Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (Harry Potter, #7) Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows discussion


82 views
elder wand

Comments Showing 1-13 of 13 (13 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Cathy (last edited Aug 25, 2016 12:07PM) (new)

Cathy If the Elder Wand is unbeatable, how did Dumbledore defeat Grindelwold in a duel to win the wand?

My best conclusion is that, because Grindelwold stole it from Gregorivich, it was never truly his. But then, it seems to me, it never would really have been Dumbledore's, since he never conquered Gregorovich either! (A similar argument to why Snape was never its master, since it was Draco who mastered Dumbledore.)

Is it something to do with wand lore, that the wand was never really mastered by Grindelwald but knew it belonged to Dumbledore???


message 2: by Shalini (last edited Aug 25, 2016 12:07PM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Shalini I Hey, help me out here... i don't understand how Draco Malfoy came to be the rightful owner of the elder wand..


message 3: by Brooke (last edited Aug 25, 2016 12:07PM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Brooke Taken from the magazine Entertainment Weekly:

"Why was Draco the rightful owner of the Elder Wand? How did that work against Voldemort?"

"Deep breath: When Draco disarmed Dumbledore at the end of book 6, the Elder Wand - won by the headmaster when he dueled Grindelwald, passed its allegiance to young Malfoy, not Snape, whose "murder" of Dumbledore was prearranged and therefore not a defeat. Then Harry won Draco's wand at Malfoy Manor. So when Voldemort tried to kill Harry with the Elder Wand and Harry countered using Draco's wand, the two wands effectively cancelled each other out. The Elder Wand realized it was attacking Draco's wand, refused to act against its master, and rebounded the Killing Curse back onto Voldemort. The Dark Lord never had a chance."

I think it's the one weakness of the whole series - the whole thing just takes a little TOO much thought.


message 4: by Patricia (last edited Aug 25, 2016 12:09PM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Patricia (theinfophile) I thought that Draco won the Elder Wand because Snape used Draco's wand to kill Dumbledore... Didn't he reach over, grab Draco's wand, kill Dumbly, then hand it back to Draco?


message 5: by Shahriar (last edited Aug 25, 2016 12:09PM) (new)

Shahriar before snape's arrival, draco had used the disarming charm on Dumbledore (while he was freezing harry who was invisible). So techincally that was a duel between Draco and Albus, and by disarming its owner, the Elder wand is 'won' by Draco. Whatever happen to Albus afterwards, is irrelevant for the wand.

As to how he beat Grendelwand, way back when, i think he was just that much better. Part of the idea that JKR was trying to convey i think was that simple ownership of the wand does not guarantee victory. i guess it is testament to Dumbledore's magical ability.


message 6: by Paul (last edited Aug 25, 2016 12:27PM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Paul I agree... There is no question as to whether Grindelwald was conquered by Dumbledore or not, the latter couldn't have used the wand at will if he hadn't taken it by force from Grindelwald... As to why the possessor can be beaten in spite of the wand's reputation as being "unbeatable," I guess we have to give credit to the possessor's skill... We cannot expect a wizard who does not know how to use the wand's full power (i.e. doing the appropriate curses and spells)to win a duel... just a thought. :)


message 7: by Jack (last edited Aug 25, 2016 12:37PM) (new) - added it

Jack Gaebler ok
draco disarmed dumbledor so HE WON THE WAND!!
they had to duel and the "winner" got the wand so in the wand's "mind" draco is its owner


Julia Brooke wrote: "I think it's the one weakness of the whole series - the whole thing just takes a little TOO much thought."

It's not THAT complicated.


Julia Just because it's rumored to be "unbeatable" doesn't mean it actually is. It usually just means it's really hard to beat. And Dumbledore was a brilliant wizard - far superior to Grindelwald.


Kristen I don't really think it's complicated....

"it never would really have been Dumbledore's, since he never conquered Gregorovich either!"

He wouldn't have had to conquer Gregorovich. He only had to beat the current owner. Which he did.

As for why Draco was the master: Dumbledore was the wand's master and Draco disarmed him. Therefore the wand was Draco's.
Harry then disarms Draco (which they totally cut in the movie), so the wand was Harry's.

And the wand isn't necessarily "unbeatable". It's just better than your average wand. The person wielding it could still be beaten.


message 11: by Jessica (last edited Nov 14, 2013 07:44AM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Jessica Kristen wrote: "I don't really think it's complicated....

"it never would really have been Dumbledore's, since he never conquered Gregorovich either!"

He wouldn't have had to conquer Gregorovich. He only had to ..."


Just as clarification...

I read an article recently where Rowling was interviewed about this. It wasn't the disarming of Draco that won Harry the wand; it was the physical wrestling of it from Draco's grasp(which is portrayed in the movie). Apparently she wanted the transfer of elder power to seem so inconsequential that readers wouldn't even notice it. She also felt it was ironic that something as mighty as the elder wand could be won in a simple wrestling match between two boys.


Nefeli The whole concept of wand ownership seems multi-dimensional. While a wand may not recognize the holder as its owner, it may still work for minor magics, as it is a means of channeling magic in the first place and correlates with the wizard's magical power(ability).According to Rowling, many wands' allegiance depend on the core and wood.So there are multiple factors in calculation as to when a wand is not loyal.

On the Elder Wand ;
The Elder Wand has a long history, and has clearly been mishandled many times.At what point does true succesion(defined by the proposition that the allegiance is with the winner) fail?Shouldn't the line have ended with the first stealing?

It is not specified whether Gregorovitch has "won" the wand, