant as to think that he, and not Harry, had figured out the right path to the Elder Wand - that he wouldn't even listen to Harry's "and now before I kill you Mr Bond" speech.
And he paid for it in the end.
T Vrana - Aug 16, 2007 11:33 am (#122 of 391)
Not sure LV could disarm Harry. Because Harry was Master of both wands, the Hawthorn and the Elder, I still think he would have won no matter what spell LV cast.
zelmia - Aug 16, 2007 12:45 pm (#123 of 391)
True, TVrana. But if Voldemort had been able to disarm Harry, then yes, he would have become the Master of the Elder Wand.
legolas returns - Aug 16, 2007 12:51 pm (#124 of 391)
Voldemort is usually so intent on killing the person in front of him. I doubt he has ever disarmed.
Xenophilius - Aug 16, 2007 1:01 pm (#125 of 391)
The thing is even if Voldy had been able to gain mastery of the wand it still wouldn't have been able to kill Harry. The deck was stacked against Voldy in this duel. Harry was master of both wands and he was protected as long as Voldy was alive.
Madam Pince - Aug 16, 2007 4:00 pm (#126 of 391)
You know, I'm liking this emphasis on "disarming." Early on in the book, JKR points out to us (via Lupin) that disarming has become sort of Harry's specialty, and Lupin chides him about it, but Harry is stubbornly insistent that he'll keep using it. If this Elder Wand / disarming thing is true, then it turns out that Harry's specialty might be the only way to win the Wand.
Hmmmm... more thought is required. Oh joy.
legolas returns - Aug 16, 2007 4:06 pm (#127 of 391)
Can you block someone from disarming you? Didnt the wand have a bloody history in the pass. Gregovitch/Dumbledore/Draco Malfoy disarmed. I wonder if Dumbledore disarmed Grindlewald because he did not kill him. I cant see people thinking it was the greatest fight in history if the two of them started to fling fists because they were not getting anywhere with wands.
Xenophilius - Aug 16, 2007 4:09 pm (#128 of 391)
Wasn't that Ron's recommendation to Harry in PS/SS when Draco challeged him to a wizards duel?
legolas returns - Aug 16, 2007 4:13 pm (#129 of 391)
Ron suggested throwing away your wand and punching Draco in the nose if you could not get your wand to work. Helpful suggestion that
Allison R - Aug 16, 2007 4:53 pm (#130 of 391)
Can you block someone from disarming you?
Wouldn't "protego!" protect you from being disarmed - Assuming you could get it cast before your opponent got out "expelliarmus!"??
mona amon - Aug 16, 2007 8:04 pm (#131 of 391)
The battle between Dumbledore and Grindelwald is not given very specific descriptions. A little hyperbole, but nothing specific. Given Dumbledore's character and past performance (actually it's things he did after, but we've seen it before) I don't think Dumbledore fought a "strait up wand-to-wand duel" with Grindelwald. (TomProffitt)
I disagree. We are never given a single hint in cannon that there was subterfuge involved. And in what way is it important to the plot for Dumbledore to have won the wand by doing something dodgy instead of with superior duelling skills?
Grindelwald had the most powerful wand. But Dumbledore was the more powerful wizard. In the end, the wand is only as powerful as the wizard that weilds it. So while the Elder Wand will give you an advantage in battle, a lot still depends on your own skill and power.
The wand can become truly undefeatable (in battle) only when the most powerful wizard is its master. I think this is what happened when Dumbledore became master of the wand. He was never defeated till the very end when, greatly weakened and busy petrifying Harry, he was not able to defend himself against Draco's Expelliarmus.
Gerald Costales - Aug 17, 2007 2:41 am (#132 of 391)
“The wand can become truly undefeatable (in battle) only when the most powerful wizard is its master. I think this is what happened when Dumbledore became master of the wand. He was never defeated till the very end when, greatly weakened and busy petrifying Harry, he was not able to defend himself against Draco's Expelliarmus.” mona amon
But, if the plan was for Snape to AK Dumbledore then both Dumbledore and Snape needed Dumbledore’s death to look convincing. We know that Dumbledore knew it was Malfoy behind the Opal Necklace and probably the Poisoned Mead that ended up with Prof. Slughorn. So, I wouldn’t discount the possibly that Dumbledore let Draco disarm him.
Dumbledore probably knew that Voldemort would go after another Wand after the Yew Wand and Holly Wand locked in the Graveyard. Dumbledore could have wanted to transfer Mastership of the Elder Wand to Draco. Who would suspect cowardly Draco of being the Master of the Elder Wand? Draco couldn’t AK a wandless Dumbledore. Also, since Draco never showed any great Magical abilities; Voldemort would never want Draco’s Hawthorn Wand. Voldemort would want the Wand of a Great Wizard.
We saw at least two hand-me-down Wands; Bill Weasley’s first Wand and Frank Longbottom’s Wand. Being buried with your Wand could be the exception and not the rule. So, Voldemort would be suspicious of Dumbledore wanting to be buried with the Elder Wand. And Voldemort probably remembered what a Powerful Wand the Elder Wand was when Voldemort and Dumbledore dueled at the MoM. Voldemort had to run because the Yew Wand could not defeat the Elder Wand.
Another flaw in the plan would have been the Two Vanishing Cabinets that allowed the Death Eaters to enter Hogwarts. Dumbledore wasn’t pleading with Snape when Dumbledore said, “Severus . . . please . . .” before being AK’ed. Dumbledore was asking Snape to AK him. GC
TomProffitt - Aug 17, 2007 4:27 am (#133 of 391)
The wand can become truly undefeatable (in battle) only when the most powerful wizard is its master. --[/b]- Mona amon
This definition (explanation) works somewhat better than the one I have been using. The confusing part for me is that Rowling doesn't give us a clear definition that fits well with the known facts. mona amon's definition works, but is further from the explanation given in the text.
While Jo understands broad complexities well, I think on the Elder Wand she has made one or more errors in the fine details.
Luna Logic - Aug 17, 2007 4:54 am (#134 of 391)
Edited by Aug 17, 2007 4:55 am
The wand can become truly undefeatable (in battle) only when the most powerful wizard is its master. --[/b]- Mona amon
Then, what would be the purpose of such a magical item?
I had understood the Legend as following: a rather ordinary wizard could become the most powerful wizard in duel, if he could become master of this unique Elder Wand.
But if mona amon sees right, then the Elder Wand is only good for the most powerful wizard of the moment.
Thus all the wizards whose names were in the history of the Wand would be the most powerful wizard of their time... And only the next “most powerful wizard” could have defeated them…
That idea seems now rather simple to me… rather JKR like ?
mona amon - Aug 17, 2007 6:06 am (#135 of 391)
The way I see it, it is a very powerful wand, the most powerful wand in fact, and if you are master of it, it will definitely give you an edge in battle. However, in battle it is not the wand alone that matters. The skill of the wizard who owns the wand is also important, perhaps more important.
But if mona amon sees right, then the Elder Wand is only good for the most powerful wizard of the moment
No, if you are master, it will help to improve your performance whatever your level of skill may be. But you can still be defeated by someone with superior skill.
mona amon's definition works, but is further from the explanation given in the text. (Tom Profitt)
Tom, I don't think I understand. We are given various explanations in the text about what the wand is supposed to do, the children's tale, the legend of the Peverell Brothers, etc. Which explanation do you mean?
T Vrana - Aug 17, 2007 6:31 am (#136 of 391)
Dumbledore could have wanted to transfer Mastership of the Elder Wand to Draco.
DD told Harry in King's Cross that he had planned for Snape to end up with the wand.
I still think DD was able to defeat Grindewald because of the manner in which Grindewald took the wand. He didn't win it, he snuck it.
megfox* - Aug 17, 2007 7:03 am (#137 of 391)
I have a thought about the idea of "defeating" and "mastering" the Elder Wand. If its true that the wand chooses the wizard, what if that is all that is needed in order to become Master of the Wand? The wand decides when it wants to change alliances to another wizard. Sometimes, a Stunning Spell is all that is needed, sometimes, just stealing it, sometimes, you need to kill the owner. The wand decides that the person who has taken control of it is worthy enough to become Master. With something like the Elder Wand, which would be heavily guarded and protected (hopefully) and make the holder more powerful, it should be hard for it to change hands, and therefore, anyone who could defeat the old Master, by whatever means, would be the Master. This is why Harry can take the "Elder Wand" from Draco and defeat Voldemort - even though Voldemort has the Elder Wand in his possession, he didn't defeat Draco so he wasn't the master of the Wand, which I think we have sort of confirmed. But Harry did defeat Draco, and so the wand chooses to be aligned with Harry.
Okay, in my head this made a lot more sense. I can't get it down properly. Any ideas on this?
TomProffitt - Aug 17, 2007 7:05 am (#138 of 391)
mona amon, the text implies, to my perspective, the wand providing the "Unbeatable" attribute. Your interpretation implies the wizard providing that attribute. You follow, Hermione "The wizard not the wand." The action in the text implied the opposite to me.
Xenophilius - Aug 17, 2007 8:11 am (#139 of 391)
T Vrana I still think DD was able to defeat Grindewald because of the manner in which Grindewald took the wand. He didn't win it, he snuck it.
But then DD would not have become the wand's master, because the wand's master would still have been Gregorovitch. DD defeated Grindelvald not Gregorovitch.
tandaradei - Aug 17, 2007 8:41 am (#140 of 391)
From the tales of Beadle the Bard on, stories on the Elder Wand (in JKR canon) IMO generally agree on how transference of ownerships occurs: the Elder Wand accepts new owners who manage to overcome previous owners by some – perhaps mischievous? – demonstration. The Elder Wand provides power, but not cleverness. As to such demonstrations, for example, I would be quite intrigued over how Dumbledore overcame Grindelwald in that famous duel, when Grindelwald had the superior wand and nearly equal talent; I must assume Dumbledore proved himself the trickier or cleverest. As to Grindelwald’s possession of the wand, he simply stole it from Gregorovitch, but he did it with cleverness: he left unexpectedly through a high window (with a mischievous grin). In sum, the Elder Wand chooses the cleverest master, which is proved by deeds and not power.
As to transference from Dumbledore. Dumbledore was supremely clever but Snape was less so IMO – though I must eat crow on everything else I have predicted about Snape (sniff, sniff). However, in an unexpected moment (wherein Draco had proven himself extremely clever throughout a previous year), Draco used an Expelliarmus spell to disarm Dumbledore. Dumbledore was otherwise employed at that moment stunning Harry, but the Elder Wand must have sensed that Draco used the situation to his advantage. Too, Expelliarmus is a bare bones and fundamental "declaration" of who-gets-to-have-what in dueling, and here could easily regard ownership of wands in the Elder Wand’s view of things.
I'm thinking that two things were generally well known about the Elder Wand, for those who studied such legends from Beadle the Bard on: (1) that wands pick their wizard in ideal situations; and (2) that the Elder Wand chooses the cleverest wizard in any ultimate confrontation. I'm thinking Dumbledore knew this full well, and intended on transferring the Elder Wand to Snape, because Snape was merely following orders and not proving himself most clever in any real sense; and thus, that the unbroken line of transference through cleverness would be broken … and thus that it could not be fully effective in Voldemort's hands.
I'm thinking Draco upset Dumbledore's plans here with a bit of cleverness in his own right. I'm wondering if the wand – perhaps in survival mode and knowing DD's intentions? – chose Draco as the cleverest of the moment. I'm thinking that when Draco did not take immediate possession of the Elder Wand, it nonetheless "pined" for its new master, much like a House Elf is always aware of its new master and master’s "situation." I'm thinking the Elder Wand deemed Voldemort an illegitimate usurper then; since Voldemort gained not it by overcoming its current master by cleverness; but rather by brute force. In another forum I used to attend we'd argue forever about whether Voldemort was truly clever anyway, and I’m thinking here the Elder Wand was declaring he was not. At least this part of Dumbledore’s plan had survived.
Be that as it may. I'm thinking the Elder Wand knew when Harry had usurped Draco's wand; compare this to how House Elves "know" when they acquire new masters (HBP, Chap 3). I'm thinking Harry gradually was working all this theory out, from the moment of his wand-conversation with Ollivander, on nearly to the end and including his talk with Dumbledore at "King's Cross." I do think Harry's force of will, to some degree, may have "insisted" that the Elder Wand into following its normal course of choosing the cleverest wizard; and that he specifically used the Expelliarmus spell to disarm Voldemort, because that was what Draco had also used to disarm Dumbledore. I’m thinking Harry had guessed, that when the wand knew its master it would protect that master, unless the pretended usurper truly demonstrated superior cleverness.
Now I'm guessing the Elder Wand had already understood this and made its choices, however, since it only killed the horcrux part of Harry’s soul when Voldemort AK-d him in the forest, and didn’t hurt him with Voldemort’s Cruciatus Curse after that moment. I’m thinking Harry pieced much of this together when he wasn’t affected much by Voldemort’s Cruciatus Curse. I’m also thinking that Harry was intuiting Dumbledore’s original (foiled) plans for this Elder Wand; and it was why he said what he said in front of Dumbledore’s portrait.
megfox* - Aug 17, 2007 11:48 am (#141 of 391)
Brava, tandaradei - you said what I wanted to say, only I was too thick to figure out how to say. And you were very eloquent! I think that you have done a very good job describing how the Elder Wand changes ownership. Thank you!
T Vrana - Aug 17, 2007 11:54 am (#142 of 391)
xeno- I don't think so. Because DD rightfully won it from its new owner, he became Master. The old Master, Gregorovich lost ownership when he carelessly let it be stolen, but the thief, Grindewald, didn't really master it, he just stole it. Does that make sense?
Could be wrong....
Xenophilius - Aug 17, 2007 12:33 pm (#143 of 391)
T Vrana xeno- I don't think so. Because DD rightfully won it from its new owner, he became Master. The old Master, Gregorovich lost ownership when he carelessly let it be stolen, but the thief, Grindewald, didn't really master it, he just stole it. Does that make sense?
What seems to be missed on the Gregorovich-Grindelvald transfer is that Grindelvald shot a stunning spell at Gregorovich. It is also Gregorovich's last memory of the incident. If that spell knocked out Gregorovich, which I think it did, then Gregorovich would have been defeated by Grindelvald making Grindelvald master of the wand.
Nathan Zimmermann - Aug 17, 2007 12:50 pm (#144 of 391)
Tandaradei, while I agree that Voldemort was illegitimate usurper of the Elder Wand.
I would argue that Voldemort lacked true mastery of the wand because, he did not confront Draco Malfoy before Harry overpowered Draco.
Further I would argue that Harry outwitted Draco by overpowering him using the means a Muggle would, a manner which caught Draco by surprise because, Draco had been expecting an attack using rudimentary non-verbal magic. By the time Voldemort stole the wand from Dumbledore's grave the mastership of the wand had been transferred to Harry
Madam Pince - Aug 17, 2007 1:11 pm (#145 of 391)
We are never given a single hint in cannon that there was subterfuge involved. And in what way is it important to the plot for Dumbledore to have won the wand by doing something dodgy instead of with superior duelling skills?
We aren't told in canon that there wasn't, either. This is all just pure speculation trying to reconcile some things that don't seem to jibe in the story. The "dodgy" thing vs. "superior duelling skills" only comes up as we're trying to explain how the Wand changed masters when it was stolen instead of being defeated in battle, which by definition of "undefeatable" shouldn't even happen anyway. (Man, this makes my head hurt....)
The wand can become truly undefeatable (in battle) only when the most powerful wizard is its master. I think this is what happened when Dumbledore became master of the wand. He was never defeated till the very end when, greatly weakened and busy petrifying Harry, he was not able to defend himself against Draco's Expelliarmus.
So you're saying Draco was a "more powerful" wizard than Dumbledore? It's hard for me to see that. And I think Luna Logic has a good point -- if that were the case, and we are discounting the use of subterfuge, why would there even need to be such a magical item as an Elder Wand? The most powerful wizard would win anyway, right?
Luna Logic - Aug 17, 2007 2:24 pm (#146 of 391)
Edited by Aug 17, 2007 2:27 pm
T Vrana #142 DD rightfully won it from its new owner, he became Master. The old Master, Gregorovich lost ownership when he carelessly let it be stolen, but the thief, Grindewald, didn't really master it, he just stole it. Does that make sense? Could be wrong....
Xenophilius #143 Grindelvald shot a stunning spell at Gregorovich. It is also Gregorovich's last memory of the incident. If that spell knocked out Gregorovich, which I think it did, then Gregorovich would have been defeated by Grindelvald making Grindelvald master of the wand.
I think Xenophilius is right, because, why would Grindelwald had to wait for Gregorovitch ? I think he knew he had to let a small chance to Gregorovitch to take his wand.
We should examin one by one all the "passing" of the mastering of the Elder Wand we have in DH, to see if that chance existed for the defated wizard. (who says the Forum will stop?)
Concerning Madam Pince post, and the problem of the "most powerfull wizard"...
I'm thinking now it could be possible that Draco was really, at the moment, more powerfull than the Dumbledore-on-the-Tower (who was weaken, and distracted by the obligation of immobilizing Harry).
Sorry Madam Pince, to contradict myself - indeed on that matter, I have no opinion, only questions ! also!
Esther Rose - Aug 17, 2007 2:32 pm (#147 of 391)
The thing about Draco becoming the master of the Elder Wand was that he disarmed Dumbledore and Dumbledore died before he could claim the Elder Wand again. So you could only argue that the power of the Elder Wand if anything had died with Dumbledore. But since Dumbledore had been disarmed and had died a short time after, the Elder Wand had changed it's loyalty to whomever disarmed its previous master who, obviously, once dead no longer has very much power.
tandaradei - Aug 17, 2007 3:51 pm (#148 of 391)
Well, for the moment I'm sticking to the premise that The Elder Wand represents an ultimate kind of Power; and therefore that it chooses the wizard who seems best able to utilize its power -- i.e., the cleverest. The point being that the wand is not so interested in talent as in "street-smarts" for its next owner: such things that would ensure winning in a duel, which seems to be its ultimate reason for being. I'm thinking Grindelwald's stealing of the wand was perfectly OK from the wand's perspective, since it measured everything apparently by "jungle rules" instead of codes of conduct.
So many things to discuss here! (1) The Talking Hat and how it "chooses" Houses for folks -- like a wand does for a wizard? (2) House Elves and how they "recognize" new masters (Ch 3/HBP) -- do these examples parallel wand transfers? (3) erm, I have to get off.
mona amon - Aug 17, 2007 7:50 pm (#149 of 391)
mona amon, the text implies, to my perspective, the wand providing the "Unbeatable" attribute. Your interpretation implies the wizard providing that attribute. You follow, Hermione "The wizard not the wand." The action in the text implied the opposite to me. (TomProffitt)
TomProffitt, as far as I can make out, the text implies that the wand can be defeated, and in many different ways. It is only rumour and tradition that say the wand will win the owner any duel. I only remember Ron, who is clueless really, calling it 'unbeatable'. But the text does imply that it is a very powerful wand.
Xenophilius describes the way it passes from hand to hand- "The possessor of the wand must capture it from its previous owner, if he is truly to be master of it." If we trace its history in DH starting from Gregorovitch who had it,
Grindelwald captures it from Gregorovitch (stealing)
Dumbledore from Grindelwald (defeats him in a duel)
Draco from Dumbledore (expelliarmus)
Harry from Draco (by wresting the wand that defeated the Elder Wand from his hand)
I feel it was important for plot purposes to show Grindelwald becoming the master by stealing the wand, because Voldemort 'sees' him doing it, and later thinks he can become master by stealing it from Dumbledore's tomb. It does not work because Dumbledore is no longer the master. He has stolen it from the wrong person, just as later he will murder the wrong person in an attempt to gain mastery.
In short, when I consider the role of the wand in the plot, I conclude that JKR needed
1) A wand that was rumoured to be more powerful than any other, so that Voldemort could go seeking after it when he found that his own and other wands were not working properly against Harry.
2) A wand that could be defeated in various ways (so that Harry, without really trying, would eventually become its master.
So you're saying Draco was a "more powerful" wizard than Dumbledore? (Madam Pince)
At that moment, yes, as Luna Logic has pointed out.
Gerald Costales - Aug 18, 2007 1:50 am (#150 of 391)
Grindelwald captures it from Gregorovitch (stealing)
Dumbledore from Grindelwald (defeats him in a duel)
Draco from Dumbledore (expelliarmus)
Harry from Draco (by wresting the wand that defeated the Elder Wand from his hand)
mona amon
I think this is a good summary of the Elder Wand exchanges in DH. But, I think that the first exchange listed should be as follows –
Grindelwald captures it from Gregorovitch (stunning)
I believe that if Grindelwald hadn’t stunned Gregorovitch, then the true Master of the Elder Wand would have remained Gregorovitch. And, we have another example in DH of a similar exchange that could support this point of view. Voldemort stole the Wand from the Tomb but was never Master of the Elder Wand. (I know that Draco was Master of the Elder Wand at this time. But even if Dumbledore remained the Master of the Elder Wand by dieing a natural death. I don’t think the Elder Wand would accept the Tomb Raider as its true Master. (And cleverness or some other trait could be a factor as well.)
But, what wand did Dumbledore use to defeat Grindelwald? I believe for Dumbledore to have defeated Grindelwald that only two other Wands could have been used by Dumbledore –
. . . 1. Antioch Peverell’s (the oldest brother) previous Wand before acquiring the Elder Wand or
. . . 2. Grindelwald’s previous Wand before acquiring the Elder Wand
Harry owned two Wands at one time, his broken and damaged Holly Wand and the Hawthorn Wand that Harry had wrest from Draco.
I think that with what we can gleam of Wand Ownership and Mastery; that Dumbledore armed with either of these two Wands would have won a duel with Grindelwald with the Elder Wand. GC
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 151 to 200
Mona Fri May 13, 2011 12:16 pm
Luna Logic - Aug 18, 2007 2:11 am (#151 of 391)
Edited by Aug 18, 2007 2:20 am
mona amon: I feel it was important for plot purposes to show Grindelwald becoming the master by stealing the wand, because Voldemort 'sees' him doing it, and later thinks he can become master by stealing it from Dumbledore's tomb. It does not work because Dumbledore is no longer the master. He has stolen it from the wrong person, just as later he will murder the wrong person in an attempt to gain mastery.
Here I don't agree because I will add to your list the Stunning of Gregorovitch by Grindelwald. The more I think of it, the more I believe you have to take a risk to really capture the Elder Wand (i.e. become his master). Grindelwald might have jumped just as he heard the door opening. But he took a fraction of second to Stun Gregorovitch. Then it was not ordinary stealing, but defeating.
The mistake of Voldemort, who does not read children's tales, was to steal the Wand from a deadwizard, who had thus no chance to defend the wand! That was real stealing, and I think it doesn't work.
(hum... in chapter 21, there is a story about a dead wizard, stolen... but killed before by the challenger?
edited to add: crossposted with Gerald Costales on this same idea.
Today the part that I don't understand is the Harry/Draco part:
mona amon: Harry from Draco (by wresting the wand that defeated the Elder Wand from his hand)
That's right, and, I'm confused again!
It seems to me that, here, we are in the other theory which is expressed in this topic, the theory of "the wand who chooses a new master"....
Which is different from the theory "the wizard who captures the Elder Wand".
edited to add
Gerald Costales: But, what wand did Dumbledore use to defeat Grindelwald? I believe for Dumbledore to have defeated Grindelwald that only two other Wands could have been used by Dumbledore –
. . . 1. Antioch Peverell’s (the oldest brother) previous Wand before acquiring the Elder Wand or
. . . 2. Grindelwald’s previous Wand before acquiring the Elder Wand
Gerald has perhaps found a way... You might either capture the Elder Wand face to face, either and first capture the previous wand of the master of the Elder Wand, then face the master in duel...
And there, to know the legend and the history would be a great help.
mona amon - Aug 18, 2007 5:31 am (#152 of 391)
I believe that if Grindelwald hadn’t stunned Gregorovitch, then the true Master of the Elder Wand would have remained Gregorovitch. (Gerald Costales)
Here I don't agree because I will add to your list the Stunning of Gregorovitch by Grindelwald. (Luna Logic)
I don't think its important to the plot whether Grindelwald won the wand by stealing or stunning. The important thing here is that Voldemort should think he could master the wand by stealing it from Dumbledore's tomb.
But even if Dumbledore remained the Master of the Elder Wand by dieing a natural death. I don’t think the Elder Wand would accept the Tomb Raider as its true Master. (And cleverness or some other trait could be a factor as well.) (Gerald Costales)
If Dumbledore had died master of the wand, the wand would have lost its power. No one can become master after that. It is what Dumbledore planned, but things did not work out that way because of Draco's expelliarmus.
The Draco-Dumbledore defeat is complicated. Draco defeated the wand but never took possession of it. This is why Harry was able to gain mastery of the Elder wand by wresting the Hawthorn wand out of Draco's hand. The wand only recognised the owner of the Hawthorn wand as its new master.
Xenophilius - Aug 18, 2007 6:11 am (#153 of 391)
mona amon I agree with everything you have said except this one tiny bit It is what Dumbledore planned, but things did not work out that way because of Draco's expelliarmus
Actually, Dumbledore stated in Kings Cross that he intended Snape to become master of the Elder Wand. Dumbledore had it wrong. (By the time Harry explains to wandlore to Voldemort, he is the Master of Death and he knows how the Hallows work and how they should be used.) However, if things would gone as Dumbledore planned, he would have been undefeated and the wand would have lost its power.
When we read Harry's lecture on wandlore in The Flaw in the Plan, we find out just how important that stunning spell is to the mastery of the wand. It is interesting that Voldemort misinterpreted the memory which made him think that mastery of the wand could be gained through theft.
I am beginning to think that if Voldemort used Stephen King's MAC-10 he would have blown off his own feet.
mona amon - Aug 18, 2007 7:02 am (#154 of 391)
Actually, Dumbledore stated in Kings Cross that he intended Snape to become master of the Elder Wand.
What is actually said is-
If you planned your death with Snape, you meant him to end up with the Elder Wand didn't you?'
'I admit that was my intention,' said Dumbledore, 'but it did not work as I intended, did it?'
I take 'end up with' to mean 'possess but not master'. Dumbledore, by arranging his death with Snape, would die master of the wand, and the wand's power would die with him. Snape was supposed to take the wand after killing Dumbledore, and (I'm just guessing here) perhaps give it to Voldemort when he asks for it. That way, if things had gone according to plan, Voldemort would eventually face Harry with a wand that had lost its power, while Harry would have his own phoenix wand, strengthened by its previous encounter with Voldemort.
NFla Barbara - Aug 18, 2007 8:07 am (#155 of 391)
I think you're right, mona amon. Whether Snape or another DE took the wand, or the wand was buried with DD for LV to possibly try to steal later, I think DD's original plan was for the power to die with him so that, eventually, LV would be holding a wand that was no more powerful than any other. That is the part that didn't work out as he intended.
tandaradei - Aug 18, 2007 8:28 am (#156 of 391)
Tale of the Three Brothers
...[cut]...The first brother traveled on for a week or more, and reaching a distant village, sought out a fellow wizard with whom he had a quarrel. Naturally, with the Elder Wand as his weapon, he could not fail to win the duel that followed. Leaving his enemy dead upon the floor, the oldest brother proceeded to an inn, where he boasted loudly...[cut]...
That very night, another wizard crept upon the oldest brother as he lay, wine-sodden, upon his bed. The thief took the wand and, for good measure, slit the oldest brother's throat...[cut]...
In The Tales of Beedle the Bard (Chap 21 & above) thievery and/or murder were perfectly acceptable methods of gaining mastership of the Elder Wand. I see little in that story to suggest the wizard needs to prove himself to the wand. The deal appears to be, that Death has given a prize possession of his to this oldest brother – an Elder Wand of unbeatable powers – but with a catch: even a thief or murderer can take it away from him to gain mastery over the wand, with the wand’s express permission.
If thievery allows the switch, Grindelwald and Harry are in good stead here as thieves/takers, for gaining of the Elder Wand’s allegiance. I am of the impression that ethics, talent, or any code of conduct is hardly the requisite for this Wand’s allegiance. Beedle tells a story of this wand being created by “cunning” Death, who was angry at being “cheated” (p. 407 USHB/DH). If anything, it appears that all that needs to happen of Death’s Elder Wand to change allegiance, is for its owner to suffer and lose. I’m thinking this Elder Wand would have yearned for Lockhart.
valuereflection - Aug 18, 2007 8:45 am (#157 of 391)
Thank you for explaining those two lines, mona amon. They confused me when I read the book.
Does everyone think that JKR's explanation about the Elder Wand helps -- which is on the NBC website. I'll quote it here, because I don't think it's been mentioned yet on this thread.
Question: Why was Draco the true owner of the Elder Wand? Voldemort thinks that he becomes the true owner of the Elder Wand by stealing it from Dumbledore’s grave, but in the end we learn that the true owner was really Draco Malfoy, that is until Harry defeated him and allegiance transferred to Harry. How did Draco become the true owner of the Elder Wand?
Answer: “To truly own the Elder Wand, which means to receive the full benefits, double-edged though it is, of all its power, you have to have conquered the previous owner,” explained Rowling.
At the end of Book 6, “Half-Blood Prince,” Draco disarmed Dumbledore before Snape killed Dumbledore.
“And that meant he conquered him, even though Dumbledore was very weak at the time, he was very ill. He was on the point of collapse when it happened,” Rowling said. “Dumbledore didn’t want to lose his wand at that point and Draco disarmed him. So that meant that the wand gave Draco its allegiance, even though Draco never knew it, even though Draco never touched it.
“From that moment on, that wand gave its allegiance to Draco, and it wouldn’t work as well for anyone but Draco.”
When Harry wrestles Draco’s “everyday” wand out of his hand at the Malfoy’s mansion, he conquers Draco, and therefore the Elder Wand — hidden in Dumbledore’s tomb at the time — transfers its allegiance to Harry.
Rowling said her American editor suggested the moment when Harry conquers Draco should be more dramatic.
“But, no, I really wanted, very consciously, for the history of the wizarding world to hinge on this moment where two teenage boys have a physical [fight]. They don’t even do it by magic,” Rowling said.
“That sort of puts all of Voldemort’s and Dumbledore’s grandiose plans in their place, doesn’t it? You just can’t plan that well, that something can go wrong and it went wrong … It went wrong because Harry managed to pull this wand out of Draco’s grip.
I took this quote from, "Confused by Potter? Author sets record straight. Exclusive: J.K. Rowling explains the finer points of “Deathly Hallows,” Interview with Meredith Viera on the NBC Today show July 30, 2007; Article written by Jen Brown.
tandaradei - Aug 18, 2007 9:01 am (#158 of 391)
This juxtaposition between Draco and Harry is interesting. Harry first uses the Room of Requirement in OoP; then Draco uses it to deadly effect in HBP. Harry first “used” in the Vanishing Cabinet; Draco put it to effect. In this final book, Draco has apparently won allegiance of the Elder Wand without knowing it; and Harry also without knowing it. Quiet symmetrical.
tandaradei - Aug 18, 2007 9:10 am (#159 of 391)
Aaack, want to add another thought.
Draco owned and used his original wand throughout Deadly Hallows, until Harry stole it; yet the Elder Wand nonetheless considered its owner to be Draco. Apparently, wand "cleaving," possibly like House Elves, doesn't require "monogamy."
Madam Pince - Aug 18, 2007 11:08 am (#160 of 391)
valuereflection, thanks for that post. I have missed that somehow in the Viera interview. It is helpful. She uses the word "conquers" rather than "disarms" or "defeats" like we've been haggling over (OK, essentially the same thing.)
I need to puzzle some more, I think...
Luna Logic, you are right I believe in what is causing me confusion -- "the wand chooses the wizard" and "a wizard wins the wand by conquering the previous owner-wizard" seem a bit contradictory. But I guess not if you just say "the wand always chooses the conquerer." Hmmmm...
I am beginning to think that if Voldemort used Stephen King's MAC-10 he would have blown off his own feet. -Xenophilius
LOL! That was a great article by King, wasn't it?
Luna Logic - Aug 18, 2007 12:02 pm (#161 of 391)
Edited by Aug 18, 2007 12:03 pm
Thank, valuereflection, I had also missed that part of the interview.
Madam Pince: "the wand always chooses the conquerer." The notes of the NBC interview seems, finally, to mean exactly that.
No more headache, then, anybody?
TomProffitt - Aug 18, 2007 5:23 pm (#162 of 391)
I think the Rowling quote pretty strongly implies that any assumption of the Elder Wand being undefeatable is in error. The wand is a very good one, but it is not unbeatable. For if it were unbeatable Draco could not have taken it from Dumbledore.
Xenophilius - Aug 18, 2007 5:37 pm (#163 of 391)
The idea that the wand is undefeatable comes from "The Tale of the Three Brothers". Xenophilius quickly qualifies the story by saying "That is a children's tale, told to amuse rather than to instruct. Those of use who understand these matters, however, recognize that the ancient story refers to three objects, or Hallows, which, if untied, will make the possessor master of Death."
valuereflection - Aug 18, 2007 8:24 pm (#164 of 391)
Edited Aug 18, 2007 9:03 pm
The legend said that the wand must always win duels for its owner. But Dumbledore was not in a "straight-on duel" with Draco. He could still lose the Elder Wand through a circumstance which was not a duel.
At the moment when Draco burst through the door shouting, "Expelliarmus!" Dumbledore wasn't "on guard." Dumbledore wasn't even looking at Draco, much less planning to duel him. Dumbledore was looking at Harry, pointing his wand at him, in order to cast the Petrificus Totalis spell. Dumbledore was not even looking at Draco, much less intending to duel with him. Dumbledore had intended all year to talk Draco out of killing him whenever the time came that Draco approached. Unfortunately, Dumbledore did not expect to be disarmed while his attention was distracted during a circumstance outside of a dueling situation. Ordinarily, Dumbledore was a powerful, brilliant wizard with quick reflexes, who was unlikely to ever be at a disadvantage in any non-dueling situation. But on that night he was weakened, near death, distracted, and not expecting to lose his wand.
Luna Logic - Aug 19, 2007 12:24 am (#165 of 391)
I agree that the legend is a legend. Dumbledore says in Chapter 35 that the legend is untrue about the origin of the three Hallows ; he thinks they were "hand made" - wizard-made - by the Peverell brothers. So "unbeatable" can be a legendary idea, too.
Today I have a new question! Why did not the Elder Wand go straight in the hand of Draco on the Astronomy Tower, after his Expelliarmus against Dumbledore, as it goes in Harry's hand after his Expelliarmus against Voldemort in Chapter 36?
Gerald Costales - Aug 19, 2007 1:28 am (#166 of 391)
Draco's conquering Dumbledore and gaining Mastery of the Elder Wand was unintentional. Magic has it own Rules not governed or controllable by any Wizard or Witch. Let’s review some examples from the Series.
. . .1. Voldemort tried to AK the infant Harry. But, Lily’s sacrifice unintentionally cast an Ancient Magic unknown to Lily or Voldemort.
. . 2. Harry’s ability to speak Parseltongue. Harry had a fragment of Voldemort’s Soul and gained this ability unintentionally.
. . 3. Ron tried to curse Draco. But, Ron’s damaged Wand unintentionally backfired and Ron began to spit up slugs.
. . 4. Lockhart tried to cast a Memory Charm. But, Ron’s damaged Wand unintentionally backfired and Lockhart’s memory is altered beyond the scope of an average Memory Charm.
. . 5. Lucius unintentionally gave Harry’s sock to Dobby. Dobby became a Free House-Elf and the Magic that caused the Servitude of the House-Elf and the Enslavement of Dobby to the Malfoy family is severed.
. . 6. Harry unintentionally cast Emotional Magic that inflated Aunt Marge.
. . 7. Harry and Voldemort dueled in the Graveyard. But, the Magic of Brother Wands unintentionally caused the Yew Wand and Holly Wand to lock.
. . 8. The Life Debt owed to Harry by Wormtail, unintentionaly caused Wormtail to strangle himself.
(I’m sure other examples of unintentional Magic occurred in the Series.)
But, my point is that the arcane rules that govern Wand Ownership and the Mastery of a Wand are uncontrollable. So, all of Dumbledore’s planning and Voldemort’s desire to control the Elder Wand failed.
IMHO - The Elder Wand may play by its own rules, so to speak. And this may explain the Elder Wand’s unruly and totally confusing behavior. The Rules and Wand lore of the Elder Wand may simply be different from other Wands. Death was tricked into creating the Elder Wand. Why wouldn’t Death create a Wand that existed beyond the scope of other Wands?
JKR - Harry Potter fans Wand to know. GC
PS As always - Be careful what you wish for.
Xenophilius - Aug 19, 2007 5:35 am (#167 of 391)
Luna - I think it has to do with skill level of the wizard casting the spell. When HRH, or any of the students, cast the spell the wand seems to fly just about anywhere. When older wizards cast the spell it generally goes to them. IMO, JKR used this to tell us about Harry when he cast Expelliarmus against Voldemort. The Elder Wand went straight to Harry.
tandaradei - Aug 19, 2007 9:12 am (#168 of 391)
Gerald Costales: The Elder Wand may play by its own rules
If true, perhaps this is a borrowing from the One Ring's characteristics in The Lord of Rings?
From “The Lightening-Struck Tower: "Then, by the light of the Mark, he saw Dumbledore's wand flying in an arc over the edge of the ramparts..." (HBP, p. 584 US.)
Sounds like the wand could have been trying to get away – like how Gollum's ring slipped off his finger for Bilbo to find, among many other such ring-losing incidents in that story. That would go along with my idea that the Elder Wand sensed that Dumbledore was intending an end to the Wand’s reign.
On the other hand!
I may be wrong, but whenever the wand DOES go to the hand of its opponent from an Expelliarmus spell, doesn’t the victor's wand further guide that lost wand to his hand? The impression pops up in canon, I think; but I only have non-canonical examples at present. The US book cover has Harry raising his hand to receive the wand, not moving else wise; and this implies such a mental willing by the victor. Too, I think in the films I see victors guiding expelled wands.
Too, we all know Draco didn't understand the rules of wand ownership; and I'll bet his intentions on the Lightening-Struck Tower were mainly to disarm Dumbledore and not capture Dumbledore's wand.
Furthermore, I'm thinking the wand understood transference had occurred; yet also felt no draw from Draco’s own mind, and just went the natural way of things.
Madam Pince - Aug 19, 2007 8:20 pm (#169 of 391)
Today I have a new question! Why did not the Elder Wand go straight in the hand of Draco on the Astronomy Tower, after his Expelliarmus against Dumbledore, as it goes in Harry's hand after his Expelliarmus against Voldemort in Chapter 36? --Luna Logic
Luna! We are just now almost sort-of close to answering the last one! For shame! (I am just teasing you!)
JKR - Harry Potter fans Wand to know. --Gerald
Ohhhh, nooooo! Groannnnnnn....
I had forgotten that part about Dumbledore's wand flying out in an arc off the tower. It does sound like the wand was trying to escape. Hmmmm...
valuereflection - Aug 19, 2007 9:38 pm (#170 of 391)
Edited Aug 19, 2007 11:00 pm
Where the wand goes depends on the the intention of the wizard who casts the Expelliarmus spell. If the caster wants to catch the wand, then he will -- providing that he has practiced the spell sufficiently to learn how to catch. If the caster doesn't care where the wand goes, but only wishes for it to leave his opponent's hand, then the wand will fly off in a random direction. There are examples of both situations in the books. For example, Lupin caught the trio's wands when he disarmed them in the Shrieking Shack in Prisoner of Azkaban. Here are some examples of situations where a wizard's wand did not fly into the hand of a caster of the disarming spell.
When Snape cast Expelliarmus at Lockhart in chapter 11 of Chamber of Secrets, Lockhart lost his wand. But Snape did not catch it. Lavender Brown found it and gave it back to Lockhart.
In Deathly Hallows when Harry cast Expelliarmus at Stan Shunpike, he did not catch Stan's wand. (chapter 4) When Ron cast Expelliarmus at Bellatrix Lestrange, Harry caught her wand. (chapter 24)
During the Battle in the Department of Mysteries: Harry... grabbed the Death Eater around the knees... Neville overturned his desk in his anxiety to help; pointing his wand wildly at the struggling pair he cried, "EXPELLIARMUS!" Both Harry's and the Death Eater's wands flew out of their hands and soared back toward the entrance to the Hall of Prophecy; both scrambled to their feet and charged after them, the Death Eater in front and Harry hot on his heels, Neville bringing up the rear, plainly horrorstruck at what he had done. (OotP, chapter 35)
When Harry began teaching the disarming charm to Dumbledore's Army, wands flew in all directions. Harry sent Neville's wand up to the ceiling and onto a bookcase. Fred and George teasingly disarmed Zacharias Smith from behind his back, but they did not catch his wand so that he would not know who disarmed him. Terry Boot's wand hit Angelina Spinnet on the nose. Harry made Dumbledore's Army practice for awhile until their disarming technique improved. (OotP, chapter 18)
Obviously Draco didn't practice the disarming spell as much as Lupin and Dumbledore's Army did.
Luna Logic - Aug 20, 2007 12:11 am (#171 of 391)
Edited by Aug 20, 2007 12:25 am
Thanks everybody for yours precious answers. I see that you are really skilled at wandlore! (practising often?)
I think valuereflexion has explained all the different circumstances:
Where the wand goes depends on the the intention of the wizard who casts the Expelliarmus spell. If the caster wants to catch the wand, then he will -- providing that he has practiced the spell sufficiently to learn how to catch. If the caster doesn't care where the wand goes, but only wishes for it to leave his opponent's hand, then the wand will fly off in a random direction.
edited to add: On the other hand… I like tandaradei‘s recall of the US cover : The US book cover has Harry raising his hand to receive the wand, not moving else wise
Now, what is the next question? Or is Madam Pince right and it was the last one? I wand one more!
Gerald Costales - Sep 1, 2007 12:26 am (#172 of 391)
Edited Sep 1, 2007 1:06 am
(re: post# 171)
I like tandaradei‘s recall of the US cover : The US book cover has Harry raising his hand to receive the wand, not moving else wise
Prior to reading Book 7, my impression would have been that the American cover showed Harry as he was casting a Spell using either “Wandless Magic” or “Wordless Magic”. Especially after reading Book 6 with its emphasis on “Wordless Magic”, I expected to see a great deal of “Wordless Magic” in Book 7.
But, Barty Crouch Sr. mentioned “Flying Carpets” in Book 4:
. . “Ali thinks there’s a niche in the market for a family vehicle,” said Crouch. “I remember my grandfather had an Axminster that could seat twelve --- but that was before (flying) carpets were banned, of course.”
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(GoF, page 91, American hardback edition)
and we never had any other references to “Flying Carpets” again in the Series.
(re: post# 168)
Furthermore, I'm thinking the wand understood transference had occurred; yet also felt no draw from Draco’s own mind, and just went the natural way of things. tandaradei
tandaradei - This is a good thought. But, I would think this statement from Book 1 could also apply to the Elder Wand:
. . . . . . “-- it’s really the wand that chooses the wizard of course” (Ollivander)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(SS, page 82, American hardback edition)
Some futher ideas on the Elder Wand and Wands:
. . Mr. Ollivander touched the lightning scar on Harry’s forehead with a long, white finger.
. . “I'm sorry to say I sold the wand that did it,” he said softly. “Thirteen-and-a-half inches. Yew. Powerful wand, very powerful, and in the wrong hands . . . well, if I’d known what that wand was going out into the world to do . . .”
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(SS, page 83, American hardback edition)
When Ollivander described the Yew Wand as a “Powerful wand” , was Ollivander aware that Yew Wand was crafted for a “Powerful Wizard” and was waiting to be sold to a “Powerful Wizard” or that the Yew Wand became Powerful after doing:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . “great things --- terrible, yes, but great.”
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(SS, page 85, American hardback)
Did Death built the Elder Wand to be Mastered by only a “Powerful Wizard”?
IMHO - Draco wasn’t Powerful enough to retain Mastery of the Elder Wand and the Elder Wand knew it. GC
Choices - Sep 1, 2007 8:44 am (#173 of 391)
Gerald - "But, Barty Crouch Sr. mentioned “Flying Carpets” in Book 4:
. . “Ali thinks there’s a niche in the market for a family vehicle,” said Crouch. “I remember my grandfather had an Axminster that could seat twelve --- but that was before (flying) carpets were banned, of course.” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(GoF, page 91, American hardback edition) ...and we never had any other references to “Flying Carpets” again in the Series."
Choices - It's interesting to note that the Muggle Prime Minister had an Axminster carpet in his office in HBP.
Gerald Costales - Sep 1, 2007 8:38 pm (#174 of 391)
“It's interesting to note that the Muggle Prime Minister had an Axminster carpet in his office in HBP.” Choices
Picture of an Axminster Carpet
Ax•min•ster car•pet [aks-min-ster] – noun
a machine-made carpet having a cut pile and an intricate design of many colors.
[Origin: 1810–20; named after town in SW England where manufactured ]
(Source for definition – Dictionary.com - [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] )
Link to Axminster Carpets - [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Choices - IMHO: I believe that this Axminster carpet thing is just a Mark Evans. But, I could be wrong.
It won’t be the first time when trying to understand a finer point in this Series.
I do believe JKR needs to simply write another Potter related book to satisfy all of our misunderstandings and answer all our questions.
PS I know I'd buy that book if she decides to write a Potter Almanac. GC
Choices - Sep 2, 2007 11:01 am (#175 of 391)
Gerald, I didn't mean to imply that the Muggle PM had a magic carpet, just that he had an Axminster carpet in his office. Axminster carpets were obviously used to make magic flying carpets in the past.
maria cloos - Sep 3, 2007 1:59 pm (#176 of 391)
Okay, I’m going to try to see if we have the facts straight with a summary of everything we’ve learned. Using info from this forum, other sites and the interviews:
Disarming: We see numerous instances of people being disarmed. We also see that wands do not just "change loyalties" upon each disarming. The difference would seem to be the ultimate intention of the person doing the disarming. In a practice situation you are not trying to devoid the person of a wand permanently....it just that, practice. Even in a duel situation it seems that if you disarm someone and that person retrieves his or her wand from you the wand's loyalties still lie with the original owner.
Using another's wand: There are a few examples we should look at. Neville, in particular, has used other people's wands. His first wand had been his father's and it seemed to have worked decently for him (although we see his talent increase once he has a wand of his own after his father's is broken.) In the DoM he picks up Hermione's wand and uses it with the same amount of flair as he did his father's. Why? I think that Hermione wanted him to use her wand to continue the defense of the group. It would be her intentions that the wand would still be carrying out. Additionally we see Harry have difficulty using the wand that Ron stole from the snatchers (because Harry did not successfully overcome the wand's owner) but that he was using Hermione's wand with no difficulty (again due to Hermione's wishes).
The Elder Wand and its owners: As Ollivander tells us, the owner of a wand must be overcome in order for the wand to change allegiance to the person who overcomes the original owner. Let's look at the specific instances when we see the Elder Wand change hands. #1) Antioch- The wand is stolen by another while he is asleep. **For good measure the thief kills him. #2) Gregorovitch- He had possession of the wand (we will have to assume for arguments sake that he is the master of the wand). Grindelwald showed up at his shop and overcame him by stealing the wand from his possession (stunning Gregorovitch in the process) and began using it. #3) Grindelwald- We know that DD fought a duel with Grindelwald and that he was defeated and sent to Nurmengard. We DO NOT know that Grindelwald was actually defeated during the duel (or if he was defeated, how). This may have been something that occurred later (more on that below). #4) DD- Upon their arrival on the tower, Draco comes upon DD and Harry. Now, in that moment DD uses his wand to immobilize Harry and is not fighting against Draco (which is significant). Draco therefore disarms DD successfully. Unlike most duel situations, DD never retrieves his wand and Draco was intending to overcome him. #5) Draco- The Elder wand has now given its allegiance to the person who overcame its previous owner, although Draco is obviously unaware of this. Moments before Harry and his mates disapparate Harry overcomes Draco by snatching the three wands he holds. Again, this was with the intention of overcoming Draco, and Draco never retrieves his wand from Harry. Note- LV tried to steal the wand out of DD’s tomb. But he was not overcoming the wand’s owner in any way. He was robbing DD, not Draco (who was the wand’s master).
Is the Elder Wand unbeatable? It is interesting to note that the description of the wand says that it must "always win duels for its master." Have we ever seen the wand beaten in a duel? No, we have not. We do not see the duel between DD and Grindelwald, and we never see another duel between the Elder Wand and a foe. The only exception to that is between DD and LV, but as that duel never comes to a conclusion I don't think we can use it for an example (DD was not trying to kill LV, and LV stops to possess Harry and then flees). So we cannot say one way or another that the Elder Wand will “always win duels for its master” as we’ve never seen a duel to its conclusion involving that wand.
So how does the Elder Wand act at the end of DH?: There has been a great deal of speculation about what happened in the forest. Here it is piece by piece: Harry's intention upon entering the forest is to sacrifice his life to save everyone else. As he faces LV he knows he will die, it is what he "wants." LV does the AK and both he and Harry fall to the ground. There are two souls as we enter King’s Cross: Harry’s and the piece of LV’s that resided within Harry. Just as a horcrux works to keep part of the soul earthbound so does Harry’s blood living on in LV allow him to return to the earth. Why did LV fall to the ground? He and Harry were tethered together not only by the horcrux but by the shared blood. I think this is the reason LV collapsed. Now, LV uses crucio on Harry. Why doesn’t it work? I don’t believe it was because Harry protected himself (as he did for the others) but because this was not what he wanted. What did he want? He wanted LV to believe he was dead, but he did not want to feel the pain associated with the curse….the wand therefore obeyed him. During his duel with LV the wand would not kill Harry, its master, and so any spell that Harry would have shot at it would have worked. He therefore chose the spell he feels most comfortable with and does best.
Does this all make sense?
Madame Pomfrey - Sep 4, 2007 7:39 am (#177 of 391)
It makes sense to me,Maria. I too,had thought that part of the reason Harry was able to come back was that the Elder Wand would not kill its true master.We see this again in the final battle.Harry blocked an A.K. which is supposed to be impossible.The curse rebounded,killing Voldemort.The Elder Wand would not kill its master.
valuereflection - Sep 4, 2007 6:31 pm (#178 of 391)
Edited Sep 4, 2007 7:08 pm
maria cloos, What an illuminating post! Would you please also post it on the thread, "Wands: Your Thoughts After Book Seven." Have you read that thread? Like the other posters on that thread, I've been trying to figure out wandlore. Your summary and insightful comments helped me and would help them, too.
I believe part of the reason Harry was able to come back was because he had fulfilled the legend, united the three Deathly Hallows and become the master of death. Xenopilius explained this could be interpreted as conqueror or vanquisher. I interpret "master" to mean that the master has the ability and the right to control, which is to choose, whether to live or die. Dumbledore explained that Harry was the only wizard in history who could unite the three Hallows and become the true master of death. I interpret this as an explanation why no one else had the ability to choose whether or not to come back: because no one else had united the three Deathly Hallows.
This book gradually worked the theme of how to be "worthy" to get all three Hallows. It was discussed by Xenophilius (chapter 21), Harry (chapter 22), Ron (chapter 25), and Dumbledore (chapter 35). But the most meaningful passage for me was in the forest (chapter 34):
...understanding was coming so fast it seemed to have bypassed thought... The black stone with its jagged crack running down the center sat in the two halves of the Snitch. The Resurrection Stone had cracked down the vertical line representing the Elder Wand. The triangle nad circle representing the Cloak and the stone were still discernible. And again Harry understood without having to think. It did not matter about bringing them back, for he was about to join them. He was not really fetching them: they were fetching him.
In this passage, I read "them" and "they" as referring to the Deathly Hallows. The Hallows were fetching him because he was worthy to unite them.
Harry was more than the true master of the Elder Wand. Many wizards in history had been master of the Elder Wand. Harry had still more power than any of its other masters had, because he was master of all the Deathly Hallows. Being master of the Deathly Hallows gave him more power than being master of the Elder Wand.
Madame Pomfrey - Sep 4, 2007 8:31 pm (#179 of 391)
Wow! I had forgotten that Harry was in possession of all three Hallows.No wonder he mastered death twice!Valuereflection,your interpretation of Harry's being Master explains why he had a choice when AK'd in the forrest.I like it.
mollis - Sep 5, 2007 10:28 am (#180 of 391)
Actually, valuereflection, I read that passage differently. I think he was referring to the fact that he was about to call forth the departed souls of his mother, father, Sirius, and Remus. He knew that it was wrong to try and bring back the dead. But rationalizes with himself that it was okay to call them back because he was about to join them. He had every intention to die within moments.
That said, I totally agree with your last paragraph. Being "master of death" is very likely why he could choose to come back after Voldy's direct-hit AK.
Madame Pomfrey - Sep 5, 2007 3:23 pm (#181 of 391)
Mollis,I read that bit the same as you.He was speaking of his loved ones.
mona amon - Sep 6, 2007 9:37 pm (#182 of 391)
Harry did not have all three Hallows when he faced Voldemort's AK. He had dropped the stone in the forest. It was because Voldemort had some of Harry's blood (along with Lily's sacrifice) in his body that Harry was able to return.
rambkowalczyk - Sep 13, 2007 4:20 am (#183 of 391)
Now, LV uses crucio on Harry. Why doesn’t it work? I don’t believe it was because Harry protected himself (as he did for the others) but because this was not what he wanted. What did he want? He wanted LV to believe he was dead, but he did not want to feel the pain associated with the curse….the wand therefore obeyed him. During his duel with LV the wand would not kill Harry, its master, and so any spell that Harry would have shot at it would have worked. He therefore chose the spell he feels most comfortable with and does best. Maria Cloos
I think the reason the Cruciatius Curse had no or little effect was because Harry chose to die just like his mother chose to die. That sacrifice protected the living just as his mother's death protected Harry. None of Voldemort's curses were effective after Harry 'died'.
maria cloos - Sep 13, 2007 11:14 am (#184 of 391)
I don't know. Can one sacrifice oneself for oneself? That's the only reason I question that. I can understand why LV's spells weren't working against the people for whom Harry had laid down his life, but I just don't see it working on Harry himself. As I said I think that the reason was simply that the wand was obeying it's master. Interesting food for thought though, rambkowalczyk.
rambkowalczyk - Sep 17, 2007 8:17 am (#185 of 391)
Can one sacrifice oneself for oneself?
That is a valid question.
On the other hand, Harry didn't resist (with a wand) the Crucio attack which would be the only way for the Elder wand to know that Harry didn't want to feel pain. (IMHO)
Maybe Voldemort's power was drained a little by his near death Experience.
I do think though, if Voldemort tried to get Harry's (Draco's) wand before the AK curse he would have been master of the Elder wand.
vball man - Sep 24, 2007 8:21 pm (#186 of 391)
I had another idea about Dumbledore defeating Grindelwald even when Grindelwald had the Elder Wand.
If the wand chooses the wizard, why can't it choose in the middle of the duel?
So Dumbledore and Grindelwald start fighting and pretty soon the Elder Wand realizes that Dumbledore is the better man. It chooses Dumbledore at that point - even though Grindelwald is still holding it. Now Dumbledore wins.
Plus, the wand wasn't really partial to Grindie anyway because he stole it from the room instead of directly from it's owner.
Harry's speech about his overpowering of Draco's wand might have been efficacious in the turning of the Elder Wand to loyalty to Harry instead of being descriptive of such a turn. Perhaps Harry's overpowering of Draco was important - but so was his announcing it to the Elder Wand.
Mrs. Sirius - Sep 25, 2007 6:38 am (#187 of 391)
I thought that wands had a power out side of the wizard, like house elves have magic different from wizards. So that wands chooses the wizard with out the the wizard talking, casting a spell or even using it.
Draco was the master of the elder wand without having ever touched it. The phoenix wand chose harry without him "casting" a spell.
valuereflection - Sep 28, 2007 3:40 pm (#188 of 391)
mollis, thank you for your alternate interpretation of the passage, "It did not matter about bringing them back, for he was about to join them. He was not really fetching them: they were fetching him." I now believe your interpretation of those two sentences works better than what I earlier thought they meant.
mona amon, Harry did have all three Hallows when he faced Voldemort and chose to accept his death.
He (Yaxley) and Dolohov turned and walked deeper into the forest. Harry followed them, knowing that they would lead him exactly where he wanted to go... They had traveled on mere minutes when Harry saw light ahead, and Yaxley and Dolohov stepped out into a clearing... A fire burned in the middle of the clearing, and its flickering light fell over a crowd of completely silent, watchful Death Eaters... Every eye was fixed upon Voldemort...Harry, standing still on the edge of the scene...
"I thought he would come," said Voldemort in his high, clear voice, his eyes on the leaping flames. "I expected him to come... I was it seems...mistaken," said Voldemort.
"You weren't." Harry said it as loudly as he could, with all the force he could muster. He did not want to sound afraid. The Resurrection Stone slipped from between his numb fingers... nobody mattered but Voldemort. It was just the two of them...
Next Harry waited motionlessly for his death to come from Voldemort, trying as hard as he could not to fight back. Then Voldemort "killed" him.
Harry did not simply drop the Resurrection Stone in the forest. First he faced Voldemort, there at the edge of the clearing, where he loudly declared his intention to accept his death at Voldemort's hands. Dumbledore said that action made Harry the true master of death, "Your are the true master of death, because the true master does not seek to run away from death" -[/b]- And thus made Harry the master of the Deathly Hallows.
It was then that Harry dropped the Stone. (Because he was facing Voldemort, the Stone probably fell at Harry's feet, between him and Voldemort.) But now it did not matter that Harry was no longer touching the Stone, because had become the master of the Deathly Hallows. He would remain the true master of the Deathly Hallows unless he failed to follow through on his choice to accept his death. As long as he did not run away from the death which he had chosen, Harry remained master of the Resurrection Stone whether it lay in his hand or on the ground at his feet.
maria cloos, may I quote your Post #176 on the thread, "Wands: Your Thoughts After Book Seven"?
mona amon - Oct 12, 2007 8:44 pm (#189 of 391)
Valuereflection, your post is interesting and helped me to understand something I hadn't thought of before- that the three Hallows all helped Harry to face (and avoid) death. This, is because, unlike Dumbledore, he uses them at the right time and for the right reasons.
He uses the stone to bring back the dead so that he himself can face death bravely. Being Master of the Elder Wand was the deciding factor in his ultimate defeat of Voldemort. And of course the invisibility cloak protected him and his friends throughout the Horcrux hunt.
But I do not agree that uniting the Hallows was the reason that Voldemort's AK did not kill him. Dumbledore explains to Harry very clearly that it was Harry's blood in Voldemort, containing Lily's sacrifice, that kept him alive. And I feel that this is why JKR made Harry drop the stone before getting hit by the AK, so that we wouldn't conclude that it was because he had all three Hallows that he was able to come back.
valuereflection - Dec 1, 2007 6:50 pm (#190 of 391)
Today there is a new essay about the Elder Wand, titled, "Still Got Your Wand in a Knot? Wandlore and The Elder Wand Examined." It helped explain some of my confusing questions about wandlore from The Deathly Hallows. It is a Scribbulus essay on The Leaky Cauldron website. Here is the link.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
PeskyPixie - Dec 4, 2007 11:21 am (#191 of 391)
I posted the following on a different thread, but feel it belongs here. Warning: It's light-hearted, not meant to be sirius at all.
Plants in the yew family are the most venomous in the Northern Hemisphere. If Voldy had paid closer attention in Herbology he'd know that all he has to do to get rid of Harry is trick him into eating his old wand by covering it in treacle. The search for the Elder Wand is not necessary.
Mrs. Sirius - Dec 6, 2007 9:58 am (#192 of 391)
Oh, no Pesky, that would never have worked! If Voldy covered the wand in treacle, Ron would have eaten it, then Harry would have be wise to him.
Can't play switch the wand on Harry, no siree.
PeskyPixie - Feb 7, 2008 11:16 am (#193 of 391)
Delayed response, but dang it! I knew the treacle scheme was too good to be true! And I'm sure Harry would manage to save Ron from the yew toxins by shoving a bezoar down his throat.
Why is Voldy zapped with his own AK if Harry uses Expelliarmus rather than Protego?
Julia H. - Feb 7, 2008 3:25 pm (#194 of 391)
Perhaps because Harry is the master of the wand. Expelliarmus does not simply disarm LV but calls the wand to its master's aid. A very useful spell.
Mrs Brisbee - Feb 8, 2008 4:55 am (#195 of 391)
I'm not sure if I understand it, and I don't think Rowling is consistent in her explanations. Protego isn't supposed to be powerful enough to stop an AK. Theoretically it would bloom into existence around the caster, then the powerful AK would go right through it. Two spells that collide in midair before they meet their destinations and release their effects act differently, though. We've seen the Priori Incantatum effect with twin wands. With unrelated wands, we've seen the effects ricochet, or explode into multicolored firework-like displays. Harry has really, really good aim. During the flight from Privet Drive, he was able to collide his spells with incoming AKs to stop them. He simply used his demonstrated talent on the ground with Voldemort.
I can only assume that if Voldy and Harry were using regular wands instead of the Elder Wand and Draco's wand, the spells would have collided, and either produced a multicolored shower of lights, or both ricocheted-- Voldemort getting killed by his rebounding AK, and Harry disarming himself with his Expelliarmus. I can only assume that in the actual duel that the reason the AK ricocheted and the Expelliarmus didn't has something to do with the Elder Wand not wanting to work against it's master. How it is able to change the demonstrated properties of raw magic is not something I understand.
mona amon - Feb 8, 2008 7:23 pm (#196 of 391)
We've never seen colliding spells boomeranging and hitting the caster before. I assume that when spells from two battling wands hit in mid air, the spells try to fight each other, and hence get deflected. But in the Harry/LV confrontation, maybe this is what happened-
The AK offers no resistance to the Expelliarmus, because the Expelliarmus was cast by the wand that is master of the wand that cast the AK.
The Expelliarmus, since it meets with no resistance, moves straight towards its target instead of ricochetting.
The AK, since it is offering no resistance to the Expelliarmus, instead of merely getting deflected from its course, bounces right back onto the caster.
The result is that Voldy drops dead and is disarmed at the same time.
Obscure laws of wizarding physics!
Anna L. Black - Feb 9, 2008 5:41 am (#197 of 391)
"The result is that Voldy drops dead and is disarmed at the same time."
I like you explanation, mona
mona amon - Feb 9, 2008 11:21 pm (#198 of 391)
Thanks Anna!
Orion - Feb 10, 2008 3:41 am (#199 of 391)
But still it is a bit awkward, isn't it? Even the most brilliant dark wizard of all times has no chance against a simple Expelliarmus by superhero Harry. I wonder how they do it in the movie? If they are diligent about it, it would have to look like two coloured waves colliding, the green wave and the different-coloured-wave (we aren't told what the colour of an Expelliarmus is, just that there are golden flames where they collide). Then the green wave rolls back to You-know-who, and the other wave, let's say it's yellow, overrides it and both go back, the yellow one on top of the green one. Complicated.
Swedish Short-Snout - Feb 10, 2008 4:11 am (#200 of 391)
I think we were told what the colour of Expelliarmus is, when Snape first demonstrated it in the Duelling Club in CoS. Though I can't remember which colour it was.
Edited by Aug 18, 2007 2:20 am
mona amon: I feel it was important for plot purposes to show Grindelwald becoming the master by stealing the wand, because Voldemort 'sees' him doing it, and later thinks he can become master by stealing it from Dumbledore's tomb. It does not work because Dumbledore is no longer the master. He has stolen it from the wrong person, just as later he will murder the wrong person in an attempt to gain mastery.
Here I don't agree because I will add to your list the Stunning of Gregorovitch by Grindelwald. The more I think of it, the more I believe you have to take a risk to really capture the Elder Wand (i.e. become his master). Grindelwald might have jumped just as he heard the door opening. But he took a fraction of second to Stun Gregorovitch. Then it was not ordinary stealing, but defeating.
The mistake of Voldemort, who does not read children's tales, was to steal the Wand from a deadwizard, who had thus no chance to defend the wand! That was real stealing, and I think it doesn't work.
(hum... in chapter 21, there is a story about a dead wizard, stolen... but killed before by the challenger?
edited to add: crossposted with Gerald Costales on this same idea.
Today the part that I don't understand is the Harry/Draco part:
mona amon: Harry from Draco (by wresting the wand that defeated the Elder Wand from his hand)
That's right, and, I'm confused again!
It seems to me that, here, we are in the other theory which is expressed in this topic, the theory of "the wand who chooses a new master"....
Which is different from the theory "the wizard who captures the Elder Wand".
edited to add
Gerald Costales: But, what wand did Dumbledore use to defeat Grindelwald? I believe for Dumbledore to have defeated Grindelwald that only two other Wands could have been used by Dumbledore –
. . . 1. Antioch Peverell’s (the oldest brother) previous Wand before acquiring the Elder Wand or
. . . 2. Grindelwald’s previous Wand before acquiring the Elder Wand
Gerald has perhaps found a way... You might either capture the Elder Wand face to face, either and first capture the previous wand of the master of the Elder Wand, then face the master in duel...
And there, to know the legend and the history would be a great help.
mona amon - Aug 18, 2007 5:31 am (#152 of 391)
I believe that if Grindelwald hadn’t stunned Gregorovitch, then the true Master of the Elder Wand would have remained Gregorovitch. (Gerald Costales)
Here I don't agree because I will add to your list the Stunning of Gregorovitch by Grindelwald. (Luna Logic)
I don't think its important to the plot whether Grindelwald won the wand by stealing or stunning. The important thing here is that Voldemort should think he could master the wand by stealing it from Dumbledore's tomb.
But even if Dumbledore remained the Master of the Elder Wand by dieing a natural death. I don’t think the Elder Wand would accept the Tomb Raider as its true Master. (And cleverness or some other trait could be a factor as well.) (Gerald Costales)
If Dumbledore had died master of the wand, the wand would have lost its power. No one can become master after that. It is what Dumbledore planned, but things did not work out that way because of Draco's expelliarmus.
The Draco-Dumbledore defeat is complicated. Draco defeated the wand but never took possession of it. This is why Harry was able to gain mastery of the Elder wand by wresting the Hawthorn wand out of Draco's hand. The wand only recognised the owner of the Hawthorn wand as its new master.
Xenophilius - Aug 18, 2007 6:11 am (#153 of 391)
mona amon I agree with everything you have said except this one tiny bit It is what Dumbledore planned, but things did not work out that way because of Draco's expelliarmus
Actually, Dumbledore stated in Kings Cross that he intended Snape to become master of the Elder Wand. Dumbledore had it wrong. (By the time Harry explains to wandlore to Voldemort, he is the Master of Death and he knows how the Hallows work and how they should be used.) However, if things would gone as Dumbledore planned, he would have been undefeated and the wand would have lost its power.
When we read Harry's lecture on wandlore in The Flaw in the Plan, we find out just how important that stunning spell is to the mastery of the wand. It is interesting that Voldemort misinterpreted the memory which made him think that mastery of the wand could be gained through theft.
I am beginning to think that if Voldemort used Stephen King's MAC-10 he would have blown off his own feet.
mona amon - Aug 18, 2007 7:02 am (#154 of 391)
Actually, Dumbledore stated in Kings Cross that he intended Snape to become master of the Elder Wand.
What is actually said is-
If you planned your death with Snape, you meant him to end up with the Elder Wand didn't you?'
'I admit that was my intention,' said Dumbledore, 'but it did not work as I intended, did it?'
I take 'end up with' to mean 'possess but not master'. Dumbledore, by arranging his death with Snape, would die master of the wand, and the wand's power would die with him. Snape was supposed to take the wand after killing Dumbledore, and (I'm just guessing here) perhaps give it to Voldemort when he asks for it. That way, if things had gone according to plan, Voldemort would eventually face Harry with a wand that had lost its power, while Harry would have his own phoenix wand, strengthened by its previous encounter with Voldemort.
NFla Barbara - Aug 18, 2007 8:07 am (#155 of 391)
I think you're right, mona amon. Whether Snape or another DE took the wand, or the wand was buried with DD for LV to possibly try to steal later, I think DD's original plan was for the power to die with him so that, eventually, LV would be holding a wand that was no more powerful than any other. That is the part that didn't work out as he intended.
tandaradei - Aug 18, 2007 8:28 am (#156 of 391)
Tale of the Three Brothers
...[cut]...The first brother traveled on for a week or more, and reaching a distant village, sought out a fellow wizard with whom he had a quarrel. Naturally, with the Elder Wand as his weapon, he could not fail to win the duel that followed. Leaving his enemy dead upon the floor, the oldest brother proceeded to an inn, where he boasted loudly...[cut]...
That very night, another wizard crept upon the oldest brother as he lay, wine-sodden, upon his bed. The thief took the wand and, for good measure, slit the oldest brother's throat...[cut]...
In The Tales of Beedle the Bard (Chap 21 & above) thievery and/or murder were perfectly acceptable methods of gaining mastership of the Elder Wand. I see little in that story to suggest the wizard needs to prove himself to the wand. The deal appears to be, that Death has given a prize possession of his to this oldest brother – an Elder Wand of unbeatable powers – but with a catch: even a thief or murderer can take it away from him to gain mastery over the wand, with the wand’s express permission.
If thievery allows the switch, Grindelwald and Harry are in good stead here as thieves/takers, for gaining of the Elder Wand’s allegiance. I am of the impression that ethics, talent, or any code of conduct is hardly the requisite for this Wand’s allegiance. Beedle tells a story of this wand being created by “cunning” Death, who was angry at being “cheated” (p. 407 USHB/DH). If anything, it appears that all that needs to happen of Death’s Elder Wand to change allegiance, is for its owner to suffer and lose. I’m thinking this Elder Wand would have yearned for Lockhart.
valuereflection - Aug 18, 2007 8:45 am (#157 of 391)
Thank you for explaining those two lines, mona amon. They confused me when I read the book.
Does everyone think that JKR's explanation about the Elder Wand helps -- which is on the NBC website. I'll quote it here, because I don't think it's been mentioned yet on this thread.
Question: Why was Draco the true owner of the Elder Wand? Voldemort thinks that he becomes the true owner of the Elder Wand by stealing it from Dumbledore’s grave, but in the end we learn that the true owner was really Draco Malfoy, that is until Harry defeated him and allegiance transferred to Harry. How did Draco become the true owner of the Elder Wand?
Answer: “To truly own the Elder Wand, which means to receive the full benefits, double-edged though it is, of all its power, you have to have conquered the previous owner,” explained Rowling.
At the end of Book 6, “Half-Blood Prince,” Draco disarmed Dumbledore before Snape killed Dumbledore.
“And that meant he conquered him, even though Dumbledore was very weak at the time, he was very ill. He was on the point of collapse when it happened,” Rowling said. “Dumbledore didn’t want to lose his wand at that point and Draco disarmed him. So that meant that the wand gave Draco its allegiance, even though Draco never knew it, even though Draco never touched it.
“From that moment on, that wand gave its allegiance to Draco, and it wouldn’t work as well for anyone but Draco.”
When Harry wrestles Draco’s “everyday” wand out of his hand at the Malfoy’s mansion, he conquers Draco, and therefore the Elder Wand — hidden in Dumbledore’s tomb at the time — transfers its allegiance to Harry.
Rowling said her American editor suggested the moment when Harry conquers Draco should be more dramatic.
“But, no, I really wanted, very consciously, for the history of the wizarding world to hinge on this moment where two teenage boys have a physical [fight]. They don’t even do it by magic,” Rowling said.
“That sort of puts all of Voldemort’s and Dumbledore’s grandiose plans in their place, doesn’t it? You just can’t plan that well, that something can go wrong and it went wrong … It went wrong because Harry managed to pull this wand out of Draco’s grip.
I took this quote from, "Confused by Potter? Author sets record straight. Exclusive: J.K. Rowling explains the finer points of “Deathly Hallows,” Interview with Meredith Viera on the NBC Today show July 30, 2007; Article written by Jen Brown.
tandaradei - Aug 18, 2007 9:01 am (#158 of 391)
This juxtaposition between Draco and Harry is interesting. Harry first uses the Room of Requirement in OoP; then Draco uses it to deadly effect in HBP. Harry first “used” in the Vanishing Cabinet; Draco put it to effect. In this final book, Draco has apparently won allegiance of the Elder Wand without knowing it; and Harry also without knowing it. Quiet symmetrical.
tandaradei - Aug 18, 2007 9:10 am (#159 of 391)
Aaack, want to add another thought.
Draco owned and used his original wand throughout Deadly Hallows, until Harry stole it; yet the Elder Wand nonetheless considered its owner to be Draco. Apparently, wand "cleaving," possibly like House Elves, doesn't require "monogamy."
Madam Pince - Aug 18, 2007 11:08 am (#160 of 391)
valuereflection, thanks for that post. I have missed that somehow in the Viera interview. It is helpful. She uses the word "conquers" rather than "disarms" or "defeats" like we've been haggling over (OK, essentially the same thing.)
I need to puzzle some more, I think...
Luna Logic, you are right I believe in what is causing me confusion -- "the wand chooses the wizard" and "a wizard wins the wand by conquering the previous owner-wizard" seem a bit contradictory. But I guess not if you just say "the wand always chooses the conquerer." Hmmmm...
I am beginning to think that if Voldemort used Stephen King's MAC-10 he would have blown off his own feet. -Xenophilius
LOL! That was a great article by King, wasn't it?
Luna Logic - Aug 18, 2007 12:02 pm (#161 of 391)
Edited by Aug 18, 2007 12:03 pm
Thank, valuereflection, I had also missed that part of the interview.
Madam Pince: "the wand always chooses the conquerer." The notes of the NBC interview seems, finally, to mean exactly that.
No more headache, then, anybody?
TomProffitt - Aug 18, 2007 5:23 pm (#162 of 391)
I think the Rowling quote pretty strongly implies that any assumption of the Elder Wand being undefeatable is in error. The wand is a very good one, but it is not unbeatable. For if it were unbeatable Draco could not have taken it from Dumbledore.
Xenophilius - Aug 18, 2007 5:37 pm (#163 of 391)
The idea that the wand is undefeatable comes from "The Tale of the Three Brothers". Xenophilius quickly qualifies the story by saying "That is a children's tale, told to amuse rather than to instruct. Those of use who understand these matters, however, recognize that the ancient story refers to three objects, or Hallows, which, if untied, will make the possessor master of Death."
valuereflection - Aug 18, 2007 8:24 pm (#164 of 391)
Edited Aug 18, 2007 9:03 pm
The legend said that the wand must always win duels for its owner. But Dumbledore was not in a "straight-on duel" with Draco. He could still lose the Elder Wand through a circumstance which was not a duel.
At the moment when Draco burst through the door shouting, "Expelliarmus!" Dumbledore wasn't "on guard." Dumbledore wasn't even looking at Draco, much less planning to duel him. Dumbledore was looking at Harry, pointing his wand at him, in order to cast the Petrificus Totalis spell. Dumbledore was not even looking at Draco, much less intending to duel with him. Dumbledore had intended all year to talk Draco out of killing him whenever the time came that Draco approached. Unfortunately, Dumbledore did not expect to be disarmed while his attention was distracted during a circumstance outside of a dueling situation. Ordinarily, Dumbledore was a powerful, brilliant wizard with quick reflexes, who was unlikely to ever be at a disadvantage in any non-dueling situation. But on that night he was weakened, near death, distracted, and not expecting to lose his wand.
Luna Logic - Aug 19, 2007 12:24 am (#165 of 391)
I agree that the legend is a legend. Dumbledore says in Chapter 35 that the legend is untrue about the origin of the three Hallows ; he thinks they were "hand made" - wizard-made - by the Peverell brothers. So "unbeatable" can be a legendary idea, too.
Today I have a new question! Why did not the Elder Wand go straight in the hand of Draco on the Astronomy Tower, after his Expelliarmus against Dumbledore, as it goes in Harry's hand after his Expelliarmus against Voldemort in Chapter 36?
Gerald Costales - Aug 19, 2007 1:28 am (#166 of 391)
Draco's conquering Dumbledore and gaining Mastery of the Elder Wand was unintentional. Magic has it own Rules not governed or controllable by any Wizard or Witch. Let’s review some examples from the Series.
. . .1. Voldemort tried to AK the infant Harry. But, Lily’s sacrifice unintentionally cast an Ancient Magic unknown to Lily or Voldemort.
. . 2. Harry’s ability to speak Parseltongue. Harry had a fragment of Voldemort’s Soul and gained this ability unintentionally.
. . 3. Ron tried to curse Draco. But, Ron’s damaged Wand unintentionally backfired and Ron began to spit up slugs.
. . 4. Lockhart tried to cast a Memory Charm. But, Ron’s damaged Wand unintentionally backfired and Lockhart’s memory is altered beyond the scope of an average Memory Charm.
. . 5. Lucius unintentionally gave Harry’s sock to Dobby. Dobby became a Free House-Elf and the Magic that caused the Servitude of the House-Elf and the Enslavement of Dobby to the Malfoy family is severed.
. . 6. Harry unintentionally cast Emotional Magic that inflated Aunt Marge.
. . 7. Harry and Voldemort dueled in the Graveyard. But, the Magic of Brother Wands unintentionally caused the Yew Wand and Holly Wand to lock.
. . 8. The Life Debt owed to Harry by Wormtail, unintentionaly caused Wormtail to strangle himself.
(I’m sure other examples of unintentional Magic occurred in the Series.)
But, my point is that the arcane rules that govern Wand Ownership and the Mastery of a Wand are uncontrollable. So, all of Dumbledore’s planning and Voldemort’s desire to control the Elder Wand failed.
IMHO - The Elder Wand may play by its own rules, so to speak. And this may explain the Elder Wand’s unruly and totally confusing behavior. The Rules and Wand lore of the Elder Wand may simply be different from other Wands. Death was tricked into creating the Elder Wand. Why wouldn’t Death create a Wand that existed beyond the scope of other Wands?
JKR - Harry Potter fans Wand to know. GC
PS As always - Be careful what you wish for.
Xenophilius - Aug 19, 2007 5:35 am (#167 of 391)
Luna - I think it has to do with skill level of the wizard casting the spell. When HRH, or any of the students, cast the spell the wand seems to fly just about anywhere. When older wizards cast the spell it generally goes to them. IMO, JKR used this to tell us about Harry when he cast Expelliarmus against Voldemort. The Elder Wand went straight to Harry.
tandaradei - Aug 19, 2007 9:12 am (#168 of 391)
Gerald Costales: The Elder Wand may play by its own rules
If true, perhaps this is a borrowing from the One Ring's characteristics in The Lord of Rings?
From “The Lightening-Struck Tower: "Then, by the light of the Mark, he saw Dumbledore's wand flying in an arc over the edge of the ramparts..." (HBP, p. 584 US.)
Sounds like the wand could have been trying to get away – like how Gollum's ring slipped off his finger for Bilbo to find, among many other such ring-losing incidents in that story. That would go along with my idea that the Elder Wand sensed that Dumbledore was intending an end to the Wand’s reign.
On the other hand!
I may be wrong, but whenever the wand DOES go to the hand of its opponent from an Expelliarmus spell, doesn’t the victor's wand further guide that lost wand to his hand? The impression pops up in canon, I think; but I only have non-canonical examples at present. The US book cover has Harry raising his hand to receive the wand, not moving else wise; and this implies such a mental willing by the victor. Too, I think in the films I see victors guiding expelled wands.
Too, we all know Draco didn't understand the rules of wand ownership; and I'll bet his intentions on the Lightening-Struck Tower were mainly to disarm Dumbledore and not capture Dumbledore's wand.
Furthermore, I'm thinking the wand understood transference had occurred; yet also felt no draw from Draco’s own mind, and just went the natural way of things.
Madam Pince - Aug 19, 2007 8:20 pm (#169 of 391)
Today I have a new question! Why did not the Elder Wand go straight in the hand of Draco on the Astronomy Tower, after his Expelliarmus against Dumbledore, as it goes in Harry's hand after his Expelliarmus against Voldemort in Chapter 36? --Luna Logic
Luna! We are just now almost sort-of close to answering the last one! For shame! (I am just teasing you!)
JKR - Harry Potter fans Wand to know. --Gerald
Ohhhh, nooooo! Groannnnnnn....
I had forgotten that part about Dumbledore's wand flying out in an arc off the tower. It does sound like the wand was trying to escape. Hmmmm...
valuereflection - Aug 19, 2007 9:38 pm (#170 of 391)
Edited Aug 19, 2007 11:00 pm
Where the wand goes depends on the the intention of the wizard who casts the Expelliarmus spell. If the caster wants to catch the wand, then he will -- providing that he has practiced the spell sufficiently to learn how to catch. If the caster doesn't care where the wand goes, but only wishes for it to leave his opponent's hand, then the wand will fly off in a random direction. There are examples of both situations in the books. For example, Lupin caught the trio's wands when he disarmed them in the Shrieking Shack in Prisoner of Azkaban. Here are some examples of situations where a wizard's wand did not fly into the hand of a caster of the disarming spell.
When Snape cast Expelliarmus at Lockhart in chapter 11 of Chamber of Secrets, Lockhart lost his wand. But Snape did not catch it. Lavender Brown found it and gave it back to Lockhart.
In Deathly Hallows when Harry cast Expelliarmus at Stan Shunpike, he did not catch Stan's wand. (chapter 4) When Ron cast Expelliarmus at Bellatrix Lestrange, Harry caught her wand. (chapter 24)
During the Battle in the Department of Mysteries: Harry... grabbed the Death Eater around the knees... Neville overturned his desk in his anxiety to help; pointing his wand wildly at the struggling pair he cried, "EXPELLIARMUS!" Both Harry's and the Death Eater's wands flew out of their hands and soared back toward the entrance to the Hall of Prophecy; both scrambled to their feet and charged after them, the Death Eater in front and Harry hot on his heels, Neville bringing up the rear, plainly horrorstruck at what he had done. (OotP, chapter 35)
When Harry began teaching the disarming charm to Dumbledore's Army, wands flew in all directions. Harry sent Neville's wand up to the ceiling and onto a bookcase. Fred and George teasingly disarmed Zacharias Smith from behind his back, but they did not catch his wand so that he would not know who disarmed him. Terry Boot's wand hit Angelina Spinnet on the nose. Harry made Dumbledore's Army practice for awhile until their disarming technique improved. (OotP, chapter 18)
Obviously Draco didn't practice the disarming spell as much as Lupin and Dumbledore's Army did.
Luna Logic - Aug 20, 2007 12:11 am (#171 of 391)
Edited by Aug 20, 2007 12:25 am
Thanks everybody for yours precious answers. I see that you are really skilled at wandlore! (practising often?)
I think valuereflexion has explained all the different circumstances:
Where the wand goes depends on the the intention of the wizard who casts the Expelliarmus spell. If the caster wants to catch the wand, then he will -- providing that he has practiced the spell sufficiently to learn how to catch. If the caster doesn't care where the wand goes, but only wishes for it to leave his opponent's hand, then the wand will fly off in a random direction.
edited to add: On the other hand… I like tandaradei‘s recall of the US cover : The US book cover has Harry raising his hand to receive the wand, not moving else wise
Now, what is the next question? Or is Madam Pince right and it was the last one? I wand one more!
Gerald Costales - Sep 1, 2007 12:26 am (#172 of 391)
Edited Sep 1, 2007 1:06 am
(re: post# 171)
I like tandaradei‘s recall of the US cover : The US book cover has Harry raising his hand to receive the wand, not moving else wise
Prior to reading Book 7, my impression would have been that the American cover showed Harry as he was casting a Spell using either “Wandless Magic” or “Wordless Magic”. Especially after reading Book 6 with its emphasis on “Wordless Magic”, I expected to see a great deal of “Wordless Magic” in Book 7.
But, Barty Crouch Sr. mentioned “Flying Carpets” in Book 4:
. . “Ali thinks there’s a niche in the market for a family vehicle,” said Crouch. “I remember my grandfather had an Axminster that could seat twelve --- but that was before (flying) carpets were banned, of course.”
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(GoF, page 91, American hardback edition)
and we never had any other references to “Flying Carpets” again in the Series.
(re: post# 168)
Furthermore, I'm thinking the wand understood transference had occurred; yet also felt no draw from Draco’s own mind, and just went the natural way of things. tandaradei
tandaradei - This is a good thought. But, I would think this statement from Book 1 could also apply to the Elder Wand:
. . . . . . “-- it’s really the wand that chooses the wizard of course” (Ollivander)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(SS, page 82, American hardback edition)
Some futher ideas on the Elder Wand and Wands:
. . Mr. Ollivander touched the lightning scar on Harry’s forehead with a long, white finger.
. . “I'm sorry to say I sold the wand that did it,” he said softly. “Thirteen-and-a-half inches. Yew. Powerful wand, very powerful, and in the wrong hands . . . well, if I’d known what that wand was going out into the world to do . . .”
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(SS, page 83, American hardback edition)
When Ollivander described the Yew Wand as a “Powerful wand” , was Ollivander aware that Yew Wand was crafted for a “Powerful Wizard” and was waiting to be sold to a “Powerful Wizard” or that the Yew Wand became Powerful after doing:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . “great things --- terrible, yes, but great.”
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(SS, page 85, American hardback)
Did Death built the Elder Wand to be Mastered by only a “Powerful Wizard”?
IMHO - Draco wasn’t Powerful enough to retain Mastery of the Elder Wand and the Elder Wand knew it. GC
Choices - Sep 1, 2007 8:44 am (#173 of 391)
Gerald - "But, Barty Crouch Sr. mentioned “Flying Carpets” in Book 4:
. . “Ali thinks there’s a niche in the market for a family vehicle,” said Crouch. “I remember my grandfather had an Axminster that could seat twelve --- but that was before (flying) carpets were banned, of course.” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(GoF, page 91, American hardback edition) ...and we never had any other references to “Flying Carpets” again in the Series."
Choices - It's interesting to note that the Muggle Prime Minister had an Axminster carpet in his office in HBP.
Gerald Costales - Sep 1, 2007 8:38 pm (#174 of 391)
“It's interesting to note that the Muggle Prime Minister had an Axminster carpet in his office in HBP.” Choices
Picture of an Axminster Carpet
Ax•min•ster car•pet [aks-min-ster] – noun
a machine-made carpet having a cut pile and an intricate design of many colors.
[Origin: 1810–20; named after town in SW England where manufactured ]
(Source for definition – Dictionary.com - [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] )
Link to Axminster Carpets - [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Choices - IMHO: I believe that this Axminster carpet thing is just a Mark Evans. But, I could be wrong.
It won’t be the first time when trying to understand a finer point in this Series.
I do believe JKR needs to simply write another Potter related book to satisfy all of our misunderstandings and answer all our questions.
PS I know I'd buy that book if she decides to write a Potter Almanac. GC
Choices - Sep 2, 2007 11:01 am (#175 of 391)
Gerald, I didn't mean to imply that the Muggle PM had a magic carpet, just that he had an Axminster carpet in his office. Axminster carpets were obviously used to make magic flying carpets in the past.
maria cloos - Sep 3, 2007 1:59 pm (#176 of 391)
Okay, I’m going to try to see if we have the facts straight with a summary of everything we’ve learned. Using info from this forum, other sites and the interviews:
Disarming: We see numerous instances of people being disarmed. We also see that wands do not just "change loyalties" upon each disarming. The difference would seem to be the ultimate intention of the person doing the disarming. In a practice situation you are not trying to devoid the person of a wand permanently....it just that, practice. Even in a duel situation it seems that if you disarm someone and that person retrieves his or her wand from you the wand's loyalties still lie with the original owner.
Using another's wand: There are a few examples we should look at. Neville, in particular, has used other people's wands. His first wand had been his father's and it seemed to have worked decently for him (although we see his talent increase once he has a wand of his own after his father's is broken.) In the DoM he picks up Hermione's wand and uses it with the same amount of flair as he did his father's. Why? I think that Hermione wanted him to use her wand to continue the defense of the group. It would be her intentions that the wand would still be carrying out. Additionally we see Harry have difficulty using the wand that Ron stole from the snatchers (because Harry did not successfully overcome the wand's owner) but that he was using Hermione's wand with no difficulty (again due to Hermione's wishes).
The Elder Wand and its owners: As Ollivander tells us, the owner of a wand must be overcome in order for the wand to change allegiance to the person who overcomes the original owner. Let's look at the specific instances when we see the Elder Wand change hands. #1) Antioch- The wand is stolen by another while he is asleep. **For good measure the thief kills him. #2) Gregorovitch- He had possession of the wand (we will have to assume for arguments sake that he is the master of the wand). Grindelwald showed up at his shop and overcame him by stealing the wand from his possession (stunning Gregorovitch in the process) and began using it. #3) Grindelwald- We know that DD fought a duel with Grindelwald and that he was defeated and sent to Nurmengard. We DO NOT know that Grindelwald was actually defeated during the duel (or if he was defeated, how). This may have been something that occurred later (more on that below). #4) DD- Upon their arrival on the tower, Draco comes upon DD and Harry. Now, in that moment DD uses his wand to immobilize Harry and is not fighting against Draco (which is significant). Draco therefore disarms DD successfully. Unlike most duel situations, DD never retrieves his wand and Draco was intending to overcome him. #5) Draco- The Elder wand has now given its allegiance to the person who overcame its previous owner, although Draco is obviously unaware of this. Moments before Harry and his mates disapparate Harry overcomes Draco by snatching the three wands he holds. Again, this was with the intention of overcoming Draco, and Draco never retrieves his wand from Harry. Note- LV tried to steal the wand out of DD’s tomb. But he was not overcoming the wand’s owner in any way. He was robbing DD, not Draco (who was the wand’s master).
Is the Elder Wand unbeatable? It is interesting to note that the description of the wand says that it must "always win duels for its master." Have we ever seen the wand beaten in a duel? No, we have not. We do not see the duel between DD and Grindelwald, and we never see another duel between the Elder Wand and a foe. The only exception to that is between DD and LV, but as that duel never comes to a conclusion I don't think we can use it for an example (DD was not trying to kill LV, and LV stops to possess Harry and then flees). So we cannot say one way or another that the Elder Wand will “always win duels for its master” as we’ve never seen a duel to its conclusion involving that wand.
So how does the Elder Wand act at the end of DH?: There has been a great deal of speculation about what happened in the forest. Here it is piece by piece: Harry's intention upon entering the forest is to sacrifice his life to save everyone else. As he faces LV he knows he will die, it is what he "wants." LV does the AK and both he and Harry fall to the ground. There are two souls as we enter King’s Cross: Harry’s and the piece of LV’s that resided within Harry. Just as a horcrux works to keep part of the soul earthbound so does Harry’s blood living on in LV allow him to return to the earth. Why did LV fall to the ground? He and Harry were tethered together not only by the horcrux but by the shared blood. I think this is the reason LV collapsed. Now, LV uses crucio on Harry. Why doesn’t it work? I don’t believe it was because Harry protected himself (as he did for the others) but because this was not what he wanted. What did he want? He wanted LV to believe he was dead, but he did not want to feel the pain associated with the curse….the wand therefore obeyed him. During his duel with LV the wand would not kill Harry, its master, and so any spell that Harry would have shot at it would have worked. He therefore chose the spell he feels most comfortable with and does best.
Does this all make sense?
Madame Pomfrey - Sep 4, 2007 7:39 am (#177 of 391)
It makes sense to me,Maria. I too,had thought that part of the reason Harry was able to come back was that the Elder Wand would not kill its true master.We see this again in the final battle.Harry blocked an A.K. which is supposed to be impossible.The curse rebounded,killing Voldemort.The Elder Wand would not kill its master.
valuereflection - Sep 4, 2007 6:31 pm (#178 of 391)
Edited Sep 4, 2007 7:08 pm
maria cloos, What an illuminating post! Would you please also post it on the thread, "Wands: Your Thoughts After Book Seven." Have you read that thread? Like the other posters on that thread, I've been trying to figure out wandlore. Your summary and insightful comments helped me and would help them, too.
I believe part of the reason Harry was able to come back was because he had fulfilled the legend, united the three Deathly Hallows and become the master of death. Xenopilius explained this could be interpreted as conqueror or vanquisher. I interpret "master" to mean that the master has the ability and the right to control, which is to choose, whether to live or die. Dumbledore explained that Harry was the only wizard in history who could unite the three Hallows and become the true master of death. I interpret this as an explanation why no one else had the ability to choose whether or not to come back: because no one else had united the three Deathly Hallows.
This book gradually worked the theme of how to be "worthy" to get all three Hallows. It was discussed by Xenophilius (chapter 21), Harry (chapter 22), Ron (chapter 25), and Dumbledore (chapter 35). But the most meaningful passage for me was in the forest (chapter 34):
...understanding was coming so fast it seemed to have bypassed thought... The black stone with its jagged crack running down the center sat in the two halves of the Snitch. The Resurrection Stone had cracked down the vertical line representing the Elder Wand. The triangle nad circle representing the Cloak and the stone were still discernible. And again Harry understood without having to think. It did not matter about bringing them back, for he was about to join them. He was not really fetching them: they were fetching him.
In this passage, I read "them" and "they" as referring to the Deathly Hallows. The Hallows were fetching him because he was worthy to unite them.
Harry was more than the true master of the Elder Wand. Many wizards in history had been master of the Elder Wand. Harry had still more power than any of its other masters had, because he was master of all the Deathly Hallows. Being master of the Deathly Hallows gave him more power than being master of the Elder Wand.
Madame Pomfrey - Sep 4, 2007 8:31 pm (#179 of 391)
Wow! I had forgotten that Harry was in possession of all three Hallows.No wonder he mastered death twice!Valuereflection,your interpretation of Harry's being Master explains why he had a choice when AK'd in the forrest.I like it.
mollis - Sep 5, 2007 10:28 am (#180 of 391)
Actually, valuereflection, I read that passage differently. I think he was referring to the fact that he was about to call forth the departed souls of his mother, father, Sirius, and Remus. He knew that it was wrong to try and bring back the dead. But rationalizes with himself that it was okay to call them back because he was about to join them. He had every intention to die within moments.
That said, I totally agree with your last paragraph. Being "master of death" is very likely why he could choose to come back after Voldy's direct-hit AK.
Madame Pomfrey - Sep 5, 2007 3:23 pm (#181 of 391)
Mollis,I read that bit the same as you.He was speaking of his loved ones.
mona amon - Sep 6, 2007 9:37 pm (#182 of 391)
Harry did not have all three Hallows when he faced Voldemort's AK. He had dropped the stone in the forest. It was because Voldemort had some of Harry's blood (along with Lily's sacrifice) in his body that Harry was able to return.
rambkowalczyk - Sep 13, 2007 4:20 am (#183 of 391)
Now, LV uses crucio on Harry. Why doesn’t it work? I don’t believe it was because Harry protected himself (as he did for the others) but because this was not what he wanted. What did he want? He wanted LV to believe he was dead, but he did not want to feel the pain associated with the curse….the wand therefore obeyed him. During his duel with LV the wand would not kill Harry, its master, and so any spell that Harry would have shot at it would have worked. He therefore chose the spell he feels most comfortable with and does best. Maria Cloos
I think the reason the Cruciatius Curse had no or little effect was because Harry chose to die just like his mother chose to die. That sacrifice protected the living just as his mother's death protected Harry. None of Voldemort's curses were effective after Harry 'died'.
maria cloos - Sep 13, 2007 11:14 am (#184 of 391)
I don't know. Can one sacrifice oneself for oneself? That's the only reason I question that. I can understand why LV's spells weren't working against the people for whom Harry had laid down his life, but I just don't see it working on Harry himself. As I said I think that the reason was simply that the wand was obeying it's master. Interesting food for thought though, rambkowalczyk.
rambkowalczyk - Sep 17, 2007 8:17 am (#185 of 391)
Can one sacrifice oneself for oneself?
That is a valid question.
On the other hand, Harry didn't resist (with a wand) the Crucio attack which would be the only way for the Elder wand to know that Harry didn't want to feel pain. (IMHO)
Maybe Voldemort's power was drained a little by his near death Experience.
I do think though, if Voldemort tried to get Harry's (Draco's) wand before the AK curse he would have been master of the Elder wand.
vball man - Sep 24, 2007 8:21 pm (#186 of 391)
I had another idea about Dumbledore defeating Grindelwald even when Grindelwald had the Elder Wand.
If the wand chooses the wizard, why can't it choose in the middle of the duel?
So Dumbledore and Grindelwald start fighting and pretty soon the Elder Wand realizes that Dumbledore is the better man. It chooses Dumbledore at that point - even though Grindelwald is still holding it. Now Dumbledore wins.
Plus, the wand wasn't really partial to Grindie anyway because he stole it from the room instead of directly from it's owner.
Harry's speech about his overpowering of Draco's wand might have been efficacious in the turning of the Elder Wand to loyalty to Harry instead of being descriptive of such a turn. Perhaps Harry's overpowering of Draco was important - but so was his announcing it to the Elder Wand.
Mrs. Sirius - Sep 25, 2007 6:38 am (#187 of 391)
I thought that wands had a power out side of the wizard, like house elves have magic different from wizards. So that wands chooses the wizard with out the the wizard talking, casting a spell or even using it.
Draco was the master of the elder wand without having ever touched it. The phoenix wand chose harry without him "casting" a spell.
valuereflection - Sep 28, 2007 3:40 pm (#188 of 391)
mollis, thank you for your alternate interpretation of the passage, "It did not matter about bringing them back, for he was about to join them. He was not really fetching them: they were fetching him." I now believe your interpretation of those two sentences works better than what I earlier thought they meant.
mona amon, Harry did have all three Hallows when he faced Voldemort and chose to accept his death.
He (Yaxley) and Dolohov turned and walked deeper into the forest. Harry followed them, knowing that they would lead him exactly where he wanted to go... They had traveled on mere minutes when Harry saw light ahead, and Yaxley and Dolohov stepped out into a clearing... A fire burned in the middle of the clearing, and its flickering light fell over a crowd of completely silent, watchful Death Eaters... Every eye was fixed upon Voldemort...Harry, standing still on the edge of the scene...
"I thought he would come," said Voldemort in his high, clear voice, his eyes on the leaping flames. "I expected him to come... I was it seems...mistaken," said Voldemort.
"You weren't." Harry said it as loudly as he could, with all the force he could muster. He did not want to sound afraid. The Resurrection Stone slipped from between his numb fingers... nobody mattered but Voldemort. It was just the two of them...
Next Harry waited motionlessly for his death to come from Voldemort, trying as hard as he could not to fight back. Then Voldemort "killed" him.
Harry did not simply drop the Resurrection Stone in the forest. First he faced Voldemort, there at the edge of the clearing, where he loudly declared his intention to accept his death at Voldemort's hands. Dumbledore said that action made Harry the true master of death, "Your are the true master of death, because the true master does not seek to run away from death" -[/b]- And thus made Harry the master of the Deathly Hallows.
It was then that Harry dropped the Stone. (Because he was facing Voldemort, the Stone probably fell at Harry's feet, between him and Voldemort.) But now it did not matter that Harry was no longer touching the Stone, because had become the master of the Deathly Hallows. He would remain the true master of the Deathly Hallows unless he failed to follow through on his choice to accept his death. As long as he did not run away from the death which he had chosen, Harry remained master of the Resurrection Stone whether it lay in his hand or on the ground at his feet.
maria cloos, may I quote your Post #176 on the thread, "Wands: Your Thoughts After Book Seven"?
mona amon - Oct 12, 2007 8:44 pm (#189 of 391)
Valuereflection, your post is interesting and helped me to understand something I hadn't thought of before- that the three Hallows all helped Harry to face (and avoid) death. This, is because, unlike Dumbledore, he uses them at the right time and for the right reasons.
He uses the stone to bring back the dead so that he himself can face death bravely. Being Master of the Elder Wand was the deciding factor in his ultimate defeat of Voldemort. And of course the invisibility cloak protected him and his friends throughout the Horcrux hunt.
But I do not agree that uniting the Hallows was the reason that Voldemort's AK did not kill him. Dumbledore explains to Harry very clearly that it was Harry's blood in Voldemort, containing Lily's sacrifice, that kept him alive. And I feel that this is why JKR made Harry drop the stone before getting hit by the AK, so that we wouldn't conclude that it was because he had all three Hallows that he was able to come back.
valuereflection - Dec 1, 2007 6:50 pm (#190 of 391)
Today there is a new essay about the Elder Wand, titled, "Still Got Your Wand in a Knot? Wandlore and The Elder Wand Examined." It helped explain some of my confusing questions about wandlore from The Deathly Hallows. It is a Scribbulus essay on The Leaky Cauldron website. Here is the link.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
PeskyPixie - Dec 4, 2007 11:21 am (#191 of 391)
I posted the following on a different thread, but feel it belongs here. Warning: It's light-hearted, not meant to be sirius at all.
Plants in the yew family are the most venomous in the Northern Hemisphere. If Voldy had paid closer attention in Herbology he'd know that all he has to do to get rid of Harry is trick him into eating his old wand by covering it in treacle. The search for the Elder Wand is not necessary.
Mrs. Sirius - Dec 6, 2007 9:58 am (#192 of 391)
Oh, no Pesky, that would never have worked! If Voldy covered the wand in treacle, Ron would have eaten it, then Harry would have be wise to him.
Can't play switch the wand on Harry, no siree.
PeskyPixie - Feb 7, 2008 11:16 am (#193 of 391)
Delayed response, but dang it! I knew the treacle scheme was too good to be true! And I'm sure Harry would manage to save Ron from the yew toxins by shoving a bezoar down his throat.
Why is Voldy zapped with his own AK if Harry uses Expelliarmus rather than Protego?
Julia H. - Feb 7, 2008 3:25 pm (#194 of 391)
Perhaps because Harry is the master of the wand. Expelliarmus does not simply disarm LV but calls the wand to its master's aid. A very useful spell.
Mrs Brisbee - Feb 8, 2008 4:55 am (#195 of 391)
I'm not sure if I understand it, and I don't think Rowling is consistent in her explanations. Protego isn't supposed to be powerful enough to stop an AK. Theoretically it would bloom into existence around the caster, then the powerful AK would go right through it. Two spells that collide in midair before they meet their destinations and release their effects act differently, though. We've seen the Priori Incantatum effect with twin wands. With unrelated wands, we've seen the effects ricochet, or explode into multicolored firework-like displays. Harry has really, really good aim. During the flight from Privet Drive, he was able to collide his spells with incoming AKs to stop them. He simply used his demonstrated talent on the ground with Voldemort.
I can only assume that if Voldy and Harry were using regular wands instead of the Elder Wand and Draco's wand, the spells would have collided, and either produced a multicolored shower of lights, or both ricocheted-- Voldemort getting killed by his rebounding AK, and Harry disarming himself with his Expelliarmus. I can only assume that in the actual duel that the reason the AK ricocheted and the Expelliarmus didn't has something to do with the Elder Wand not wanting to work against it's master. How it is able to change the demonstrated properties of raw magic is not something I understand.
mona amon - Feb 8, 2008 7:23 pm (#196 of 391)
We've never seen colliding spells boomeranging and hitting the caster before. I assume that when spells from two battling wands hit in mid air, the spells try to fight each other, and hence get deflected. But in the Harry/LV confrontation, maybe this is what happened-
The AK offers no resistance to the Expelliarmus, because the Expelliarmus was cast by the wand that is master of the wand that cast the AK.
The Expelliarmus, since it meets with no resistance, moves straight towards its target instead of ricochetting.
The AK, since it is offering no resistance to the Expelliarmus, instead of merely getting deflected from its course, bounces right back onto the caster.
The result is that Voldy drops dead and is disarmed at the same time.
Obscure laws of wizarding physics!
Anna L. Black - Feb 9, 2008 5:41 am (#197 of 391)
"The result is that Voldy drops dead and is disarmed at the same time."
I like you explanation, mona
mona amon - Feb 9, 2008 11:21 pm (#198 of 391)
Thanks Anna!
Orion - Feb 10, 2008 3:41 am (#199 of 391)
But still it is a bit awkward, isn't it? Even the most brilliant dark wizard of all times has no chance against a simple Expelliarmus by superhero Harry. I wonder how they do it in the movie? If they are diligent about it, it would have to look like two coloured waves colliding, the green wave and the different-coloured-wave (we aren't told what the colour of an Expelliarmus is, just that there are golden flames where they collide). Then the green wave rolls back to You-know-who, and the other wave, let's say it's yellow, overrides it and both go back, the yellow one on top of the green one. Complicated.
Swedish Short-Snout - Feb 10, 2008 4:11 am (#200 of 391)
I think we were told what the colour of Expelliarmus is, when Snape first demonstrated it in the Duelling Club in CoS. Though I can't remember which colour it was.
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 201 to 250
Mona Fri May 13, 2011 12:17 pm
Julia H. - Feb 10, 2008 4:52 am (#201 of 391)
It is red.
haymoni - Feb 26, 2008 12:21 pm (#202 of 391)
If this has been discussed some place, please direct me.
Harry beat Voldy w/ Draco's wand. The true Elder wand (the wand that Voldy had) would not defeat Draco's wand because Draco's had beaten it earlier (disarming Dumbledore).
Harry took Draco's wand, so he is now the Master of both Draco's wand and the Elder Wand. And his own wand.
What is Harry's wand??? If Harry was using his own wand against the Elder wand, who would win?
I'm guessing Harry could use any wand against the Elder Wand, as he is its master.
Yes???
Anna L. Black - Feb 26, 2008 12:26 pm (#203 of 391)
Thst sound right to me, haymoni (Of course, that doesn't mean anything, as wand theory is such a complicated magical art that I, a simple Muggle, cannot pretend to grasp its intricate meanings. Or something )
Orion - Feb 26, 2008 12:29 pm (#204 of 391)
Doesn't it have to be Draco's hawthorn wand because Harry is master of it and the Elder wand recognizes Harry as it's master because he has won the hawthorn wand? "The last thing it knew, some Draco kid had sent it flying over the battlements of Hogwarts with a hawthorn wand...", and so it would have been thoroughly unimpressed if Daddy had been waving some stupid stick at it.
Steve Newton - Feb 26, 2008 1:01 pm (#205 of 391)
I think that Harry is master of the wand. Whichever wand he uses does not seem to mean a lot. The wizard is the master not the wand.
I'm not feeling my best so this may not make sense.
haymoni - Feb 26, 2008 1:10 pm (#206 of 391)
Mmm...so did Draco's Cruciatus Curses hurt more?
Julia H. - Feb 26, 2008 2:39 pm (#207 of 391)
I think it makes a lot of sense that Harry masters the Elder Wand because he masters the wand that previously disarmed the then current master of the Elder Wand. I have not thought of it so far but I felt that there must be a missing link somewhere and now I think that is it. So if Draco had been using a completely different wand at the time when Harry disarmed him that might not have affected the mastery of the Elder Wand. Is that right? Suppose someone else had been using Draco's hawthorn wand and Harry had disarmed that person, would Harry have been the master of the Elder Wand? (Complicated. No wonder LV had no clue of how these things worked.)
rambkowalczyk - Feb 27, 2008 5:43 am (#208 of 391)
So if Draco had been using a completely different wand at the time when Harry disarmed him that might not have affected the mastery of the Elder Wand. Is that right? Suppose someone else had been using Draco's hawthorn wand and Harry had disarmed that person, would Harry have been the master of the Elder Wand? Julia H
Sounds like a Newt level question to me.
Orion - Feb 27, 2008 8:25 am (#209 of 391)
This like maths at school. I understood it all for the one moment when teacher explained it, but ten seconds later it was complete chaos. At the core of the problem seems to be insufficient information and/or contradictory information by the author.
rambkowalczyk - Mar 2, 2008 3:22 pm (#210 of 391)
I thought I would try to tackle some of the previous wands questions logically only to discover I had more unanswered questions.
I decided to test whether some of our premises were true.
1 Draco was Master of the Elder wand because he disarmed Dumbledore.
Draco was able to disarm Dumbledore because Dumbledore was not dueling with Draco. Harry at the end of DH says that Draco was Master of The Elder wand.
2 Harry was able to use Draco's wand after he took it.
Harry had to physically fight Draco to get possession of the wand. If Harry used a wand to disarm Draco and Draco fought back with his wand Draco would have won because at the time Draco was Master of the Elder Wand.
3 Harry became Master of the Elder Wand after he physically fought Draco over the Hawthorne wand.
There are obvious limits to the Elder Wand. It only works if it is involved in a duel between wands. If there is no duel or if the fight doesn't involve wands it is vulnerable.
4 It is possible for a person to use another's wand if there is permission?
We've seen examples of this. Harry using Hermione's wand. Draco using his mother's wand.
But we also have seen an example where it will not always work. Neville was using his father's wand, but wasn't there a comment in one of the books that Neville was better after he got his own wand or was that just fan speculation?
5 If there isn't permission, the wand doesn't work as well.
Again we have two examples: Harry using the wand that Ron stole and Voldemort using the Elder Wand that he didn't earn.
6 Harry was Master of his own wand.
His wand was not defeated in a wizard's duel. Hermione accidentally injured it.
At this point I noticed that we need to make a distinction between how the Elder wand works and how regular wands work. In both cases it is a case of the wand choosing the wizard and not the other way around.
The Elder Wand chooses the wizard who can get the wand anyway he or she can unless there is a duel between the Elder wand and another wand. The Elder wand does not seem to have loyalty to its previous owner. For instance once Grindelwald took the wand and Stunned Gregorovitch, I don't think the Elder Wand would work as well for Gregorovitch as it used to (Unless of course he defeated Grindelwald).
I don't think this is true of regular wands. For instance Ron had 'defeated' the Snatchers and was able to take his wand. Therefore by my above reasoning the wand should have worked well for Ron and it probably did, but Ron did not become the owner of the wand just a rightful user. Therefore Ron giving permission for Harry to use the wand didn't work for Harry. Granted the idea of permission being allowable is not exactly proven.
Consider Draco's wand. Can Draco ever use it again? or is it forever loyal to Harry? If Draco were to wrestle it from Harry the answer would be a definite yes. But suppose Harry were to just give it back to Draco, would it still work as well for him as it did before? My guess is probably yes. Draco already proved his worth for the wand when he was 11. I doubt if his Hawthorne wand would reject him even if he was defeated by Harry. A corollary question would be is it a given that if a) Draco's wand was just given back by Harry and b) if Draco and Harry were to duel would Harry always win because Draco's wand is somewhat loyal to Harry?
Orion - Mar 3, 2008 9:46 am (#211 of 391)
I still think that the Elder wand first recognized the Hawthorn Wand, and then the person clinging to it at the other end. The Hawthorn wand had thrown it over the battlements of Hogwarts. It then had changed its owner. The Elder Wand only recognized Harry as its master because he was on the other side of the Hawthorn wand.
Another thing I just don't understand: If DD was so intent to let the Elder Wand's power die with him, why didn't he simply use one of his knees and break it? Crack, goes the Elder Wand. (Yes, yes, I know that Rowling wanted Snape to die, but strictly speaking, it wasn't quite necessary. And I don't think that anybody thinks that it was a great plan of DD to make Snape let LV steal the Elder Wand. Why???)
Julia H. - Mar 3, 2008 10:09 am (#212 of 391)
Ramb, it is a very interesting essay (it will probably earn an O for you) but it goes way beyond my knowledge of wandlore. Orion's "The Elder Wand only recognized Harry as its master because he was on the other side of the Hawthorn wand" is much easier to understand. However that would mean that Harry fully became the true master of the wand only after winning it in duel from LV because after that (I guess) his mastership did not depend on the hawthorn wand any more. (Good trick!) The Elder Wand was indeed willing to repair the phoenix wand for him.
"If DD was so intent to let the Elder Wand's power die with him, why didn't he simply use one of his knees and break it?"
Good question. I can think of two possible answers. Either the Elder Wand is unbreakable or DD liked complicated and imaginative solutions. There is a third one actually: he wanted to use the Elder Wand as long as he lived and he did not hope that in his last moment he would have the strength to break the wand.
"... strictly speaking, it wasn't quite necessary..."
I agree. (Leaving aside artistic reasons of course.)
"I don't think that anybody thinks that it was a great plan of DD to make Snape let LV steal the Elder Wand."
To make??? Could he have prevented it? (Oh, I guess he could have stolen it himself...) Tell us more about it, Orion, please!
Mrs Brisbee - Mar 3, 2008 10:09 am (#213 of 391)
Orion, I think the wand had the same protective magicks on it as other "unbreakable" items, such as the Horcruxes. Dumbledore still could have broken it with the Sword of Gryffindor, though, if his intention was simply to be rid of it. It's all very confusing.
I wonder, did Dumbledore actually intend for Snape to be the master, but for Snape to never know it? Someone would need to kill Voldemort after all his Horcruxes were destroyed. If Voldemort had a wand that wouldn't work properly against Snape, then Snape's job would be easy. And it would be just like Dumbledore not to tell Snape about the wand.
Against this idea: Harry doesn't break the wand at the end of DH, even though he wants it to lose its power. Did Rowling just forget that she established that "unbreakable" items can be broken by certain methods?
Julia H. - Mar 3, 2008 10:22 am (#214 of 391)
"If Voldemort had a wand that wouldn't work properly against Snape, then Snape's job would be easy. And it would be just like Dumbledore not to tell Snape about the wand." (Mrs Brisbee)
So you mean the scenario in which Voldemort has got the wand but Snape is the actual master, so he can easily defeat LV? Unfortunately, this is exactly LV's (incorrect) assessment of the situation and he knows the solution (the snake).
Or [/b]- Another scenario - Snape should both master and have the wand physically but should not know he has got the Elder Wand. In this case how can DD be sure that Snape would use his - DD's - wand at the critical moment (or at any other time)? Snape has got his own wand (do we know anything about it?).
Mrs Brisbee - Mar 3, 2008 10:55 am (#215 of 391)
Unfortunately, there are swiss cheese holes in in the plans, no matter how we look at them. But then, I feel Dumbledore's final plan was one big piece of swiss cheese.
I'd really like to know what he intended with the wand, though.
Madam Pince - Mar 4, 2008 7:29 am (#216 of 391)
The Elder Wand chooses the wizard who can get the wand any way he or she can unless there is a duel between the Elder wand and another wand. --rambkowalczyk (emphasis mine)
Thank you for posting this! I like it very much. That clarifies things in my mind that had been most muddied.
Julia H. - Mar 4, 2008 9:33 am (#217 of 391)
"Harry doesn't break the wand at the end of DH, even though he wants it to lose its power. Did Rowling just forget that she established that "unbreakable" items can be broken by certain methods?" (Mrs Brisbee)
Neville's got the sword at the moment. Perhaps Harry would have to jump again into ... something if he wanted to use it again. Harry may not want to go back to the Chamber of Secrets either just to look for basilisk teeth.
mona amon - Mar 4, 2008 10:48 am (#218 of 391)
There are obvious limits to the Elder Wand. It only works if it is involved in a duel between wands. If there is no duel or if the fight doesn't involve wands it is vulnerable. (Ramb)
But Dumbledore won the Elder Wand from Grindelwald in a duel. I can only conclude that, though it is a powerful wand, the 'unbeatable' part is just rumour.
Steve Newton - Mar 4, 2008 11:34 am (#219 of 391)
Unbeatable is clearly untrue as its bloody history attests. Also, as I read it, Grindelwald defeated Gregorovitch while using the Elder wand. That was why he waited until Gregorovitch saw him to make his escape.
rambkowalczyk - Mar 4, 2008 2:32 pm (#220 of 391)
I still think that the Elder wand first recognized the Hawthorn Wand, and then the person clinging to it at the other end. The Hawthorn wand had thrown it over the battlements of Hogwarts. It then had changed its owner. The Elder Wand only recognized Harry as its master because he was on the other side of the Hawthorn wand. Orion
Not sure if I agree with this. Then again I may not understand this completely. Based on your premise then the following should be true.
If for instance Ron picked (as opposed to defeating Harry) up the the Hawthorne (Draco'S) wand and was fighting Voldemort who was using the Elder Wand, then the Elder wand would recognize the Hawthorne Wand as the 'victor' but then it would recognize that Ron is not the Master of it, so therefore ? the one with the better skill would win? That is most likely Voldemort would win because he is a superb fighter compared to Ron but there would be no guarantee that he would win. Actually this would be true for whoever was holding the Elder Wand who was not it's master.
It would also mean if Harry used his Holly wand (assuming it never broke) against Voldemort, then the Elder wand would not recognise Harry as its master because there is no Hawthorne wand. Again if this were true then the victor in this duel would simply be the better of the two fighters. Having the Elder Wand would not in and of itself help Voldemort.
My own gut feeling is that the Elder wand recognizes the wizard, not just the wand so that in the second example Harry's Holly wand could defeat Voldemort.
In the 7 Harrys chapter, Harry's wand fought against Voldemort, not his Yew wand which I don't think he carried with him. Harry's wand fought against Lucius wand which in one sense was defeated by Voldemort in that Lucius did not wish to give the wand but let it be taken.
There are obvious limits to the Elder Wand. It only works if it is involved in a duel between wands. If there is no duel or if the fight doesn't involve wands it is vulnerable. (Ramb)
But Dumbledore won the Elder Wand from Grindelwald in a duel. I can only conclude that, though it is a powerful wand, the 'unbeatable' part is just rumour.
I think an argument can be made that no one actually saw this duel. Rita Skeeter questions whether it actually took place. If it did take place then there was some sort of trickery involved before the duel took place such that Grindelwald was no longer the Master of the Wand. There may have been an interim Master that Dumbledore defeated.
Steve Newton - Mar 4, 2008 2:59 pm (#221 of 391)
I don't see it. Do you have any evidence?
els - Mar 5, 2008 11:27 am (#222 of 391)
My own gut feeling is that the Elder wand recognizes the wizard, not just the wand so that in the second example Harry's Holly wand could defeat Voldemort. (Ramb)
I think this is the key statement, the wand can detect who the stronger wizard is.
Gregorivich to Grindewald - no duel, but the wand would "sense" that Grindewald was powerful as Gregorivich was unable to get the wand back.
Grindewald to DD - uncertain duel, but if there was, the wand would "sense" the DD was holding his own with a less superior wand and would change allegiance to the better wizard.
DD to Draco - no duel, DD was near death due to other circumstances, Draco challenged him (though not in duel sense) and DD lost his wand. I would surmise that Draco was more powerful than DD at this point and the wand changed allegiances.
Draco to Harry - "Muggle" duel, but also in the RoR, Draco has clearly submitted to Harry and recognized Harry's power and ability. Again the wand would shift allegiance.
In all cases there was a battle of wills between the previous owner of the wand and the supplanter. So a true wizard duel would not be necessary. The unbeatable nature of the wand could also be upheld because it is the wielder of the wand who submits to the opponent and not the wand being beat.
~Erin
Orion - Mar 5, 2008 1:22 pm (#223 of 391)
It must be a combination of both: a wand must be able to sniff out the more powerful wizard, but it must also communicate with the wand being wagged in it's face, because we know that wands recognize each other. For example LV's wand and Harry's with the twin cores.
rambkowalczyk - Mar 9, 2008 12:43 pm (#224 of 391)
I don't see it. Do you have any evidence? Steve Newton
Not sure what it is you don't see. Is it my assertion that no one saw the duel between Dumbledore and Grindelwald? or something else.
Swedish Short-Snout - Mar 9, 2008 12:54 pm (#225 of 391)
Regarding the question if someone saw the duel between Dumbledore and Grindelwald, I think Rita Skeeter wrote something like: "Was it really the spectacular event the eye-witnesses claim they saw?" but I'm too lazy to check it up.
Solitaire - Jul 19, 2008 1:29 pm (#226 of 391)
I have not followed this entire thread, so forgive me if this has been discussed. If Grindelwald stole the wand rather than "winning" it in combat--which Ollivander indicates is important when he asks Harry whether he "won" Draco's wand--then he was no more its true master than Voldemort was. Perhaps that is why Dumbledore was able to defeat him and claim the wand--Grindelwand was never the wand's true master.
Earlier in the thread--I know, because I was looking for something and happened upon it--Choices speculates that perhaps Dumbledore has repaired the two pieces of Hagrid's wand with the Elder wand. At first, it made sense. Then I began to wonder ... is it possible that the Elder wand was able to repair Harry's Phoenix wand only because Harry was the master of both wands? His Phoenix wand was broken not by an enemy but accidentally, by Hermione. That wouldn't have been the same thing, would it? Just wondering ...
Solitaire
PeskyPixie - Jul 19, 2008 2:24 pm (#227 of 391)
"Dumbledore was able to defeat him and claim the wand--Grindelwand was never the wand's true master."
This is a new idea for me, Soli, and I really like it. Another interpretation is that Grindelwald waits for Gregorovitch to 'catch' him taking the wand. Gregorovitch goes after Grindelwald who runs off with it. Thus, he 'wins' it from the previous owner. (Just as Harry physically takes away Malfoy's wand and becomes owner of it.)
Regarding Hagrid's broken wand, I figured (especially after DH) that Dumbledore uses the Elder wand to mend it after Hagrid is cleared of all charges at the end of CoS.
Steve Newton - Jul 19, 2008 2:26 pm (#228 of 391)
Grindelwald did defeat the previous owner. The last thing that we see in that scene is Grindelwald's spell. I can't remember what spell it was.
PeskyPixie - Jul 19, 2008 2:53 pm (#229 of 391)
You're right, Steve.
"Gregorovitch burst into the room ... there on the window ledge sat perched ... a young man with golden hair ... Harry saw the delight upon his handsome face, then the intruder shot a Stunning spell from his wand and jumped neatly backwards out of the window with a crow of laughter."
Solitaire - Jul 19, 2008 9:17 pm (#230 of 391)
But Steve, did he disarm Gregorovitch or just steal the wand from his desk or workshop? If he just picked it up before Greg was in the room and then used it to stun Greg, would it be the same? Wouldn't it be more like Voldemort stealing the wand from the tomb rather than winning it? It seems so to me. Given the wandlore that Ollivander has explained, it seems the wand needs to be taken by force. I do not think it was.
Solitaire
EDIT: I'm surprised anyone found my post so quickly! The thread was hidden in the folder in my screen.
Steve Newton - Jul 20, 2008 5:22 am (#231 of 391)
I don't think that it makes any difference. He defeated the master magically and it was his. He seems to have already stolen it when he defeats Gregorovitch.
Julia H. - Jul 20, 2008 5:29 am (#232 of 391)
It is a good question how much it takes to "win" the wand's allegiance. However, if Grindelwald was not the true master of the wand, I don't think DD was its true master either because how can you win the allegiance of the wand from anyone else but the true master?
That would leave Gregorovitch as the true master but he was killed by Voldy, so if Gregorovitch had remained the true master, the wand might have recognized LV as its new master because he had killed Gregorovitch. But this is not what happened, so at this point, the only logical explanation would be that Gregorovitch was not the true master either and I would not be surprised, since he did not seem to be the warrior type and he used the Elder Wand only as a master wand whose qualities he tried to copy in the wands he made.
That would mean the last real master is unknown and the whole anxiety in DH about who the true master is would seem to be irrelevant and Harry would defeat Voldemort simply because he is the Chosen One with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord.
To me this seems to result from the possibility that Grindelwald (despite his Stunning Spell) was not the true master.
Orion - Jul 20, 2008 5:51 am (#233 of 391)
Voldie killed Gregorovitch when DD had been the master of the Elder Wand for about half a century, so I think it didn't make much of a difference to the Elder Wand. JM2K. And I think that it's completely irrelevant to the Elder Wand whether it's won by brute force, cheating, stealing, magic or pure chance, because it will acknowledge eiter of these possibilities as "ok, so he(she)'s better then".
Julia H. - Jul 20, 2008 5:56 am (#234 of 391)
Orion, I was just saying if Grindelwald did not win the wand's allegiance and so DD could not have won it from him (only the physical possession of the wand) and if Gregorovitch had indeed been the master still (in theory at least) - then I think if would have counted that Voldy killed him.
Orion - Jul 20, 2008 6:00 am (#235 of 391)
Aha!
poohnpiglettt - Jul 20, 2008 6:26 am (#236 of 391)
I think the key in the switch of allegiance is whether the wand was taken away from the person who had it "against his [or her] will." I just reread DH and I was trying to figure out why DD wanted Snape to end up with the Elder Wand--putting him at risk of having someone come after it, as LV did. Or, other possible scenario is that he might abuse the power of the wand. But Harry tells LV that the wand never recognized Snape because the death was planned--it would not have been taken against DD's will, no allegiance never would have shifted and the power of the wand would have ended with DD. Since Draco took it from DD "against his will," the allegiance shifted to Draco. I hope that makes sense.
Orion - Jul 20, 2008 7:50 am (#237 of 391)
I agree, poohnpiglettt. That's why students can practise Expelliarmus without consequences.
Julia H. - Jul 20, 2008 8:40 am (#238 of 391)
Hm... What if a student is very unwilling to let himself be disarmed even if for the sake of practice? (For example, if Draco and Harry had really practised Expelliarmus in the Duelling Club as Lockhart told them to, could the enmity between them have resulted in one of them losing the allegiance of his wand?)
More seriously, in this case, taking the wand from DD's tomb (against DD's will) could have given LV the allegiance of the wand if it had not already been transferred to Draco. Risky... Then the power of the wand does not necessarily die with its last and undefeated owner.
PeskyPixie - Jul 20, 2008 10:39 am (#239 of 391)
Maybe the ownership of a wand switches only in a real duel (i.e. in a real life adult situation where one witch/wizard seriously wants to win over another witch/wizard)? School circumstances may not matter even when one kid doesn't want to be Disarmed by another.
Then again, how does the wand allegiance thing work regarding the Battle of the MoM in OotP? If Sirius's wand had not gone through the veil with him, would Bellatrix have had ownership over it?
Solitaire - Jul 20, 2008 11:39 am (#240 of 391)
I think that it's completely irrelevant to the Elder Wand whether it's won by brute force, cheating, stealing, magic or pure chance, because it will acknowledge eiter of these possibilities as "ok, so he(she)'s better then
I do not believe it is irrelevant, but I realize that is my prerogative and others may differ. I also do not believe that we can say for certain that Grindelwald was more powerful than Gregorovitch, because we did not see them in combat of any kind. Grindelwald did not take the wand forcibly. He did not wrench it from Greg's hand (as Harry did with the wands he took from Draco) or win it in combat. He stole it from Greg's workshop without any interference from Greg, although he wanted Greg to know that he had stolen the wand. Perhaps he did not want to chance dueling for the wand, because perhaps he was not sure he could win it. Again, these are only my beliefs about the situation. Fortunately, until we are told otherwise by Jo, I think there are some things we can interpret as we choose. I believe, for the moment, that Grindelwald was not the true master of the wand, and that Dumbledore, the stronger Wizard, was able to win against it for that reason.
Pesky, if Bella had disarmed SIrius or taken his wand, I guess it might have recognized her as its owner. I think, perhaps, that Jo left some of this wandlore deliberately vague. If it were too clearly spelled out, what would we discuss?
Solitaire
tandaradei - Jul 20, 2008 12:25 pm (#241 of 391)
I'm not so sure about any rules for this Elder Wand.
I'm thinking the wand is combat oriented. I kind of think it "knows" when the combat is real or feigned. I kind of think it "knows" who wins in a real combat, in the same way a 3-year old knows who wins a boxing match. There are any number of rules in boxing, and judges decide who wins by their scores; but the child watching it almost always picks the winner anyway, by "knowing" who got beat.
Orion - Jul 20, 2008 12:32 pm (#242 of 391)
If Harry and Draco would have gone into battle with bloodthirst in their eyes, their wands would have changed owners, practice situation or not, NEWTs already in pocket or not, IMO. But as both of them are quite equal in their magical abilities they would probably have ended up with each other's wands, much to their horror.
tandaradei - Jul 20, 2008 1:09 pm (#243 of 391)
Yes I rather think so too, that's what I was trying to say.
Its more a question of ruthlessness between two who judge each other as adversaries. All other considerations be D-----.
I'm thinking if the wand were handed back that it would still work for the original owner but not with as much enthusiasm; and the Elder Wand even more so.
I suppose if Draco wanted his old wand back at full force, he'd have to get Harry to duel him; and Harry would have to put up at least some fight for Draco's wand to "want" to go back to Draco.
PeskyPixie - Jul 20, 2008 1:50 pm (#244 of 391)
Wandlore makes my head hurt!
Solitaire - Jul 20, 2008 2:15 pm (#245 of 391)
Wandlore makes my head hurt!
Time-Turners, anyone? **evil giggle**
poohnpiglettt - Jul 21, 2008 2:18 am (#246 of 391)
I think that too much emphasis might be on the "unbeatable" aspect of the wand. I think the stories told about the wand are like any stories passed down over generations--they get distorted and exaggerated. Just like the invisibility cloak, while amazing, did not work with Moody's magical eye, I dont think the elder wand was truly unbeatable. I think it was extremely powerful but a better wizard could beat the wand (ie DD vs. Grindelwald) , albeit definitely not easily. IMHO that is why DD became master in the fight with Grindelwald since I believe he was master by taking it against the will of Gregorovitch.
rassannassar - Jul 31, 2008 11:47 am (#247 of 391)
In the Leaky Cauldron Pottercast 130 or 131, I can't remember exactly which one, Jo talked about wandlore. She said that while a normal wand would have some loyalty to it's original owner, the Elder Wand is completely different. She said that if you disarmed someone their wand would still work fine for them if they got it back, however the Elder Wand feels no loyalty at all. It's only loyalty is based on what it thinks is more powerful. If you were able to disarm it's previous owner, it would consider you as more powerful and it would give you it's allegiance, until of course the same was done to you. She called wands quasi-sentient beings. I believe she also said that the core of the Elder Wand was a thestral hair. That one I may have heard incorrectly I was under the impression that thestrals didn't have hair but maybe they do have hairy tails like a horse. I'll have to go back and reread the original description of them to check to see if that's possible. She might have said something along the lines of that not being the case, that maybe that was fanfic.
me and my shadow 813 - Jan 22, 2009 7:30 pm (#248 of 391)
It's probably been discussed, but I thought it would be poetic for the series if Severus was a distant relative of Antioch Peverell. That way the three "abandoned boys", the three half-bloods, the three on-and-on parallels between Vold, Harry and Severus would be complete with the three Hallows. I know most wizards/witches are related in some way to the Peverells, but still, it would be a nice little addition. And DD meant for Severus to be the wand's final master.
PeskyPixie - Mar 22, 2009 2:38 pm (#249 of 391)
A belated response (two months to the day!), but I like the sound of that, Shadow.
Mrs. Sirius - Aug 12, 2009 6:40 am (#250 of 391)
sstabeler - Jul 21, 2007 Dumbledore intended to be the wand's last master, but to stop Draco form getting hold of it, and letting Voldemort take it, he tried to set it up so Snape would become the master of the wand,a s Snape was his man. of course, now Draco has swapped sides........ it was quite funny that the Elder Wand was powerful enough to fix Harry's broken one.
I am re-reading the Kings Cross chapter now. I understood DD intent that Snape posses the wand but not be it's "master" since Snape would have used the wand with DD permission, just as Harry used Hermione's wand with her permission and it worked well enough.
What I had not understood was when Harry understood that he was now that "master". JKR hid, deep in plain sight, in that conversation between DD and Harry his realization. DD explains how he became it's master by winning it from Grindenwald, who lived. Pages later Harry asks DD his intention for the wand to be with Snape. In that I think is where Harry gets it, <indent>"No... That bit didn't work out". "...realization of what would happen next settled gradually over Harry in the long minutes, like softly falling snow."
It has taken me this the 3-4th time I have re-read it. I had always wondered how Harry had gotten it.
It is red.
haymoni - Feb 26, 2008 12:21 pm (#202 of 391)
If this has been discussed some place, please direct me.
Harry beat Voldy w/ Draco's wand. The true Elder wand (the wand that Voldy had) would not defeat Draco's wand because Draco's had beaten it earlier (disarming Dumbledore).
Harry took Draco's wand, so he is now the Master of both Draco's wand and the Elder Wand. And his own wand.
What is Harry's wand??? If Harry was using his own wand against the Elder wand, who would win?
I'm guessing Harry could use any wand against the Elder Wand, as he is its master.
Yes???
Anna L. Black - Feb 26, 2008 12:26 pm (#203 of 391)
Thst sound right to me, haymoni (Of course, that doesn't mean anything, as wand theory is such a complicated magical art that I, a simple Muggle, cannot pretend to grasp its intricate meanings. Or something )
Orion - Feb 26, 2008 12:29 pm (#204 of 391)
Doesn't it have to be Draco's hawthorn wand because Harry is master of it and the Elder wand recognizes Harry as it's master because he has won the hawthorn wand? "The last thing it knew, some Draco kid had sent it flying over the battlements of Hogwarts with a hawthorn wand...", and so it would have been thoroughly unimpressed if Daddy had been waving some stupid stick at it.
Steve Newton - Feb 26, 2008 1:01 pm (#205 of 391)
I think that Harry is master of the wand. Whichever wand he uses does not seem to mean a lot. The wizard is the master not the wand.
I'm not feeling my best so this may not make sense.
haymoni - Feb 26, 2008 1:10 pm (#206 of 391)
Mmm...so did Draco's Cruciatus Curses hurt more?
Julia H. - Feb 26, 2008 2:39 pm (#207 of 391)
I think it makes a lot of sense that Harry masters the Elder Wand because he masters the wand that previously disarmed the then current master of the Elder Wand. I have not thought of it so far but I felt that there must be a missing link somewhere and now I think that is it. So if Draco had been using a completely different wand at the time when Harry disarmed him that might not have affected the mastery of the Elder Wand. Is that right? Suppose someone else had been using Draco's hawthorn wand and Harry had disarmed that person, would Harry have been the master of the Elder Wand? (Complicated. No wonder LV had no clue of how these things worked.)
rambkowalczyk - Feb 27, 2008 5:43 am (#208 of 391)
So if Draco had been using a completely different wand at the time when Harry disarmed him that might not have affected the mastery of the Elder Wand. Is that right? Suppose someone else had been using Draco's hawthorn wand and Harry had disarmed that person, would Harry have been the master of the Elder Wand? Julia H
Sounds like a Newt level question to me.
Orion - Feb 27, 2008 8:25 am (#209 of 391)
This like maths at school. I understood it all for the one moment when teacher explained it, but ten seconds later it was complete chaos. At the core of the problem seems to be insufficient information and/or contradictory information by the author.
rambkowalczyk - Mar 2, 2008 3:22 pm (#210 of 391)
I thought I would try to tackle some of the previous wands questions logically only to discover I had more unanswered questions.
I decided to test whether some of our premises were true.
1 Draco was Master of the Elder wand because he disarmed Dumbledore.
Draco was able to disarm Dumbledore because Dumbledore was not dueling with Draco. Harry at the end of DH says that Draco was Master of The Elder wand.
2 Harry was able to use Draco's wand after he took it.
Harry had to physically fight Draco to get possession of the wand. If Harry used a wand to disarm Draco and Draco fought back with his wand Draco would have won because at the time Draco was Master of the Elder Wand.
3 Harry became Master of the Elder Wand after he physically fought Draco over the Hawthorne wand.
There are obvious limits to the Elder Wand. It only works if it is involved in a duel between wands. If there is no duel or if the fight doesn't involve wands it is vulnerable.
4 It is possible for a person to use another's wand if there is permission?
We've seen examples of this. Harry using Hermione's wand. Draco using his mother's wand.
But we also have seen an example where it will not always work. Neville was using his father's wand, but wasn't there a comment in one of the books that Neville was better after he got his own wand or was that just fan speculation?
5 If there isn't permission, the wand doesn't work as well.
Again we have two examples: Harry using the wand that Ron stole and Voldemort using the Elder Wand that he didn't earn.
6 Harry was Master of his own wand.
His wand was not defeated in a wizard's duel. Hermione accidentally injured it.
At this point I noticed that we need to make a distinction between how the Elder wand works and how regular wands work. In both cases it is a case of the wand choosing the wizard and not the other way around.
The Elder Wand chooses the wizard who can get the wand anyway he or she can unless there is a duel between the Elder wand and another wand. The Elder wand does not seem to have loyalty to its previous owner. For instance once Grindelwald took the wand and Stunned Gregorovitch, I don't think the Elder Wand would work as well for Gregorovitch as it used to (Unless of course he defeated Grindelwald).
I don't think this is true of regular wands. For instance Ron had 'defeated' the Snatchers and was able to take his wand. Therefore by my above reasoning the wand should have worked well for Ron and it probably did, but Ron did not become the owner of the wand just a rightful user. Therefore Ron giving permission for Harry to use the wand didn't work for Harry. Granted the idea of permission being allowable is not exactly proven.
Consider Draco's wand. Can Draco ever use it again? or is it forever loyal to Harry? If Draco were to wrestle it from Harry the answer would be a definite yes. But suppose Harry were to just give it back to Draco, would it still work as well for him as it did before? My guess is probably yes. Draco already proved his worth for the wand when he was 11. I doubt if his Hawthorne wand would reject him even if he was defeated by Harry. A corollary question would be is it a given that if a) Draco's wand was just given back by Harry and b) if Draco and Harry were to duel would Harry always win because Draco's wand is somewhat loyal to Harry?
Orion - Mar 3, 2008 9:46 am (#211 of 391)
I still think that the Elder wand first recognized the Hawthorn Wand, and then the person clinging to it at the other end. The Hawthorn wand had thrown it over the battlements of Hogwarts. It then had changed its owner. The Elder Wand only recognized Harry as its master because he was on the other side of the Hawthorn wand.
Another thing I just don't understand: If DD was so intent to let the Elder Wand's power die with him, why didn't he simply use one of his knees and break it? Crack, goes the Elder Wand. (Yes, yes, I know that Rowling wanted Snape to die, but strictly speaking, it wasn't quite necessary. And I don't think that anybody thinks that it was a great plan of DD to make Snape let LV steal the Elder Wand. Why???)
Julia H. - Mar 3, 2008 10:09 am (#212 of 391)
Ramb, it is a very interesting essay (it will probably earn an O for you) but it goes way beyond my knowledge of wandlore. Orion's "The Elder Wand only recognized Harry as its master because he was on the other side of the Hawthorn wand" is much easier to understand. However that would mean that Harry fully became the true master of the wand only after winning it in duel from LV because after that (I guess) his mastership did not depend on the hawthorn wand any more. (Good trick!) The Elder Wand was indeed willing to repair the phoenix wand for him.
"If DD was so intent to let the Elder Wand's power die with him, why didn't he simply use one of his knees and break it?"
Good question. I can think of two possible answers. Either the Elder Wand is unbreakable or DD liked complicated and imaginative solutions. There is a third one actually: he wanted to use the Elder Wand as long as he lived and he did not hope that in his last moment he would have the strength to break the wand.
"... strictly speaking, it wasn't quite necessary..."
I agree. (Leaving aside artistic reasons of course.)
"I don't think that anybody thinks that it was a great plan of DD to make Snape let LV steal the Elder Wand."
To make??? Could he have prevented it? (Oh, I guess he could have stolen it himself...) Tell us more about it, Orion, please!
Mrs Brisbee - Mar 3, 2008 10:09 am (#213 of 391)
Orion, I think the wand had the same protective magicks on it as other "unbreakable" items, such as the Horcruxes. Dumbledore still could have broken it with the Sword of Gryffindor, though, if his intention was simply to be rid of it. It's all very confusing.
I wonder, did Dumbledore actually intend for Snape to be the master, but for Snape to never know it? Someone would need to kill Voldemort after all his Horcruxes were destroyed. If Voldemort had a wand that wouldn't work properly against Snape, then Snape's job would be easy. And it would be just like Dumbledore not to tell Snape about the wand.
Against this idea: Harry doesn't break the wand at the end of DH, even though he wants it to lose its power. Did Rowling just forget that she established that "unbreakable" items can be broken by certain methods?
Julia H. - Mar 3, 2008 10:22 am (#214 of 391)
"If Voldemort had a wand that wouldn't work properly against Snape, then Snape's job would be easy. And it would be just like Dumbledore not to tell Snape about the wand." (Mrs Brisbee)
So you mean the scenario in which Voldemort has got the wand but Snape is the actual master, so he can easily defeat LV? Unfortunately, this is exactly LV's (incorrect) assessment of the situation and he knows the solution (the snake).
Or [/b]- Another scenario - Snape should both master and have the wand physically but should not know he has got the Elder Wand. In this case how can DD be sure that Snape would use his - DD's - wand at the critical moment (or at any other time)? Snape has got his own wand (do we know anything about it?).
Mrs Brisbee - Mar 3, 2008 10:55 am (#215 of 391)
Unfortunately, there are swiss cheese holes in in the plans, no matter how we look at them. But then, I feel Dumbledore's final plan was one big piece of swiss cheese.
I'd really like to know what he intended with the wand, though.
Madam Pince - Mar 4, 2008 7:29 am (#216 of 391)
The Elder Wand chooses the wizard who can get the wand any way he or she can unless there is a duel between the Elder wand and another wand. --rambkowalczyk (emphasis mine)
Thank you for posting this! I like it very much. That clarifies things in my mind that had been most muddied.
Julia H. - Mar 4, 2008 9:33 am (#217 of 391)
"Harry doesn't break the wand at the end of DH, even though he wants it to lose its power. Did Rowling just forget that she established that "unbreakable" items can be broken by certain methods?" (Mrs Brisbee)
Neville's got the sword at the moment. Perhaps Harry would have to jump again into ... something if he wanted to use it again. Harry may not want to go back to the Chamber of Secrets either just to look for basilisk teeth.
mona amon - Mar 4, 2008 10:48 am (#218 of 391)
There are obvious limits to the Elder Wand. It only works if it is involved in a duel between wands. If there is no duel or if the fight doesn't involve wands it is vulnerable. (Ramb)
But Dumbledore won the Elder Wand from Grindelwald in a duel. I can only conclude that, though it is a powerful wand, the 'unbeatable' part is just rumour.
Steve Newton - Mar 4, 2008 11:34 am (#219 of 391)
Unbeatable is clearly untrue as its bloody history attests. Also, as I read it, Grindelwald defeated Gregorovitch while using the Elder wand. That was why he waited until Gregorovitch saw him to make his escape.
rambkowalczyk - Mar 4, 2008 2:32 pm (#220 of 391)
I still think that the Elder wand first recognized the Hawthorn Wand, and then the person clinging to it at the other end. The Hawthorn wand had thrown it over the battlements of Hogwarts. It then had changed its owner. The Elder Wand only recognized Harry as its master because he was on the other side of the Hawthorn wand. Orion
Not sure if I agree with this. Then again I may not understand this completely. Based on your premise then the following should be true.
If for instance Ron picked (as opposed to defeating Harry) up the the Hawthorne (Draco'S) wand and was fighting Voldemort who was using the Elder Wand, then the Elder wand would recognize the Hawthorne Wand as the 'victor' but then it would recognize that Ron is not the Master of it, so therefore ? the one with the better skill would win? That is most likely Voldemort would win because he is a superb fighter compared to Ron but there would be no guarantee that he would win. Actually this would be true for whoever was holding the Elder Wand who was not it's master.
It would also mean if Harry used his Holly wand (assuming it never broke) against Voldemort, then the Elder wand would not recognise Harry as its master because there is no Hawthorne wand. Again if this were true then the victor in this duel would simply be the better of the two fighters. Having the Elder Wand would not in and of itself help Voldemort.
My own gut feeling is that the Elder wand recognizes the wizard, not just the wand so that in the second example Harry's Holly wand could defeat Voldemort.
In the 7 Harrys chapter, Harry's wand fought against Voldemort, not his Yew wand which I don't think he carried with him. Harry's wand fought against Lucius wand which in one sense was defeated by Voldemort in that Lucius did not wish to give the wand but let it be taken.
There are obvious limits to the Elder Wand. It only works if it is involved in a duel between wands. If there is no duel or if the fight doesn't involve wands it is vulnerable. (Ramb)
But Dumbledore won the Elder Wand from Grindelwald in a duel. I can only conclude that, though it is a powerful wand, the 'unbeatable' part is just rumour.
I think an argument can be made that no one actually saw this duel. Rita Skeeter questions whether it actually took place. If it did take place then there was some sort of trickery involved before the duel took place such that Grindelwald was no longer the Master of the Wand. There may have been an interim Master that Dumbledore defeated.
Steve Newton - Mar 4, 2008 2:59 pm (#221 of 391)
I don't see it. Do you have any evidence?
els - Mar 5, 2008 11:27 am (#222 of 391)
My own gut feeling is that the Elder wand recognizes the wizard, not just the wand so that in the second example Harry's Holly wand could defeat Voldemort. (Ramb)
I think this is the key statement, the wand can detect who the stronger wizard is.
Gregorivich to Grindewald - no duel, but the wand would "sense" that Grindewald was powerful as Gregorivich was unable to get the wand back.
Grindewald to DD - uncertain duel, but if there was, the wand would "sense" the DD was holding his own with a less superior wand and would change allegiance to the better wizard.
DD to Draco - no duel, DD was near death due to other circumstances, Draco challenged him (though not in duel sense) and DD lost his wand. I would surmise that Draco was more powerful than DD at this point and the wand changed allegiances.
Draco to Harry - "Muggle" duel, but also in the RoR, Draco has clearly submitted to Harry and recognized Harry's power and ability. Again the wand would shift allegiance.
In all cases there was a battle of wills between the previous owner of the wand and the supplanter. So a true wizard duel would not be necessary. The unbeatable nature of the wand could also be upheld because it is the wielder of the wand who submits to the opponent and not the wand being beat.
~Erin
Orion - Mar 5, 2008 1:22 pm (#223 of 391)
It must be a combination of both: a wand must be able to sniff out the more powerful wizard, but it must also communicate with the wand being wagged in it's face, because we know that wands recognize each other. For example LV's wand and Harry's with the twin cores.
rambkowalczyk - Mar 9, 2008 12:43 pm (#224 of 391)
I don't see it. Do you have any evidence? Steve Newton
Not sure what it is you don't see. Is it my assertion that no one saw the duel between Dumbledore and Grindelwald? or something else.
Swedish Short-Snout - Mar 9, 2008 12:54 pm (#225 of 391)
Regarding the question if someone saw the duel between Dumbledore and Grindelwald, I think Rita Skeeter wrote something like: "Was it really the spectacular event the eye-witnesses claim they saw?" but I'm too lazy to check it up.
Solitaire - Jul 19, 2008 1:29 pm (#226 of 391)
I have not followed this entire thread, so forgive me if this has been discussed. If Grindelwald stole the wand rather than "winning" it in combat--which Ollivander indicates is important when he asks Harry whether he "won" Draco's wand--then he was no more its true master than Voldemort was. Perhaps that is why Dumbledore was able to defeat him and claim the wand--Grindelwand was never the wand's true master.
Earlier in the thread--I know, because I was looking for something and happened upon it--Choices speculates that perhaps Dumbledore has repaired the two pieces of Hagrid's wand with the Elder wand. At first, it made sense. Then I began to wonder ... is it possible that the Elder wand was able to repair Harry's Phoenix wand only because Harry was the master of both wands? His Phoenix wand was broken not by an enemy but accidentally, by Hermione. That wouldn't have been the same thing, would it? Just wondering ...
Solitaire
PeskyPixie - Jul 19, 2008 2:24 pm (#227 of 391)
"Dumbledore was able to defeat him and claim the wand--Grindelwand was never the wand's true master."
This is a new idea for me, Soli, and I really like it. Another interpretation is that Grindelwald waits for Gregorovitch to 'catch' him taking the wand. Gregorovitch goes after Grindelwald who runs off with it. Thus, he 'wins' it from the previous owner. (Just as Harry physically takes away Malfoy's wand and becomes owner of it.)
Regarding Hagrid's broken wand, I figured (especially after DH) that Dumbledore uses the Elder wand to mend it after Hagrid is cleared of all charges at the end of CoS.
Steve Newton - Jul 19, 2008 2:26 pm (#228 of 391)
Grindelwald did defeat the previous owner. The last thing that we see in that scene is Grindelwald's spell. I can't remember what spell it was.
PeskyPixie - Jul 19, 2008 2:53 pm (#229 of 391)
You're right, Steve.
"Gregorovitch burst into the room ... there on the window ledge sat perched ... a young man with golden hair ... Harry saw the delight upon his handsome face, then the intruder shot a Stunning spell from his wand and jumped neatly backwards out of the window with a crow of laughter."
Solitaire - Jul 19, 2008 9:17 pm (#230 of 391)
But Steve, did he disarm Gregorovitch or just steal the wand from his desk or workshop? If he just picked it up before Greg was in the room and then used it to stun Greg, would it be the same? Wouldn't it be more like Voldemort stealing the wand from the tomb rather than winning it? It seems so to me. Given the wandlore that Ollivander has explained, it seems the wand needs to be taken by force. I do not think it was.
Solitaire
EDIT: I'm surprised anyone found my post so quickly! The thread was hidden in the folder in my screen.
Steve Newton - Jul 20, 2008 5:22 am (#231 of 391)
I don't think that it makes any difference. He defeated the master magically and it was his. He seems to have already stolen it when he defeats Gregorovitch.
Julia H. - Jul 20, 2008 5:29 am (#232 of 391)
It is a good question how much it takes to "win" the wand's allegiance. However, if Grindelwald was not the true master of the wand, I don't think DD was its true master either because how can you win the allegiance of the wand from anyone else but the true master?
That would leave Gregorovitch as the true master but he was killed by Voldy, so if Gregorovitch had remained the true master, the wand might have recognized LV as its new master because he had killed Gregorovitch. But this is not what happened, so at this point, the only logical explanation would be that Gregorovitch was not the true master either and I would not be surprised, since he did not seem to be the warrior type and he used the Elder Wand only as a master wand whose qualities he tried to copy in the wands he made.
That would mean the last real master is unknown and the whole anxiety in DH about who the true master is would seem to be irrelevant and Harry would defeat Voldemort simply because he is the Chosen One with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord.
To me this seems to result from the possibility that Grindelwald (despite his Stunning Spell) was not the true master.
Orion - Jul 20, 2008 5:51 am (#233 of 391)
Voldie killed Gregorovitch when DD had been the master of the Elder Wand for about half a century, so I think it didn't make much of a difference to the Elder Wand. JM2K. And I think that it's completely irrelevant to the Elder Wand whether it's won by brute force, cheating, stealing, magic or pure chance, because it will acknowledge eiter of these possibilities as "ok, so he(she)'s better then".
Julia H. - Jul 20, 2008 5:56 am (#234 of 391)
Orion, I was just saying if Grindelwald did not win the wand's allegiance and so DD could not have won it from him (only the physical possession of the wand) and if Gregorovitch had indeed been the master still (in theory at least) - then I think if would have counted that Voldy killed him.
Orion - Jul 20, 2008 6:00 am (#235 of 391)
Aha!
poohnpiglettt - Jul 20, 2008 6:26 am (#236 of 391)
I think the key in the switch of allegiance is whether the wand was taken away from the person who had it "against his [or her] will." I just reread DH and I was trying to figure out why DD wanted Snape to end up with the Elder Wand--putting him at risk of having someone come after it, as LV did. Or, other possible scenario is that he might abuse the power of the wand. But Harry tells LV that the wand never recognized Snape because the death was planned--it would not have been taken against DD's will, no allegiance never would have shifted and the power of the wand would have ended with DD. Since Draco took it from DD "against his will," the allegiance shifted to Draco. I hope that makes sense.
Orion - Jul 20, 2008 7:50 am (#237 of 391)
I agree, poohnpiglettt. That's why students can practise Expelliarmus without consequences.
Julia H. - Jul 20, 2008 8:40 am (#238 of 391)
Hm... What if a student is very unwilling to let himself be disarmed even if for the sake of practice? (For example, if Draco and Harry had really practised Expelliarmus in the Duelling Club as Lockhart told them to, could the enmity between them have resulted in one of them losing the allegiance of his wand?)
More seriously, in this case, taking the wand from DD's tomb (against DD's will) could have given LV the allegiance of the wand if it had not already been transferred to Draco. Risky... Then the power of the wand does not necessarily die with its last and undefeated owner.
PeskyPixie - Jul 20, 2008 10:39 am (#239 of 391)
Maybe the ownership of a wand switches only in a real duel (i.e. in a real life adult situation where one witch/wizard seriously wants to win over another witch/wizard)? School circumstances may not matter even when one kid doesn't want to be Disarmed by another.
Then again, how does the wand allegiance thing work regarding the Battle of the MoM in OotP? If Sirius's wand had not gone through the veil with him, would Bellatrix have had ownership over it?
Solitaire - Jul 20, 2008 11:39 am (#240 of 391)
I think that it's completely irrelevant to the Elder Wand whether it's won by brute force, cheating, stealing, magic or pure chance, because it will acknowledge eiter of these possibilities as "ok, so he(she)'s better then
I do not believe it is irrelevant, but I realize that is my prerogative and others may differ. I also do not believe that we can say for certain that Grindelwald was more powerful than Gregorovitch, because we did not see them in combat of any kind. Grindelwald did not take the wand forcibly. He did not wrench it from Greg's hand (as Harry did with the wands he took from Draco) or win it in combat. He stole it from Greg's workshop without any interference from Greg, although he wanted Greg to know that he had stolen the wand. Perhaps he did not want to chance dueling for the wand, because perhaps he was not sure he could win it. Again, these are only my beliefs about the situation. Fortunately, until we are told otherwise by Jo, I think there are some things we can interpret as we choose. I believe, for the moment, that Grindelwald was not the true master of the wand, and that Dumbledore, the stronger Wizard, was able to win against it for that reason.
Pesky, if Bella had disarmed SIrius or taken his wand, I guess it might have recognized her as its owner. I think, perhaps, that Jo left some of this wandlore deliberately vague. If it were too clearly spelled out, what would we discuss?
Solitaire
tandaradei - Jul 20, 2008 12:25 pm (#241 of 391)
I'm not so sure about any rules for this Elder Wand.
I'm thinking the wand is combat oriented. I kind of think it "knows" when the combat is real or feigned. I kind of think it "knows" who wins in a real combat, in the same way a 3-year old knows who wins a boxing match. There are any number of rules in boxing, and judges decide who wins by their scores; but the child watching it almost always picks the winner anyway, by "knowing" who got beat.
Orion - Jul 20, 2008 12:32 pm (#242 of 391)
If Harry and Draco would have gone into battle with bloodthirst in their eyes, their wands would have changed owners, practice situation or not, NEWTs already in pocket or not, IMO. But as both of them are quite equal in their magical abilities they would probably have ended up with each other's wands, much to their horror.
tandaradei - Jul 20, 2008 1:09 pm (#243 of 391)
Yes I rather think so too, that's what I was trying to say.
Its more a question of ruthlessness between two who judge each other as adversaries. All other considerations be D-----.
I'm thinking if the wand were handed back that it would still work for the original owner but not with as much enthusiasm; and the Elder Wand even more so.
I suppose if Draco wanted his old wand back at full force, he'd have to get Harry to duel him; and Harry would have to put up at least some fight for Draco's wand to "want" to go back to Draco.
PeskyPixie - Jul 20, 2008 1:50 pm (#244 of 391)
Wandlore makes my head hurt!
Solitaire - Jul 20, 2008 2:15 pm (#245 of 391)
Wandlore makes my head hurt!
Time-Turners, anyone? **evil giggle**
poohnpiglettt - Jul 21, 2008 2:18 am (#246 of 391)
I think that too much emphasis might be on the "unbeatable" aspect of the wand. I think the stories told about the wand are like any stories passed down over generations--they get distorted and exaggerated. Just like the invisibility cloak, while amazing, did not work with Moody's magical eye, I dont think the elder wand was truly unbeatable. I think it was extremely powerful but a better wizard could beat the wand (ie DD vs. Grindelwald) , albeit definitely not easily. IMHO that is why DD became master in the fight with Grindelwald since I believe he was master by taking it against the will of Gregorovitch.
rassannassar - Jul 31, 2008 11:47 am (#247 of 391)
In the Leaky Cauldron Pottercast 130 or 131, I can't remember exactly which one, Jo talked about wandlore. She said that while a normal wand would have some loyalty to it's original owner, the Elder Wand is completely different. She said that if you disarmed someone their wand would still work fine for them if they got it back, however the Elder Wand feels no loyalty at all. It's only loyalty is based on what it thinks is more powerful. If you were able to disarm it's previous owner, it would consider you as more powerful and it would give you it's allegiance, until of course the same was done to you. She called wands quasi-sentient beings. I believe she also said that the core of the Elder Wand was a thestral hair. That one I may have heard incorrectly I was under the impression that thestrals didn't have hair but maybe they do have hairy tails like a horse. I'll have to go back and reread the original description of them to check to see if that's possible. She might have said something along the lines of that not being the case, that maybe that was fanfic.
me and my shadow 813 - Jan 22, 2009 7:30 pm (#248 of 391)
It's probably been discussed, but I thought it would be poetic for the series if Severus was a distant relative of Antioch Peverell. That way the three "abandoned boys", the three half-bloods, the three on-and-on parallels between Vold, Harry and Severus would be complete with the three Hallows. I know most wizards/witches are related in some way to the Peverells, but still, it would be a nice little addition. And DD meant for Severus to be the wand's final master.
PeskyPixie - Mar 22, 2009 2:38 pm (#249 of 391)
A belated response (two months to the day!), but I like the sound of that, Shadow.
Mrs. Sirius - Aug 12, 2009 6:40 am (#250 of 391)
sstabeler - Jul 21, 2007 Dumbledore intended to be the wand's last master, but to stop Draco form getting hold of it, and letting Voldemort take it, he tried to set it up so Snape would become the master of the wand,a s Snape was his man. of course, now Draco has swapped sides........ it was quite funny that the Elder Wand was powerful enough to fix Harry's broken one.
I am re-reading the Kings Cross chapter now. I understood DD intent that Snape posses the wand but not be it's "master" since Snape would have used the wand with DD permission, just as Harry used Hermione's wand with her permission and it worked well enough.
What I had not understood was when Harry understood that he was now that "master". JKR hid, deep in plain sight, in that conversation between DD and Harry his realization. DD explains how he became it's master by winning it from Grindenwald, who lived. Pages later Harry asks DD his intention for the wand to be with Snape. In that I think is where Harry gets it, <indent>"No... That bit didn't work out". "...realization of what would happen next settled gradually over Harry in the long minutes, like softly falling snow."
It has taken me this the 3-4th time I have re-read it. I had always wondered how Harry had gotten it.
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 251 to 300
Mona Fri May 13, 2011 12:22 pm
Solitaire - Aug 12, 2009 10:44 pm (#251 of 391)
I think Dumbledore wanted the wand buried with him all along. Since Snape would have killed him with his permission, the wand would not have been "won," so Snape would not really have been its master. Its power would have died with Dumbledore. Alas, along came Draco ...
If Snape had known the secret of the Elder Wand, wouldn't he have disarmed Draco himself? Having done so would have rendered him its master. I do not believe he would have left Draco its master (and in danger) had he known. JM2K ...
Puck - Aug 13, 2009 4:28 am (#252 of 391)
But Draco was in less danger as it's master than Snape, as LV would never guess that simply disarming the opponent -without killing them- would win you the wand. This way, if Snape is killed, LV still hasn't got the power.
Now, technically LV doesn't killing Snape, he has the snake do it. If Snape was the wand's master, would that have given the power to LV?
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 13, 2009 9:30 am (#253 of 391)
I believe so, Puck -[/b]- Just as, although Riddle had the Basilisk kill Myrtle it still qualified as his murdering her, soul split and Horcrux made with diary. Nagini was merely a weapon.
PeskyPixie - Aug 15, 2009 7:15 pm (#254 of 391)
Madam Pince, I like your interpretation of it. That part has always bothered me as it seems as if Dumbledore is back to his secrets and lies () after he has just promised Harry that there will no longer be any secrets between them. Your take on "...realization of what would happen next settled gradually over Harry in the long minutes, like softly falling snow," makes a lot of sense to me.
Madam Pince - Aug 16, 2009 10:43 am (#255 of 391)
That was Mrs. Sirius' idea, actually, but I'll gladly take credit for it, as it was so good.
PeskyPixie - Aug 16, 2009 10:52 am (#256 of 391)
Sounds good. We just won't tell Mrs. Sirius.
Julia H. - Aug 18, 2009 1:43 pm (#257 of 391)
This bit in DH simply does not work for me. In what sense could Dumbledore want Snape to have the wand?
1) Dumbledore wanted Snape to be the master of the wand.
In this case, Harry is completely wrong when he thinks Dumbledore wanted the power of the wand to die with him. In this case, if Dumbledore was right, Snape would have got the wand if Draco had not interfered; however, Harry uses the argument (in his conversation with Voldemort) that the whole "murder" was planned between Dumbledore and Snape, therefore Snape never defeated Dumbledore - not because Draco defeated him first, but because Snape never wanted to defeat Dumbledore.
If Dumbledore thought Snape could be the master of his wand in this way, he must have also thought that the allegiance of the wand could be intentionally transferred by the master by means of a totally formal defeat. (It would be a good way to inherit the allegiance of the wand, for example. Someone may have already tried it in wizarding history, only we don't know about it.)
All in all, either Dumbledore or Harry must be wrong about the way the wand can be inherited; but that does not make much sense as neither of them turns out to be wrong on the pages of the novel.
2) Dumbledore wanted Snape to physically possess the wand, not to be its master.
In this case, Dumbledore's intention was not enough - he would have had to make it sure somehow that Snape would keep the wand. Unfortunately, we don't know about Dumbledore telling Snape to keep the wand, nor does Snape ever seem to look for it. Immediately after killing Dumbledore, Snape does not have much time to get hold of the wand; but later, as the Hogwarts Headmaster, he could try to get it from Dumbledore's tomb [/b]- And he would probably do it if he knew that Dumbledore had intended him to possess the wand. If, however, Dumbledore did not tell Snape that he wanted him to have the wand, how could he expect Snape to look for it at all?
Apart from that, I'm not sure why it would be any good for anyone if Snape physically possessed the wand. He could hide it from Voldemort, but hiding it does not mean "possessing it" or "ending up with it". It is possible that the wand would work for Snape in a way, but not necessarily better than his own wand.
So neither of these two possibilities seems to make much sense to me. Is there any other way in which Dumbledore could want Snape to end up with the Elder Wand?
I think it makes sense that Snape would not leave Draco the master of the wand if he knew the full story. Voldemort could find out the truth somehow, and then Draco would be in the greatest danger; and leaving the allegiance of this powerful wand in such unreliable company is also dangerous. Voldemort could become the master of the wand by pure chance if he only got angry with Draco one day.
PeskyPixie - Aug 18, 2009 2:25 pm (#258 of 391)
Julia, this is the very dilemma which is holding up my Snapilogue. Wand ownership is such a complicated subject that I need some time to figure what exactly I wrote in my story!
Here's a stab at interpreting JKR's words.
Dumbledore chooses to die undefeated, so the power of the Elder Wand will die with him. He arranges his death with Severus Snape and at his death the horrible power of the wand will die with him. Okay. So, if things had gone according to plan he would be dead and the Elder Wand (just a normal wand now) would be left behind. And that gets us .... where? As far as I can tell, Snape is unaware that Dumbledore's wand is the legendary Deathstick. So, why would Dumbledore leave the one wand (and that with a bloody history) Voldy will desire in the hands of the guy dangling on LV's arm? That's hardly safe for Snape. Does he think that if it's under Voldy's nose he'll won't be able to find it?
legolas returns - Aug 18, 2009 2:33 pm (#259 of 391)
Snape would still have been toast. The wand would be burried with Dumbledore and Voldemort would go to collect it. He would kill Snape because he would think that there was something wrong with the wand because he did not do something spectacular with it. The difference would be that there would be no power in the wand. The power remained because Dumbledore was defeated by Draco.
Julia H. - Aug 18, 2009 3:35 pm (#260 of 391)
Physically possessing the Elder Wand (without being its master) or not does not make any difference to Snape, IMO. What is more, Snape does not seem to be aware of the fact that he should possess Dumbledore's wand.
On the other hand, even if Snape was the master of the Elder Wand (by means of a clever trick of Dumbledore's) but not its physical owner, it would still make little difference to him, as he could not use the only weapon that might give him a chance against Voldemort, so Voldemort could probably kill him and become the master of the Elder Wand.
The only version that would make sense to me would be Dumbledore wanting Snape to possess the wand in both ways (just in case Harry might really die at Voldemort's hand there should be someone with a power similar to Dumbledore's to kill even the Horcrux-less Voldemort) - but that just does not seem to be the case in the book.
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 18, 2009 4:35 pm (#261 of 391)
I have always taken it as:
Dumbledore wanted the Wand's power to die with himself as master. Vold would *think* Severus was the master after the Tower incident and kill him. However, Dumbledore would remain the master because he was not truly defeated and, once dead, could never be defeated. So if Vold killed Severus and then broke into the tomb to retrieve the Wand, he would still not be its master.
When Dumbledore says his intention was for Severus to end up with the Wand, I feel this is where JKR made the error. That's just my opinion. According to the Lexicon, Dumbledore's mistake was that Severus did not defeat him. So either Dumbledore's line in King's Cross is an error, or...?
Madam Pince - Aug 18, 2009 4:56 pm (#262 of 391)
So then, yet again, Dumbledore is being pretty... well... not so nice. He's OK with the idea that Voldy would *think* Severus was master of the wand and thus would kill him? Sheesh! Is there no limit to how many people Dumbledore thinks it would be OK if they die?
I agree that Dumbledore's line stating that he intended Snape to end up with the wand must be a mistake on JKR's part. It makes absolutely no sense to me.
*best Ricky Ricardo voice* Jo, you got some 'splainin' to do... The whole wand thing really does make my head hurt.
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 18, 2009 5:08 pm (#263 of 391)
Well, Madam P, it could be that Dumbledore hoped Vold would only disarm Severus and not kill him.
*best New Yorker voice* Hell-o? We're talkin' Vold here!
Gerald Costales - Aug 18, 2009 9:14 pm (#264 of 391)
Rewind. Dumbledore is dying. Dumbledore arranges for Snape to kill him. I would think that under most situations, Snape should become the True Master of the Elder Wand. (Unless arranging one's own death voids the transfer of Wand Mastery to the killer???)
Possession of the Wand isn't important as both Draco and then Harry proved.
Dumbledore's death on the Tower is unexpected just like Draco disarming Dumbledore.
Maybe JKR does need to explain it better. I agree this Wandlore stuff does give you headache.
mona amon - Aug 19, 2009 2:12 am (#265 of 391)
This is my theory~
By planning his death with Severus, Dumbledore intended that the wand's power would die with him. (Harry's explanation to Voldemort.)
Dumbledore also intended that Severus would "end up" with the Elder Wand. ('If you planned your death with Snape, you meant him to end up with the Elder Wand didn't you?'
'I admit that was my intention,' said Dumbledore, 'but it did not work as I intended, did it?')
I think the italicised lines were a red herring, planted by JKR to deliberately mislead the first time reader. We'll think it means that Dumbledore intended Severus to be master of the wand, and the part that didn't work out was that Voldemort realised this and killed him. So now he's the master, and Harry doesn't have his holly wand, so he's a goner, and all this adds to the suspense.
So what do the lines mean? I think that Dumbledore and Severus's plan was that Severus would kill Dumbledore, and take possession of his (now masterless) wand. He was to keep it, and perhaps hand it over to Voldemort if he asked for it.
I'm convinced that it never occurred to Dumbledore that Voldemort would think he had to kill Severus for the wand. After all, that's not part of the lore of the Elder Wand, and Dumbledore himself mastered the wand without killing Grindelwald.
Julia H. - Aug 19, 2009 2:56 am (#266 of 391)
The red herring makes sense, only it is not a very good red herring.
He was to keep it, and perhaps hand it over to Voldemort if he asked for it. (Mona)
It would make sense if Dumbledore wanted to make it easier for Voldemort to find the wand, in which case Voldemort would not have "had to" kill so many people. Only Snape. The problem with this is that we should have seen Snape at least try to do in accordance with this wish of Dumbledore, or it should have been explained why he did not rush to Voldemort with the wand. My impression is that Snape had no idea that he was to do anything with Dumbledore's wand. (Of course, the plot needed Snape until almost the end of the book, so killing him early on would not have been a good idea, but I still want an internal explanation as well.)
... it could be that Dumbledore hoped Vold would only disarm Severus and not kill him. (MAMS)
I'm convinced that it never occurred to Dumbledore that Voldemort would think he had to kill Severus for the wand. After all, that's not part of the lore of the Elder Wand, and Dumbledore himself mastered the wand without killing Grindelwald. (Mona)
It is true that Voldemort had the chance to realize that killing the previous master is not necessary to gain the allegiance of the wand. For Dumbledore's sake, we can suppose that he hoped Voldemort would be satisfied by disarming Snape, and we can even suppose that it was a secret reason why Dumbledore insisted that Snape must appear to be permanently very useful for Voldemort. To be sure, Dumbledore wanted to make Snape the Headmaster in "Voldemort's Hogwarts", but perhaps he also had a secret reason that he did not tell Snape: To give Snape a chance to end up disarmed and alive instead of killed.
However, if that was what Dumbledore thought, he made another HUGE mistake for the genious that he was and for someone who had spent decades studying Voldemort's ways and personality. Voldemort was the evil perfectionist, who considered killing someone the ultimate victory over the person. Becoming the master of the wand was far more important to him than any servant or ally. He must have thought that, as soon as he was the master of the Deathstick, there was no one whose help would be indispensable for him in the future. And even if he had spared Snape's life at first, he would soon have realized that the wand did not work for him properly, and, at that point the latest, he would have decided to kill Snape just to be on the safe side.
If Dumbledore did not foresee that, it means he had learned nothing about Voldemort throughout the years.
Mrs Brisbee - Aug 19, 2009 4:18 am (#267 of 391)
Julia has described very well my problems with the whole Elder Wand plot. It was frustrating, because reading the book I had the impression that it all made sense to Rowling, but I still don't understand what she meant Dumbledore's plan to be.
Why even risk the Elder Wand, when Dumbledore could have snapped it in half at any time with the Sword of Gryffindor? (Hermione describes what is needed to get past protective spells at the beginning of DH.)
If Dumbledore meant Voldemort to go after it as a distraction, it was all very risky, and I can't see what he hoped to accomplish. (The only way I see to reconcile "If you planned your death with Snape, you meant him to end up with the Elder Wand, didn't you?" with what Harry says during his duel with Voldemort is if "him" refers to Voldemort, not Snape. Grammatically wonky, but the conversation was all about Voldemort, so maybe Harry is referring back to that.)
Madam Pince - Aug 19, 2009 5:59 am (#268 of 391)
Good thought, Mrs. Brisbee. That hadn't occurred to me. "him" = Voldemort, not Snape. That would help a little. (I'm in your boat, too, by the way... it seems like it makes sense to JKR but it sure doesn't to me.)
Julia... yeah, what you said! Mona, your "red herring" thought is a good one, but as Julia said, surely he couldn't seriously believe that Voldy wouldn't kill instead of disarm.
Hieronymus Graubart - Aug 21, 2009 9:49 am (#269 of 391)
Why even risk the Elder Wand, when Dumbledore could have snapped it in half at any time with the Sword of Gryffindor?
Could he, Mrs. Brisbee? Gryffindor's sword (or the basilisk venom on it) could break nearly any protective spell and even destroy horcruxes, but the deathley hallows are very special objects.
Why did Harry (who prefered his holly wand over the elder wand) not snap the deathstick instead of following Dumbledore's plan trying to die undefeated? To give us some hope for a sequel ?
My take on this is that Harry assumed that Dumbledore had tried everything including fiendfyre to destroy the elder wand after he had taken it from Grindelwald, but found it as undestroyable as the resurrection stone (still working after beeing stabbed with Gryffindor's sword) or the invisibility cloak.
Obviously Dumbledore expected (knew?) that the resurrection stone was still working, but he had not used it after stabbing it with the sword?
PeskyPixie - Aug 21, 2009 2:24 pm (#270 of 391)
Would Dumbledore unleash a force as Dark as fiendfyre?
Mrs Brisbee - Aug 21, 2009 9:32 pm (#271 of 391)
Well, the Sword did crack the Stone, which suggests that hitting it a few more times with Sword could actually break it. I can't think of any reason to assume that the Hallows were any different than other near-industructible objects shown in the series. I think if they were supposed to not follow the rules it should have been shown somehow or an explanantion of why given.
However, as the Sword did crack the Stone, I think we are shown that the Stone had the normal protective spells wizards put on uber-objects, and could have been destroyed.
Dumbledore could have simply hidden the wand away somewhere, too. If it was like the Cloak, it was unsummonable, so it was unlikely to ever be found. Then he could have still planned to die undefeated and not run any risk of the wand ending up in the wrong hands.
Gerald Costales - Aug 23, 2009 11:29 pm (#272 of 391)
I was watching Goblet of Fire on TV this weekend. It looks like Dumbledore's wand was the same wand I saw in the 6th movie. I also noticed Voldemort's Yew wand as well.
Dumbledore's wand - the Elder Wand
Source - [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Tom Riddle/Voldemort's wand - the Yew Wand
Source - [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Harry's wand - the Holly Wand
Source - [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I didn't notice Harry's wand but I included a picture of his wand as well.
Solitaire - Aug 26, 2009 4:42 pm (#273 of 391)
My take on this is that Harry assumed that Dumbledore had tried everything including fiendfyre to destroy the elder wand after he had taken it from Grindelwald
I do not remember any indication that Dumbledore had ever tried to destroy the Elder Wand. Have I forgotten or missed something? I think he was originally hoping he would die a natural death and the wand's power would die with him, as no one would have defeated him. If his and Snape's plan had worked, this would have happened, since Snape would not really have murdered DD (my guess is that he would have made a potion for DD to take, had things gone according to plan). Draco was the spoiler.
Dumbledore could have simply hidden the wand away somewhere
He tried to hide it in his tomb, which was a piece of marble that completely encased his body. That didn't work too well. The fact that Harry and DD were able to find all of the Horcruxes leads me to believe that Voldy could certainly have found the wand wherever DD might have chosen to hide it ... which he did.
Gerald Costales - Aug 26, 2009 9:01 pm (#274 of 391)
When Harry left the Resurrection Stone in the forest before meeting Voldemort, I had the sense that the Resurrection Stone was for all intentions lost.
The Deathly Hallows existed for years. But, neither the Invisibility Cloak or the Resurrection Stone were ever found. Whether Slytherin knew the stone in his ring was the Resurrection Stone, we cannnot know. But, my feeling is that Slytherin didn't know that his Ring had the Resurrection Stone.
I believe only Dumbledore knew the true meaning of the Cloak and the Ring with the Resurrection Stone. Everyone wanted the Death Stick, the Wand of Destiny, the Elder Wand. The Elder Wand would disappear for years than resurface. So, whose to say that without the constant and endless number of searchers for the Wand; that the Wand would one day just slip into legend and never be seen again.
Could the Wand have been hidden or lost forever? IMHO Yes.
Would Dumbledore original plans for the Wand have worked? IMHO Again, yes. But, Draco did put a flaw in the plan.
mona amon - Aug 26, 2009 11:16 pm (#275 of 391)
Could the Wand have been hidden or lost forever? IMHO Yes.
I really like your idea, Gerald.
So this is the way I see Dumbledore's plan now. Severus was to kill him in private, take the now powerless wand and hide it (bury it in the Forbidden Forest or something). Voldemort would never have found it. And because of Severus's occlumency skills and the apparent loyalty demonstrated by his killing of Dumbledore, Voldemort would never have suspected that Severus had anything to do with its disappearance.
This covers everything very well, IMO, and most important, it shows that Dumbledore had no intention of allowing Severus to get murdered for the wand.
Julia H. - Aug 27, 2009 2:16 am (#276 of 391)
If only we saw Snape looking for the wand at least once... He could have taken it out of Dumbledore's tomb (if Voldy could) to hide it in a less obvious place to obey Dumbledore's order, and I'm sure he would have wanted to follow Dumbledore's plan - in this particular case, it would have been in his own personal interest as well. With Draco being the master of the wand, there was even more reason to hide the wand physically, as Voldemort could easily have gained its allegiance by killing Draco.
Then again Voldemort could have found out that the wand had been put into the tomb, and then he would have looked for the person who had removed it. Snape could have defended his mind with Occlumency, the question is whether Voldemort would have been satisfied with the information that nobody knew what had happened to the wand or would have begun to torture half the school.
And because of Severus's occlumency skills and the apparent loyalty demonstrated by his killing of Dumbledore, Voldemort would never have suspected that Severus had anything to do with its disappearance.(Mona)
Occlumency would have helped; still, if the wand had mysteriously disappeared, Voldemort could have reached the conclusion that Snape was not so loyal after all, that he might have had his own agenda when he had killed Dumbledore, i.e. that he might have known about the secret of Dumbledore's wand before Voldemort and wanted to obtain it for himself. Then Voldemort would probably have killed Snape just the same, to prevent the rise of a "competitor", i.e. another powerful dark wizard. (Once Voldemort had "realized" that Snape had been able to defeat the Master of the Elder Wand, he may not have been so sure any more that Snape was not able to hide information from him.)
Hm... can it be that Snape thought of these possibilites and decided to let Voldemort get the wand physically? He risked his own life, but at least Voldemort stopped looking for the wand and killing people (other than Snape) as he followed its path. It would also give Voldemort a false sense of security, which would eventually be useful to the person whose job it would be to kill him.
No hints in the books, of course.
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 27, 2009 10:44 am (#277 of 391)
Interesting speculations. The question is whether Vold knew about the Unbreakable Vow. If Severus had killed Dumbledore in private would Vold know it was Severus? I think this was the intention, that Dumbledore would die without Vold knowing it was Severus who was the Wand's new master.
If someone other than Severus killed Dumbledore would the Vow be instantly released? I would think so. But Dumbledore needed it to be Severus because of the allegiance of the Wand. I personally don't think Severus knew about the Wand; I think Dumbledore simply intended Vold to be unsure of who killed him by having Severus do it in private.
Julia H. - Aug 27, 2009 11:05 am (#278 of 391)
Good idea. Still, in this case, Draco would have been in the same mortal danger in which eventually Snape ended up. That would mean Dumbledore did not care too much about Draco's life. (The opposite version would mean he did not care much about Snape's life... ) This plan would also be dependent on Draco managing to lie to Voldemort, which would make it somewhat vulnerable.
Whatever Dumbledore's original plan was, it must have been horrible for him to realize (just before his death) that he was leaving behind his people and his plan in a terrible mess.
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 27, 2009 11:24 am (#279 of 391)
Julia, do you mean that Draco would be killed by Vold if someone else killed Dumbledore?
Julia H. - Aug 27, 2009 12:10 pm (#280 of 391)
I thought you said Snape would have killed Dumbledore in private, without Voldemort's knowledge. In that case, Voldemort could be made to believe that Draco had indeed fulfilled his task. (Perhaps that was how Narcissa wanted it to happen.) However, if Voldemort found out about Dumbledore's wand being the Elder Wand, he could easily conclude that he'd better kill Draco.
Or did you mean that Snape could have killed Dumbledore making it look like a natural death? In that case, Draco could claim that he was really close, but old age had done the trick sooner... and Voldemort would think Dumbledore had died undefeated. (He would still have taken the wand out of the tomb, just in case, but perhaps it would not have been there.) Oh, yes, I see it now. This plan would not have meant extra risk for anyone's life (although Draco might have wanted to take credit for Dumbledore's death anyway ), and Snape would have ended up with the wand .. in one sense or another. Poor Snape having to realize the last minute changes in the plan and to immediately muster the courage to AK Dumbledore publicly... He had good reason to yell and to scream.
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 27, 2009 12:41 pm (#281 of 391)
Yes, I don't think Severus was intended to give that particular performance on the Tower. It's interesting that, as Severus arrives, it has already been established that Draco cannot bring himself to do it. Amycus informs Severus of this and immediately Dumbledore speaks up to get his attention, to get him to do it. Had Severus been delayed arriving a mere few seconds, it could have easily been one of the other DE's who stepped up to do what Draco could not. And they would have been the one Vold eventually went after to gain the Wand.
And, yes, I think the intention could have been to make it look like murder -- perhaps on one of Dumbledore's many travels during that school year -- so that it could have been anyone. Draco then could not be blamed for abandoning his mission, as someone merely beat him to it. Or it could have been a natural death or an accident.
That's my latest theory.
Madam Pince - Aug 28, 2009 12:32 pm (#282 of 391)
It's interesting that, as Severus arrives, it has already been established that Draco cannot bring himself to do it. Amycus informs Severus of this and immediately Dumbledore speaks up to get his attention, to get him to do it. Had Severus been delayed arriving a mere few seconds, it could have easily been one of the other DE's who stepped up to do what Draco could not. And they would have been the one Vold eventually went after to gain the Wand.
You know, that is interesting! I can't believe I never thought of this before! Why on Earth was Dumbledore so set on it being Snape who killed him? OK, I can see why he wanted Snape to do it instead of Draco, but if some big bad DE was willing to do it, why not let them? It's like he threw Snape under the bus! The comment "yes, I admit that's what I intended (Snape to be wand master) but it didn't turn out, did it?" sounds like there was some grand plan, but what the heck was it????
Now I'm getting all mad again...
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 28, 2009 12:45 pm (#283 of 391)
LOL Madam P. Yes, a flaw became Draco cornering Dumbledore in a "public" place so that, no matter who killed him, there would be witnesses to tell Vold who the person was. Then it would only be a matter of time for Vold to realize that person was the Wand's new master. indeed. Severus died for no reason. Vold would not have killed his second-in-command if not for this assumption.
Another thing to get mad about: if the DE's had a brain cell they would have realized Dumbledore was already disarmed, by Draco, by the time they arrived, by the time Severus arrived. As they enter the Tower they shout: "Dumbledore cornered!... Dumbledore wandless, Dumbledore alone! Well done, Draco, well done!"
They could at least have given Vold this bit of information (to boost Draco's otherwise lack of "courage") or just to revel in how old and feeble the great wizard had become at the end. So if they couldn't put two and two together, perhaps Vold would have.
azi - Aug 28, 2009 12:55 pm (#284 of 391)
Why on Earth was Dumbledore so set on it being Snape who killed him? [/b]- Madam P.
I would guess it was that thing some people have (in movies anyway, lol) about not getting killed by the enemy. A die on your own terms sort of thing.
Either that or something complicated to do with the Elder Wand ownership? My head spins...
Steve Newton - Aug 28, 2009 1:58 pm (#285 of 391)
I thought that Albus want Severus to get the credit for killing him to cement Severus' place close to Voldemort.
azi - Aug 28, 2009 2:27 pm (#286 of 391)
Oh yeah! I like Steve's idea.
PeskyPixie - Aug 28, 2009 3:23 pm (#287 of 391)
But why does Dumbledore say that he had intended for Snape to get the wand? Because he had told Snape to hide it? Or perhaps to present the powerless wand to Voldy?
My brain isn't working, so I'm sure that I just stepped all over the logic in this post.
Soul Search - Aug 28, 2009 3:42 pm (#288 of 391)
Dumbledore may not have been an Elder wand expert, believing, like Voldemort, that the wand only changed masters by a killing. (In spite of his not killing the previous master.) He didn't expect Draco to become the wand's master just because of an Expellimus. Had another Death Eater killed Dumbledore, he could have become the wand's master, and Dumbledore wanted the wand's power to fade away.
Dumbledore did not recognize that Draco had become the wand's master, so Snape didn't have to be the one to kill him.
We have discussed before why the wand flew off the tower, instead of going to Draco like in other uses of Expelliamus. Did Dumbledore merely throw it?
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 28, 2009 3:51 pm (#289 of 391)
But Dumbledore had not killed Gellert, yet became master of the Wand. Surely he realized that much.
I feel he was obviously not planning on being ambushed by Draco, and had not planned on this twist of fate: that, despite planning to have Severus be a step ahead of Draco, it didn't work out that way.
As stated in an earlier post, I feel the plan was for Dumbledore to be killed privately by Severus and make it look like either an accident, a natural death, or a random killing. This way Vold could not trace the Wand back to Severus or Draco.
If it came down to one or the other, I would rather Vold deduce Draco was the master of the Wand than Severus in the end. We lost Sirius, Remus, Tonks, etc., etc., Draco would not have affected me much.
edit: Pesky, I don't believe that Severus knew about the Wand. He would be unaware he was the master, it would be buried with Dumbledore, Vold would break into the tomb thinking Dumbledore was still its master, but the Wand would not be a Death Stick for him.
Madam Pince - Aug 28, 2009 5:22 pm (#290 of 391)
I hate this thread. I don't know why I ever come here.
Madam Pince - Aug 28, 2009 5:22 pm (#290 of 391)
I hate this thread. I don't know why I ever come here.
PeskyPixie - Aug 28, 2009 6:15 pm (#291 of 391)
"I don't believe that Severus knew about the Wand. He would be unaware he was the master, it would be buried with Dumbledore, Vold would break into the tomb thinking Dumbledore was still its master, but the Wand would not be a Death Stick for him." -MEAMS
Yes, but Lord Voldemort would still (wrongly) believe that Snape was the master of the wand because he 'defeated' its previous owner. Snape would still be in horrible danger, only this time it would be over a powerless wand, rather than one in the power of Draco Malfoy/Harry Potter.
LOL, Madam Pince, this thread really makes my head hurt!
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 28, 2009 6:49 pm (#292 of 391)
Pesky, what I am trying to say is that Severus was possibly meant to kill Dumbledore NOT to have Vold know about it but to become master of the Wand, with Vold THINKING Dumbledore died while remaining its master. If Dumbledore was assumed dead from either an accident, natural causes or an unknown killing, this would ensure Vold never became master of the Wand because he would not know that Severus was its new master.
PeskyPixie - Aug 28, 2009 7:25 pm (#293 of 391)
Oh right, that explanation focussed on Snape killing Dumbledore in private.
However, Dumbledore tells Snape that the moment for the murder will present itself. Doesn't this imply that it may be a bit of a public spectacle, with at least Draco as a witness? Dumbledore does need Lord Voldemort to know that Snape killed him.
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 28, 2009 7:48 pm (#294 of 391)
Dumbledore does need Lord Voldemort to know that Snape killed him.
Why? We have no canon that Dumbledore and Severus talked about Vold needing to know he killed DD.
We have Bellatrix, Narcissa and Draco knowing about the Vow. It is highly unlikely they told Vold of their visit to Spinner’s End or the Vow because they were forbidden to speak of Draco’s task to anyone.
We have Severus and Dumbledore speaking after the hand injury. They talk about Draco having a death sentence as surely as DD does from the curse on his hand. They talk about Dumbledore having within a year to live and that "the moment will present itself in due course." This, to me, does not indicate whatsoever that it was to be a public display or public knowledge at all. To me it is because Dumbledore has to wait, to impart knowledge to Harry before he can die. This is alluded to in the next memory when Dumbledore says, "I have, as you know, limited time. It is essential that I give the boy enough information… " So DD is waiting until after they retrieve Slughorn’s memory and go to the Cave.
They speak of Severus killing him again in the Forest Conversation. Both times the only things spoken about are to kill him rather than Draco doing it.
He asks Severus if he will do all in his power to protect the students of Hogwarts. This, I imagine, would be accomplished without Vold knowing he was the one who murdered DD.
However, we do have canon mentioning that Severus was intended to be the master of the Wand, which DD wanted to save others from. He would not have "staged" a public death knowing that Vold would simply go after Severus. That is the antithesis of saving it from others. He would, therefore, want to conceal who killed him so that that Vold would never be able to gain mastery of the Wand.
Solitaire - Aug 28, 2009 8:13 pm (#295 of 391)
I still think no one currently alive but Dumbledore (and now Harry, Ron, and Hermione) ever knew that the Elder Wand existed, until Voldy questioned Gregorovitch and Grindlewald. I do not think DD told Snape about it. Why would he suddenly become so chatty about that wand after keeping everything else secret for so long? Snape keeps saying DD has not confided in him, etc. It doesn't fit, IMO.
If Snape had helped DD die in private, Draco would not necessarily have been involved. It could just have seemed that DD died. After all, he was old, and many knew he had suffered a serious injury to his hand ... a magical injury that had not healed even after the better part of a year.
Why on Earth was Dumbledore so set on it being Snape who killed him?
Dumbledore did not want that wand to get into anyone else's hands because they had won it from him (thereby continuing its power). Amycus would undoubtedly have taken it, and that would have been tantamount to putting it right into Voldy's hand, since he would not have hesitated to kill for it, as we saw when he believed it was Snape who killed DD.
I still think DD wanted the wand buried with him, but if anyone had to have it, he would have wanted Snape to claim it. Snape's not actually winning it would have robbed it of some of its power, I believe.
I thought that Albus want Severus to get the credit for killing him to cement Severus' place close to Voldemort.
This is also true. In fact, didn't Dumbledore ask Snape something about this?
But why does Dumbledore say that he had intended for Snape to get the wand?
Where does he say this? I can't find it. I'm not saying he doesn't; I just can't seem to locate it.
Dumbledore may not have been an Elder wand expert, believing, like Voldemort, that the wand only changed masters by a killing.
Dumbledore knew the secret of the wand, and he wanted Harry to know it, as well. That is why he left the Tales to Hermione. DD knew that defeating did not necessarily mean killing.
I feel the plan was for Dumbledore to be killed privately by Severus and make it look like either an accident, a natural death, or a random killing. This way Vold could not trace the Wand back to Severus or Draco.
Shadow, I believe this is the most likely scenario. In fact, as I've said before, I do not think DD intended Snape to have to actually kill him but to help him die, probably via a poison of some sort that he could administer himself.
Yes, but Lord Voldemort would still (wrongly) believe that Snape was the master of the wand because he 'defeated' its previous owner.
Yes, Pesky, and I think this has everything to do with Dumbledore's plea, "Severus, please ...," there on the tower. Things had not played out as the two of them intended, so they had to play the cards they had. This was the only way to keep the power of the Wand from Voldemort, I think. I still don't think Snape knew, and I do not believe he was meant to be the master of the Elder Wand.
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 28, 2009 8:34 pm (#296 of 391)
Soli, Dumbledore says he meant the Wand to go to Severus in the King's Cross chapter (almost the last page of chapter).
This solidifies in my mind that he would not want Vold to know it was Severus who killed him, as this knowledge would surely not keep the Wand from Vold. IMO the theory that DD wanted Severus to kill him publically in order to get Severus closer to Vold became obsolete after DH came out and we knew of the Elder Wand, its allegiance passing on, and DD knowing his murderer would be prey to Vold.
Solitaire - Aug 28, 2009 8:53 pm (#297 of 391)
Thanks ... I'll reread.
Julia H. - Aug 29, 2009 5:04 am (#298 of 391)
I also thought Dumbledore wanted Voldemort to know Snape had killed him - to strengthen Snape's position as Voldemort's right-hand man so that he could become the Headmaster and also an "advisor" who could cleverly manipulate and contain Voldemort. While Dumbledore was alive, his power and Voldemort's fear of him meant some control over Voldemort, but there would be no one with such power after Dumbledore's death, so whatever Snape could achieve through manipulation was even more important as the only way to slow down Vold a little.
On the other hand, the same strategy [/b]- Making Voldemort know Snape had killed Dumbledore - undermined the very result Dumbledore could hope to achieve by it, since the knowledge that Snape had killed Dumbledore would ultimately make Voldemort want to kill Snape, and Dumbledore had to foresee that. Even if we put aside the ethics of the plan, risking the life of a key person like Snape is a bad idea. (At least the wand itself could have been hidden a little better to buy Snape more time...) After all, Snape was the only person to know the ultimate secret of Harry-Horcrux, and how could Dumbledore be sure that Snape - who had to delay giving Harry the information until the time specified by Dumbledore - would have the opportunity to deliver the message before getting killed?
So all in all, wanting Voldy to know Snape had killed Dumbledore could only have short-term advantages and long-term risks.
I do not think DD intended Snape to have to actually kill him but to help him die, probably via a poison of some sort that he could administer himself. (Solitaire)
Dumbledore said "You must kill me", and to me it seems to mean Snape was intended to do just that: Kill Dumbledore. If Dumbledore had wanted to kill himself using some poison, he could have obtained that poison easily and carry it with himself all the time, without burdening Snape's soul with these words. To me, it seems Dumbledore either did not want to commit suicide (how would that had affected the power of his wand?) or he did not want to die while he had any strength, power or ability to do anything.
For example, he may have expected that due to the curse on his hand, he would eventually become so seriously ill that he would not be able take that poison himself. He also seemed to expect DE's to be around when the time came (I'm not sure how he could foresee that, perhaps only as a possibility), again, robbing him of the chance to kill himself before they killed him.
As for "the moment will present itself in due course", I interpret it as referring to the moment when death was inevitable one way or another, and Dumbledore would die either as a direct consequence of the curse from the ring (in which case, he practically would have been defeated by Voldemort) or in the hands of DE's (defeated again), and that was the moment when Snape was expected to step in. So actually Dumbledore may have foreseen both a scenario in which he would die in private and a scenario in which he would be killed in front of others.
I think, if no one had killed Dumbledore on the Tower, he would have died poisoned by Voldemort's potion (another defeat), but in this case, it would have been technically Harry who had killed him. Dumbledore obviously did not want that. It is interesting that Dumbledore tells Snape quite bluntly "You must kill me" (and lets Snape deal with that); but to Harry, he tactfully points out that the potion Harry is going to force down his throat will not kill him immediately, allowing Harry to believe that Dumbledore could be saved eventually. It never seems that Harry is left with any conscious guilt about playing a part in Dumbledore's death - he probably sticks with the thought that Madam Pomfrey (or Snape even) could have cured Dumbledore after the poisoning in the Cave, so he (Harry) did not inflict mortal harm on Dumbledore.
Dumbledore acknowledges to Harry that he wanted Snape "to end up" with the wand (the expression sounds rather vague to me), but after that, Harry tells Voldemort that Dumbledore wanted to die undefeated (which Dumbledore did not tell him). I have a hard time reconciling these two statements unless Dumbledore wanted Snape to only physically end up with the wand - but then I don't see the point in Snape having the wand only physically. What for?
PeskyPixie - Aug 29, 2009 11:31 am (#299 of 391)
"Dumbledore does need Lord Voldemort to know that Snape killed him." -myself
"Why? We have no canon that Dumbledore and Severus talked about Vold needing to know he killed DD." -me and my shadow 813
Dumbledore makes it very clear that he needs to have Snape as close to the Dark Lord as possible. Dumbledore's murder is the ultimate proof of Severus' loyalty. Since Voldemort planned to have Snape kill him (as it was supposedly a given that Draco would fail) Dumbledore used his own life-threatening injury to further this important plot. He needs Snape close to Voldemort both to keep an eye on Nagini and to have access to the headmaster's study at Hogwarts (1. Dumbledore's portrait is there; 2. Gryffindor's sword is there; 3. the students of Hogwarts need to be protected from the Carrows). Who else would the Dark Lord entrust his beloved Hogwarts to, but his most loyal servant, the remover of one of the greatest obstacles in his path?
No, Dumbledore needed Severus to be as close to Voldemort as possible, so if Snape must kill Dumbledore it is to Dumbledore's advantage to give Voldemort knowledge of this fact.
So, it seems very dangerous for Dumbledore to want Severus to have this wand.
Madam Pince - Aug 29, 2009 2:49 pm (#300 of 391)
So JKR totally screwed up with that quote by Dumbledore at King's Cross when she had him say "I admit that was my intention." Which is what I thought in the first place. Arrrgh.
I agree with Soli that I don't think Snape knew anything about the Elder Wand or any of the Hallows for that matter, and was totally unaware of that part of the plan. Just more of Dumbledore's being secretive and concealing vital information. From his own lieutenant! Whom he vowed he trusted! *goes off muttering*
I wish JKR would read this thread, I really do.
Edit: Oh, and I also don't think that "hiding" the Wand would ever work, either. Someone's bound to stumble across it someday... maybe not Voldemort, maybe centuries from now, but someone, someday. Same thing with the Resurrection Stone -- I absolutely hate the fact that it's lying somewhere in the Forest. (Except for the fact that that's the one thing that gives me some faint hope of a sequel someday... )
I think Dumbledore wanted the wand buried with him all along. Since Snape would have killed him with his permission, the wand would not have been "won," so Snape would not really have been its master. Its power would have died with Dumbledore. Alas, along came Draco ...
If Snape had known the secret of the Elder Wand, wouldn't he have disarmed Draco himself? Having done so would have rendered him its master. I do not believe he would have left Draco its master (and in danger) had he known. JM2K ...
Puck - Aug 13, 2009 4:28 am (#252 of 391)
But Draco was in less danger as it's master than Snape, as LV would never guess that simply disarming the opponent -without killing them- would win you the wand. This way, if Snape is killed, LV still hasn't got the power.
Now, technically LV doesn't killing Snape, he has the snake do it. If Snape was the wand's master, would that have given the power to LV?
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 13, 2009 9:30 am (#253 of 391)
I believe so, Puck -[/b]- Just as, although Riddle had the Basilisk kill Myrtle it still qualified as his murdering her, soul split and Horcrux made with diary. Nagini was merely a weapon.
PeskyPixie - Aug 15, 2009 7:15 pm (#254 of 391)
Madam Pince, I like your interpretation of it. That part has always bothered me as it seems as if Dumbledore is back to his secrets and lies () after he has just promised Harry that there will no longer be any secrets between them. Your take on "...realization of what would happen next settled gradually over Harry in the long minutes, like softly falling snow," makes a lot of sense to me.
Madam Pince - Aug 16, 2009 10:43 am (#255 of 391)
That was Mrs. Sirius' idea, actually, but I'll gladly take credit for it, as it was so good.
PeskyPixie - Aug 16, 2009 10:52 am (#256 of 391)
Sounds good. We just won't tell Mrs. Sirius.
Julia H. - Aug 18, 2009 1:43 pm (#257 of 391)
This bit in DH simply does not work for me. In what sense could Dumbledore want Snape to have the wand?
1) Dumbledore wanted Snape to be the master of the wand.
In this case, Harry is completely wrong when he thinks Dumbledore wanted the power of the wand to die with him. In this case, if Dumbledore was right, Snape would have got the wand if Draco had not interfered; however, Harry uses the argument (in his conversation with Voldemort) that the whole "murder" was planned between Dumbledore and Snape, therefore Snape never defeated Dumbledore - not because Draco defeated him first, but because Snape never wanted to defeat Dumbledore.
If Dumbledore thought Snape could be the master of his wand in this way, he must have also thought that the allegiance of the wand could be intentionally transferred by the master by means of a totally formal defeat. (It would be a good way to inherit the allegiance of the wand, for example. Someone may have already tried it in wizarding history, only we don't know about it.)
All in all, either Dumbledore or Harry must be wrong about the way the wand can be inherited; but that does not make much sense as neither of them turns out to be wrong on the pages of the novel.
2) Dumbledore wanted Snape to physically possess the wand, not to be its master.
In this case, Dumbledore's intention was not enough - he would have had to make it sure somehow that Snape would keep the wand. Unfortunately, we don't know about Dumbledore telling Snape to keep the wand, nor does Snape ever seem to look for it. Immediately after killing Dumbledore, Snape does not have much time to get hold of the wand; but later, as the Hogwarts Headmaster, he could try to get it from Dumbledore's tomb [/b]- And he would probably do it if he knew that Dumbledore had intended him to possess the wand. If, however, Dumbledore did not tell Snape that he wanted him to have the wand, how could he expect Snape to look for it at all?
Apart from that, I'm not sure why it would be any good for anyone if Snape physically possessed the wand. He could hide it from Voldemort, but hiding it does not mean "possessing it" or "ending up with it". It is possible that the wand would work for Snape in a way, but not necessarily better than his own wand.
So neither of these two possibilities seems to make much sense to me. Is there any other way in which Dumbledore could want Snape to end up with the Elder Wand?
I think it makes sense that Snape would not leave Draco the master of the wand if he knew the full story. Voldemort could find out the truth somehow, and then Draco would be in the greatest danger; and leaving the allegiance of this powerful wand in such unreliable company is also dangerous. Voldemort could become the master of the wand by pure chance if he only got angry with Draco one day.
PeskyPixie - Aug 18, 2009 2:25 pm (#258 of 391)
Julia, this is the very dilemma which is holding up my Snapilogue. Wand ownership is such a complicated subject that I need some time to figure what exactly I wrote in my story!
Here's a stab at interpreting JKR's words.
Dumbledore chooses to die undefeated, so the power of the Elder Wand will die with him. He arranges his death with Severus Snape and at his death the horrible power of the wand will die with him. Okay. So, if things had gone according to plan he would be dead and the Elder Wand (just a normal wand now) would be left behind. And that gets us .... where? As far as I can tell, Snape is unaware that Dumbledore's wand is the legendary Deathstick. So, why would Dumbledore leave the one wand (and that with a bloody history) Voldy will desire in the hands of the guy dangling on LV's arm? That's hardly safe for Snape. Does he think that if it's under Voldy's nose he'll won't be able to find it?
legolas returns - Aug 18, 2009 2:33 pm (#259 of 391)
Snape would still have been toast. The wand would be burried with Dumbledore and Voldemort would go to collect it. He would kill Snape because he would think that there was something wrong with the wand because he did not do something spectacular with it. The difference would be that there would be no power in the wand. The power remained because Dumbledore was defeated by Draco.
Julia H. - Aug 18, 2009 3:35 pm (#260 of 391)
Physically possessing the Elder Wand (without being its master) or not does not make any difference to Snape, IMO. What is more, Snape does not seem to be aware of the fact that he should possess Dumbledore's wand.
On the other hand, even if Snape was the master of the Elder Wand (by means of a clever trick of Dumbledore's) but not its physical owner, it would still make little difference to him, as he could not use the only weapon that might give him a chance against Voldemort, so Voldemort could probably kill him and become the master of the Elder Wand.
The only version that would make sense to me would be Dumbledore wanting Snape to possess the wand in both ways (just in case Harry might really die at Voldemort's hand there should be someone with a power similar to Dumbledore's to kill even the Horcrux-less Voldemort) - but that just does not seem to be the case in the book.
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 18, 2009 4:35 pm (#261 of 391)
I have always taken it as:
Dumbledore wanted the Wand's power to die with himself as master. Vold would *think* Severus was the master after the Tower incident and kill him. However, Dumbledore would remain the master because he was not truly defeated and, once dead, could never be defeated. So if Vold killed Severus and then broke into the tomb to retrieve the Wand, he would still not be its master.
When Dumbledore says his intention was for Severus to end up with the Wand, I feel this is where JKR made the error. That's just my opinion. According to the Lexicon, Dumbledore's mistake was that Severus did not defeat him. So either Dumbledore's line in King's Cross is an error, or...?
Madam Pince - Aug 18, 2009 4:56 pm (#262 of 391)
So then, yet again, Dumbledore is being pretty... well... not so nice. He's OK with the idea that Voldy would *think* Severus was master of the wand and thus would kill him? Sheesh! Is there no limit to how many people Dumbledore thinks it would be OK if they die?
I agree that Dumbledore's line stating that he intended Snape to end up with the wand must be a mistake on JKR's part. It makes absolutely no sense to me.
*best Ricky Ricardo voice* Jo, you got some 'splainin' to do... The whole wand thing really does make my head hurt.
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 18, 2009 5:08 pm (#263 of 391)
Well, Madam P, it could be that Dumbledore hoped Vold would only disarm Severus and not kill him.
*best New Yorker voice* Hell-o? We're talkin' Vold here!
Gerald Costales - Aug 18, 2009 9:14 pm (#264 of 391)
Rewind. Dumbledore is dying. Dumbledore arranges for Snape to kill him. I would think that under most situations, Snape should become the True Master of the Elder Wand. (Unless arranging one's own death voids the transfer of Wand Mastery to the killer???)
Possession of the Wand isn't important as both Draco and then Harry proved.
Dumbledore's death on the Tower is unexpected just like Draco disarming Dumbledore.
Maybe JKR does need to explain it better. I agree this Wandlore stuff does give you headache.
mona amon - Aug 19, 2009 2:12 am (#265 of 391)
This is my theory~
By planning his death with Severus, Dumbledore intended that the wand's power would die with him. (Harry's explanation to Voldemort.)
Dumbledore also intended that Severus would "end up" with the Elder Wand. ('If you planned your death with Snape, you meant him to end up with the Elder Wand didn't you?'
'I admit that was my intention,' said Dumbledore, 'but it did not work as I intended, did it?')
I think the italicised lines were a red herring, planted by JKR to deliberately mislead the first time reader. We'll think it means that Dumbledore intended Severus to be master of the wand, and the part that didn't work out was that Voldemort realised this and killed him. So now he's the master, and Harry doesn't have his holly wand, so he's a goner, and all this adds to the suspense.
So what do the lines mean? I think that Dumbledore and Severus's plan was that Severus would kill Dumbledore, and take possession of his (now masterless) wand. He was to keep it, and perhaps hand it over to Voldemort if he asked for it.
I'm convinced that it never occurred to Dumbledore that Voldemort would think he had to kill Severus for the wand. After all, that's not part of the lore of the Elder Wand, and Dumbledore himself mastered the wand without killing Grindelwald.
Julia H. - Aug 19, 2009 2:56 am (#266 of 391)
The red herring makes sense, only it is not a very good red herring.
He was to keep it, and perhaps hand it over to Voldemort if he asked for it. (Mona)
It would make sense if Dumbledore wanted to make it easier for Voldemort to find the wand, in which case Voldemort would not have "had to" kill so many people. Only Snape. The problem with this is that we should have seen Snape at least try to do in accordance with this wish of Dumbledore, or it should have been explained why he did not rush to Voldemort with the wand. My impression is that Snape had no idea that he was to do anything with Dumbledore's wand. (Of course, the plot needed Snape until almost the end of the book, so killing him early on would not have been a good idea, but I still want an internal explanation as well.)
... it could be that Dumbledore hoped Vold would only disarm Severus and not kill him. (MAMS)
I'm convinced that it never occurred to Dumbledore that Voldemort would think he had to kill Severus for the wand. After all, that's not part of the lore of the Elder Wand, and Dumbledore himself mastered the wand without killing Grindelwald. (Mona)
It is true that Voldemort had the chance to realize that killing the previous master is not necessary to gain the allegiance of the wand. For Dumbledore's sake, we can suppose that he hoped Voldemort would be satisfied by disarming Snape, and we can even suppose that it was a secret reason why Dumbledore insisted that Snape must appear to be permanently very useful for Voldemort. To be sure, Dumbledore wanted to make Snape the Headmaster in "Voldemort's Hogwarts", but perhaps he also had a secret reason that he did not tell Snape: To give Snape a chance to end up disarmed and alive instead of killed.
However, if that was what Dumbledore thought, he made another HUGE mistake for the genious that he was and for someone who had spent decades studying Voldemort's ways and personality. Voldemort was the evil perfectionist, who considered killing someone the ultimate victory over the person. Becoming the master of the wand was far more important to him than any servant or ally. He must have thought that, as soon as he was the master of the Deathstick, there was no one whose help would be indispensable for him in the future. And even if he had spared Snape's life at first, he would soon have realized that the wand did not work for him properly, and, at that point the latest, he would have decided to kill Snape just to be on the safe side.
If Dumbledore did not foresee that, it means he had learned nothing about Voldemort throughout the years.
Mrs Brisbee - Aug 19, 2009 4:18 am (#267 of 391)
Julia has described very well my problems with the whole Elder Wand plot. It was frustrating, because reading the book I had the impression that it all made sense to Rowling, but I still don't understand what she meant Dumbledore's plan to be.
Why even risk the Elder Wand, when Dumbledore could have snapped it in half at any time with the Sword of Gryffindor? (Hermione describes what is needed to get past protective spells at the beginning of DH.)
If Dumbledore meant Voldemort to go after it as a distraction, it was all very risky, and I can't see what he hoped to accomplish. (The only way I see to reconcile "If you planned your death with Snape, you meant him to end up with the Elder Wand, didn't you?" with what Harry says during his duel with Voldemort is if "him" refers to Voldemort, not Snape. Grammatically wonky, but the conversation was all about Voldemort, so maybe Harry is referring back to that.)
Madam Pince - Aug 19, 2009 5:59 am (#268 of 391)
Good thought, Mrs. Brisbee. That hadn't occurred to me. "him" = Voldemort, not Snape. That would help a little. (I'm in your boat, too, by the way... it seems like it makes sense to JKR but it sure doesn't to me.)
Julia... yeah, what you said! Mona, your "red herring" thought is a good one, but as Julia said, surely he couldn't seriously believe that Voldy wouldn't kill instead of disarm.
Hieronymus Graubart - Aug 21, 2009 9:49 am (#269 of 391)
Why even risk the Elder Wand, when Dumbledore could have snapped it in half at any time with the Sword of Gryffindor?
Could he, Mrs. Brisbee? Gryffindor's sword (or the basilisk venom on it) could break nearly any protective spell and even destroy horcruxes, but the deathley hallows are very special objects.
Why did Harry (who prefered his holly wand over the elder wand) not snap the deathstick instead of following Dumbledore's plan trying to die undefeated? To give us some hope for a sequel ?
My take on this is that Harry assumed that Dumbledore had tried everything including fiendfyre to destroy the elder wand after he had taken it from Grindelwald, but found it as undestroyable as the resurrection stone (still working after beeing stabbed with Gryffindor's sword) or the invisibility cloak.
Obviously Dumbledore expected (knew?) that the resurrection stone was still working, but he had not used it after stabbing it with the sword?
PeskyPixie - Aug 21, 2009 2:24 pm (#270 of 391)
Would Dumbledore unleash a force as Dark as fiendfyre?
Mrs Brisbee - Aug 21, 2009 9:32 pm (#271 of 391)
Well, the Sword did crack the Stone, which suggests that hitting it a few more times with Sword could actually break it. I can't think of any reason to assume that the Hallows were any different than other near-industructible objects shown in the series. I think if they were supposed to not follow the rules it should have been shown somehow or an explanantion of why given.
However, as the Sword did crack the Stone, I think we are shown that the Stone had the normal protective spells wizards put on uber-objects, and could have been destroyed.
Dumbledore could have simply hidden the wand away somewhere, too. If it was like the Cloak, it was unsummonable, so it was unlikely to ever be found. Then he could have still planned to die undefeated and not run any risk of the wand ending up in the wrong hands.
Gerald Costales - Aug 23, 2009 11:29 pm (#272 of 391)
I was watching Goblet of Fire on TV this weekend. It looks like Dumbledore's wand was the same wand I saw in the 6th movie. I also noticed Voldemort's Yew wand as well.
Dumbledore's wand - the Elder Wand
Source - [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Tom Riddle/Voldemort's wand - the Yew Wand
Source - [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Harry's wand - the Holly Wand
Source - [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I didn't notice Harry's wand but I included a picture of his wand as well.
Solitaire - Aug 26, 2009 4:42 pm (#273 of 391)
My take on this is that Harry assumed that Dumbledore had tried everything including fiendfyre to destroy the elder wand after he had taken it from Grindelwald
I do not remember any indication that Dumbledore had ever tried to destroy the Elder Wand. Have I forgotten or missed something? I think he was originally hoping he would die a natural death and the wand's power would die with him, as no one would have defeated him. If his and Snape's plan had worked, this would have happened, since Snape would not really have murdered DD (my guess is that he would have made a potion for DD to take, had things gone according to plan). Draco was the spoiler.
Dumbledore could have simply hidden the wand away somewhere
He tried to hide it in his tomb, which was a piece of marble that completely encased his body. That didn't work too well. The fact that Harry and DD were able to find all of the Horcruxes leads me to believe that Voldy could certainly have found the wand wherever DD might have chosen to hide it ... which he did.
Gerald Costales - Aug 26, 2009 9:01 pm (#274 of 391)
When Harry left the Resurrection Stone in the forest before meeting Voldemort, I had the sense that the Resurrection Stone was for all intentions lost.
The Deathly Hallows existed for years. But, neither the Invisibility Cloak or the Resurrection Stone were ever found. Whether Slytherin knew the stone in his ring was the Resurrection Stone, we cannnot know. But, my feeling is that Slytherin didn't know that his Ring had the Resurrection Stone.
I believe only Dumbledore knew the true meaning of the Cloak and the Ring with the Resurrection Stone. Everyone wanted the Death Stick, the Wand of Destiny, the Elder Wand. The Elder Wand would disappear for years than resurface. So, whose to say that without the constant and endless number of searchers for the Wand; that the Wand would one day just slip into legend and never be seen again.
Could the Wand have been hidden or lost forever? IMHO Yes.
Would Dumbledore original plans for the Wand have worked? IMHO Again, yes. But, Draco did put a flaw in the plan.
mona amon - Aug 26, 2009 11:16 pm (#275 of 391)
Could the Wand have been hidden or lost forever? IMHO Yes.
I really like your idea, Gerald.
So this is the way I see Dumbledore's plan now. Severus was to kill him in private, take the now powerless wand and hide it (bury it in the Forbidden Forest or something). Voldemort would never have found it. And because of Severus's occlumency skills and the apparent loyalty demonstrated by his killing of Dumbledore, Voldemort would never have suspected that Severus had anything to do with its disappearance.
This covers everything very well, IMO, and most important, it shows that Dumbledore had no intention of allowing Severus to get murdered for the wand.
Julia H. - Aug 27, 2009 2:16 am (#276 of 391)
If only we saw Snape looking for the wand at least once... He could have taken it out of Dumbledore's tomb (if Voldy could) to hide it in a less obvious place to obey Dumbledore's order, and I'm sure he would have wanted to follow Dumbledore's plan - in this particular case, it would have been in his own personal interest as well. With Draco being the master of the wand, there was even more reason to hide the wand physically, as Voldemort could easily have gained its allegiance by killing Draco.
Then again Voldemort could have found out that the wand had been put into the tomb, and then he would have looked for the person who had removed it. Snape could have defended his mind with Occlumency, the question is whether Voldemort would have been satisfied with the information that nobody knew what had happened to the wand or would have begun to torture half the school.
And because of Severus's occlumency skills and the apparent loyalty demonstrated by his killing of Dumbledore, Voldemort would never have suspected that Severus had anything to do with its disappearance.(Mona)
Occlumency would have helped; still, if the wand had mysteriously disappeared, Voldemort could have reached the conclusion that Snape was not so loyal after all, that he might have had his own agenda when he had killed Dumbledore, i.e. that he might have known about the secret of Dumbledore's wand before Voldemort and wanted to obtain it for himself. Then Voldemort would probably have killed Snape just the same, to prevent the rise of a "competitor", i.e. another powerful dark wizard. (Once Voldemort had "realized" that Snape had been able to defeat the Master of the Elder Wand, he may not have been so sure any more that Snape was not able to hide information from him.)
Hm... can it be that Snape thought of these possibilites and decided to let Voldemort get the wand physically? He risked his own life, but at least Voldemort stopped looking for the wand and killing people (other than Snape) as he followed its path. It would also give Voldemort a false sense of security, which would eventually be useful to the person whose job it would be to kill him.
No hints in the books, of course.
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 27, 2009 10:44 am (#277 of 391)
Interesting speculations. The question is whether Vold knew about the Unbreakable Vow. If Severus had killed Dumbledore in private would Vold know it was Severus? I think this was the intention, that Dumbledore would die without Vold knowing it was Severus who was the Wand's new master.
If someone other than Severus killed Dumbledore would the Vow be instantly released? I would think so. But Dumbledore needed it to be Severus because of the allegiance of the Wand. I personally don't think Severus knew about the Wand; I think Dumbledore simply intended Vold to be unsure of who killed him by having Severus do it in private.
Julia H. - Aug 27, 2009 11:05 am (#278 of 391)
Good idea. Still, in this case, Draco would have been in the same mortal danger in which eventually Snape ended up. That would mean Dumbledore did not care too much about Draco's life. (The opposite version would mean he did not care much about Snape's life... ) This plan would also be dependent on Draco managing to lie to Voldemort, which would make it somewhat vulnerable.
Whatever Dumbledore's original plan was, it must have been horrible for him to realize (just before his death) that he was leaving behind his people and his plan in a terrible mess.
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 27, 2009 11:24 am (#279 of 391)
Julia, do you mean that Draco would be killed by Vold if someone else killed Dumbledore?
Julia H. - Aug 27, 2009 12:10 pm (#280 of 391)
I thought you said Snape would have killed Dumbledore in private, without Voldemort's knowledge. In that case, Voldemort could be made to believe that Draco had indeed fulfilled his task. (Perhaps that was how Narcissa wanted it to happen.) However, if Voldemort found out about Dumbledore's wand being the Elder Wand, he could easily conclude that he'd better kill Draco.
Or did you mean that Snape could have killed Dumbledore making it look like a natural death? In that case, Draco could claim that he was really close, but old age had done the trick sooner... and Voldemort would think Dumbledore had died undefeated. (He would still have taken the wand out of the tomb, just in case, but perhaps it would not have been there.) Oh, yes, I see it now. This plan would not have meant extra risk for anyone's life (although Draco might have wanted to take credit for Dumbledore's death anyway ), and Snape would have ended up with the wand .. in one sense or another. Poor Snape having to realize the last minute changes in the plan and to immediately muster the courage to AK Dumbledore publicly... He had good reason to yell and to scream.
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 27, 2009 12:41 pm (#281 of 391)
Yes, I don't think Severus was intended to give that particular performance on the Tower. It's interesting that, as Severus arrives, it has already been established that Draco cannot bring himself to do it. Amycus informs Severus of this and immediately Dumbledore speaks up to get his attention, to get him to do it. Had Severus been delayed arriving a mere few seconds, it could have easily been one of the other DE's who stepped up to do what Draco could not. And they would have been the one Vold eventually went after to gain the Wand.
And, yes, I think the intention could have been to make it look like murder -- perhaps on one of Dumbledore's many travels during that school year -- so that it could have been anyone. Draco then could not be blamed for abandoning his mission, as someone merely beat him to it. Or it could have been a natural death or an accident.
That's my latest theory.
Madam Pince - Aug 28, 2009 12:32 pm (#282 of 391)
It's interesting that, as Severus arrives, it has already been established that Draco cannot bring himself to do it. Amycus informs Severus of this and immediately Dumbledore speaks up to get his attention, to get him to do it. Had Severus been delayed arriving a mere few seconds, it could have easily been one of the other DE's who stepped up to do what Draco could not. And they would have been the one Vold eventually went after to gain the Wand.
You know, that is interesting! I can't believe I never thought of this before! Why on Earth was Dumbledore so set on it being Snape who killed him? OK, I can see why he wanted Snape to do it instead of Draco, but if some big bad DE was willing to do it, why not let them? It's like he threw Snape under the bus! The comment "yes, I admit that's what I intended (Snape to be wand master) but it didn't turn out, did it?" sounds like there was some grand plan, but what the heck was it????
Now I'm getting all mad again...
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 28, 2009 12:45 pm (#283 of 391)
LOL Madam P. Yes, a flaw became Draco cornering Dumbledore in a "public" place so that, no matter who killed him, there would be witnesses to tell Vold who the person was. Then it would only be a matter of time for Vold to realize that person was the Wand's new master. indeed. Severus died for no reason. Vold would not have killed his second-in-command if not for this assumption.
Another thing to get mad about: if the DE's had a brain cell they would have realized Dumbledore was already disarmed, by Draco, by the time they arrived, by the time Severus arrived. As they enter the Tower they shout: "Dumbledore cornered!... Dumbledore wandless, Dumbledore alone! Well done, Draco, well done!"
They could at least have given Vold this bit of information (to boost Draco's otherwise lack of "courage") or just to revel in how old and feeble the great wizard had become at the end. So if they couldn't put two and two together, perhaps Vold would have.
azi - Aug 28, 2009 12:55 pm (#284 of 391)
Why on Earth was Dumbledore so set on it being Snape who killed him? [/b]- Madam P.
I would guess it was that thing some people have (in movies anyway, lol) about not getting killed by the enemy. A die on your own terms sort of thing.
Either that or something complicated to do with the Elder Wand ownership? My head spins...
Steve Newton - Aug 28, 2009 1:58 pm (#285 of 391)
I thought that Albus want Severus to get the credit for killing him to cement Severus' place close to Voldemort.
azi - Aug 28, 2009 2:27 pm (#286 of 391)
Oh yeah! I like Steve's idea.
PeskyPixie - Aug 28, 2009 3:23 pm (#287 of 391)
But why does Dumbledore say that he had intended for Snape to get the wand? Because he had told Snape to hide it? Or perhaps to present the powerless wand to Voldy?
My brain isn't working, so I'm sure that I just stepped all over the logic in this post.
Soul Search - Aug 28, 2009 3:42 pm (#288 of 391)
Dumbledore may not have been an Elder wand expert, believing, like Voldemort, that the wand only changed masters by a killing. (In spite of his not killing the previous master.) He didn't expect Draco to become the wand's master just because of an Expellimus. Had another Death Eater killed Dumbledore, he could have become the wand's master, and Dumbledore wanted the wand's power to fade away.
Dumbledore did not recognize that Draco had become the wand's master, so Snape didn't have to be the one to kill him.
We have discussed before why the wand flew off the tower, instead of going to Draco like in other uses of Expelliamus. Did Dumbledore merely throw it?
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 28, 2009 3:51 pm (#289 of 391)
But Dumbledore had not killed Gellert, yet became master of the Wand. Surely he realized that much.
I feel he was obviously not planning on being ambushed by Draco, and had not planned on this twist of fate: that, despite planning to have Severus be a step ahead of Draco, it didn't work out that way.
As stated in an earlier post, I feel the plan was for Dumbledore to be killed privately by Severus and make it look like either an accident, a natural death, or a random killing. This way Vold could not trace the Wand back to Severus or Draco.
If it came down to one or the other, I would rather Vold deduce Draco was the master of the Wand than Severus in the end. We lost Sirius, Remus, Tonks, etc., etc., Draco would not have affected me much.
edit: Pesky, I don't believe that Severus knew about the Wand. He would be unaware he was the master, it would be buried with Dumbledore, Vold would break into the tomb thinking Dumbledore was still its master, but the Wand would not be a Death Stick for him.
Madam Pince - Aug 28, 2009 5:22 pm (#290 of 391)
I hate this thread. I don't know why I ever come here.
Madam Pince - Aug 28, 2009 5:22 pm (#290 of 391)
I hate this thread. I don't know why I ever come here.
PeskyPixie - Aug 28, 2009 6:15 pm (#291 of 391)
"I don't believe that Severus knew about the Wand. He would be unaware he was the master, it would be buried with Dumbledore, Vold would break into the tomb thinking Dumbledore was still its master, but the Wand would not be a Death Stick for him." -MEAMS
Yes, but Lord Voldemort would still (wrongly) believe that Snape was the master of the wand because he 'defeated' its previous owner. Snape would still be in horrible danger, only this time it would be over a powerless wand, rather than one in the power of Draco Malfoy/Harry Potter.
LOL, Madam Pince, this thread really makes my head hurt!
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 28, 2009 6:49 pm (#292 of 391)
Pesky, what I am trying to say is that Severus was possibly meant to kill Dumbledore NOT to have Vold know about it but to become master of the Wand, with Vold THINKING Dumbledore died while remaining its master. If Dumbledore was assumed dead from either an accident, natural causes or an unknown killing, this would ensure Vold never became master of the Wand because he would not know that Severus was its new master.
PeskyPixie - Aug 28, 2009 7:25 pm (#293 of 391)
Oh right, that explanation focussed on Snape killing Dumbledore in private.
However, Dumbledore tells Snape that the moment for the murder will present itself. Doesn't this imply that it may be a bit of a public spectacle, with at least Draco as a witness? Dumbledore does need Lord Voldemort to know that Snape killed him.
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 28, 2009 7:48 pm (#294 of 391)
Dumbledore does need Lord Voldemort to know that Snape killed him.
Why? We have no canon that Dumbledore and Severus talked about Vold needing to know he killed DD.
We have Bellatrix, Narcissa and Draco knowing about the Vow. It is highly unlikely they told Vold of their visit to Spinner’s End or the Vow because they were forbidden to speak of Draco’s task to anyone.
We have Severus and Dumbledore speaking after the hand injury. They talk about Draco having a death sentence as surely as DD does from the curse on his hand. They talk about Dumbledore having within a year to live and that "the moment will present itself in due course." This, to me, does not indicate whatsoever that it was to be a public display or public knowledge at all. To me it is because Dumbledore has to wait, to impart knowledge to Harry before he can die. This is alluded to in the next memory when Dumbledore says, "I have, as you know, limited time. It is essential that I give the boy enough information… " So DD is waiting until after they retrieve Slughorn’s memory and go to the Cave.
They speak of Severus killing him again in the Forest Conversation. Both times the only things spoken about are to kill him rather than Draco doing it.
He asks Severus if he will do all in his power to protect the students of Hogwarts. This, I imagine, would be accomplished without Vold knowing he was the one who murdered DD.
However, we do have canon mentioning that Severus was intended to be the master of the Wand, which DD wanted to save others from. He would not have "staged" a public death knowing that Vold would simply go after Severus. That is the antithesis of saving it from others. He would, therefore, want to conceal who killed him so that that Vold would never be able to gain mastery of the Wand.
Solitaire - Aug 28, 2009 8:13 pm (#295 of 391)
I still think no one currently alive but Dumbledore (and now Harry, Ron, and Hermione) ever knew that the Elder Wand existed, until Voldy questioned Gregorovitch and Grindlewald. I do not think DD told Snape about it. Why would he suddenly become so chatty about that wand after keeping everything else secret for so long? Snape keeps saying DD has not confided in him, etc. It doesn't fit, IMO.
If Snape had helped DD die in private, Draco would not necessarily have been involved. It could just have seemed that DD died. After all, he was old, and many knew he had suffered a serious injury to his hand ... a magical injury that had not healed even after the better part of a year.
Why on Earth was Dumbledore so set on it being Snape who killed him?
Dumbledore did not want that wand to get into anyone else's hands because they had won it from him (thereby continuing its power). Amycus would undoubtedly have taken it, and that would have been tantamount to putting it right into Voldy's hand, since he would not have hesitated to kill for it, as we saw when he believed it was Snape who killed DD.
I still think DD wanted the wand buried with him, but if anyone had to have it, he would have wanted Snape to claim it. Snape's not actually winning it would have robbed it of some of its power, I believe.
I thought that Albus want Severus to get the credit for killing him to cement Severus' place close to Voldemort.
This is also true. In fact, didn't Dumbledore ask Snape something about this?
But why does Dumbledore say that he had intended for Snape to get the wand?
Where does he say this? I can't find it. I'm not saying he doesn't; I just can't seem to locate it.
Dumbledore may not have been an Elder wand expert, believing, like Voldemort, that the wand only changed masters by a killing.
Dumbledore knew the secret of the wand, and he wanted Harry to know it, as well. That is why he left the Tales to Hermione. DD knew that defeating did not necessarily mean killing.
I feel the plan was for Dumbledore to be killed privately by Severus and make it look like either an accident, a natural death, or a random killing. This way Vold could not trace the Wand back to Severus or Draco.
Shadow, I believe this is the most likely scenario. In fact, as I've said before, I do not think DD intended Snape to have to actually kill him but to help him die, probably via a poison of some sort that he could administer himself.
Yes, but Lord Voldemort would still (wrongly) believe that Snape was the master of the wand because he 'defeated' its previous owner.
Yes, Pesky, and I think this has everything to do with Dumbledore's plea, "Severus, please ...," there on the tower. Things had not played out as the two of them intended, so they had to play the cards they had. This was the only way to keep the power of the Wand from Voldemort, I think. I still don't think Snape knew, and I do not believe he was meant to be the master of the Elder Wand.
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 28, 2009 8:34 pm (#296 of 391)
Soli, Dumbledore says he meant the Wand to go to Severus in the King's Cross chapter (almost the last page of chapter).
This solidifies in my mind that he would not want Vold to know it was Severus who killed him, as this knowledge would surely not keep the Wand from Vold. IMO the theory that DD wanted Severus to kill him publically in order to get Severus closer to Vold became obsolete after DH came out and we knew of the Elder Wand, its allegiance passing on, and DD knowing his murderer would be prey to Vold.
Solitaire - Aug 28, 2009 8:53 pm (#297 of 391)
Thanks ... I'll reread.
Julia H. - Aug 29, 2009 5:04 am (#298 of 391)
I also thought Dumbledore wanted Voldemort to know Snape had killed him - to strengthen Snape's position as Voldemort's right-hand man so that he could become the Headmaster and also an "advisor" who could cleverly manipulate and contain Voldemort. While Dumbledore was alive, his power and Voldemort's fear of him meant some control over Voldemort, but there would be no one with such power after Dumbledore's death, so whatever Snape could achieve through manipulation was even more important as the only way to slow down Vold a little.
On the other hand, the same strategy [/b]- Making Voldemort know Snape had killed Dumbledore - undermined the very result Dumbledore could hope to achieve by it, since the knowledge that Snape had killed Dumbledore would ultimately make Voldemort want to kill Snape, and Dumbledore had to foresee that. Even if we put aside the ethics of the plan, risking the life of a key person like Snape is a bad idea. (At least the wand itself could have been hidden a little better to buy Snape more time...) After all, Snape was the only person to know the ultimate secret of Harry-Horcrux, and how could Dumbledore be sure that Snape - who had to delay giving Harry the information until the time specified by Dumbledore - would have the opportunity to deliver the message before getting killed?
So all in all, wanting Voldy to know Snape had killed Dumbledore could only have short-term advantages and long-term risks.
I do not think DD intended Snape to have to actually kill him but to help him die, probably via a poison of some sort that he could administer himself. (Solitaire)
Dumbledore said "You must kill me", and to me it seems to mean Snape was intended to do just that: Kill Dumbledore. If Dumbledore had wanted to kill himself using some poison, he could have obtained that poison easily and carry it with himself all the time, without burdening Snape's soul with these words. To me, it seems Dumbledore either did not want to commit suicide (how would that had affected the power of his wand?) or he did not want to die while he had any strength, power or ability to do anything.
For example, he may have expected that due to the curse on his hand, he would eventually become so seriously ill that he would not be able take that poison himself. He also seemed to expect DE's to be around when the time came (I'm not sure how he could foresee that, perhaps only as a possibility), again, robbing him of the chance to kill himself before they killed him.
As for "the moment will present itself in due course", I interpret it as referring to the moment when death was inevitable one way or another, and Dumbledore would die either as a direct consequence of the curse from the ring (in which case, he practically would have been defeated by Voldemort) or in the hands of DE's (defeated again), and that was the moment when Snape was expected to step in. So actually Dumbledore may have foreseen both a scenario in which he would die in private and a scenario in which he would be killed in front of others.
I think, if no one had killed Dumbledore on the Tower, he would have died poisoned by Voldemort's potion (another defeat), but in this case, it would have been technically Harry who had killed him. Dumbledore obviously did not want that. It is interesting that Dumbledore tells Snape quite bluntly "You must kill me" (and lets Snape deal with that); but to Harry, he tactfully points out that the potion Harry is going to force down his throat will not kill him immediately, allowing Harry to believe that Dumbledore could be saved eventually. It never seems that Harry is left with any conscious guilt about playing a part in Dumbledore's death - he probably sticks with the thought that Madam Pomfrey (or Snape even) could have cured Dumbledore after the poisoning in the Cave, so he (Harry) did not inflict mortal harm on Dumbledore.
Dumbledore acknowledges to Harry that he wanted Snape "to end up" with the wand (the expression sounds rather vague to me), but after that, Harry tells Voldemort that Dumbledore wanted to die undefeated (which Dumbledore did not tell him). I have a hard time reconciling these two statements unless Dumbledore wanted Snape to only physically end up with the wand - but then I don't see the point in Snape having the wand only physically. What for?
PeskyPixie - Aug 29, 2009 11:31 am (#299 of 391)
"Dumbledore does need Lord Voldemort to know that Snape killed him." -myself
"Why? We have no canon that Dumbledore and Severus talked about Vold needing to know he killed DD." -me and my shadow 813
Dumbledore makes it very clear that he needs to have Snape as close to the Dark Lord as possible. Dumbledore's murder is the ultimate proof of Severus' loyalty. Since Voldemort planned to have Snape kill him (as it was supposedly a given that Draco would fail) Dumbledore used his own life-threatening injury to further this important plot. He needs Snape close to Voldemort both to keep an eye on Nagini and to have access to the headmaster's study at Hogwarts (1. Dumbledore's portrait is there; 2. Gryffindor's sword is there; 3. the students of Hogwarts need to be protected from the Carrows). Who else would the Dark Lord entrust his beloved Hogwarts to, but his most loyal servant, the remover of one of the greatest obstacles in his path?
No, Dumbledore needed Severus to be as close to Voldemort as possible, so if Snape must kill Dumbledore it is to Dumbledore's advantage to give Voldemort knowledge of this fact.
So, it seems very dangerous for Dumbledore to want Severus to have this wand.
Madam Pince - Aug 29, 2009 2:49 pm (#300 of 391)
So JKR totally screwed up with that quote by Dumbledore at King's Cross when she had him say "I admit that was my intention." Which is what I thought in the first place. Arrrgh.
I agree with Soli that I don't think Snape knew anything about the Elder Wand or any of the Hallows for that matter, and was totally unaware of that part of the plan. Just more of Dumbledore's being secretive and concealing vital information. From his own lieutenant! Whom he vowed he trusted! *goes off muttering*
I wish JKR would read this thread, I really do.
Edit: Oh, and I also don't think that "hiding" the Wand would ever work, either. Someone's bound to stumble across it someday... maybe not Voldemort, maybe centuries from now, but someone, someday. Same thing with the Resurrection Stone -- I absolutely hate the fact that it's lying somewhere in the Forest. (Except for the fact that that's the one thing that gives me some faint hope of a sequel someday... )
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 301 to 350
Mona Fri May 13, 2011 12:24 pm
Julia H. - Aug 29, 2009 3:40 pm (#301 of 391)
I agree that Snape cannot have known about Dumbledore wanting him to do anything with the Elder Wand. If he had known that Dumbledore wanted him to keep or to hide the wand physically, he would have done his best to get the wand and to do as he had been told. If he had known that Dumbledore wanted him to be the master of the wand, he would have found an opportunity to disarm Draco. Dumbledore apparently took some details of his plan to the grave.
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 29, 2009 4:26 pm (#302 of 391)
I'll just repeat my belief that there would be no advantage to Voldemort knowing that Severus killed Dumbledore. Once DH came out, we realize that the Elder Wand was Dumbledore's most crucial concern beyond getting Harry his information. Severus was doing just fine as a DE without risking Vold getting the Elder Wand by simply killing Severus and robbing the tomb. We have no canon to support Dumbledore wanting Severus to kill him in front of Death Eaters to impress Vold.
Even this line in The Prince's Tale, "Draco blames me, he thinks I have ursurped Lucius's position." Dumbledore says nothing like "which is our plan" or "we need you much closer than that".
Severus had a secure position the moment the DoM battle went sour and Lucius, Bella and the rest had disappointed Vold.
Regarding Dumbledore poisoning himself, that to me was no part of the plan. Severus was told to give him a "quick, painless exit".
Solitaire - Aug 29, 2009 5:09 pm (#303 of 391)
he would have died poisoned by Voldemort's potion (another defeat), but in this case, it would have been technically Harry who had killed him
I disagree, considering Harry was only following orders. Besides, do we know for sure that the potion itself would have killed DD? I thought it was being dragged under the surface of the lake full of Inferi--when the drinker went to get what he thought was water--that did it. The potion certainly didn't kill Kreacher. He was still alive and well many years later, because he was able to get out of the lake. Regulus was not, so he must have drowned. Dumbledore was already weakened, so perhaps it would have affected him more powerfully ... hard to say.
Julia H. - Aug 29, 2009 5:35 pm (#304 of 391)
Of course, Harry was only following orders (so was Snape). That is why I said "killed", not "murdered". Dumbledore would have been murdered by Voldemort (through his potion), with Harry being an instrument. It probably would have been enough to make Harry feel some vague guilt, but he was spared that, and I wanted to point out that Dumbledore (IMO) intentionally saw to it that there should be no guilt Harry could feel because of his involvement. Snape, an adult, hardened as he was by life, struggled with the knowledge of being instrumental in Dumbledore's death even though he accepted it as a necessity. But Dumbledore apparently trusted that he would eventually be able to handle it. Harry had to be protected in this respect.
I'm pretty convinced that Dumbledore was dying on the Tower. He was very weak. He himself had said that he did not think the potion would kill a person immediately, which sounds as though he thought it was in fact lethal. He wanted to summon Snape even before he met Malfoy and the DE's. The castle was full of Order members - Dumbledore could have been shielded and cured if there had been any chance of recovery. I think this was the moment to "present itself in due course". Dumbledore was dying, and he had to die in the hands of a friend.
As for Kreacher, he was a house-elf, not a human, so he may have reacted differently to the potion. (Or simply his duty to serve his masters was so strong that he could not be sick...)
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 29, 2009 10:13 pm (#305 of 391)
Dumbledore apparently took some details of his plan to the grave. - Julia
Yes, Severus had his role but knew about neither Horcruxes nor Hallows.
Dumbledore asks Severus to kill him for the sake of Draco (which Severus knew of course) and for the sake of the Wand (which Severus did not know). We do not even have canon that Severus told Dumbledore about the Vow, which I find interesting. Draco brings it to DD's attention on the Tower that Severus is watching Draco because he promised Narcissa, and Dumbledore only responds with, "Of course that is what he would tell you, Draco, but - ". He doesn't say he knew about the Vow (which would have been an appropriate response). And, there is nothing about it in the Memories between Severus and Dumbledore.
Again regarding Dumbledore's real motivation, in The Prince's Tale Dumbledore feels that Severus is doing just fine and asks no more of him: "And you are doing extremely well... To give Voldemort what appears to be valuable information while withholding the essentials..."
IMO Severus would naturally stay on at Hogwarts after it is taken over (why wouldn't he become Headmaster then? Certainly Amycus or "brutal face" weren't up for it). Severus is, as Dumbledore said, already "a basket...dangling on the arm of Lord Voldemort". This is all stated as the situation without any staged, public killing, which would only cause Severus's death perhaps even a mere day after Dumbledore's. How could that be helpful?
Soul Search - Aug 30, 2009 9:31 am (#306 of 391)
Snape had taken an "unbreakable vow" that he would fulfil Draco's mission if Draco failed. If Snape doesn't kill Dumbledore, he dies.
On the tower Draco clearly fails to complete his mission and kill Dumbledore. If anyone besides Snape kills Dumbledore, then Snape dies.
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 30, 2009 3:55 pm (#307 of 391)
I do not believe if "someone" killed Dumbledore before Draco had clearly failed (i.e., prior to the night on the Tower) that Severus would have died. JM2K
Solitaire - Aug 30, 2009 5:42 pm (#308 of 391)
I'm not sure, either, Shadow. Snape's pledge was to protect Draco, wasn't it? I'll have to reread the Vow, and my books are packed away at the moment. But if protection was the issue, then as long as Draco was not in danger, perhaps Snape would have been okay. Maybe ...
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 30, 2009 6:30 pm (#309 of 391)
I'm happy to post the Vow, Soli. I seem to be on a quoting streak these past few days.
* Watch over Draco as he attempts to fulfil the Dark Lord's wishes.
* (to the best of your ability) protect him from harm.
* if it seems Draco will fail... carry out the deed that the Dark Lord has ordered Draco to perform.
I have looked at this in a couple of ways:
1) Did Severus die after the necklace and the mead failed to reach Dumbledore? Those were both failed attempts, even if Draco's heart wasn't in it.
2) If Dumbledore had died in the Cave, which was before it was apparent that Draco could not go through with what he had planned that night, would Severus die?
Solitaire - Aug 30, 2009 7:11 pm (#310 of 391)
I think protection of Draco was the bottom line with his mother.
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 30, 2009 10:47 pm (#311 of 391)
That is probably true, Soli. Regarding the Vow as a binding contract, however, Severus would die if he did not meet the requirements as she worded them.
I cannot help but think, given examples such as the two I mentioned above, that Severus would not die if the criteria of the Vow were met or no longer necessary.
mona amon - Aug 31, 2009 6:28 am (#312 of 391)
I agree. I think Narcissa's intent matters. What she wanted was the death of Dumbledore, so if someone else killed him before Severus got to him, or if he'd died of some other cause, Severus would be automatically released from his contract.
Some thoughts on the Elder Wand-
Dumbledore intended to die as the undefeated master of the Elder Wand, so that the wand's power would die with him. This could have been acheived even if he had died of the ring injury, so it was not the reason why he wanted to die at the hand of Severus. So it was not an important part of the plan.
He wanted Severus to kill him so that he could further boost his already good standing with Voldemort, and get the Headmaster's post when Dumbledore was gone. Moreover, Voldemort had ordered Severus to kill Dumbledore if Draco failed, so it was as much about obeying him as it was about getting into his good books.
IMO, the plan was that when the end of term (Draco's Judgement day) came, Dumbledore would approach Draco and offer to hide him and his mother, just as he does on the Tower. He was absolutely confident that Draco wouldn't attack him alone. He was also absolutely confident that Draco would never be able to breach the protections he had put round the castle, and let DEs in to help him. So I think the plan didn't centre around Draco.
After that, sometime before the end of the year when DD would die anyway, Severus was to kill him in private. He would have to kill him with his wand, so that he had proof that he had done it. After that comes the tricky part. Severus was supposed to take the wand, or how else could he 'end up' with it. But we can only speculate as to what he was supposed to do with it.
Anyway, the important part for me, is to show that Dumbledore did not intend to put Severus in any danger because of the Elder Wand. At least not in any more danger than he already was.
Did he really anticipate Voldemort's obsession with the wand? He tells Harry in Kingscross, "I have been sure that he would try [to go after the wand], ever since your wand beat Voldemort's in the graveyard of Little Hangleton. At first, he was afraid that you had conquered him by superior skill. Once he had kidnapped Ollivander, however, he discovered the existence of the twin cores. He thought that explained everything." This was the most that DD anticipated when he formulated his plan. At first he thought that Voldemort would go after the Elder Wand, but after kidnapping Olivander and learning about the twin cores, Dumbledore felt he was reassured that Harry's wand was actually not more powerful than his own.
I think that because the Elder Wand and Voldemort's obsession with it had such a central place in the plot of DH, we assume that Dumbledore should have foretold what would happen - Voldemort becoming obsessed with the wand, killing Severus for mastery, etc. But actually, what sent Voldemort off on his quest for the wand was the fact that Lucius's wand did not work against Harry either. Dumbledore could not have guessed that this would happen.
To conclude, I think the Elder Wand was not an important part of Dumbledore's plan to have Severus kill him, and he could not have anticipated that Voldemort would end up killing Severus for the wand.
Solitaire - Aug 31, 2009 7:12 am (#313 of 391)
It's interesting that Voldemort believed he had to kill Snape in order to take possession of his wand. Why not just perform Expelliarmus? Was he afraid, perhaps, that Snape might turn on him? (We know Snape's loyalties, but did Voldy?)
Julia H. - Aug 31, 2009 8:56 am (#314 of 391)
Dumbledore intended to die as the undefeated master of the Elder Wand, so that the wand's power would die with him. This could have been acheived even if he had died of the ring injury... (Mona)
I'm not sure about that at all. The injury was caused by Voldemort's Horcrux and/or by a powerful curse put on it probably by Voldemort. It might have counted as Voldemort defeating Dumbledore even if Voldemort had not known about it.
But actually, what sent Voldemort off on his quest for the wand was the fact that Lucius's wand did not work against Harry either. Dumbledore could not have guessed that this would happen.
He could not have foreseen exactly what would happen, but the passage that you quoted (and its continuation in the book) does not strike me as explaining that Dumbledore stopped expecting Voldemort to go after the Elder Wand at any point. How could he be sure that Voldemort would not go after the wand eventually? How could he know for sure exactly what and how much Ollivander would tell Voldemort about wandlore? He acknowledges that he expected Voldemort to go after the Elder Wand, and I see no reason why he could be confident at any point later on that Voldemort would still not go after that wand.
Severus was supposed to take the wand, or how else could he 'end up' with it. But we can only speculate as to what he was supposed to do with it.
Then why does he not take it? Not on the Tower, where he may not have the chance, but later, when he is the Headmaster.
Anyway, the important part for me, is to show that Dumbledore did not intend to put Severus in any danger because of the Elder Wand. At least not in any more danger than he already was.
I agree that it would be important. I just don't see an explanation that works for me.
I have some questions and I wonder how you all would answer them:
1) Was Dumbledore's argument concerning "pain and humiliation" purely a way to convince Snape more easily (as it seems that is what eventually convinced Snape), or just another way of saying "defeat by the DE's" (which he wanted to avoid) or something else? If it was only an argument to convince Snape, how necessary do you think it was? I am sure it was a very effective argument, but what would have happened if he had simply told Snape his true reasons, whatever they were?
2) Maybe Dumbledore, while he lived, did not expect that his plan for Snape to kill him would mean additional risk for Snape. What about his portrait? Could portrait-Dumbledore warn Snape? If it could, why does not Snape get any warnings from the portrait?
It's interesting that Voldemort believed he had to kill Snape in order to take possession of his wand. Why not just perform Expelliarmus? Was he afraid, perhaps, that Snape might turn on him? (Solitaire)
Because he was a perfectionist. Because after giving Lily a choice, he learned that being "merciful" was dangerous. He killed everyone on the road toward the Elder Wand, all the previous masters he found alive. When he was so close to once again confronting the Boy Who Lived Whenever He Wanted To Kill Him, he took no chances.
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 31, 2009 9:39 am (#315 of 391)
The injury was caused by Voldemort's Horcrux and/or by a powerful curse put on it probably by Voldemort. It might have counted as Voldemort defeating Dumbledore even if Voldemort had not known about it. [/b]- Julia
This is very possible, as Draco did not need to be aware of his victory in order to have it. However, we do not know if poisoning constitutes winning a duel.
He acknowledges that he expected Voldemort to go after the Elder Wand, and I see no reason why he could be confident at any point later on that Voldemort would still not go after that wand.
My feeling as well. When Dumbledore is written as stating, “I have been sure that he would try…”, and we have no canon to contradict this surety, then I am taking it as how he felt and continued to feel. It does not say, “I HAD been sure that he would try…”.
Severus was supposed to take the wand, or how else could he 'end up' with it. But we can only speculate as to what he was supposed to do with it. [/b]- Mona
I read "end up" as to be its master and not to hide it. The physical location of the Wand is not important for Severus to be its master, as we see with Draco. In fact, Severus having physical possession of it would be more dangerous if he became the master because the plan was to thwart Vold. Thus, burying it with Dumbledore while someone unknown was the master is the most intelligent plan, IMO, and the one Dumbledore would have wanted. I used to think perhaps Dumbledore didn’t care about Severus’s life, but I no longer think that.
Julia, IMO the answer to your question (1) is Yes, Dumbledore was not beneath using certain measures to get what he wanted/needed to get done. I think that is why he made sure to point out Harry’s nature was more like Lily’s, and why he made sure to play on Severus’s “guilt” of not giving his mentor what he requests: a quick and painless death.
I don’t think Dumbledore would “put all his eggs in one basket” by telling Severus about the Wand. It was just too risky. As he said to Severus, it is not because he didn’t trust him.
Your question (2) is a good one. Back to how much Portraits can communicate! Not sure…
mona amon - Aug 31, 2009 10:27 am (#316 of 391)
I'm not sure about that at all. The injury was caused by Voldemort's Horcrux and/or by a powerful curse put on it probably by Voldemort. It might have counted as Voldemort defeating Dumbledore even if Voldemort had not known about it. (Julia)
I don't think it would have counted, because the Elder wand wasn't involved in this 'defeat' in any way. It's the wand that has to be defeated, not merely the master, by stealing it, by disarming the master of the wand, or by defeating him in a duel where the master is fighting with the wand and so on.
He could not have foreseen exactly what would happen, but the passage that you quoted (and its continuation in the book) does not strike me as explaining that Dumbledore stopped expecting Voldemort to go after the Elder Wand at any point.
He'd have stopped expecting him to go after the wand because he knew that Voldemort had kidnapped Olivander and got an explanation for the priori incantantem phenomenon in the graveyard. And he was right. Voldemort was perfectly content to borrow Lucius's wand when he went after Harry. Dumbledore couldn't possibly have forseen that any wand that Voldemort used against Harry would not work against the Holly wand, resulting in Voldemort setting off in search of the most powerful wand.
I'll try and reply to the other points on the Dumbledore thread tomorrow. Now I'm off to bed.
I read "end up" as to be its master and not to hide it. (Shadow)
I don't know about hiding it since we are never told exactly what DD wanted Severus to do with his wand after he had killed him, but he never intended Severus to be its master. I'll find the quotes to support this tomorrow.
Julia H. - Aug 31, 2009 11:35 am (#317 of 391)
It's the wand that has to be defeated, not merely the master, by stealing it, by disarming the master of the wand, or by defeating him in a duel where the master is fighting with the wand and so on. (Mona)
Not necessarily. Harry becomes the master of the Elder Wand by disarming Draco of a different wand. Neither Draco, nor he has touched the Elder Wand at this point. I would not regard "stealing the wand" as "defeating the wand" either. It seems it is the master of the wand that has to be defeated.
Looking at the question from a different perspective, if you already have a wand that can defeat the Elder Wand in a duel, you already have quite a powerful wand - so why would you want the Elder Wand (which is apparently not as good as your original wand)? I know Dumbledore apparently swapped the wand that defeated the Deathstick for the Deathstick, but being Dumbledore means you have complicated motivations. The average hunger-power warrior may not be so subtle. Defeating the wand's master, however, (in a situation where he cannot use the Elder Wand or by stealing his wand or by catching him unawares and disarming him etc.) will keep the myth of the wand intact so that it will still be a desirable object for the winner.
He'd have stopped expecting him to go after the wand because he knew that Voldemort had kidnapped Olivander and got an explanation for the priori incantantem phenomenon in the graveyard.
But that's not what he says. He says he has been sure that Voldemort would go after the wand, and then he explains Voldemort's way of thinking after kidnapping Ollivander. He does not say he expected Voldemort to find out about the twin cores but he did not expect that another wand would fail against Harry's. The only thing he says he has expected is Voldemort going after the Elder Wand. In the Final Duel, Harry tells Voldemort that Dumbledore wanted to die undefeated, as the last true master of the wand. If Dumbledore was sure that Voldemort would not now go after the Elder Wand, then why is it emphasized that he wanted to die undefeated? His main concern was Voldemort and his Horcruxes, so why would he bother about a wand that he thought was safe from Voldemort anyway?
This is what Harry says:
"Aren't you listening? Snape never beat Dumbledore! Dumbledore's death was planned between them! Dumbledore intended to die undefeated, the wand's last true master! If all had gone as planned, the wand's power would have died with him, because it had never been won from him!"
If Harry is right, then Dumbledore's plans with Snape about his death are directly connected to Dumbledore being the last true master of the wand. It also suggests that Dumbledore did not expect to die undefeated if he had died otherwise (possibly including dying because of the curse of the ring).
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 31, 2009 11:47 am (#318 of 391)
I recall this being discussed in the past, that Harry's statement (above) makes no sense. We are told that the Elder Wand disappears and shows up again throughout history. To me, this has been because of the very situation Voldemort believes he is accomplishing: stealing it from the grave of its master. I have thought, for the Wand to continue to change hands throughout so many centuries, it must have been robbed from dead masters or their estates at some points in history, as long as it was robbed from the actual master's possession.
After all, Gellert stole the Wand from Gregorovitch's workshop, without dueling him. He simply picked it up and jumped out the window. If he had come after Gregorovitch's natural death, and found it lying about on a desk and stole it, I think it would have been Gellert's then, too.
Compounding the issue of Harry's contradictory statement quoted above, if Dumbledore wanted Severus to physically "end up" with the Wand, he could have told him so at any point during that year without giving anything away as to why it was important. He could have said, "I want you to have it, to remember me by." So simple and innocuous, but he didn't. *shrug*
As Julia pointed out, Dumbledore's original wand defeated the Elder Wand. He could have given Severus the Elder Wand at any time and continued to use his original one. He wanted to protect others from the Wand, so IMO had to devise a plan where the real master could not be traced back to it. Thus, if the master were to be defeated, that victor would never know he was the Wand's new master and the *trail* would be forever lost.
mona amon - Sep 1, 2009 2:57 am (#319 of 391)
The average hunger-power warrior may not be so subtle. Defeating the wand's master, however, (in a situation where he cannot use the Elder Wand or by stealing his wand or by catching him unawares and disarming him etc.) will keep the myth of the wand intact so that it will still be a desirable object for the winner. (Julia)
Maybe so, though we do not know if Dumbledore was the only one to ever win the wand in a regular duel. However, in all the examples in the book, the Elder Wand has to be involved in some way. "the possessor of the wand must capture it from its previous owner, if he is to be truly master of it" (Xenophilius, pg. 334 Bloomsbury edition). Even if one is stealing the wand, or taking the wand after stabbing the master of it to death, or some other trickery, the object is to get mastery of the wand. So the wand considers itself to be captured, and transfers allegience.
In the case of the ring curse, the wand wasn't involved in any way. How is it to know that it has to transfer its allegience to Voldemort if Dumbledore dies of the curse?
Not necessarily. Harry becomes the master of the Elder Wand by disarming Draco of a different wand. Neither Draco, nor he has touched the Elder Wand at this point. I would not regard "stealing the wand" as "defeating the wand" either. It seems it is the master of the wand that has to be defeated.
I think this only supports my point. Draco disarms DD of the Elder wand (Elder Wand is directly involved. Even though Draco doesn't touch it, he defeats it with his Hawthorn wand). The Elder Wand switches allegience to Draco, or at least to the wand that defeated it. Harry captures the wand that defeated the Elder wand. Does the Elder Wand realise that Harry is its new master the moment that this happens? Probably not. But in the final duel with Voldemort, the Elder Wand does recognise its conqueror, the hawthorn wand that sent it flying over the ramparts, and refuses to work against it. It's only when Harry takes full possession of it that he becomes its true master.
The only thing he says he has expected is Voldemort going after the Elder Wand.
Here DD is speaking with the benefit of hindsight. He seems to know everything that happened after his death, so, after Harry's holly wand beat Voldemort's borrowed wand during the Seven Potters Chase, Dumbledore must once again have expected him to go after the Elder Wand. But he could not have known this when he was alive, as shown by this conversation, “There’s more,” said Harry. “There’s more to it. Why did my wand break the wand he borrowed?”
“As to that, I cannot be sure.”
“Have a guess, then,” said Harry, and Dumbledore laughed.
“What you must understand, Harry, is that you and Lord Voldemort have journeyed together into realms of magic hitherto unknown and untested. But here is what I think happened, and it is unprecedented, and no wandmaker could, I think, ever have predicted or explained it to Voldemort." (Ch. 35, Pg. 569, Bloomsbury ed.)
I'm not saying that he laid out a careful plan involving an assumption that Voldemort would not go after the Elder Wand. I'm saying that Voldemort going after the wand was not in the forefront of his mind when he formulated his plan, so while he was alive, he could not have forseen that Severus would end up getting killed for the wand.
If Dumbledore was sure that Voldemort would not now go after the Elder Wand, then why is it emphasized that he wanted to die undefeated? His main concern was Voldemort and his Horcruxes, so why would he bother about a wand that he thought was safe from Voldemort anyway?
I don't think he actually thought about it and said, "it will be safe from Voldemort". Like I said in my previous paragraph, IMO, that wasn't in the forefront of his mind. Dumbledore would have wanted to die undefeated so that the wand would lose its power, thus saving it from all the megalomaniacs who might try to get it in the future. This is the same reason why he took it and used it when he was alive, "to save others from it", and he would have wanted this to continue after his death.
I recall this being discussed in the past, that Harry's statement (above) makes no sense. (Shadow)
It does make sense. If Severus had killed him on Dumbledore's request, Dumbledore would not have used his wand to protect himself. So he'd die undefeated because he was allowing himself to be killed. That's not a defeat. I think the only problem with the statement is, how did Harry know this? For me it's not a problem because a lot of 'between the lines' communication goes on between Harry and Dumbledore in King's Cross. Harry was in a heighted state of awareness and could have intuited things from what Dumbledore said, without him actually spelling it out.
If he had come after Gregorovitch's natural death, and found it lying about on a desk and stole it, I think it would have been Gellert's then, too.
If Gregorovich had died a natural death, the wand's power would have died with him. "If I die a natural death like Ignotus, its power will be broken, won't it? The previous master will never have been defeated. That'll be the end of it." (Harry to DD's portrait, DH, Ch.36)
Julia H. - Sep 1, 2009 3:39 am (#320 of 391)
I'm saying that Voldemort going after the wand was not in the forefront of his mind when he formulated his plan, so while he was alive, he could not have forseen that Severus would end up getting killed for the wand. (Mona)
I can accept that, although I still think, if he had at any point expected Voldemort to go after the Elder Wand (and he says so), he should have taken this possibility into account when he arranged it for Snape to kill him, especially if he wanted it to happen with Voldemort's knowledge. He was a commander; he was the keeper of all secrets that were important in the war against Voldemort; by his own decision, he was the only person with a full view of the situation; and he was also a genious. In this situation, it was his duty to think about both the advantages and the disadvantages of his plan. If he was to strengthen Snape's position with Voldemort at such a great cost and risk (by risk I mean the fact that Snape immediately became Enemy Nr 2., whom all the Order would have gladly killed), at least he was to make it sure that this plan would work, and there would be no drawbacks that would further endanger the key-person's life [/b]- And the plan itself with it. If Voldemort had not wanted to go after the Elder Wand, the plan would have been all right. When, however, Voldemort decided to go after the Wand, there was practically nothing to prevent Snape being eventually killed by him. So, if Dumbledore did not think of that, he made a huge mistake, and it almost ruined the whole plan. If Harry had arrived into the Shrieking Shack a few minutes later, if Voldemort had waited in the Shack until Snape was dead, if the dying Snape had not had the strength to give Harry the memories, if Hermione had not had the presence of mind to conjure a flask (etc.), Dumbledore's plan would have likely failed - simply because the idea that Voldemort might go after the Elder Wand (which he says he was sure Voldemort would do) was not in the forefront of his mind.
Does the Elder Wand realise that Harry is its new master the moment that this happens? Probably not. But in the final duel with Voldemort, the Elder Wand does recognise its conqueror, the hawthorn wand that sent it flying over the ramparts, and refuses to work against it. It's only when Harry takes full possession of it that he becomes its true master.
What Harry says, however, is different:
Does the wand in your hand know its last master was Disarmed? Because if it does ... I am the true master of the Elder Wand."
If the wand may know its master was disarmed (of a different wand), why can't it know that its master was killed by someone's poison? It is at least a possibility the Dumbledore had to consider.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 1, 2009 8:28 am (#321 of 391)
Julia, I agree with your post and feel that it is one of the *rare* bits of this plot that seems very direct! Dumbledore knew Vold would go after the Wand ever since his graveyard fiasco.
The quote from Harry at the end that mona provided, again, is contradictory IMO to what we see in the series. If the quote is true, and if Dumbledore intended to die a "natural death", then why bother needing to make sure Severus "ends up" with it?
Regarding how it is mastered, the idea that a Wand must be dueled away and/or wrestled from its owner is also contradictory to what we see in the series. We have an entire chapter entitled "The Thief". Gellert took the Wand off of a bench and fled. How is this disarming? To me one can obviously master the wand by stealing it.
That it cannot be done after the master is dead to me is questionable. After all, Dumbledore's plan, either way, does not support this idea to me.
mona amon - Sep 1, 2009 10:33 am (#322 of 391)
Does the wand in your hand know its last master was Disarmed?
This is a question, but what is the answer? Did the wand know it then, or only at the moment that the spells collided? And even if it was sentient enough to recognise Harry as Master the minute he had wrested the Hawthorn wand from Draco, there's still a 'wand connection'. Harry captures the wand that defeated the Elder Wand, so yes, maybe the Elder Wand knows.
But if DD had died of the Horcrux curse, there would be no such chain of connections back to the Elder Wand. Voldemort wouldn't have captured the wand itself in any way, either by wand (DD from GG, Draco from DD), or by hand (GG from Gregorovich) or by a chain of wand defeat (Harry from Draco via the Hawthorn Wand.)
But that's neither here nor there. I sometimes feel we can prove almost anything if we try hard enough. There are so many ambiguities in the text. I'm not convinced that JKR thought everything out as thoroughly as we do.
I'm also not at all convinced that she'd intended Voldemort's indirect defeat of DD through the ring curse to count as 'capture' of the Elder Wand. For one thing, there's not a hint of it anywhere. And if that were the case, then, even if Severus kills Dumbledore, his death is still a defeat at Voldemort's hands, because Severus would never have had to kill him if it wasn't for the ring injury, so Dumbledore could never have hoped to die as the undefeated master of the wand.
When, however, Voldemort decided to go after the Wand, there was practically nothing to prevent Snape being eventually killed by him. So, if Dumbledore did not think of that, he made a huge mistake, and it almost ruined the whole plan.
But of course he couldn't forsee everything. He did the best that he could, under the circumstances. Severus had to kill him so that Voldemort would make him Headmaster of Hogwarts, and he could protect the students. That was the main part of the plan.
Even if he had expected Voldemort to go after the wand eventually, he had no idea when, so he was probably hoping for the best, hoping that Harry would finish him off before that happened. And he'd probably have been right, except for that strange thing which happened during the flight from #4 Privet Drive, which no one, not even Dumbledore, could have foretold.
Come to think of it, if that unprecedented phenomenon hadn't happened, Harry would have been toast right there. So much for plans and foretelling future events!
To me one can obviously master the wand by stealing it. (Shadow)
Yes, it is shown in the books that one can master the wand by stealing it. JKR did say it was a very fickle wand, which would transfer allegience at the slightest excuse.
Soul Search - Sep 1, 2009 10:49 am (#323 of 391)
The whole business of the Elder Wand and its master seems a bit loose. I go back to the very first piece of wand lore we learned ... "The wand chooses the wizard." Above any considerations for who stole the elder wand or who defeated who, it is the wand's choice. Sometimes the wand "chooses" the wizard who kills its master, sometimes the one who merely steals it from its master. The Elder Wand chose Dumbledore. Then it chose Harry. It did not choose Voldemort. Good wand.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 1, 2009 11:24 am (#324 of 391)
mona, I agree. Your perspective lies in the quote that Dumbledore wanted to die as the Wand's master. My perspective lies in the quote that Dumbledore wanted Severus to end up with the Wand. They contradict each other IMO. What are we to do? I have much more of a detective nature than a lawyer nature. I don't want to simply "win", I want the truth. Will we have no resolution? No peace? Ahh!
Julia H. - Sep 1, 2009 11:29 am (#325 of 391)
But, Soul Search, it chose Draco, too. And GG. Bad wand?
Voldemort wouldn't have captured the wand itself in any way, either by wand (DD from GG, Draco from DD), or by hand (GG from Gregorovich) or by a chain of wand defeat (Harry from Draco via the Hawthorn Wand.) (Mona)
That's already so many possibilities that I am not at all convinced that there could not be more. Voldemort, who had learned things from Ollivander, believed that he could have the wand by taking it from the dead master's grave, or by having the master killed by his snake (no wand involved in the latter case). We don't know if his theory was right or not, because he did not attack the rightful master in either case. It is possible that only the ways you have listed are possible ways of truly possessing the Elder Wand, but it is not satisfactorily spelt out in the books. In The Tale of the Three Brothers, the thief slit the oldest brother's throat after stealing the wand. That's not the same as stunning a la GG. To me, it seems it always works if you defeat the master in whatever way, because it is such a wand.
As for the poison, perhaps it would have counted as "defeat" only if it had been the immediate cause of Dumbledore's death.
Come to think of it, if that unprecedented phenomenon hadn't happened, Harry would have been toast right there. So much for plans and foretelling future events! (Mona)
I am not trying to claim that Dumbledore had to foresee every event. Of course not. There would always be a risk, whatever the plan. But the "Voldemort would want to kill Snape because of the Elder Wand" bit was exclusively the result of the plan itself, and since Dumbledore acknowledges that he has expected Voldemort to try and go after the Elder Wand, I see no excuse for him not considering this particular possibility, especially because it resulted in a turn of events that could not be thwarted once Voldemort did go after the Wand.
Even if he had expected Voldemort to go after the wand eventually, he had no idea when, so he was probably hoping for the best, hoping that Harry would finish him off before that happened.
But just hoping seems to be too little for me. If he knew that his plan had a possibly fatal flaw, he might have at least given a warning to Snape instead of taking that piece of information into the grave. Dumbledore could foretell that Ron would need the Deluminator. Dumbledore could even foretell that Voldemort starting to protect the snake would be the sign that Harry was ready to learn the secret (i.e., that the other Horcruxes were down). I really don't think giving Snape a hint would have made things worse than they already were. (Or he could have at least given Harry one more hint, implying that Harry should talk to Snape before the decisive confrontation with Voldemort.) Snape was supposed to stay alive long enough to give Harry Dumbledore's message, which was more important than keeping his cover at all costs, and, considering his general circumstances, he could have used that much help.
EDITED.
Mrs Brisbee - Sep 1, 2009 11:38 am (#326 of 391)
Regarding how it is mastered, the idea that a Wand must be dueled away and/or wrestled from its owner is also contradictory to what we see in the series. We have an entire chapter entitled "The Thief". Gellert took the Wand off of a bench and fled. How is this disarming? To me one can obviously master the wand by stealing it.-[/b]- MAMS
Gellert took the wand, but then waited for Gregorovich and stunned him, I think. So he didn't just pick up the wand, he also defeated its master. So I think that defeating the master is necessary to gaining mastery of the Elder Wand.
I find the whole Wand Plot very confusing.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 1, 2009 11:43 am (#327 of 391)
But the "Voldemort would want to kill Snape because of the Elder Wand" bit was exclusively the result of the plan itself,
If he knew that his plan had a possibly fatal flaw, he might have at least given a warning to Snape instead of taking that piece of information into the grave. [/b]- Julia
But this fits with my theory that Dumbledore did NOT wish for Severus to kill him in front of DE's for Vold's benefit. Had Severus been successful in assisting Dumbledore to die privately, he would then not be hunted by Vold for the Elder Wand. This makes perfect sense to me, even without his meaning Severus to be its master. So by the time they meet on the Tower there was no choice.
edit: Mrs B, I thought the Stunning Spell might be JKR's way of saying Gregorovitch was "disarmed". It doesn't say that to me, though. Also, as mona pointed out on another thread, if that were the case why risk using the Wand against its current master?
Mrs Brisbee - Sep 1, 2009 11:50 am (#328 of 391)
I thought Gellert used his own wand, not the Elder Wand. As I see it, he wouldn't have mastery of the Elder Wand until he both defeats Gregorovich and has the Wand is in his possession. It's just confusing because he takes possession of the wand first, then defeats Gregorovich. It's like what Voldemort tried to do when he already had the Wand and thought Snape was the master.
Edit: Actually, come to think of it, possession doesn't really matter, because Draco was master but never possessed the Wand. It's the defeating part that matters. I suppose Gellert stole it first so Gregorovich couldn't use it.
Solitaire - Sep 1, 2009 5:21 pm (#329 of 391)
Gellert took the wand and then stunned Gregorovitch with the wand, most likely. I do not see this "defeat" in the same way as dueling or even physically wresting the wand from him ... but that's just me. Obviously the wand was not unbeatable ... DD beat him!
Madam Pince - Sep 1, 2009 7:27 pm (#330 of 391)
I'm not convinced that JKR thought everything out as thoroughly as we do. --Mona Amon
Now there's the understatement of the century!
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 1, 2009 9:33 pm (#331 of 391)
It's starting to sound like my old favorite board game: Clue.
Vold in the Forest with the Elder Wand
Severus in the Shrieking Shack with the Elder Wand
Grindelwald on the window ledge with the Elder Wand
Dumbledore on the Tower with the Elder Wand
Draco in the Drawing Room with the Elder Wand. AAHH!
Julia H. - Sep 2, 2009 2:08 am (#332 of 391)
I guess my only problem with the "Dumbledore made a mistake (forgetting that Voldemort would kill for the Wand)" solution, is that it should have been made clear in the book that he had made a mistake if an important section of the plot was based on that mistake. So it is really not the theory that is a problem, only the way it does not come across in the book.
In OotP, for example, it becomes absolutely clear that Dumbledore made a huge mistake keeping information from Harry. His motivation is explained, too. We also know that Dumbledore made a mistake when he put on the cursed ring, trying to use the Stone. Since we find out about Ariana and Dumbledore's whole family, we understand in the end, why he made that mistake.
We know that Harry made a mistake when he allowed Voldemort to lure him into the Ministry. He could have alerted the Order through Snape, but we know why he forgot about this possibility. We also know he loved Sirius too much to wait patiently while he thought Sirius was being tortured. Harry made another mistake when he pronounced Voldemort's name in DH so they were all captured and taken to the Malfoy Manor. However, it is another totally understandable mistake. (It would have been much more strange if Ron had made that mistake, for example.)
In the case of Dumbledore's plan, it is only mentioned (vaguely) that the bit "Snape ending up with the wand" did not work out, possibly because of Draco. That is not the same as explaining that there was originally a major mistake in the plan, with Dumbledore acknowledging it.
I can't decide which would be Dumbledore's real goal: To make sure the "future" of the Elder Wand after his death or to cement Snape's position as Voldemort's right-hand man - or maybe both(?). Neither of these goals worked out perfectly: We don't even know what would have been the wand's destiny if Dumbledore's plan had worked; and although Snape did become Voldemort's right-hand man, his position was still very precarious, a fact ultimately undermining the very advantages resulting from his sacrifice.
Madam Pince - Sep 2, 2009 3:47 am (#333 of 391)
...resulting from his sacrifice. --Julia
Whose sacrifice? Dumbledore's or Snape's? I'm not quite clear what you're referring to here...
Julia H. - Sep 2, 2009 6:01 am (#334 of 391)
Sorry. I was referring to the sacrifice Snape made when he AK-d Dumbledore (at least I think he made a significant sacrifice there). Dumbledore asked him to do it for a purpose even if it is ultimately somewhat unclear what exactly that purpose was. If the purpose was to give Snape a more powerful position to slow down Voldemort, this purpose was both served and undermined by the fact that Voldemort thought Snape to be the one who had murdered Dumbledore. Snape as Voldemort's right-hand man could be useful only as long as he was alive.
Solitaire - Sep 2, 2009 7:10 am (#335 of 391)
I agree that AK-ing Dumbledore was a significant sacrifice for Snape, because it meant he would be hated and branded a murderer by the Wizarding World at large.
Madam Pince - Sep 2, 2009 7:17 am (#336 of 391)
Snape as Voldemort's right-hand man could be useful only as long as he was alive.
As long as Dumbledore was alive? (Must be, because Snape couldn't be useful if Snape was dead, really... )
OK, gotcha now. I think. You're saying the purpose (cementing Snape's position as Voldy's right-hand man) was served because Voldemort sees Snape as a loyal DE because he killed Dumbledore, but at the same time that purpose was undermined because with Dumbledore dead, does Voldemort really have any further use for Snape? That makes sense. (Sorry I'm so thick -- no coffee yet...)
mona amon - Sep 2, 2009 9:09 am (#337 of 391)
I guess my only problem with the "Dumbledore made a mistake (forgetting that Voldemort would kill for the Wand)" solution, is that it should have been made clear in the book that he had made a mistake if an important section of the plot was based on that mistake. So it is really not the theory that is a problem, only the way it does not come across in the book. (Julia)
I don't see it as a mistake. Yes, there was a possibility that Voldemort might start hunting for the wand at some unknown future date. It was a risk that had to be handled just like all the other risks that he was facing. It did turn out that in the end Voldemort killed Severus for the wand. But that was a casualty of the war, not a mistake on Dumbledore's part.
I can't decide which would be Dumbledore's real goal: To make sure the "future" of the Elder Wand after his death or to cement Snape's position as Voldemort's right-hand man - or maybe both(?). Neither of these goals worked out perfectly: We don't even know what would have been the wand's destiny if Dumbledore's plan had worked; and although Snape did become Voldemort's right-hand man, his position was still very precarious, a fact ultimately undermining the very advantages resulting from his sacrifice.
I feel it was definitely to cement his position with Voldemort, so that Hogwarts wouldn't be at the mercy of the Carrows, or at least this was the main goal. The Elder Wand part of the plan flopped thanks to Draco's Expelliarmus, But the rest of it worked perfectly. Voldemort had confidence in Severus till the very end, and the lives of all the students were protected. ETA: It's sad that Severus got killed, but I see it as a consequence of the role he willingly undertook, rather than as Dumbledore's fault.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 2, 2009 12:11 pm (#338 of 391)
I feel it was definitely to cement his position with Voldemort, so that Hogwarts wouldn't be at the mercy of the Carrows, or at least this was the main goal. The Elder Wand part of the plan flopped thanks to Draco's Expelliarmus, But the rest of it worked perfectly. Voldemort had confidence in Severus till the very end, and the lives of all the students were protected. ETA: It's sad that Severus got killed, but I see it as a consequence of the role he willingly undertook, rather than as Dumbledore's fault.
For the record, I don't agree. But I'm done because I've posted and reposted my opinion more times than I can count already.
Julia H. - Sep 2, 2009 12:33 pm (#339 of 391)
You're saying the purpose (cementing Snape's position as Voldy's right-hand man) was served because Voldemort sees Snape as a loyal DE because he killed Dumbledore, but at the same time that purpose was undermined because with Dumbledore dead, does Voldemort really have any further use for Snape? (Madam Pince)
Almost. The first part is what I meant, the second part would be: ... that purpose was undermined because Snape being the one who had killed Dumbledore gave Voldemort a reason to kill him (for the Elder Wand).
And I meant: Snape as Voldemort's right-hand man could be useful only as long as Snape was alive.
I know I was stating the obvious, but I have wanted to point out that making Snape Voldemort's most trusted "follower" on the one hand (by having Snape kill Dumbledore so that Snape seems to be the most loyal and useful DE) while on the other hand making Snape a target for Voldemort (by having him kill Dumbledore so that he seems to be the current master of the Elder Wand) can be somewhat counterproductive, IMO. What is the strategical point in creating a key-position like Snape's (and at a great cost), when you [/b]- At the same time - put this key-person into immediate mortal danger that is independent of the job he does? The moment Voldemort thinks he must kill Snape for the Wand, it does not matter any more how well Snape is doing his job as a spy, he will be killed anyway.
It did turn out that in the end Voldemort killed Severus for the wand. But that was a casualty of the war, not a mistake on Dumbledore's part. (Mona)
As a person, yes, Snape was just another casualty of the war. What I see as a flaw in the plan is that all the work he had to do, the crucial secret he was alone entrusted with, and ultimately the success of Harry's efforts depended on whether Snape stayed alive long enough to deliver Dumbledore's message [/b]- And then there was also the relative safety of Hogwarts, which he alone could guarantee for months. (Of course, Dumbledore could not foresee how long Snape would be needed in the Headmaster's position.) In this kind of plan, when so much depended on Snape, it was an elementary mistake (not because of Snape's life, but because of everything that depended on Snape) to allow Snape to become Voldemort's (unsuspecting) target in spite of Snape doing his job successfully. One could always hope that Voldemort perhaps would not kill Snape too quickly, but plans in a war must not be built on hopes and pure chances.
It's sad that Severus got killed, but I see it as a consequence of the role he willingly undertook, rather than as Dumbledore's fault.
He was permanently in mortal danger as a consequence of the role he willingly undertook, but the immediate reason why he died was a flaw in Dumbledore's plan rather than a reason directly connected to the role he had willingly and knowingly undertook - like a mistake Snape would have made as a spy, or a situation that would have made it necessary for him to blow his cover, or death in the hands of Order members. These were risks he must have taken into account, but he apparently had no idea that he would have to play the part of the master of the Elder Wand, too.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 2, 2009 1:06 pm (#340 of 391)
In this kind of plan, when so much depended on Snape, it was an elementary mistake (not because of Snape's life, but because of everything that depended on Snape) to allow Snape to become Voldemort's (unsuspecting) target in spite of Snape doing his job successfully. One could always hope that Voldemort perhaps would not kill Snape too quickly, but plans in a war must not be built on hopes and pure chances.
sneaks in to whisper: I agree wholeheartedly!
Madam Pince - Sep 2, 2009 1:50 pm (#341 of 391)
OK OK OK... now I got it! Finally! Thanks, Julia!
mona amon - Sep 2, 2009 7:38 pm (#342 of 391)
...to allow Snape to become Voldemort's (unsuspecting) target...
These were risks he must have taken into account, but he apparently had no idea that he would have to play the part of the master of the Elder Wand, too. (Julia)
But why do you think he was unsuspecting? I've always assumed that Dumbledore told him that he may be in danger if Voldemort ever decided to go in quest of the Elder Wand, because of the way Severus's reactions are described in the Elder Wand chapter of DH. There would have been no reason for keeping it a secret.
So if Dumbledore warned him, it becomes just one of the risks (and perhaps, from Dumbledore's POV at that time, not such a big risk) of the role he willingly undertook. I don't really see any alternative plan that Dumbledore and Severus could have used to protect the students of Hogwarts, when you consider that Dumbledore was going to die anyway before the new term began.
Thom Matheson - Sep 2, 2009 7:55 pm (#343 of 391)
Mona, what makes you think that DD would warn Snape? I would think that it would be the other way around. Dumbledore with his secrets and all. If he were to warn Snape, he (Snape) might not perform the deed, knowing that it would put him to death.
Solitaire - Sep 2, 2009 8:57 pm (#344 of 391)
I agree, Thom. Snape generally seemed to feel there were things he was not being told (there were). Harry felt the same. Interesting that the two people key to the demise of Voldemort both realize that DD has not given them the whole story.
Julia H. - Sep 3, 2009 2:36 am (#345 of 391)
If Dumbledore warned Snape about the Elder Wand, the problem must have still been in the forefront of his mind. Nothing indicates that he warned him though. While I find it possible that Snape would still have obeyed Dumbledore if he had known (he was indeed taking various risks), I think Snape would have at least prepared for this turn of events. In the Shrieking Shack scene, however, Snape seems to be absolutely unprepared.
Solitaire - Sep 3, 2009 9:19 pm (#346 of 391)
Even though I'm not a Snape fan, I think he must have been so desperate there in the shack. How horrible to have to try and convince Voldemort to let him return to the castle, so that he could get that vital information to Harry ... and yet not let Voldemort "see" what was going on in his mind. And then to be treated so despicably ... the only person who deserved that fate was Voldemort himself.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 3, 2009 9:57 pm (#347 of 391)
:anguish:
mona amon - Sep 3, 2009 10:06 pm (#348 of 391)
Mona, what makes you think that DD would warn Snape? I would think that it would be the other way around. Dumbledore with his secrets and all. If he were to warn Snape, he (Snape) might not perform the deed, knowing that it would put him to death. (Thom)
I don't know, Thom. If he thought that Severus wouldn't be willing to take such a risk, he definitely wouldn't have tricked him into it, IMO. That just doesn't seem like Dumbledore to me.
Snape generally seemed to feel there were things he was not being told (there were). Harry felt the same. Interesting that the two people key to the demise of Voldemort both realize that DD has not given them the whole story. (Soli)
But there's usually a reason for Dumbledore's secrets. For example, he doesn't tell Harry about the Deathly Hallows because...umm...I've forgotten why but he does give a reason. He doesn't tell Harry how to destroy Horcruxes because he died before he could do so, and so on.
Then, he never tells anyone more than they need to know. He keeps his plans with Severus a secret from Harry. And he keeps all information about Horcruxes a secret from Severus, the basket dangling from Voldemort's arm.
However, I see no reason for concealing the Elder Wand information from Severus, especially since it involves him so deeply.
If Dumbledore warned Snape about the Elder Wand, the problem must have still been in the forefront of his mind. Nothing indicates that he warned him though. While I find it possible that Snape would still have obeyed Dumbledore if he had known (he was indeed taking various risks), I think Snape would have at least prepared for this turn of events. In the Shrieking Shack scene, however, Snape seems to be absolutely unprepared. (Julia)
OK let's say it was in the forefront of his mind, not as an absolute certainty, or one that would happen in the near future, but as one of the possible risks. I see no reason why he wouldn't have discussed this with Severus.
"I sought a third wand, Severus. the Elder Wand, the Wand of Destiny, the Deathstick. I took it from its previous master. I took it from the grave of Albus Dumbledore."
And now Snape looked at Voldemort, and Snape's face was like a death mask. it was marble white and so still that when he spoke, it was a shock to see that anyone lived behind the blank eyes.
"My Lord--let me go to the boy--" (DH, chapter 32)
I doubt if anyone can prove anything with these lines. It just seems to me that while Severus was unprepared, he was not clueless about the wand.
So what I feel is, Dumbledore did discuss the wand with Severus, warning him to be alert, and if Voldemort ever started searching for the Elder Wand, he would eventually trace it back to Dumbledore, and consequently Severus, so to be on his guard. But as it turned out, Severus had no idea that Voldemort was hunting for the Elder Wand, so he was caught unawares. **Eureka! ** I just had an idea while writing this. Maybe that was why Dumbledore intended Severus to "end up with the Wand". If Severus took possession of the wand and hid it somewhere, Voldemort would have to ask him for it when he eventually discovered that Dumbledore was its master, and that would be the warning that Severus needed!
Julia H. - Sep 4, 2009 1:30 am (#349 of 391)
OK. So why did not Snape take the wand and hide it? DD's tomb was a bit too obvious for a real hiding place.
"You - you have performed extraordinary magic with that wand." (Snape to Voldemort)
It sounds as though Snape had seen the wand in Voldemort's hand before.
But you are right, it's difficult to prove anything with quotations. Did JKR do it on purpose?
Madam Pince - Sep 4, 2009 3:52 am (#350 of 391)
"You - you have performed extraordinary magic with that wand." (Snape to Voldemort)
It sounds as though Snape had seen the wand in Voldemort's hand before.
I thought that just referred to the magic he'd done that afternoon maybe?
And now Snape looked at Voldemort, and Snape's face was like a death mask. It was marble white and so still that when he spoke, it was a shock to see that anyone lived behind the blank eyes. --mona
I had forgotten about that line. It's frustratingly hard to decipher. From all of Snape's other actions previously, I thought it seemed like he has no clue about the Hallows. But he must have had some idea what the Wand means for his face to go deathly white like that and to suddenly start essentially begging for his life. Hmmmm. Maybe he'd just heard of the Elder Wand/Wand of Destiny/Deathstick in folklore, and knew it had to be taken by being conquered, and then realized he'd "conquered" Dumbledore, all in a flash. (This without knowing about all three of the Hallows and the story of uniting them and such...) It did seem like the Elder Wand got talked about throughout history more than the others... almost a basic wizarding urban-legend type of thing.
Snape was a very intelligent wizard, and very well-read, apparently. (What else was there to do when all the other kids were playing Quidditch and going to parties?) So even if he skipped the kiddie fairy tales and missed out on the Deathly Hallows, he had probably come across the Deathstick in some of his reading. I don't think he knew Dumbledore's wand was it, though, nor that Voldy had it (until right then.)
Mona, I think you're convincing me that Snape knew something about the wand, but I'm still not thinking that Dumbledore was the one that told him...
I agree that Snape cannot have known about Dumbledore wanting him to do anything with the Elder Wand. If he had known that Dumbledore wanted him to keep or to hide the wand physically, he would have done his best to get the wand and to do as he had been told. If he had known that Dumbledore wanted him to be the master of the wand, he would have found an opportunity to disarm Draco. Dumbledore apparently took some details of his plan to the grave.
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 29, 2009 4:26 pm (#302 of 391)
I'll just repeat my belief that there would be no advantage to Voldemort knowing that Severus killed Dumbledore. Once DH came out, we realize that the Elder Wand was Dumbledore's most crucial concern beyond getting Harry his information. Severus was doing just fine as a DE without risking Vold getting the Elder Wand by simply killing Severus and robbing the tomb. We have no canon to support Dumbledore wanting Severus to kill him in front of Death Eaters to impress Vold.
Even this line in The Prince's Tale, "Draco blames me, he thinks I have ursurped Lucius's position." Dumbledore says nothing like "which is our plan" or "we need you much closer than that".
Severus had a secure position the moment the DoM battle went sour and Lucius, Bella and the rest had disappointed Vold.
Regarding Dumbledore poisoning himself, that to me was no part of the plan. Severus was told to give him a "quick, painless exit".
Solitaire - Aug 29, 2009 5:09 pm (#303 of 391)
he would have died poisoned by Voldemort's potion (another defeat), but in this case, it would have been technically Harry who had killed him
I disagree, considering Harry was only following orders. Besides, do we know for sure that the potion itself would have killed DD? I thought it was being dragged under the surface of the lake full of Inferi--when the drinker went to get what he thought was water--that did it. The potion certainly didn't kill Kreacher. He was still alive and well many years later, because he was able to get out of the lake. Regulus was not, so he must have drowned. Dumbledore was already weakened, so perhaps it would have affected him more powerfully ... hard to say.
Julia H. - Aug 29, 2009 5:35 pm (#304 of 391)
Of course, Harry was only following orders (so was Snape). That is why I said "killed", not "murdered". Dumbledore would have been murdered by Voldemort (through his potion), with Harry being an instrument. It probably would have been enough to make Harry feel some vague guilt, but he was spared that, and I wanted to point out that Dumbledore (IMO) intentionally saw to it that there should be no guilt Harry could feel because of his involvement. Snape, an adult, hardened as he was by life, struggled with the knowledge of being instrumental in Dumbledore's death even though he accepted it as a necessity. But Dumbledore apparently trusted that he would eventually be able to handle it. Harry had to be protected in this respect.
I'm pretty convinced that Dumbledore was dying on the Tower. He was very weak. He himself had said that he did not think the potion would kill a person immediately, which sounds as though he thought it was in fact lethal. He wanted to summon Snape even before he met Malfoy and the DE's. The castle was full of Order members - Dumbledore could have been shielded and cured if there had been any chance of recovery. I think this was the moment to "present itself in due course". Dumbledore was dying, and he had to die in the hands of a friend.
As for Kreacher, he was a house-elf, not a human, so he may have reacted differently to the potion. (Or simply his duty to serve his masters was so strong that he could not be sick...)
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 29, 2009 10:13 pm (#305 of 391)
Dumbledore apparently took some details of his plan to the grave. - Julia
Yes, Severus had his role but knew about neither Horcruxes nor Hallows.
Dumbledore asks Severus to kill him for the sake of Draco (which Severus knew of course) and for the sake of the Wand (which Severus did not know). We do not even have canon that Severus told Dumbledore about the Vow, which I find interesting. Draco brings it to DD's attention on the Tower that Severus is watching Draco because he promised Narcissa, and Dumbledore only responds with, "Of course that is what he would tell you, Draco, but - ". He doesn't say he knew about the Vow (which would have been an appropriate response). And, there is nothing about it in the Memories between Severus and Dumbledore.
Again regarding Dumbledore's real motivation, in The Prince's Tale Dumbledore feels that Severus is doing just fine and asks no more of him: "And you are doing extremely well... To give Voldemort what appears to be valuable information while withholding the essentials..."
IMO Severus would naturally stay on at Hogwarts after it is taken over (why wouldn't he become Headmaster then? Certainly Amycus or "brutal face" weren't up for it). Severus is, as Dumbledore said, already "a basket...dangling on the arm of Lord Voldemort". This is all stated as the situation without any staged, public killing, which would only cause Severus's death perhaps even a mere day after Dumbledore's. How could that be helpful?
Soul Search - Aug 30, 2009 9:31 am (#306 of 391)
Snape had taken an "unbreakable vow" that he would fulfil Draco's mission if Draco failed. If Snape doesn't kill Dumbledore, he dies.
On the tower Draco clearly fails to complete his mission and kill Dumbledore. If anyone besides Snape kills Dumbledore, then Snape dies.
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 30, 2009 3:55 pm (#307 of 391)
I do not believe if "someone" killed Dumbledore before Draco had clearly failed (i.e., prior to the night on the Tower) that Severus would have died. JM2K
Solitaire - Aug 30, 2009 5:42 pm (#308 of 391)
I'm not sure, either, Shadow. Snape's pledge was to protect Draco, wasn't it? I'll have to reread the Vow, and my books are packed away at the moment. But if protection was the issue, then as long as Draco was not in danger, perhaps Snape would have been okay. Maybe ...
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 30, 2009 6:30 pm (#309 of 391)
I'm happy to post the Vow, Soli. I seem to be on a quoting streak these past few days.
* Watch over Draco as he attempts to fulfil the Dark Lord's wishes.
* (to the best of your ability) protect him from harm.
* if it seems Draco will fail... carry out the deed that the Dark Lord has ordered Draco to perform.
I have looked at this in a couple of ways:
1) Did Severus die after the necklace and the mead failed to reach Dumbledore? Those were both failed attempts, even if Draco's heart wasn't in it.
2) If Dumbledore had died in the Cave, which was before it was apparent that Draco could not go through with what he had planned that night, would Severus die?
Solitaire - Aug 30, 2009 7:11 pm (#310 of 391)
I think protection of Draco was the bottom line with his mother.
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 30, 2009 10:47 pm (#311 of 391)
That is probably true, Soli. Regarding the Vow as a binding contract, however, Severus would die if he did not meet the requirements as she worded them.
I cannot help but think, given examples such as the two I mentioned above, that Severus would not die if the criteria of the Vow were met or no longer necessary.
mona amon - Aug 31, 2009 6:28 am (#312 of 391)
I agree. I think Narcissa's intent matters. What she wanted was the death of Dumbledore, so if someone else killed him before Severus got to him, or if he'd died of some other cause, Severus would be automatically released from his contract.
Some thoughts on the Elder Wand-
Dumbledore intended to die as the undefeated master of the Elder Wand, so that the wand's power would die with him. This could have been acheived even if he had died of the ring injury, so it was not the reason why he wanted to die at the hand of Severus. So it was not an important part of the plan.
He wanted Severus to kill him so that he could further boost his already good standing with Voldemort, and get the Headmaster's post when Dumbledore was gone. Moreover, Voldemort had ordered Severus to kill Dumbledore if Draco failed, so it was as much about obeying him as it was about getting into his good books.
IMO, the plan was that when the end of term (Draco's Judgement day) came, Dumbledore would approach Draco and offer to hide him and his mother, just as he does on the Tower. He was absolutely confident that Draco wouldn't attack him alone. He was also absolutely confident that Draco would never be able to breach the protections he had put round the castle, and let DEs in to help him. So I think the plan didn't centre around Draco.
After that, sometime before the end of the year when DD would die anyway, Severus was to kill him in private. He would have to kill him with his wand, so that he had proof that he had done it. After that comes the tricky part. Severus was supposed to take the wand, or how else could he 'end up' with it. But we can only speculate as to what he was supposed to do with it.
Anyway, the important part for me, is to show that Dumbledore did not intend to put Severus in any danger because of the Elder Wand. At least not in any more danger than he already was.
Did he really anticipate Voldemort's obsession with the wand? He tells Harry in Kingscross, "I have been sure that he would try [to go after the wand], ever since your wand beat Voldemort's in the graveyard of Little Hangleton. At first, he was afraid that you had conquered him by superior skill. Once he had kidnapped Ollivander, however, he discovered the existence of the twin cores. He thought that explained everything." This was the most that DD anticipated when he formulated his plan. At first he thought that Voldemort would go after the Elder Wand, but after kidnapping Olivander and learning about the twin cores, Dumbledore felt he was reassured that Harry's wand was actually not more powerful than his own.
I think that because the Elder Wand and Voldemort's obsession with it had such a central place in the plot of DH, we assume that Dumbledore should have foretold what would happen - Voldemort becoming obsessed with the wand, killing Severus for mastery, etc. But actually, what sent Voldemort off on his quest for the wand was the fact that Lucius's wand did not work against Harry either. Dumbledore could not have guessed that this would happen.
To conclude, I think the Elder Wand was not an important part of Dumbledore's plan to have Severus kill him, and he could not have anticipated that Voldemort would end up killing Severus for the wand.
Solitaire - Aug 31, 2009 7:12 am (#313 of 391)
It's interesting that Voldemort believed he had to kill Snape in order to take possession of his wand. Why not just perform Expelliarmus? Was he afraid, perhaps, that Snape might turn on him? (We know Snape's loyalties, but did Voldy?)
Julia H. - Aug 31, 2009 8:56 am (#314 of 391)
Dumbledore intended to die as the undefeated master of the Elder Wand, so that the wand's power would die with him. This could have been acheived even if he had died of the ring injury... (Mona)
I'm not sure about that at all. The injury was caused by Voldemort's Horcrux and/or by a powerful curse put on it probably by Voldemort. It might have counted as Voldemort defeating Dumbledore even if Voldemort had not known about it.
But actually, what sent Voldemort off on his quest for the wand was the fact that Lucius's wand did not work against Harry either. Dumbledore could not have guessed that this would happen.
He could not have foreseen exactly what would happen, but the passage that you quoted (and its continuation in the book) does not strike me as explaining that Dumbledore stopped expecting Voldemort to go after the Elder Wand at any point. How could he be sure that Voldemort would not go after the wand eventually? How could he know for sure exactly what and how much Ollivander would tell Voldemort about wandlore? He acknowledges that he expected Voldemort to go after the Elder Wand, and I see no reason why he could be confident at any point later on that Voldemort would still not go after that wand.
Severus was supposed to take the wand, or how else could he 'end up' with it. But we can only speculate as to what he was supposed to do with it.
Then why does he not take it? Not on the Tower, where he may not have the chance, but later, when he is the Headmaster.
Anyway, the important part for me, is to show that Dumbledore did not intend to put Severus in any danger because of the Elder Wand. At least not in any more danger than he already was.
I agree that it would be important. I just don't see an explanation that works for me.
I have some questions and I wonder how you all would answer them:
1) Was Dumbledore's argument concerning "pain and humiliation" purely a way to convince Snape more easily (as it seems that is what eventually convinced Snape), or just another way of saying "defeat by the DE's" (which he wanted to avoid) or something else? If it was only an argument to convince Snape, how necessary do you think it was? I am sure it was a very effective argument, but what would have happened if he had simply told Snape his true reasons, whatever they were?
2) Maybe Dumbledore, while he lived, did not expect that his plan for Snape to kill him would mean additional risk for Snape. What about his portrait? Could portrait-Dumbledore warn Snape? If it could, why does not Snape get any warnings from the portrait?
It's interesting that Voldemort believed he had to kill Snape in order to take possession of his wand. Why not just perform Expelliarmus? Was he afraid, perhaps, that Snape might turn on him? (Solitaire)
Because he was a perfectionist. Because after giving Lily a choice, he learned that being "merciful" was dangerous. He killed everyone on the road toward the Elder Wand, all the previous masters he found alive. When he was so close to once again confronting the Boy Who Lived Whenever He Wanted To Kill Him, he took no chances.
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 31, 2009 9:39 am (#315 of 391)
The injury was caused by Voldemort's Horcrux and/or by a powerful curse put on it probably by Voldemort. It might have counted as Voldemort defeating Dumbledore even if Voldemort had not known about it. [/b]- Julia
This is very possible, as Draco did not need to be aware of his victory in order to have it. However, we do not know if poisoning constitutes winning a duel.
He acknowledges that he expected Voldemort to go after the Elder Wand, and I see no reason why he could be confident at any point later on that Voldemort would still not go after that wand.
My feeling as well. When Dumbledore is written as stating, “I have been sure that he would try…”, and we have no canon to contradict this surety, then I am taking it as how he felt and continued to feel. It does not say, “I HAD been sure that he would try…”.
Severus was supposed to take the wand, or how else could he 'end up' with it. But we can only speculate as to what he was supposed to do with it. [/b]- Mona
I read "end up" as to be its master and not to hide it. The physical location of the Wand is not important for Severus to be its master, as we see with Draco. In fact, Severus having physical possession of it would be more dangerous if he became the master because the plan was to thwart Vold. Thus, burying it with Dumbledore while someone unknown was the master is the most intelligent plan, IMO, and the one Dumbledore would have wanted. I used to think perhaps Dumbledore didn’t care about Severus’s life, but I no longer think that.
Julia, IMO the answer to your question (1) is Yes, Dumbledore was not beneath using certain measures to get what he wanted/needed to get done. I think that is why he made sure to point out Harry’s nature was more like Lily’s, and why he made sure to play on Severus’s “guilt” of not giving his mentor what he requests: a quick and painless death.
I don’t think Dumbledore would “put all his eggs in one basket” by telling Severus about the Wand. It was just too risky. As he said to Severus, it is not because he didn’t trust him.
Your question (2) is a good one. Back to how much Portraits can communicate! Not sure…
mona amon - Aug 31, 2009 10:27 am (#316 of 391)
I'm not sure about that at all. The injury was caused by Voldemort's Horcrux and/or by a powerful curse put on it probably by Voldemort. It might have counted as Voldemort defeating Dumbledore even if Voldemort had not known about it. (Julia)
I don't think it would have counted, because the Elder wand wasn't involved in this 'defeat' in any way. It's the wand that has to be defeated, not merely the master, by stealing it, by disarming the master of the wand, or by defeating him in a duel where the master is fighting with the wand and so on.
He could not have foreseen exactly what would happen, but the passage that you quoted (and its continuation in the book) does not strike me as explaining that Dumbledore stopped expecting Voldemort to go after the Elder Wand at any point.
He'd have stopped expecting him to go after the wand because he knew that Voldemort had kidnapped Olivander and got an explanation for the priori incantantem phenomenon in the graveyard. And he was right. Voldemort was perfectly content to borrow Lucius's wand when he went after Harry. Dumbledore couldn't possibly have forseen that any wand that Voldemort used against Harry would not work against the Holly wand, resulting in Voldemort setting off in search of the most powerful wand.
I'll try and reply to the other points on the Dumbledore thread tomorrow. Now I'm off to bed.
I read "end up" as to be its master and not to hide it. (Shadow)
I don't know about hiding it since we are never told exactly what DD wanted Severus to do with his wand after he had killed him, but he never intended Severus to be its master. I'll find the quotes to support this tomorrow.
Julia H. - Aug 31, 2009 11:35 am (#317 of 391)
It's the wand that has to be defeated, not merely the master, by stealing it, by disarming the master of the wand, or by defeating him in a duel where the master is fighting with the wand and so on. (Mona)
Not necessarily. Harry becomes the master of the Elder Wand by disarming Draco of a different wand. Neither Draco, nor he has touched the Elder Wand at this point. I would not regard "stealing the wand" as "defeating the wand" either. It seems it is the master of the wand that has to be defeated.
Looking at the question from a different perspective, if you already have a wand that can defeat the Elder Wand in a duel, you already have quite a powerful wand - so why would you want the Elder Wand (which is apparently not as good as your original wand)? I know Dumbledore apparently swapped the wand that defeated the Deathstick for the Deathstick, but being Dumbledore means you have complicated motivations. The average hunger-power warrior may not be so subtle. Defeating the wand's master, however, (in a situation where he cannot use the Elder Wand or by stealing his wand or by catching him unawares and disarming him etc.) will keep the myth of the wand intact so that it will still be a desirable object for the winner.
He'd have stopped expecting him to go after the wand because he knew that Voldemort had kidnapped Olivander and got an explanation for the priori incantantem phenomenon in the graveyard.
But that's not what he says. He says he has been sure that Voldemort would go after the wand, and then he explains Voldemort's way of thinking after kidnapping Ollivander. He does not say he expected Voldemort to find out about the twin cores but he did not expect that another wand would fail against Harry's. The only thing he says he has expected is Voldemort going after the Elder Wand. In the Final Duel, Harry tells Voldemort that Dumbledore wanted to die undefeated, as the last true master of the wand. If Dumbledore was sure that Voldemort would not now go after the Elder Wand, then why is it emphasized that he wanted to die undefeated? His main concern was Voldemort and his Horcruxes, so why would he bother about a wand that he thought was safe from Voldemort anyway?
This is what Harry says:
"Aren't you listening? Snape never beat Dumbledore! Dumbledore's death was planned between them! Dumbledore intended to die undefeated, the wand's last true master! If all had gone as planned, the wand's power would have died with him, because it had never been won from him!"
If Harry is right, then Dumbledore's plans with Snape about his death are directly connected to Dumbledore being the last true master of the wand. It also suggests that Dumbledore did not expect to die undefeated if he had died otherwise (possibly including dying because of the curse of the ring).
me and my shadow 813 - Aug 31, 2009 11:47 am (#318 of 391)
I recall this being discussed in the past, that Harry's statement (above) makes no sense. We are told that the Elder Wand disappears and shows up again throughout history. To me, this has been because of the very situation Voldemort believes he is accomplishing: stealing it from the grave of its master. I have thought, for the Wand to continue to change hands throughout so many centuries, it must have been robbed from dead masters or their estates at some points in history, as long as it was robbed from the actual master's possession.
After all, Gellert stole the Wand from Gregorovitch's workshop, without dueling him. He simply picked it up and jumped out the window. If he had come after Gregorovitch's natural death, and found it lying about on a desk and stole it, I think it would have been Gellert's then, too.
Compounding the issue of Harry's contradictory statement quoted above, if Dumbledore wanted Severus to physically "end up" with the Wand, he could have told him so at any point during that year without giving anything away as to why it was important. He could have said, "I want you to have it, to remember me by." So simple and innocuous, but he didn't. *shrug*
As Julia pointed out, Dumbledore's original wand defeated the Elder Wand. He could have given Severus the Elder Wand at any time and continued to use his original one. He wanted to protect others from the Wand, so IMO had to devise a plan where the real master could not be traced back to it. Thus, if the master were to be defeated, that victor would never know he was the Wand's new master and the *trail* would be forever lost.
mona amon - Sep 1, 2009 2:57 am (#319 of 391)
The average hunger-power warrior may not be so subtle. Defeating the wand's master, however, (in a situation where he cannot use the Elder Wand or by stealing his wand or by catching him unawares and disarming him etc.) will keep the myth of the wand intact so that it will still be a desirable object for the winner. (Julia)
Maybe so, though we do not know if Dumbledore was the only one to ever win the wand in a regular duel. However, in all the examples in the book, the Elder Wand has to be involved in some way. "the possessor of the wand must capture it from its previous owner, if he is to be truly master of it" (Xenophilius, pg. 334 Bloomsbury edition). Even if one is stealing the wand, or taking the wand after stabbing the master of it to death, or some other trickery, the object is to get mastery of the wand. So the wand considers itself to be captured, and transfers allegience.
In the case of the ring curse, the wand wasn't involved in any way. How is it to know that it has to transfer its allegience to Voldemort if Dumbledore dies of the curse?
Not necessarily. Harry becomes the master of the Elder Wand by disarming Draco of a different wand. Neither Draco, nor he has touched the Elder Wand at this point. I would not regard "stealing the wand" as "defeating the wand" either. It seems it is the master of the wand that has to be defeated.
I think this only supports my point. Draco disarms DD of the Elder wand (Elder Wand is directly involved. Even though Draco doesn't touch it, he defeats it with his Hawthorn wand). The Elder Wand switches allegience to Draco, or at least to the wand that defeated it. Harry captures the wand that defeated the Elder wand. Does the Elder Wand realise that Harry is its new master the moment that this happens? Probably not. But in the final duel with Voldemort, the Elder Wand does recognise its conqueror, the hawthorn wand that sent it flying over the ramparts, and refuses to work against it. It's only when Harry takes full possession of it that he becomes its true master.
The only thing he says he has expected is Voldemort going after the Elder Wand.
Here DD is speaking with the benefit of hindsight. He seems to know everything that happened after his death, so, after Harry's holly wand beat Voldemort's borrowed wand during the Seven Potters Chase, Dumbledore must once again have expected him to go after the Elder Wand. But he could not have known this when he was alive, as shown by this conversation, “There’s more,” said Harry. “There’s more to it. Why did my wand break the wand he borrowed?”
“As to that, I cannot be sure.”
“Have a guess, then,” said Harry, and Dumbledore laughed.
“What you must understand, Harry, is that you and Lord Voldemort have journeyed together into realms of magic hitherto unknown and untested. But here is what I think happened, and it is unprecedented, and no wandmaker could, I think, ever have predicted or explained it to Voldemort." (Ch. 35, Pg. 569, Bloomsbury ed.)
I'm not saying that he laid out a careful plan involving an assumption that Voldemort would not go after the Elder Wand. I'm saying that Voldemort going after the wand was not in the forefront of his mind when he formulated his plan, so while he was alive, he could not have forseen that Severus would end up getting killed for the wand.
If Dumbledore was sure that Voldemort would not now go after the Elder Wand, then why is it emphasized that he wanted to die undefeated? His main concern was Voldemort and his Horcruxes, so why would he bother about a wand that he thought was safe from Voldemort anyway?
I don't think he actually thought about it and said, "it will be safe from Voldemort". Like I said in my previous paragraph, IMO, that wasn't in the forefront of his mind. Dumbledore would have wanted to die undefeated so that the wand would lose its power, thus saving it from all the megalomaniacs who might try to get it in the future. This is the same reason why he took it and used it when he was alive, "to save others from it", and he would have wanted this to continue after his death.
I recall this being discussed in the past, that Harry's statement (above) makes no sense. (Shadow)
It does make sense. If Severus had killed him on Dumbledore's request, Dumbledore would not have used his wand to protect himself. So he'd die undefeated because he was allowing himself to be killed. That's not a defeat. I think the only problem with the statement is, how did Harry know this? For me it's not a problem because a lot of 'between the lines' communication goes on between Harry and Dumbledore in King's Cross. Harry was in a heighted state of awareness and could have intuited things from what Dumbledore said, without him actually spelling it out.
If he had come after Gregorovitch's natural death, and found it lying about on a desk and stole it, I think it would have been Gellert's then, too.
If Gregorovich had died a natural death, the wand's power would have died with him. "If I die a natural death like Ignotus, its power will be broken, won't it? The previous master will never have been defeated. That'll be the end of it." (Harry to DD's portrait, DH, Ch.36)
Julia H. - Sep 1, 2009 3:39 am (#320 of 391)
I'm saying that Voldemort going after the wand was not in the forefront of his mind when he formulated his plan, so while he was alive, he could not have forseen that Severus would end up getting killed for the wand. (Mona)
I can accept that, although I still think, if he had at any point expected Voldemort to go after the Elder Wand (and he says so), he should have taken this possibility into account when he arranged it for Snape to kill him, especially if he wanted it to happen with Voldemort's knowledge. He was a commander; he was the keeper of all secrets that were important in the war against Voldemort; by his own decision, he was the only person with a full view of the situation; and he was also a genious. In this situation, it was his duty to think about both the advantages and the disadvantages of his plan. If he was to strengthen Snape's position with Voldemort at such a great cost and risk (by risk I mean the fact that Snape immediately became Enemy Nr 2., whom all the Order would have gladly killed), at least he was to make it sure that this plan would work, and there would be no drawbacks that would further endanger the key-person's life [/b]- And the plan itself with it. If Voldemort had not wanted to go after the Elder Wand, the plan would have been all right. When, however, Voldemort decided to go after the Wand, there was practically nothing to prevent Snape being eventually killed by him. So, if Dumbledore did not think of that, he made a huge mistake, and it almost ruined the whole plan. If Harry had arrived into the Shrieking Shack a few minutes later, if Voldemort had waited in the Shack until Snape was dead, if the dying Snape had not had the strength to give Harry the memories, if Hermione had not had the presence of mind to conjure a flask (etc.), Dumbledore's plan would have likely failed - simply because the idea that Voldemort might go after the Elder Wand (which he says he was sure Voldemort would do) was not in the forefront of his mind.
Does the Elder Wand realise that Harry is its new master the moment that this happens? Probably not. But in the final duel with Voldemort, the Elder Wand does recognise its conqueror, the hawthorn wand that sent it flying over the ramparts, and refuses to work against it. It's only when Harry takes full possession of it that he becomes its true master.
What Harry says, however, is different:
Does the wand in your hand know its last master was Disarmed? Because if it does ... I am the true master of the Elder Wand."
If the wand may know its master was disarmed (of a different wand), why can't it know that its master was killed by someone's poison? It is at least a possibility the Dumbledore had to consider.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 1, 2009 8:28 am (#321 of 391)
Julia, I agree with your post and feel that it is one of the *rare* bits of this plot that seems very direct! Dumbledore knew Vold would go after the Wand ever since his graveyard fiasco.
The quote from Harry at the end that mona provided, again, is contradictory IMO to what we see in the series. If the quote is true, and if Dumbledore intended to die a "natural death", then why bother needing to make sure Severus "ends up" with it?
Regarding how it is mastered, the idea that a Wand must be dueled away and/or wrestled from its owner is also contradictory to what we see in the series. We have an entire chapter entitled "The Thief". Gellert took the Wand off of a bench and fled. How is this disarming? To me one can obviously master the wand by stealing it.
That it cannot be done after the master is dead to me is questionable. After all, Dumbledore's plan, either way, does not support this idea to me.
mona amon - Sep 1, 2009 10:33 am (#322 of 391)
Does the wand in your hand know its last master was Disarmed?
This is a question, but what is the answer? Did the wand know it then, or only at the moment that the spells collided? And even if it was sentient enough to recognise Harry as Master the minute he had wrested the Hawthorn wand from Draco, there's still a 'wand connection'. Harry captures the wand that defeated the Elder Wand, so yes, maybe the Elder Wand knows.
But if DD had died of the Horcrux curse, there would be no such chain of connections back to the Elder Wand. Voldemort wouldn't have captured the wand itself in any way, either by wand (DD from GG, Draco from DD), or by hand (GG from Gregorovich) or by a chain of wand defeat (Harry from Draco via the Hawthorn Wand.)
But that's neither here nor there. I sometimes feel we can prove almost anything if we try hard enough. There are so many ambiguities in the text. I'm not convinced that JKR thought everything out as thoroughly as we do.
I'm also not at all convinced that she'd intended Voldemort's indirect defeat of DD through the ring curse to count as 'capture' of the Elder Wand. For one thing, there's not a hint of it anywhere. And if that were the case, then, even if Severus kills Dumbledore, his death is still a defeat at Voldemort's hands, because Severus would never have had to kill him if it wasn't for the ring injury, so Dumbledore could never have hoped to die as the undefeated master of the wand.
When, however, Voldemort decided to go after the Wand, there was practically nothing to prevent Snape being eventually killed by him. So, if Dumbledore did not think of that, he made a huge mistake, and it almost ruined the whole plan.
But of course he couldn't forsee everything. He did the best that he could, under the circumstances. Severus had to kill him so that Voldemort would make him Headmaster of Hogwarts, and he could protect the students. That was the main part of the plan.
Even if he had expected Voldemort to go after the wand eventually, he had no idea when, so he was probably hoping for the best, hoping that Harry would finish him off before that happened. And he'd probably have been right, except for that strange thing which happened during the flight from #4 Privet Drive, which no one, not even Dumbledore, could have foretold.
Come to think of it, if that unprecedented phenomenon hadn't happened, Harry would have been toast right there. So much for plans and foretelling future events!
To me one can obviously master the wand by stealing it. (Shadow)
Yes, it is shown in the books that one can master the wand by stealing it. JKR did say it was a very fickle wand, which would transfer allegience at the slightest excuse.
Soul Search - Sep 1, 2009 10:49 am (#323 of 391)
The whole business of the Elder Wand and its master seems a bit loose. I go back to the very first piece of wand lore we learned ... "The wand chooses the wizard." Above any considerations for who stole the elder wand or who defeated who, it is the wand's choice. Sometimes the wand "chooses" the wizard who kills its master, sometimes the one who merely steals it from its master. The Elder Wand chose Dumbledore. Then it chose Harry. It did not choose Voldemort. Good wand.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 1, 2009 11:24 am (#324 of 391)
mona, I agree. Your perspective lies in the quote that Dumbledore wanted to die as the Wand's master. My perspective lies in the quote that Dumbledore wanted Severus to end up with the Wand. They contradict each other IMO. What are we to do? I have much more of a detective nature than a lawyer nature. I don't want to simply "win", I want the truth. Will we have no resolution? No peace? Ahh!
Julia H. - Sep 1, 2009 11:29 am (#325 of 391)
But, Soul Search, it chose Draco, too. And GG. Bad wand?
Voldemort wouldn't have captured the wand itself in any way, either by wand (DD from GG, Draco from DD), or by hand (GG from Gregorovich) or by a chain of wand defeat (Harry from Draco via the Hawthorn Wand.) (Mona)
That's already so many possibilities that I am not at all convinced that there could not be more. Voldemort, who had learned things from Ollivander, believed that he could have the wand by taking it from the dead master's grave, or by having the master killed by his snake (no wand involved in the latter case). We don't know if his theory was right or not, because he did not attack the rightful master in either case. It is possible that only the ways you have listed are possible ways of truly possessing the Elder Wand, but it is not satisfactorily spelt out in the books. In The Tale of the Three Brothers, the thief slit the oldest brother's throat after stealing the wand. That's not the same as stunning a la GG. To me, it seems it always works if you defeat the master in whatever way, because it is such a wand.
As for the poison, perhaps it would have counted as "defeat" only if it had been the immediate cause of Dumbledore's death.
Come to think of it, if that unprecedented phenomenon hadn't happened, Harry would have been toast right there. So much for plans and foretelling future events! (Mona)
I am not trying to claim that Dumbledore had to foresee every event. Of course not. There would always be a risk, whatever the plan. But the "Voldemort would want to kill Snape because of the Elder Wand" bit was exclusively the result of the plan itself, and since Dumbledore acknowledges that he has expected Voldemort to try and go after the Elder Wand, I see no excuse for him not considering this particular possibility, especially because it resulted in a turn of events that could not be thwarted once Voldemort did go after the Wand.
Even if he had expected Voldemort to go after the wand eventually, he had no idea when, so he was probably hoping for the best, hoping that Harry would finish him off before that happened.
But just hoping seems to be too little for me. If he knew that his plan had a possibly fatal flaw, he might have at least given a warning to Snape instead of taking that piece of information into the grave. Dumbledore could foretell that Ron would need the Deluminator. Dumbledore could even foretell that Voldemort starting to protect the snake would be the sign that Harry was ready to learn the secret (i.e., that the other Horcruxes were down). I really don't think giving Snape a hint would have made things worse than they already were. (Or he could have at least given Harry one more hint, implying that Harry should talk to Snape before the decisive confrontation with Voldemort.) Snape was supposed to stay alive long enough to give Harry Dumbledore's message, which was more important than keeping his cover at all costs, and, considering his general circumstances, he could have used that much help.
EDITED.
Mrs Brisbee - Sep 1, 2009 11:38 am (#326 of 391)
Regarding how it is mastered, the idea that a Wand must be dueled away and/or wrestled from its owner is also contradictory to what we see in the series. We have an entire chapter entitled "The Thief". Gellert took the Wand off of a bench and fled. How is this disarming? To me one can obviously master the wand by stealing it.-[/b]- MAMS
Gellert took the wand, but then waited for Gregorovich and stunned him, I think. So he didn't just pick up the wand, he also defeated its master. So I think that defeating the master is necessary to gaining mastery of the Elder Wand.
I find the whole Wand Plot very confusing.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 1, 2009 11:43 am (#327 of 391)
But the "Voldemort would want to kill Snape because of the Elder Wand" bit was exclusively the result of the plan itself,
If he knew that his plan had a possibly fatal flaw, he might have at least given a warning to Snape instead of taking that piece of information into the grave. [/b]- Julia
But this fits with my theory that Dumbledore did NOT wish for Severus to kill him in front of DE's for Vold's benefit. Had Severus been successful in assisting Dumbledore to die privately, he would then not be hunted by Vold for the Elder Wand. This makes perfect sense to me, even without his meaning Severus to be its master. So by the time they meet on the Tower there was no choice.
edit: Mrs B, I thought the Stunning Spell might be JKR's way of saying Gregorovitch was "disarmed". It doesn't say that to me, though. Also, as mona pointed out on another thread, if that were the case why risk using the Wand against its current master?
Mrs Brisbee - Sep 1, 2009 11:50 am (#328 of 391)
I thought Gellert used his own wand, not the Elder Wand. As I see it, he wouldn't have mastery of the Elder Wand until he both defeats Gregorovich and has the Wand is in his possession. It's just confusing because he takes possession of the wand first, then defeats Gregorovich. It's like what Voldemort tried to do when he already had the Wand and thought Snape was the master.
Edit: Actually, come to think of it, possession doesn't really matter, because Draco was master but never possessed the Wand. It's the defeating part that matters. I suppose Gellert stole it first so Gregorovich couldn't use it.
Solitaire - Sep 1, 2009 5:21 pm (#329 of 391)
Gellert took the wand and then stunned Gregorovitch with the wand, most likely. I do not see this "defeat" in the same way as dueling or even physically wresting the wand from him ... but that's just me. Obviously the wand was not unbeatable ... DD beat him!
Madam Pince - Sep 1, 2009 7:27 pm (#330 of 391)
I'm not convinced that JKR thought everything out as thoroughly as we do. --Mona Amon
Now there's the understatement of the century!
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 1, 2009 9:33 pm (#331 of 391)
It's starting to sound like my old favorite board game: Clue.
Vold in the Forest with the Elder Wand
Severus in the Shrieking Shack with the Elder Wand
Grindelwald on the window ledge with the Elder Wand
Dumbledore on the Tower with the Elder Wand
Draco in the Drawing Room with the Elder Wand. AAHH!
Julia H. - Sep 2, 2009 2:08 am (#332 of 391)
I guess my only problem with the "Dumbledore made a mistake (forgetting that Voldemort would kill for the Wand)" solution, is that it should have been made clear in the book that he had made a mistake if an important section of the plot was based on that mistake. So it is really not the theory that is a problem, only the way it does not come across in the book.
In OotP, for example, it becomes absolutely clear that Dumbledore made a huge mistake keeping information from Harry. His motivation is explained, too. We also know that Dumbledore made a mistake when he put on the cursed ring, trying to use the Stone. Since we find out about Ariana and Dumbledore's whole family, we understand in the end, why he made that mistake.
We know that Harry made a mistake when he allowed Voldemort to lure him into the Ministry. He could have alerted the Order through Snape, but we know why he forgot about this possibility. We also know he loved Sirius too much to wait patiently while he thought Sirius was being tortured. Harry made another mistake when he pronounced Voldemort's name in DH so they were all captured and taken to the Malfoy Manor. However, it is another totally understandable mistake. (It would have been much more strange if Ron had made that mistake, for example.)
In the case of Dumbledore's plan, it is only mentioned (vaguely) that the bit "Snape ending up with the wand" did not work out, possibly because of Draco. That is not the same as explaining that there was originally a major mistake in the plan, with Dumbledore acknowledging it.
I can't decide which would be Dumbledore's real goal: To make sure the "future" of the Elder Wand after his death or to cement Snape's position as Voldemort's right-hand man - or maybe both(?). Neither of these goals worked out perfectly: We don't even know what would have been the wand's destiny if Dumbledore's plan had worked; and although Snape did become Voldemort's right-hand man, his position was still very precarious, a fact ultimately undermining the very advantages resulting from his sacrifice.
Madam Pince - Sep 2, 2009 3:47 am (#333 of 391)
...resulting from his sacrifice. --Julia
Whose sacrifice? Dumbledore's or Snape's? I'm not quite clear what you're referring to here...
Julia H. - Sep 2, 2009 6:01 am (#334 of 391)
Sorry. I was referring to the sacrifice Snape made when he AK-d Dumbledore (at least I think he made a significant sacrifice there). Dumbledore asked him to do it for a purpose even if it is ultimately somewhat unclear what exactly that purpose was. If the purpose was to give Snape a more powerful position to slow down Voldemort, this purpose was both served and undermined by the fact that Voldemort thought Snape to be the one who had murdered Dumbledore. Snape as Voldemort's right-hand man could be useful only as long as he was alive.
Solitaire - Sep 2, 2009 7:10 am (#335 of 391)
I agree that AK-ing Dumbledore was a significant sacrifice for Snape, because it meant he would be hated and branded a murderer by the Wizarding World at large.
Madam Pince - Sep 2, 2009 7:17 am (#336 of 391)
Snape as Voldemort's right-hand man could be useful only as long as he was alive.
As long as Dumbledore was alive? (Must be, because Snape couldn't be useful if Snape was dead, really... )
OK, gotcha now. I think. You're saying the purpose (cementing Snape's position as Voldy's right-hand man) was served because Voldemort sees Snape as a loyal DE because he killed Dumbledore, but at the same time that purpose was undermined because with Dumbledore dead, does Voldemort really have any further use for Snape? That makes sense. (Sorry I'm so thick -- no coffee yet...)
mona amon - Sep 2, 2009 9:09 am (#337 of 391)
I guess my only problem with the "Dumbledore made a mistake (forgetting that Voldemort would kill for the Wand)" solution, is that it should have been made clear in the book that he had made a mistake if an important section of the plot was based on that mistake. So it is really not the theory that is a problem, only the way it does not come across in the book. (Julia)
I don't see it as a mistake. Yes, there was a possibility that Voldemort might start hunting for the wand at some unknown future date. It was a risk that had to be handled just like all the other risks that he was facing. It did turn out that in the end Voldemort killed Severus for the wand. But that was a casualty of the war, not a mistake on Dumbledore's part.
I can't decide which would be Dumbledore's real goal: To make sure the "future" of the Elder Wand after his death or to cement Snape's position as Voldemort's right-hand man - or maybe both(?). Neither of these goals worked out perfectly: We don't even know what would have been the wand's destiny if Dumbledore's plan had worked; and although Snape did become Voldemort's right-hand man, his position was still very precarious, a fact ultimately undermining the very advantages resulting from his sacrifice.
I feel it was definitely to cement his position with Voldemort, so that Hogwarts wouldn't be at the mercy of the Carrows, or at least this was the main goal. The Elder Wand part of the plan flopped thanks to Draco's Expelliarmus, But the rest of it worked perfectly. Voldemort had confidence in Severus till the very end, and the lives of all the students were protected. ETA: It's sad that Severus got killed, but I see it as a consequence of the role he willingly undertook, rather than as Dumbledore's fault.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 2, 2009 12:11 pm (#338 of 391)
I feel it was definitely to cement his position with Voldemort, so that Hogwarts wouldn't be at the mercy of the Carrows, or at least this was the main goal. The Elder Wand part of the plan flopped thanks to Draco's Expelliarmus, But the rest of it worked perfectly. Voldemort had confidence in Severus till the very end, and the lives of all the students were protected. ETA: It's sad that Severus got killed, but I see it as a consequence of the role he willingly undertook, rather than as Dumbledore's fault.
For the record, I don't agree. But I'm done because I've posted and reposted my opinion more times than I can count already.
Julia H. - Sep 2, 2009 12:33 pm (#339 of 391)
You're saying the purpose (cementing Snape's position as Voldy's right-hand man) was served because Voldemort sees Snape as a loyal DE because he killed Dumbledore, but at the same time that purpose was undermined because with Dumbledore dead, does Voldemort really have any further use for Snape? (Madam Pince)
Almost. The first part is what I meant, the second part would be: ... that purpose was undermined because Snape being the one who had killed Dumbledore gave Voldemort a reason to kill him (for the Elder Wand).
And I meant: Snape as Voldemort's right-hand man could be useful only as long as Snape was alive.
I know I was stating the obvious, but I have wanted to point out that making Snape Voldemort's most trusted "follower" on the one hand (by having Snape kill Dumbledore so that Snape seems to be the most loyal and useful DE) while on the other hand making Snape a target for Voldemort (by having him kill Dumbledore so that he seems to be the current master of the Elder Wand) can be somewhat counterproductive, IMO. What is the strategical point in creating a key-position like Snape's (and at a great cost), when you [/b]- At the same time - put this key-person into immediate mortal danger that is independent of the job he does? The moment Voldemort thinks he must kill Snape for the Wand, it does not matter any more how well Snape is doing his job as a spy, he will be killed anyway.
It did turn out that in the end Voldemort killed Severus for the wand. But that was a casualty of the war, not a mistake on Dumbledore's part. (Mona)
As a person, yes, Snape was just another casualty of the war. What I see as a flaw in the plan is that all the work he had to do, the crucial secret he was alone entrusted with, and ultimately the success of Harry's efforts depended on whether Snape stayed alive long enough to deliver Dumbledore's message [/b]- And then there was also the relative safety of Hogwarts, which he alone could guarantee for months. (Of course, Dumbledore could not foresee how long Snape would be needed in the Headmaster's position.) In this kind of plan, when so much depended on Snape, it was an elementary mistake (not because of Snape's life, but because of everything that depended on Snape) to allow Snape to become Voldemort's (unsuspecting) target in spite of Snape doing his job successfully. One could always hope that Voldemort perhaps would not kill Snape too quickly, but plans in a war must not be built on hopes and pure chances.
It's sad that Severus got killed, but I see it as a consequence of the role he willingly undertook, rather than as Dumbledore's fault.
He was permanently in mortal danger as a consequence of the role he willingly undertook, but the immediate reason why he died was a flaw in Dumbledore's plan rather than a reason directly connected to the role he had willingly and knowingly undertook - like a mistake Snape would have made as a spy, or a situation that would have made it necessary for him to blow his cover, or death in the hands of Order members. These were risks he must have taken into account, but he apparently had no idea that he would have to play the part of the master of the Elder Wand, too.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 2, 2009 1:06 pm (#340 of 391)
In this kind of plan, when so much depended on Snape, it was an elementary mistake (not because of Snape's life, but because of everything that depended on Snape) to allow Snape to become Voldemort's (unsuspecting) target in spite of Snape doing his job successfully. One could always hope that Voldemort perhaps would not kill Snape too quickly, but plans in a war must not be built on hopes and pure chances.
sneaks in to whisper: I agree wholeheartedly!
Madam Pince - Sep 2, 2009 1:50 pm (#341 of 391)
OK OK OK... now I got it! Finally! Thanks, Julia!
mona amon - Sep 2, 2009 7:38 pm (#342 of 391)
...to allow Snape to become Voldemort's (unsuspecting) target...
These were risks he must have taken into account, but he apparently had no idea that he would have to play the part of the master of the Elder Wand, too. (Julia)
But why do you think he was unsuspecting? I've always assumed that Dumbledore told him that he may be in danger if Voldemort ever decided to go in quest of the Elder Wand, because of the way Severus's reactions are described in the Elder Wand chapter of DH. There would have been no reason for keeping it a secret.
So if Dumbledore warned him, it becomes just one of the risks (and perhaps, from Dumbledore's POV at that time, not such a big risk) of the role he willingly undertook. I don't really see any alternative plan that Dumbledore and Severus could have used to protect the students of Hogwarts, when you consider that Dumbledore was going to die anyway before the new term began.
Thom Matheson - Sep 2, 2009 7:55 pm (#343 of 391)
Mona, what makes you think that DD would warn Snape? I would think that it would be the other way around. Dumbledore with his secrets and all. If he were to warn Snape, he (Snape) might not perform the deed, knowing that it would put him to death.
Solitaire - Sep 2, 2009 8:57 pm (#344 of 391)
I agree, Thom. Snape generally seemed to feel there were things he was not being told (there were). Harry felt the same. Interesting that the two people key to the demise of Voldemort both realize that DD has not given them the whole story.
Julia H. - Sep 3, 2009 2:36 am (#345 of 391)
If Dumbledore warned Snape about the Elder Wand, the problem must have still been in the forefront of his mind. Nothing indicates that he warned him though. While I find it possible that Snape would still have obeyed Dumbledore if he had known (he was indeed taking various risks), I think Snape would have at least prepared for this turn of events. In the Shrieking Shack scene, however, Snape seems to be absolutely unprepared.
Solitaire - Sep 3, 2009 9:19 pm (#346 of 391)
Even though I'm not a Snape fan, I think he must have been so desperate there in the shack. How horrible to have to try and convince Voldemort to let him return to the castle, so that he could get that vital information to Harry ... and yet not let Voldemort "see" what was going on in his mind. And then to be treated so despicably ... the only person who deserved that fate was Voldemort himself.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 3, 2009 9:57 pm (#347 of 391)
:anguish:
mona amon - Sep 3, 2009 10:06 pm (#348 of 391)
Mona, what makes you think that DD would warn Snape? I would think that it would be the other way around. Dumbledore with his secrets and all. If he were to warn Snape, he (Snape) might not perform the deed, knowing that it would put him to death. (Thom)
I don't know, Thom. If he thought that Severus wouldn't be willing to take such a risk, he definitely wouldn't have tricked him into it, IMO. That just doesn't seem like Dumbledore to me.
Snape generally seemed to feel there were things he was not being told (there were). Harry felt the same. Interesting that the two people key to the demise of Voldemort both realize that DD has not given them the whole story. (Soli)
But there's usually a reason for Dumbledore's secrets. For example, he doesn't tell Harry about the Deathly Hallows because...umm...I've forgotten why but he does give a reason. He doesn't tell Harry how to destroy Horcruxes because he died before he could do so, and so on.
Then, he never tells anyone more than they need to know. He keeps his plans with Severus a secret from Harry. And he keeps all information about Horcruxes a secret from Severus, the basket dangling from Voldemort's arm.
However, I see no reason for concealing the Elder Wand information from Severus, especially since it involves him so deeply.
If Dumbledore warned Snape about the Elder Wand, the problem must have still been in the forefront of his mind. Nothing indicates that he warned him though. While I find it possible that Snape would still have obeyed Dumbledore if he had known (he was indeed taking various risks), I think Snape would have at least prepared for this turn of events. In the Shrieking Shack scene, however, Snape seems to be absolutely unprepared. (Julia)
OK let's say it was in the forefront of his mind, not as an absolute certainty, or one that would happen in the near future, but as one of the possible risks. I see no reason why he wouldn't have discussed this with Severus.
"I sought a third wand, Severus. the Elder Wand, the Wand of Destiny, the Deathstick. I took it from its previous master. I took it from the grave of Albus Dumbledore."
And now Snape looked at Voldemort, and Snape's face was like a death mask. it was marble white and so still that when he spoke, it was a shock to see that anyone lived behind the blank eyes.
"My Lord--let me go to the boy--" (DH, chapter 32)
I doubt if anyone can prove anything with these lines. It just seems to me that while Severus was unprepared, he was not clueless about the wand.
So what I feel is, Dumbledore did discuss the wand with Severus, warning him to be alert, and if Voldemort ever started searching for the Elder Wand, he would eventually trace it back to Dumbledore, and consequently Severus, so to be on his guard. But as it turned out, Severus had no idea that Voldemort was hunting for the Elder Wand, so he was caught unawares. **Eureka! ** I just had an idea while writing this. Maybe that was why Dumbledore intended Severus to "end up with the Wand". If Severus took possession of the wand and hid it somewhere, Voldemort would have to ask him for it when he eventually discovered that Dumbledore was its master, and that would be the warning that Severus needed!
Julia H. - Sep 4, 2009 1:30 am (#349 of 391)
OK. So why did not Snape take the wand and hide it? DD's tomb was a bit too obvious for a real hiding place.
"You - you have performed extraordinary magic with that wand." (Snape to Voldemort)
It sounds as though Snape had seen the wand in Voldemort's hand before.
But you are right, it's difficult to prove anything with quotations. Did JKR do it on purpose?
Madam Pince - Sep 4, 2009 3:52 am (#350 of 391)
"You - you have performed extraordinary magic with that wand." (Snape to Voldemort)
It sounds as though Snape had seen the wand in Voldemort's hand before.
I thought that just referred to the magic he'd done that afternoon maybe?
And now Snape looked at Voldemort, and Snape's face was like a death mask. It was marble white and so still that when he spoke, it was a shock to see that anyone lived behind the blank eyes. --mona
I had forgotten about that line. It's frustratingly hard to decipher. From all of Snape's other actions previously, I thought it seemed like he has no clue about the Hallows. But he must have had some idea what the Wand means for his face to go deathly white like that and to suddenly start essentially begging for his life. Hmmmm. Maybe he'd just heard of the Elder Wand/Wand of Destiny/Deathstick in folklore, and knew it had to be taken by being conquered, and then realized he'd "conquered" Dumbledore, all in a flash. (This without knowing about all three of the Hallows and the story of uniting them and such...) It did seem like the Elder Wand got talked about throughout history more than the others... almost a basic wizarding urban-legend type of thing.
Snape was a very intelligent wizard, and very well-read, apparently. (What else was there to do when all the other kids were playing Quidditch and going to parties?) So even if he skipped the kiddie fairy tales and missed out on the Deathly Hallows, he had probably come across the Deathstick in some of his reading. I don't think he knew Dumbledore's wand was it, though, nor that Voldy had it (until right then.)
Mona, I think you're convincing me that Snape knew something about the wand, but I'm still not thinking that Dumbledore was the one that told him...
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Posts 351 to 391
Mona Fri May 13, 2011 12:34 pm
Solitaire - Sep 4, 2009 6:40 am (#351 of 391)
He doesn't tell Harry how to destroy Horcruxes because he died before he could do so
Actually, this is not true. Dumbledore knew the Sword of Gryffindor would work. Whether he knew about Fiendfyre or Basilisk fangs is debatable. However, there were plenty of opportunities for DD to have told Harry about the Sword ... IMO.
I see no reason for concealing the Elder Wand information from Severus
Actually, I understand this one--at least, I've come up with an explanation that satisfies me. I think Dumbledore may have wondered if Snape--believing he had the Unbeatable Wand-[/b]- Might attempt to kill Voldemort himself. Had he attempted it, and had Voldy killed him and won the wand legitimately, it is possible Harry might not have been able to defeat Voldy. I think it was imperative that Voldy not get that wand by means that could empower it further.
It sounds as though Snape had seen the wand in Voldemort's hand before.
Is that possible, Julia? Voldemort had not had the Elder wand long. Didn't he get it just before the Trio pulled off the Bank Caper, or was it some weeks before that? I can't remember how long they were at Shell Cottage, but Harry saw Voldy blasting open DD's tomb while he was there, I believe. Is it possible that Snape did not realize this wand was Dumbledore's wand?
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 4, 2009 9:03 am (#352 of 391)
According to Hermione in DH, the only reason the Sword worked on Horcruxes is because it imbibed Basilisk venom. So, I am concluding that Dumbledore knew about the venom part.
Julia H. - Sep 6, 2009 3:54 pm (#353 of 391)
It sounds as though Snape had seen the wand in Voldemort's hand before. (Julia)
Is that possible, Julia? Voldemort had not had the Elder wand long. (Solitaire)
I don't know. Snape says Voldemort has done extraordinary magic with that wand - but, of course, it is possible that Snape has not yet realized that Voldemort has a new wand. With Voldemort complaining about the magic he is doing, flattery is probably the only possible answer. As for how long Voldemort has had the Elder Wand, to me it seems he got it the day when the Trio found refuge in Shell Cottage, which was during the Hogwarts spring break (Bill mentioned that Ginny was on holiday, and so was Draco). The battle of Hogwarts was in May. So Voldemort must have had the wand for a few weeks. But I agree with you that Snape must have recognized Dumbledore's wand when he first saw it in Voldemort's hand.
Solitaire - Sep 6, 2009 4:54 pm (#354 of 391)
Couldn't the "extraordinary things" have referred to any and all of Voldemort's previous magic, which was done with his old wand? I wonder how many "extraordinary things" he had actually done with this wand, up to this point. It seems like his most extraordinary magic had already been done with his original wand--the Yew and Phoenix-feather wand.
mona amon - Sep 7, 2009 2:18 am (#355 of 391)
So why did not Snape take the wand and hide it? DD's tomb was a bit too obvious for a real hiding place. (Julia)
He may not have wanted to violate Dumbledore's tomb. Harry does say somewhere that he wasn't afraid of breaking into DD's tomb if it really was DD's intent that he should get the wand (or something like that), but the Elder Wand may not have been in the forefront of Severus's mind the way that it was in Harry's. He may have decided to wait for some sign that Voldemort was really after the wand.
Snape was a very intelligent wizard, and very well-read, apparently. (What else was there to do when all the other kids were playing Quidditch and going to parties?) So even if he skipped the kiddie fairy tales and missed out on the Deathly Hallows, he had probably come across the Deathstick in some of his reading. I don't think he knew Dumbledore's wand was it, though, nor that Voldy had it (until right then.)
Mona, I think you're convincing me that Snape knew something about the wand, but I'm still not thinking that Dumbledore was the one that told him... (Madam Pince)
It's possible, but I feel that just LV's mention of having taken possession of the legendary Deathstick would not have been enough to shock him like that. To me it seems like he's finally got the confirmation, and the reason, for what he suspected right from the beginning of the interview - that Voldemort called him there to kill him.
I like to think DD told Severus about the wand, and I cannot see anything to show that he didn't. However, I'm not sure it was JKR's intent. You never know with Jo!
He doesn't tell Harry how to destroy Horcruxes because he died before he could do so (Me)
Actually, this is not true. Dumbledore knew the Sword of Gryffindor would work. Whether he knew about Fiendfyre or Basilisk fangs is debatable. However, there were plenty of opportunities for DD to have told Harry about the Sword ... IMO. (Soli)
What I meant was, that this wasn't an intentional secret on DD's part. He must have meant to explain to Harry how Horcruxes are destroyed and to actually demonstrate this with the Locket horcrux after their return from the cave. I think Dumbledore's intention was that Harry would use the sword to destroy all the remaining Horcruxes. Unfortunately he died before he could explain.
Actually, I understand this one--at least, I've come up with an explanation that satisfies me. I think Dumbledore may have wondered if Snape--believing he had the Unbeatable Wand-[/b]- Might attempt to kill Voldemort himself. Had he attempted it, and had Voldy killed him and won the wand legitimately, it is possible Harry might not have been able to defeat Voldy. I think it was imperative that Voldy not get that wand by means that could empower it further.
But if DD had died in accordance with their original plan, the Elder Wand would have "lost its power". I do not know whether this means it would have become an ordinary wand with no super powers, or just a wooden stick. Anyway, no one could have become its master after DD's death at the hands of Severus.
Couldn't the "extraordinary things" have referred to any and all of Voldemort's previous magic, which was done with his old wand? I wonder how many "extraordinary things" he had actually done with this wand, up to this point. It seems like his most extraordinary magic had already been done with his original wand--the Yew and Phoenix-feather wand.
I agree. We see Voldemort firing off AKs at his DEs with the Elder Wand after hearing about the loss of the cup, but Severus was at Hogwarts at the time. The only time he had a chance to see it prior to this would have been if Voldemort had visited him in the castle as he had promised, after plundering DD's grave. But since he probably just had a cup of tea with him before returning to Malfoy Manor, Severus wouldn't have had a chance to see any display of 'extraordinary' magic.
Julia H. - Sep 7, 2009 3:04 am (#356 of 391)
Couldn't the "extraordinary things" have referred to any and all of Voldemort's previous magic, which was done with his old wand? (Solitaire)
It is possible if we suppose one of the things below:
a) Snape does not realize that the wand Voldemort is waving in front of him is not Voldemort's usual wand, that it is in fact Dumbledore's wand. (Is it likely?)
b) He realizes the above but pretends that he does not. (Why?)
c) He may realize everything but he is not even trying to give a sensible answer to Voldemort's question - only a mechanical one. (Has he already given up? Is he too focused on Harry to pay proper attention to Voldemort?)
As for what Snape has seen recently, just because we don't see Voldemort doing any magic in that particular period of time, he may have summoned Snape to himself once or twice, and Snape may have seen him do some magic - extraordinary or not - which he could refer to in this moment. Voldemort must have done some magic before he reached the conclusion that the wand did not work for him properly. It could have been the magic of that particular day though - but still before the Shrieking Shack scene. My main problem with this possibility is that in that case, Snape should already know that Voldemort is using Dumbledore's wand, but in The Elder Wand chapter, I have the impression that he is just realizing it now.
He may not have wanted to violate Dumbledore's tomb. (Mona)
I am ready to accept any explanation of self-sacrifice on Snape's part - including the idea that had he known the true significance of the wand for Voldemort and the reason why he was likely to go after it, Snape would not have stolen it from Dumbledore's tomb because (once Voldemort knew that the wand had been buried with Dumbledore [/b]- A piece of information easy enough for him to find out) it would have given Voldemort a reason to torture a lot of people in the castle thinking that someone would know where the wand was.
However, if it had been a clear order of Dumbledore's that Snape had to hide the wand from Voldemort - would he have refused to obey? Snape does seem to be disillusioned with Dumbledore around Christmas time ... would he have refused to obey an order that would mainly serve his own safety (as Voldemort was not the master of the wand anyway...)? He had also promised that he would do everything for the safety of Hogwarts students, which may include not bringing Voldemort's wrath upon them... But then again, Snape seems rather shocked when he meets Voldemort in the Shack.
No conclusion.
mona amon - Sep 7, 2009 6:14 am (#357 of 391)
a) Snape does not realize that the wand Voldemort is waving in front of him is not Voldemort's usual wand, that it is in fact Dumbledore's wand. (Is it likely?) (Julia)
I think he really does not realise this at the beginning of the interview. It's probably only in the movies that each wand looks so distinctive. I think it's quite possible that Dumbledore's wand did not look that different from Voldemort's.
However, if it had been a clear order of Dumbledore's that Snape had to hide the wand from Voldemort - would he have refused to obey?
Severus wouldn't have thought of it as an order, but as an instruction that he was not able to follow because of the way things worked out on the Tower the night he killed Dumbledore.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 7, 2009 8:56 am (#358 of 391)
Couldn't the "extraordinary things" have referred to any and all of Voldemort's previous magic, which was done with his old wand? (Solitaire)
It is possible if we suppose one of the things below:
a) Snape does not realize that the wand Voldemort is waving in front of him is not Voldemort's usual wand, that it is in fact Dumbledore's wand. (Is it likely?)
b) He realizes the above but pretends that he does not. (Why?)
c) He may realize everything but he is not even trying to give a sensible answer to Voldemort's question - only a mechanical one. (Has he already given up? Is he too focused on Harry to pay proper attention to Voldemort?) - Julia
I agree that, unless I am missing something, there is really no obvious difference between wands. Yes, Vold's wand has been described as having a "handle" but IMO, unless you are Ollivander or unless a wand is of a very pale or very dark wood, they would all appear quite similar. Especially if you are a bit distracted! You are about to get killed, and desperate to complete the mission of giving Harry the crucial bit of information needed to kill this piece of scum standing before you.
IMO this reinforces my belief that Severus knew nothing of the Elder Wand. And the passage itself does, too. Severus's line really does say to me that he has no idea why Vold is saying "Why doesn't it work for me, Severus?" And then, when Severus sees Nagini in the cage, all he can think about is what Dumbledore told him. This is the moment, when he keeps the snake close by. Severus's mind must have been focused on how to get away IMO. He also must have been employing an extraordinary amount of Occlumency right then!
Solitaire - Sep 7, 2009 10:02 am (#359 of 391)
Wand lengths are certainly distinctive. Hagrid's was 16 inches long. Voldy's was 13½, Harry's was 11, Umbridge's was "unusually short." Wasn't it Travers who recognized and asked about Bella's wand when Hermione was impersonating her? I'm curious ... are we ever told how long the Elder Wand was or what it looked like? I'm trying to remember if Harry ever mentioned Dumbledore's wand as looking unique in some way.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 7, 2009 10:12 am (#360 of 391)
Yes, I was going to add that -- unless it is Hagrid's 16" or Umbridge's stubby -- I really don't think anyone could notice a 1" difference unless it was sitting on a table alongside others of varying lengths.
Travers did not recognize Bella's wand. He only asks because he heard a rumour that Bella's was taken.
We are only told Vold's wand has a handle, other than that we are never told of physically distinguishing wand features, i.e., color, crookedness, diameter, etc.
Just for good measure I will add that, in the situation Severus finds himself, the Shrieking Shack room was "dimly lit".
Soul Search - Sep 7, 2009 12:28 pm (#361 of 391)
Voldemort's Shrieking Shack statements to Severus imply Severus knows there is supposed to be something special about the wand Voldemort is using.
Severus met Voldemort on the Hogwarts grounds when Voldemort went for the wand. I think the conversation implied Voldemort would join Severus in the castle, later. How could Voldemort not show off to Severus that he now had Dumbledore's wand?
For that matter, I don't recall Voldemort restoring Dumbledore's tomb, so Snape could figure what he was after.
The term "Elder Wand" may not have come up, but Severus had to know Voldemort had Dumbledore's wand and that he thought it something special.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 7, 2009 1:17 pm (#362 of 391)
Soul Search, I'm not in agreement with your post but I have, like you, wondered about the tomb. But as Vold broke into it in March, and no one brings it up, I conclude that Vold restored the marble being cracked in half.
I don't think Vold would show off that he had the Elder Wand, personally. And we are not shown any reason to believe that Severus watched Vold go to the tomb. He was under a Disillusionment Charm in the dark at the lake, which is far enough from the castle.
It was stated that the DE's must know Harry's wand was broken (when they test Hermione's at Malfoy Manor) and, if this were the case, Vold would allow everyone to assume he was satisfied, because the "twin wand issue" was no longer an issue. As Ollivander tells Harry, Vold is no longer hunting the Elder Wand to merely kill Harry. So, in a nutshell I don't think Vold would tell Severus about the Elder Wand and I don't think Dumbledore would tell Severus about it either.
Not that this really matters but, just for my own reference regarding the length of wands, I took a 12" ruler and held it in my hand like a wand. I could hold it comfortably with 3" in my palm and with 6" in my palm, that's without a cloak sleeve concealing whether I was actually holding the very tip/end. So it could be anywhere from 8-15" long judging from someone looking at it in my hand. It would be very hard to tell what length a wand is when it is in one's hand, other than Umbridge's . So, I think JKR gives us these details to provide insight into the character of the owners of these wands, but I do not feel that most are easily distinguishable.
edited
Julia H. - Sep 7, 2009 2:03 pm (#363 of 391)
About wands: I don't know but I have always thought that wands are unique and look unique as well. Differences of wood type (affecting colour and flexibility) and length and whatever other subtle differences there are may be more important to wizards than to others. The way I see it is this: In the Muggle world, someone who is not the least bit interested in cars may not find much difference between two cars, except perhaps the colour, and such people may find it difficult to recognize their friends' cars (in a street full of cars) even if they have travelled in it before. Those, however, for whom a car means power, prestige, pride and the extension of the self will probably recognize and remember even the small details of other people's cars. In the wizarding world, wands are extremely important. One's wand is like a body part. Wizards see and handle wands all the time. I find it quite possible that they can observe and recognize details and differences where Muggles would only see two identical sticks. I am not saying that a wizard will necessarily recognize any wand he has ever seen. But Snape worked and lived close to Dumbledore for many years. It is likely that he knew Dumbledore's wand well enough to recognize it. I think that Voldemort's wand would be easy to remember as well - not because of the handle but because it was the wand of the most terrible dark wizard alive.
Steve Newton - Sep 7, 2009 3:25 pm (#364 of 391)
MAMS says "Severus's mind must have been focused on how to get away IMO."
That's how I read it. HE asks 4 times to be allowed to go get Draco. This sounds like the only obvious way to get away without be found out. It doesn't work but he stuck with the plan.
Of course, I have no idea on the Elder Wand thing.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 7, 2009 5:24 pm (#365 of 391)
Yes, I feel he was determined, even monocular in his focus, once he saw Nagini -[/b]- And JKR makes a point to tell us that his eyes were staring at the snake.
Julia, I see what you are saying but your explanation IMO fits more when showing the difference between, for instance, Ron and Hermione. Ron notices virtually no detail and Hermione notices every detail. So, to me, it is not that all wizards notice wands.
Yes, I do believe the average wizard has memorised their wand's physical uniqueness. And I do think a cherry wood wand would look different than other wood, but there are not many cherry wood wands.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 7, 2009 6:02 pm (#366 of 391)
That's how I read it. HE asks 4 times to be allowed to go get Draco. - Steve
Sorry, too late to edit. You probably made a typo Steve... It is Harry he asks to retrieve, not Draco. It has nothing to do with Draco and the Elder Wand. It has to do with Severus trying to find some way to get to Harry before Vold does.
"Let me find the boy. Let me bring you Potter. I know I can find him, my Lord. Please."
Steve Newton - Sep 7, 2009 7:22 pm (#367 of 391)
Not a typo, just a plain old mistake. Its been quite a while since I read the book. I am listening to it but have not gotten this far yet.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 7, 2009 7:54 pm (#368 of 391)
I know how it is, Steve -- there are some parts of this series I haven't read in a while. I'm at the point where I re-read 50 pages that I'm interested in, rather than cover to cover anymore.
Back to the Elder Wand: to me, Voldemort's speech to Severus in the Shrieking Shack seems to be informing Severus for the first time of what has transpired since Lucius's wand did not perform. Not that Severus is getting a review of what he already knows about the situation with Vold's new Elder Wand. I get the impression that Severus knows of the Elder Wand Vold speaks of, but only because of The Tales of Beedle and nothing more. He is drawing very fast conclusions.
mona amon - Sep 8, 2009 5:20 am (#369 of 391)
I think the Elder wand may have looked similar enough to Voldemort's yew wand for Severus not to notice the difference. As Shadow has pointed out, the shock of seeing Nagini in her enchanted cage and at the same time sensing that he was trapped would have left him with not much attention to spare for the details of the wand Voldemort was holding.
He's so distracted by the snake that he doesn't recognise it even when Voldemort tells him that it's not his yew wand. It's only when he actualy tells him that it's Dumbledore's wand in his hand that Severus finally raises his eyes to look at him, trying to hide his shock by 'occlumensing' so hard that his face becomes a blank, marble mask.
BTW, why does everyone feel that Dumbledore did not warn Severus about the Elder Wand?
Mrs Brisbee - Sep 8, 2009 7:30 am (#370 of 391)
BTW, why does everyone feel that Dumbledore did not warn Severus about the Elder Wand?
Mostly because I don't remember there being anything in the story to show that Dumbledore and Snape discussed the Wand.
I don't understand Dumbledore's final Grand Plan. I did wonder at one point if Dumbledore actually did want Snape to be master of the Wand, so he could jump in after Harry died and finish off both Nagini and Voldemort, but the only thing to suggest that is Dumbledore's one ambiguous statement in Kings Cross. Plus, the Plan is just fraught with too many contradictions and perils.
It may be that de-powering the Elder Wand was seen by Dumbledore as a convenient by product of making Snape look good by "murdering" Dumbledore, but neither outcome seems so important that they were worth the sacrifices made to achieve them, in my opinion. I do think Dumbledore was surprised that Death Eaters got into the castle, though, so it is possible that Snape and Dumbledore were instigating an emergency plan that under better circumstances would have never seen the light of day. At this point I think that the point of the Elder Wand Plan was that it was a bad plan because of the distrust it spread, and it was Harry bringing trust and truth to the table that finally defeated Voldemort.
legolas returns - Sep 8, 2009 12:29 pm (#371 of 391)
The plan to me seems to have a few flaws in it particularly the fact that Snape gets the chop regardless of who the true master of the wand is and regardless of whether the wand is powerful or not. It seems that Dumbledore sacrificed Snape without giving him all the facts (not the first time). At the same time Snape has locked himself in by agreeing to an unbreakable curse. Is death the only way to protect Harry and Draco? I suppose being a double/triple agent has a limited lifespan .
Soul Search - Sep 8, 2009 12:30 pm (#372 of 391)
I think Dumbledore intentionally kept knowledge of his Elder Wand from Severus because Dumbledore was not quite willing to trust Severus with the wand. I know, Dumbleodre repeatedly said he trusted Severus Snape, but there may have been limits.
Voldemort killed Lily. Lily was Snape's whole reason for dedicating his life, quite literally, with protecting Hary and, thereby, defeating Voldemort. I find it strange, but nowhere does Snape express any hate or desire for revenge against Voldemort; he keeps it all inside.
We also know Snape did not have a lot of faith in Harry's ability to conquer Voldemort. Then, after Dumbledore reveals that Harry is "a pig to the slaughter" Snape is even more skeptic of the success of Dumbleodre's plan. How can Harry defeat Voldemort if he is dead?
Had Snape become master of the elder wand he would have tried to kill Voldemort with it. Snape didn't know about horcruxes, so that would have been a disaster.
Dumbledore didn't tell Severus about the elder wand to keep him safe ... from himself.
Madam Pince - Sep 8, 2009 2:22 pm (#373 of 391)
I just thought that because Snape's actions and dialogue give us no hint that he knew anything about the Hallows at all. Plus, there's the whole "secretive Dumbledore" thing. I have no real "canon" to base it on, I guess. It just seemed to me like Snape knew nothing about them.
Then his reaction upon hearing Voldemort mention the Deathstick makes me think he had possibly stumbled across that one in his experience/reading, and he suddenly froze, thinking fast, because he was suddenly recognizing that silky tone in Voldy's voice and realizing he was in deep doo-doo.
Upon reflection, I almost think the "You - you have performed extraordinary magic with that wand" line was just babbling flattery -- he was trying to buy time, collect his thoughts, etc. He was thinking fast. He had suddenly realized he was in danger, and was trying desperately to think of a way to get his message to Harry before that snake was set loose on him.
Oh, and put me in the camp that thinks wizards would notice whose wand was whose. Something that's that personal, and that attached to what you're able to do? Oh yeah. Snape would've seen that wand in Dumbledore's hand every day for the past x-number of years -- he'd recognize Dumbledore's wand in a second, I'd think.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 8, 2009 4:09 pm (#374 of 391)
I agree with recent posts. And I do agree that a man like Severus would notice details of someone else's wand that he saw every day for nearly two decades. I just don't think it applies to all wizards. And in this case, I do not believe that Severus noticed Voldemort's wand -[/b]- As I and others have stated, it seems he had other things on his mind (as well as perpetually blocking Voldemort out of his mind!) I definitely think his statement about Vold's wand was just babbling while he was frantically assessing the situation.
I think Dumbledore's statement that he doesn't put all his eggs into the basket dangling from Voldemort's arm is reason enough to assume that, with no canon to prove otherwise, Severus was not only in the dark about Horcruxes, he was not informed of the Elder Wand.
Madam Pince - Sep 9, 2009 6:05 am (#375 of 391)
...Dumbledore's statement that he doesn't put all his eggs into the basket dangling from Voldemort's arm...
You know, that text always irritated me. Dangling from whose arm? You might just as well say dangling from Dumbledore's arm. Hmph. But I digress... (My, but I'm finding it easy to get into a snit at DD these days...)
Solitaire - Sep 9, 2009 6:43 am (#376 of 391)
But he was dangling on Voldemort's arm, Madam Pince. The fact that it was at DD's behest and done for "the cause" (Harry's defeat of Voldemort) should have been acknowledged ... but it was true.
What bothers me about DD's intent for Snape to have the wand is that it would have been tantamount to putting a bull's-eye on his back. Doing it without telling ... I don't like it.
Madam Pince - Sep 9, 2009 6:49 am (#377 of 391)
I know he was. I just didn't like Dumbledore's stating the fact like he did. It felt almost like taunting a bit. But, see, every time I start thinking about the Elder Wand and how I don't understand the whole deal, I decide that it's all Dumbledore's fault and I get irritated with him.
mona amon - Sep 9, 2009 8:45 am (#378 of 391)
Oh well, Severus does fight back. "Which I do on your orders!" growled Snape. At least I hope he growled. That was quoted from memory.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 9, 2009 9:39 am (#379 of 391)
You know, I cannot help but wonder if "the plan" would have gone along more smoothly had Severus been in charge. I know that's a big proposal, but he did have the gift of thinking like a criminal, and acting like one, while masterfully lying to serve the truth in his heart -- honoring Lily's death to make good for his digressions. I know Dumbledore was in the same situation -- wanting to serve partially because of long-carried guilt -- but Severus was more intimately and passionately involved. Dumbledore became emotionally involved against his will (speech in OP) but he still was willing to feed Harry to Voldemort by the end of HBP. Yes, he was reasonably confident in the "shared protective blood" theory, but I really feel that Severus would have been more thorough with the details
But that would only have made his job with Vold more stressful -- imagine knowing *everything* and having to hide it *all* from Legilimency. Yikes.
Madam Pince - Sep 9, 2009 12:33 pm (#380 of 391)
I suppose that's as good a reason as any (and it sounds like one JKR would trot out if asked in an interview) -- the reason Dumbledore didn't tell Snape about the Elder Wand was because that would be just one more thing he'd have to 'Occlumens' about whenever he was attending the DE Staff meetings.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 9, 2009 1:19 pm (#381 of 391)
DE Staff Meetings, LOL, did Vold serve punch and biscuits? That saying, "Never let them see you sweat" -- yeah, no wonder Severus had greasy hair -- the man was always broken out in a nervous sweat!
Back to the Elder Wand...where were we?
Gerald Costales - Sep 9, 2009 10:14 pm (#382 of 391)
Hmmm. I think Snape would have noticed that Voldemort had Dumbledore's wand. But, I don't think Snape knew that Dumbledore's wand was the Elder Wand, the Deathstick, the Wand of Destiny, etc.
Dumbledore didn't tell Harry everything. So, I wouldn't be surprised if Dumbledore kept the fact that his wand was the Elder Wand, the Deathstick, the Wand of Destiny, etc. from Snape.
Dumbledore's death was unplanned. So, there was the chance that Dumbledore could have given Snape more info. before his death. Including knowledge of the Elder Wand. Finally, I think even with the knowledge of the Elder Wand. Snape would have still been willing to carry out Dumbledore's plan. I don't see Snape backing away from a mission. Even if that mission meant possible death.
Snape is not a warm fuzzy type of guy. So, Snape is just hard to read. But, Snape did shed tears. And that's something I would never have expected from Snape.
Julia H. - Sep 10, 2009 9:54 am (#383 of 391)
I can accept that Snape did not in that particular moment recognize DD's wand because he was focused on Harry and Nagini and on trying to get away. I can see that. Apart from that, I still think he would know that wand well enough to recognize it in normal circumstances. So it makes sense that this is the first time when he sees DD's wand in Voldemort's hand, but does not realize that it is DD's wand until Voldemort starts "explaining" [/b]- And then, yes, Snape quickly makes the connection.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 10, 2009 10:25 am (#384 of 391)
I agree, Julia. With all that said and debated, I can accept the following:
He knew nothing of Dumbledore's wand being the Elder Wand
He knew nothing of the "plan" DD had for him to end up with it
He knew the story in the Tales of Beedle Bard and the lore of the Elder Wand throughout WW history
He was struck by Vold's words at the last second, pulling his attention from Nagini and what it meant for Harry, and then drew very fast conclusions. The death mask was the culmination of these puzzle pieces all fitting together to point to his death.
This seems plausable to me
Soul Search - Sep 10, 2009 11:07 am (#385 of 391)
"He knew nothing of the "plan" DD had for him to end up with it." (me and my shadow 813)
Good analysis, but I don't think this line is exactly right. Dumbledore "planned" for Severus to become Master of the Elder Wand, but not necessarily to "end up with it." If Severus possessed the wand, he would try it and discover that it was very powerful in his hand. Then, the wand would get a new Master when someone defeated Severus. This isn't what Dumbledore wanted.
Dumbledore wanted Severus to be the wand's Master, but NOT to possess it. I think it was to be buried with him all along.
All that said, I don't think Dumbledore's plan would have worked. Ollivander (and Lovegood) mention that there were long periods in the Elder Wand's history where it seemed to disappear. I conclude there were other times when a Master of the Elder Wand died without being defeated, the Wand lay dormant for a time, then was discovered and the Elder Wand chose a new master.
Given that the Wand was "unbeatable" this scenario actually makes more sense than Mastery of the wand always being transferred when a wizard kills the current Master.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 10, 2009 1:25 pm (#386 of 391)
Dumbledore wanted Severus to be the wand's Master, but NOT to possess it. I think it was to be buried with him all along. - Soul Search
I thought that as well, and stated a pretty good theory about why in this post: me and my shadow 813, "+ The Elder Wand - Deathly Hallow #1" #277, 27 Aug 2009 10:44 am
But, as we do have several bits of canon stating that Dumbledore wanted the Wand's power to die with himself, it seems that the Severus theory does not make sense. Harry makes a comment to Voldemort at the end, as many have mentioned, that just doesn't fit.
Here is the Lexicon's take on it: Upon his death, Dumbledore intended for Severus Snape to become the master of the Elder Wand, but failed to take into account that, as his death was pre-planned, Snape had not truly defeated him.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 10, 2009 2:34 pm (#387 of 391)
Continued -- As Soul Search points out -- sorry to be a (gloating) nitpicker but -- I stated in this post that it is highly unlikely that over so many centuries the Wand was always taken from a *living* master me and my shadow 813, "+ The Elder Wand - Deathly Hallow #1" #318, 31 Aug 2009 11:47 am
I think this speculation only makes sense, that the Wand was *stolen* from graves or estates or found like the Ring in LOTR. But it is not my series to make rules about...
Madam Pince - Sep 10, 2009 5:27 pm (#388 of 391)
Oh, hey, I think you / we can make all the rules we want! If the author leaves strings left untied, then we are free to speculate and set them up however we please!
Solitaire - Sep 11, 2009 6:23 pm (#389 of 391)
Then again, perhaps some of the people who were defeated simply had not trumpeted about the fact that they had the wand ... rather like DD. Isn't it possible that the wand passed through the hands of some Wizards who did not know its significance?
Gerald Costales - Sep 11, 2009 10:42 pm (#390 of 391)
"Isn't it possible that the wand passed through the hands of some Wizards who did not know its significance?" Solitaire
Yes, I don't see how everyone would know about the Elder Wand. The only person besides Dumbledore who had a deep knowledge of the Elder Wand was Xeno Lovegood. I think believing in the Elder Wand is like believing in aliens from outer space or Bigfoot.
How many people knew about Horcruxes? There are probably many magical things that the average Wizard or Witch just wouldn't know.
Solitaire - Sep 12, 2009 3:10 am (#391 of 391)
Even Voldemort didn't give the wand a second thought, until he was unable to kill Harry with Lucius's wand. Do you suppose he already knew Harry's wand was broken when he took the Elder Wand? I mean, would he have done anything as mundane as Finite Incantatem on Hermione's wand? Even if he had, would it have been possible to tell what the Reparo spell was being used to repair?
He doesn't tell Harry how to destroy Horcruxes because he died before he could do so
Actually, this is not true. Dumbledore knew the Sword of Gryffindor would work. Whether he knew about Fiendfyre or Basilisk fangs is debatable. However, there were plenty of opportunities for DD to have told Harry about the Sword ... IMO.
I see no reason for concealing the Elder Wand information from Severus
Actually, I understand this one--at least, I've come up with an explanation that satisfies me. I think Dumbledore may have wondered if Snape--believing he had the Unbeatable Wand-[/b]- Might attempt to kill Voldemort himself. Had he attempted it, and had Voldy killed him and won the wand legitimately, it is possible Harry might not have been able to defeat Voldy. I think it was imperative that Voldy not get that wand by means that could empower it further.
It sounds as though Snape had seen the wand in Voldemort's hand before.
Is that possible, Julia? Voldemort had not had the Elder wand long. Didn't he get it just before the Trio pulled off the Bank Caper, or was it some weeks before that? I can't remember how long they were at Shell Cottage, but Harry saw Voldy blasting open DD's tomb while he was there, I believe. Is it possible that Snape did not realize this wand was Dumbledore's wand?
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 4, 2009 9:03 am (#352 of 391)
According to Hermione in DH, the only reason the Sword worked on Horcruxes is because it imbibed Basilisk venom. So, I am concluding that Dumbledore knew about the venom part.
Julia H. - Sep 6, 2009 3:54 pm (#353 of 391)
It sounds as though Snape had seen the wand in Voldemort's hand before. (Julia)
Is that possible, Julia? Voldemort had not had the Elder wand long. (Solitaire)
I don't know. Snape says Voldemort has done extraordinary magic with that wand - but, of course, it is possible that Snape has not yet realized that Voldemort has a new wand. With Voldemort complaining about the magic he is doing, flattery is probably the only possible answer. As for how long Voldemort has had the Elder Wand, to me it seems he got it the day when the Trio found refuge in Shell Cottage, which was during the Hogwarts spring break (Bill mentioned that Ginny was on holiday, and so was Draco). The battle of Hogwarts was in May. So Voldemort must have had the wand for a few weeks. But I agree with you that Snape must have recognized Dumbledore's wand when he first saw it in Voldemort's hand.
Solitaire - Sep 6, 2009 4:54 pm (#354 of 391)
Couldn't the "extraordinary things" have referred to any and all of Voldemort's previous magic, which was done with his old wand? I wonder how many "extraordinary things" he had actually done with this wand, up to this point. It seems like his most extraordinary magic had already been done with his original wand--the Yew and Phoenix-feather wand.
mona amon - Sep 7, 2009 2:18 am (#355 of 391)
So why did not Snape take the wand and hide it? DD's tomb was a bit too obvious for a real hiding place. (Julia)
He may not have wanted to violate Dumbledore's tomb. Harry does say somewhere that he wasn't afraid of breaking into DD's tomb if it really was DD's intent that he should get the wand (or something like that), but the Elder Wand may not have been in the forefront of Severus's mind the way that it was in Harry's. He may have decided to wait for some sign that Voldemort was really after the wand.
Snape was a very intelligent wizard, and very well-read, apparently. (What else was there to do when all the other kids were playing Quidditch and going to parties?) So even if he skipped the kiddie fairy tales and missed out on the Deathly Hallows, he had probably come across the Deathstick in some of his reading. I don't think he knew Dumbledore's wand was it, though, nor that Voldy had it (until right then.)
Mona, I think you're convincing me that Snape knew something about the wand, but I'm still not thinking that Dumbledore was the one that told him... (Madam Pince)
It's possible, but I feel that just LV's mention of having taken possession of the legendary Deathstick would not have been enough to shock him like that. To me it seems like he's finally got the confirmation, and the reason, for what he suspected right from the beginning of the interview - that Voldemort called him there to kill him.
I like to think DD told Severus about the wand, and I cannot see anything to show that he didn't. However, I'm not sure it was JKR's intent. You never know with Jo!
He doesn't tell Harry how to destroy Horcruxes because he died before he could do so (Me)
Actually, this is not true. Dumbledore knew the Sword of Gryffindor would work. Whether he knew about Fiendfyre or Basilisk fangs is debatable. However, there were plenty of opportunities for DD to have told Harry about the Sword ... IMO. (Soli)
What I meant was, that this wasn't an intentional secret on DD's part. He must have meant to explain to Harry how Horcruxes are destroyed and to actually demonstrate this with the Locket horcrux after their return from the cave. I think Dumbledore's intention was that Harry would use the sword to destroy all the remaining Horcruxes. Unfortunately he died before he could explain.
Actually, I understand this one--at least, I've come up with an explanation that satisfies me. I think Dumbledore may have wondered if Snape--believing he had the Unbeatable Wand-[/b]- Might attempt to kill Voldemort himself. Had he attempted it, and had Voldy killed him and won the wand legitimately, it is possible Harry might not have been able to defeat Voldy. I think it was imperative that Voldy not get that wand by means that could empower it further.
But if DD had died in accordance with their original plan, the Elder Wand would have "lost its power". I do not know whether this means it would have become an ordinary wand with no super powers, or just a wooden stick. Anyway, no one could have become its master after DD's death at the hands of Severus.
Couldn't the "extraordinary things" have referred to any and all of Voldemort's previous magic, which was done with his old wand? I wonder how many "extraordinary things" he had actually done with this wand, up to this point. It seems like his most extraordinary magic had already been done with his original wand--the Yew and Phoenix-feather wand.
I agree. We see Voldemort firing off AKs at his DEs with the Elder Wand after hearing about the loss of the cup, but Severus was at Hogwarts at the time. The only time he had a chance to see it prior to this would have been if Voldemort had visited him in the castle as he had promised, after plundering DD's grave. But since he probably just had a cup of tea with him before returning to Malfoy Manor, Severus wouldn't have had a chance to see any display of 'extraordinary' magic.
Julia H. - Sep 7, 2009 3:04 am (#356 of 391)
Couldn't the "extraordinary things" have referred to any and all of Voldemort's previous magic, which was done with his old wand? (Solitaire)
It is possible if we suppose one of the things below:
a) Snape does not realize that the wand Voldemort is waving in front of him is not Voldemort's usual wand, that it is in fact Dumbledore's wand. (Is it likely?)
b) He realizes the above but pretends that he does not. (Why?)
c) He may realize everything but he is not even trying to give a sensible answer to Voldemort's question - only a mechanical one. (Has he already given up? Is he too focused on Harry to pay proper attention to Voldemort?)
As for what Snape has seen recently, just because we don't see Voldemort doing any magic in that particular period of time, he may have summoned Snape to himself once or twice, and Snape may have seen him do some magic - extraordinary or not - which he could refer to in this moment. Voldemort must have done some magic before he reached the conclusion that the wand did not work for him properly. It could have been the magic of that particular day though - but still before the Shrieking Shack scene. My main problem with this possibility is that in that case, Snape should already know that Voldemort is using Dumbledore's wand, but in The Elder Wand chapter, I have the impression that he is just realizing it now.
He may not have wanted to violate Dumbledore's tomb. (Mona)
I am ready to accept any explanation of self-sacrifice on Snape's part - including the idea that had he known the true significance of the wand for Voldemort and the reason why he was likely to go after it, Snape would not have stolen it from Dumbledore's tomb because (once Voldemort knew that the wand had been buried with Dumbledore [/b]- A piece of information easy enough for him to find out) it would have given Voldemort a reason to torture a lot of people in the castle thinking that someone would know where the wand was.
However, if it had been a clear order of Dumbledore's that Snape had to hide the wand from Voldemort - would he have refused to obey? Snape does seem to be disillusioned with Dumbledore around Christmas time ... would he have refused to obey an order that would mainly serve his own safety (as Voldemort was not the master of the wand anyway...)? He had also promised that he would do everything for the safety of Hogwarts students, which may include not bringing Voldemort's wrath upon them... But then again, Snape seems rather shocked when he meets Voldemort in the Shack.
No conclusion.
mona amon - Sep 7, 2009 6:14 am (#357 of 391)
a) Snape does not realize that the wand Voldemort is waving in front of him is not Voldemort's usual wand, that it is in fact Dumbledore's wand. (Is it likely?) (Julia)
I think he really does not realise this at the beginning of the interview. It's probably only in the movies that each wand looks so distinctive. I think it's quite possible that Dumbledore's wand did not look that different from Voldemort's.
However, if it had been a clear order of Dumbledore's that Snape had to hide the wand from Voldemort - would he have refused to obey?
Severus wouldn't have thought of it as an order, but as an instruction that he was not able to follow because of the way things worked out on the Tower the night he killed Dumbledore.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 7, 2009 8:56 am (#358 of 391)
Couldn't the "extraordinary things" have referred to any and all of Voldemort's previous magic, which was done with his old wand? (Solitaire)
It is possible if we suppose one of the things below:
a) Snape does not realize that the wand Voldemort is waving in front of him is not Voldemort's usual wand, that it is in fact Dumbledore's wand. (Is it likely?)
b) He realizes the above but pretends that he does not. (Why?)
c) He may realize everything but he is not even trying to give a sensible answer to Voldemort's question - only a mechanical one. (Has he already given up? Is he too focused on Harry to pay proper attention to Voldemort?) - Julia
I agree that, unless I am missing something, there is really no obvious difference between wands. Yes, Vold's wand has been described as having a "handle" but IMO, unless you are Ollivander or unless a wand is of a very pale or very dark wood, they would all appear quite similar. Especially if you are a bit distracted! You are about to get killed, and desperate to complete the mission of giving Harry the crucial bit of information needed to kill this piece of scum standing before you.
IMO this reinforces my belief that Severus knew nothing of the Elder Wand. And the passage itself does, too. Severus's line really does say to me that he has no idea why Vold is saying "Why doesn't it work for me, Severus?" And then, when Severus sees Nagini in the cage, all he can think about is what Dumbledore told him. This is the moment, when he keeps the snake close by. Severus's mind must have been focused on how to get away IMO. He also must have been employing an extraordinary amount of Occlumency right then!
Solitaire - Sep 7, 2009 10:02 am (#359 of 391)
Wand lengths are certainly distinctive. Hagrid's was 16 inches long. Voldy's was 13½, Harry's was 11, Umbridge's was "unusually short." Wasn't it Travers who recognized and asked about Bella's wand when Hermione was impersonating her? I'm curious ... are we ever told how long the Elder Wand was or what it looked like? I'm trying to remember if Harry ever mentioned Dumbledore's wand as looking unique in some way.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 7, 2009 10:12 am (#360 of 391)
Yes, I was going to add that -- unless it is Hagrid's 16" or Umbridge's stubby -- I really don't think anyone could notice a 1" difference unless it was sitting on a table alongside others of varying lengths.
Travers did not recognize Bella's wand. He only asks because he heard a rumour that Bella's was taken.
We are only told Vold's wand has a handle, other than that we are never told of physically distinguishing wand features, i.e., color, crookedness, diameter, etc.
Just for good measure I will add that, in the situation Severus finds himself, the Shrieking Shack room was "dimly lit".
Soul Search - Sep 7, 2009 12:28 pm (#361 of 391)
Voldemort's Shrieking Shack statements to Severus imply Severus knows there is supposed to be something special about the wand Voldemort is using.
Severus met Voldemort on the Hogwarts grounds when Voldemort went for the wand. I think the conversation implied Voldemort would join Severus in the castle, later. How could Voldemort not show off to Severus that he now had Dumbledore's wand?
For that matter, I don't recall Voldemort restoring Dumbledore's tomb, so Snape could figure what he was after.
The term "Elder Wand" may not have come up, but Severus had to know Voldemort had Dumbledore's wand and that he thought it something special.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 7, 2009 1:17 pm (#362 of 391)
Soul Search, I'm not in agreement with your post but I have, like you, wondered about the tomb. But as Vold broke into it in March, and no one brings it up, I conclude that Vold restored the marble being cracked in half.
I don't think Vold would show off that he had the Elder Wand, personally. And we are not shown any reason to believe that Severus watched Vold go to the tomb. He was under a Disillusionment Charm in the dark at the lake, which is far enough from the castle.
It was stated that the DE's must know Harry's wand was broken (when they test Hermione's at Malfoy Manor) and, if this were the case, Vold would allow everyone to assume he was satisfied, because the "twin wand issue" was no longer an issue. As Ollivander tells Harry, Vold is no longer hunting the Elder Wand to merely kill Harry. So, in a nutshell I don't think Vold would tell Severus about the Elder Wand and I don't think Dumbledore would tell Severus about it either.
Not that this really matters but, just for my own reference regarding the length of wands, I took a 12" ruler and held it in my hand like a wand. I could hold it comfortably with 3" in my palm and with 6" in my palm, that's without a cloak sleeve concealing whether I was actually holding the very tip/end. So it could be anywhere from 8-15" long judging from someone looking at it in my hand. It would be very hard to tell what length a wand is when it is in one's hand, other than Umbridge's . So, I think JKR gives us these details to provide insight into the character of the owners of these wands, but I do not feel that most are easily distinguishable.
edited
Julia H. - Sep 7, 2009 2:03 pm (#363 of 391)
About wands: I don't know but I have always thought that wands are unique and look unique as well. Differences of wood type (affecting colour and flexibility) and length and whatever other subtle differences there are may be more important to wizards than to others. The way I see it is this: In the Muggle world, someone who is not the least bit interested in cars may not find much difference between two cars, except perhaps the colour, and such people may find it difficult to recognize their friends' cars (in a street full of cars) even if they have travelled in it before. Those, however, for whom a car means power, prestige, pride and the extension of the self will probably recognize and remember even the small details of other people's cars. In the wizarding world, wands are extremely important. One's wand is like a body part. Wizards see and handle wands all the time. I find it quite possible that they can observe and recognize details and differences where Muggles would only see two identical sticks. I am not saying that a wizard will necessarily recognize any wand he has ever seen. But Snape worked and lived close to Dumbledore for many years. It is likely that he knew Dumbledore's wand well enough to recognize it. I think that Voldemort's wand would be easy to remember as well - not because of the handle but because it was the wand of the most terrible dark wizard alive.
Steve Newton - Sep 7, 2009 3:25 pm (#364 of 391)
MAMS says "Severus's mind must have been focused on how to get away IMO."
That's how I read it. HE asks 4 times to be allowed to go get Draco. This sounds like the only obvious way to get away without be found out. It doesn't work but he stuck with the plan.
Of course, I have no idea on the Elder Wand thing.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 7, 2009 5:24 pm (#365 of 391)
Yes, I feel he was determined, even monocular in his focus, once he saw Nagini -[/b]- And JKR makes a point to tell us that his eyes were staring at the snake.
Julia, I see what you are saying but your explanation IMO fits more when showing the difference between, for instance, Ron and Hermione. Ron notices virtually no detail and Hermione notices every detail. So, to me, it is not that all wizards notice wands.
Yes, I do believe the average wizard has memorised their wand's physical uniqueness. And I do think a cherry wood wand would look different than other wood, but there are not many cherry wood wands.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 7, 2009 6:02 pm (#366 of 391)
That's how I read it. HE asks 4 times to be allowed to go get Draco. - Steve
Sorry, too late to edit. You probably made a typo Steve... It is Harry he asks to retrieve, not Draco. It has nothing to do with Draco and the Elder Wand. It has to do with Severus trying to find some way to get to Harry before Vold does.
"Let me find the boy. Let me bring you Potter. I know I can find him, my Lord. Please."
Steve Newton - Sep 7, 2009 7:22 pm (#367 of 391)
Not a typo, just a plain old mistake. Its been quite a while since I read the book. I am listening to it but have not gotten this far yet.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 7, 2009 7:54 pm (#368 of 391)
I know how it is, Steve -- there are some parts of this series I haven't read in a while. I'm at the point where I re-read 50 pages that I'm interested in, rather than cover to cover anymore.
Back to the Elder Wand: to me, Voldemort's speech to Severus in the Shrieking Shack seems to be informing Severus for the first time of what has transpired since Lucius's wand did not perform. Not that Severus is getting a review of what he already knows about the situation with Vold's new Elder Wand. I get the impression that Severus knows of the Elder Wand Vold speaks of, but only because of The Tales of Beedle and nothing more. He is drawing very fast conclusions.
mona amon - Sep 8, 2009 5:20 am (#369 of 391)
I think the Elder wand may have looked similar enough to Voldemort's yew wand for Severus not to notice the difference. As Shadow has pointed out, the shock of seeing Nagini in her enchanted cage and at the same time sensing that he was trapped would have left him with not much attention to spare for the details of the wand Voldemort was holding.
He's so distracted by the snake that he doesn't recognise it even when Voldemort tells him that it's not his yew wand. It's only when he actualy tells him that it's Dumbledore's wand in his hand that Severus finally raises his eyes to look at him, trying to hide his shock by 'occlumensing' so hard that his face becomes a blank, marble mask.
BTW, why does everyone feel that Dumbledore did not warn Severus about the Elder Wand?
Mrs Brisbee - Sep 8, 2009 7:30 am (#370 of 391)
BTW, why does everyone feel that Dumbledore did not warn Severus about the Elder Wand?
Mostly because I don't remember there being anything in the story to show that Dumbledore and Snape discussed the Wand.
I don't understand Dumbledore's final Grand Plan. I did wonder at one point if Dumbledore actually did want Snape to be master of the Wand, so he could jump in after Harry died and finish off both Nagini and Voldemort, but the only thing to suggest that is Dumbledore's one ambiguous statement in Kings Cross. Plus, the Plan is just fraught with too many contradictions and perils.
It may be that de-powering the Elder Wand was seen by Dumbledore as a convenient by product of making Snape look good by "murdering" Dumbledore, but neither outcome seems so important that they were worth the sacrifices made to achieve them, in my opinion. I do think Dumbledore was surprised that Death Eaters got into the castle, though, so it is possible that Snape and Dumbledore were instigating an emergency plan that under better circumstances would have never seen the light of day. At this point I think that the point of the Elder Wand Plan was that it was a bad plan because of the distrust it spread, and it was Harry bringing trust and truth to the table that finally defeated Voldemort.
legolas returns - Sep 8, 2009 12:29 pm (#371 of 391)
The plan to me seems to have a few flaws in it particularly the fact that Snape gets the chop regardless of who the true master of the wand is and regardless of whether the wand is powerful or not. It seems that Dumbledore sacrificed Snape without giving him all the facts (not the first time). At the same time Snape has locked himself in by agreeing to an unbreakable curse. Is death the only way to protect Harry and Draco? I suppose being a double/triple agent has a limited lifespan .
Soul Search - Sep 8, 2009 12:30 pm (#372 of 391)
I think Dumbledore intentionally kept knowledge of his Elder Wand from Severus because Dumbledore was not quite willing to trust Severus with the wand. I know, Dumbleodre repeatedly said he trusted Severus Snape, but there may have been limits.
Voldemort killed Lily. Lily was Snape's whole reason for dedicating his life, quite literally, with protecting Hary and, thereby, defeating Voldemort. I find it strange, but nowhere does Snape express any hate or desire for revenge against Voldemort; he keeps it all inside.
We also know Snape did not have a lot of faith in Harry's ability to conquer Voldemort. Then, after Dumbledore reveals that Harry is "a pig to the slaughter" Snape is even more skeptic of the success of Dumbleodre's plan. How can Harry defeat Voldemort if he is dead?
Had Snape become master of the elder wand he would have tried to kill Voldemort with it. Snape didn't know about horcruxes, so that would have been a disaster.
Dumbledore didn't tell Severus about the elder wand to keep him safe ... from himself.
Madam Pince - Sep 8, 2009 2:22 pm (#373 of 391)
I just thought that because Snape's actions and dialogue give us no hint that he knew anything about the Hallows at all. Plus, there's the whole "secretive Dumbledore" thing. I have no real "canon" to base it on, I guess. It just seemed to me like Snape knew nothing about them.
Then his reaction upon hearing Voldemort mention the Deathstick makes me think he had possibly stumbled across that one in his experience/reading, and he suddenly froze, thinking fast, because he was suddenly recognizing that silky tone in Voldy's voice and realizing he was in deep doo-doo.
Upon reflection, I almost think the "You - you have performed extraordinary magic with that wand" line was just babbling flattery -- he was trying to buy time, collect his thoughts, etc. He was thinking fast. He had suddenly realized he was in danger, and was trying desperately to think of a way to get his message to Harry before that snake was set loose on him.
Oh, and put me in the camp that thinks wizards would notice whose wand was whose. Something that's that personal, and that attached to what you're able to do? Oh yeah. Snape would've seen that wand in Dumbledore's hand every day for the past x-number of years -- he'd recognize Dumbledore's wand in a second, I'd think.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 8, 2009 4:09 pm (#374 of 391)
I agree with recent posts. And I do agree that a man like Severus would notice details of someone else's wand that he saw every day for nearly two decades. I just don't think it applies to all wizards. And in this case, I do not believe that Severus noticed Voldemort's wand -[/b]- As I and others have stated, it seems he had other things on his mind (as well as perpetually blocking Voldemort out of his mind!) I definitely think his statement about Vold's wand was just babbling while he was frantically assessing the situation.
I think Dumbledore's statement that he doesn't put all his eggs into the basket dangling from Voldemort's arm is reason enough to assume that, with no canon to prove otherwise, Severus was not only in the dark about Horcruxes, he was not informed of the Elder Wand.
Madam Pince - Sep 9, 2009 6:05 am (#375 of 391)
...Dumbledore's statement that he doesn't put all his eggs into the basket dangling from Voldemort's arm...
You know, that text always irritated me. Dangling from whose arm? You might just as well say dangling from Dumbledore's arm. Hmph. But I digress... (My, but I'm finding it easy to get into a snit at DD these days...)
Solitaire - Sep 9, 2009 6:43 am (#376 of 391)
But he was dangling on Voldemort's arm, Madam Pince. The fact that it was at DD's behest and done for "the cause" (Harry's defeat of Voldemort) should have been acknowledged ... but it was true.
What bothers me about DD's intent for Snape to have the wand is that it would have been tantamount to putting a bull's-eye on his back. Doing it without telling ... I don't like it.
Madam Pince - Sep 9, 2009 6:49 am (#377 of 391)
I know he was. I just didn't like Dumbledore's stating the fact like he did. It felt almost like taunting a bit. But, see, every time I start thinking about the Elder Wand and how I don't understand the whole deal, I decide that it's all Dumbledore's fault and I get irritated with him.
mona amon - Sep 9, 2009 8:45 am (#378 of 391)
Oh well, Severus does fight back. "Which I do on your orders!" growled Snape. At least I hope he growled. That was quoted from memory.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 9, 2009 9:39 am (#379 of 391)
You know, I cannot help but wonder if "the plan" would have gone along more smoothly had Severus been in charge. I know that's a big proposal, but he did have the gift of thinking like a criminal, and acting like one, while masterfully lying to serve the truth in his heart -- honoring Lily's death to make good for his digressions. I know Dumbledore was in the same situation -- wanting to serve partially because of long-carried guilt -- but Severus was more intimately and passionately involved. Dumbledore became emotionally involved against his will (speech in OP) but he still was willing to feed Harry to Voldemort by the end of HBP. Yes, he was reasonably confident in the "shared protective blood" theory, but I really feel that Severus would have been more thorough with the details
But that would only have made his job with Vold more stressful -- imagine knowing *everything* and having to hide it *all* from Legilimency. Yikes.
Madam Pince - Sep 9, 2009 12:33 pm (#380 of 391)
I suppose that's as good a reason as any (and it sounds like one JKR would trot out if asked in an interview) -- the reason Dumbledore didn't tell Snape about the Elder Wand was because that would be just one more thing he'd have to 'Occlumens' about whenever he was attending the DE Staff meetings.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 9, 2009 1:19 pm (#381 of 391)
DE Staff Meetings, LOL, did Vold serve punch and biscuits? That saying, "Never let them see you sweat" -- yeah, no wonder Severus had greasy hair -- the man was always broken out in a nervous sweat!
Back to the Elder Wand...where were we?
Gerald Costales - Sep 9, 2009 10:14 pm (#382 of 391)
Hmmm. I think Snape would have noticed that Voldemort had Dumbledore's wand. But, I don't think Snape knew that Dumbledore's wand was the Elder Wand, the Deathstick, the Wand of Destiny, etc.
Dumbledore didn't tell Harry everything. So, I wouldn't be surprised if Dumbledore kept the fact that his wand was the Elder Wand, the Deathstick, the Wand of Destiny, etc. from Snape.
Dumbledore's death was unplanned. So, there was the chance that Dumbledore could have given Snape more info. before his death. Including knowledge of the Elder Wand. Finally, I think even with the knowledge of the Elder Wand. Snape would have still been willing to carry out Dumbledore's plan. I don't see Snape backing away from a mission. Even if that mission meant possible death.
Snape is not a warm fuzzy type of guy. So, Snape is just hard to read. But, Snape did shed tears. And that's something I would never have expected from Snape.
Julia H. - Sep 10, 2009 9:54 am (#383 of 391)
I can accept that Snape did not in that particular moment recognize DD's wand because he was focused on Harry and Nagini and on trying to get away. I can see that. Apart from that, I still think he would know that wand well enough to recognize it in normal circumstances. So it makes sense that this is the first time when he sees DD's wand in Voldemort's hand, but does not realize that it is DD's wand until Voldemort starts "explaining" [/b]- And then, yes, Snape quickly makes the connection.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 10, 2009 10:25 am (#384 of 391)
I agree, Julia. With all that said and debated, I can accept the following:
He knew nothing of Dumbledore's wand being the Elder Wand
He knew nothing of the "plan" DD had for him to end up with it
He knew the story in the Tales of Beedle Bard and the lore of the Elder Wand throughout WW history
He was struck by Vold's words at the last second, pulling his attention from Nagini and what it meant for Harry, and then drew very fast conclusions. The death mask was the culmination of these puzzle pieces all fitting together to point to his death.
This seems plausable to me
Soul Search - Sep 10, 2009 11:07 am (#385 of 391)
"He knew nothing of the "plan" DD had for him to end up with it." (me and my shadow 813)
Good analysis, but I don't think this line is exactly right. Dumbledore "planned" for Severus to become Master of the Elder Wand, but not necessarily to "end up with it." If Severus possessed the wand, he would try it and discover that it was very powerful in his hand. Then, the wand would get a new Master when someone defeated Severus. This isn't what Dumbledore wanted.
Dumbledore wanted Severus to be the wand's Master, but NOT to possess it. I think it was to be buried with him all along.
All that said, I don't think Dumbledore's plan would have worked. Ollivander (and Lovegood) mention that there were long periods in the Elder Wand's history where it seemed to disappear. I conclude there were other times when a Master of the Elder Wand died without being defeated, the Wand lay dormant for a time, then was discovered and the Elder Wand chose a new master.
Given that the Wand was "unbeatable" this scenario actually makes more sense than Mastery of the wand always being transferred when a wizard kills the current Master.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 10, 2009 1:25 pm (#386 of 391)
Dumbledore wanted Severus to be the wand's Master, but NOT to possess it. I think it was to be buried with him all along. - Soul Search
I thought that as well, and stated a pretty good theory about why in this post: me and my shadow 813, "+ The Elder Wand - Deathly Hallow #1" #277, 27 Aug 2009 10:44 am
But, as we do have several bits of canon stating that Dumbledore wanted the Wand's power to die with himself, it seems that the Severus theory does not make sense. Harry makes a comment to Voldemort at the end, as many have mentioned, that just doesn't fit.
Here is the Lexicon's take on it: Upon his death, Dumbledore intended for Severus Snape to become the master of the Elder Wand, but failed to take into account that, as his death was pre-planned, Snape had not truly defeated him.
me and my shadow 813 - Sep 10, 2009 2:34 pm (#387 of 391)
Continued -- As Soul Search points out -- sorry to be a (gloating) nitpicker but -- I stated in this post that it is highly unlikely that over so many centuries the Wand was always taken from a *living* master me and my shadow 813, "+ The Elder Wand - Deathly Hallow #1" #318, 31 Aug 2009 11:47 am
I think this speculation only makes sense, that the Wand was *stolen* from graves or estates or found like the Ring in LOTR. But it is not my series to make rules about...
Madam Pince - Sep 10, 2009 5:27 pm (#388 of 391)
Oh, hey, I think you / we can make all the rules we want! If the author leaves strings left untied, then we are free to speculate and set them up however we please!
Solitaire - Sep 11, 2009 6:23 pm (#389 of 391)
Then again, perhaps some of the people who were defeated simply had not trumpeted about the fact that they had the wand ... rather like DD. Isn't it possible that the wand passed through the hands of some Wizards who did not know its significance?
Gerald Costales - Sep 11, 2009 10:42 pm (#390 of 391)
"Isn't it possible that the wand passed through the hands of some Wizards who did not know its significance?" Solitaire
Yes, I don't see how everyone would know about the Elder Wand. The only person besides Dumbledore who had a deep knowledge of the Elder Wand was Xeno Lovegood. I think believing in the Elder Wand is like believing in aliens from outer space or Bigfoot.
How many people knew about Horcruxes? There are probably many magical things that the average Wizard or Witch just wouldn't know.
Solitaire - Sep 12, 2009 3:10 am (#391 of 391)
Even Voldemort didn't give the wand a second thought, until he was unable to kill Harry with Lucius's wand. Do you suppose he already knew Harry's wand was broken when he took the Elder Wand? I mean, would he have done anything as mundane as Finite Incantatem on Hermione's wand? Even if he had, would it have been possible to tell what the Reparo spell was being used to repair?
Mona- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India
Similar topics» The Cloak of Invisibility - Deathly Hallow #3
» The Resurrection Stone - Deathly Hallow #2
» Purchasing a Second Wand
» Re-read of Deathly Hallow pre-DH movie, part 1
» Horcrux: ...Voldemort´s wand
» The Resurrection Stone - Deathly Hallow #2
» Purchasing a Second Wand
» Re-read of Deathly Hallow pre-DH movie, part 1
» Horcrux: ...Voldemort´s wand
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum|
|
|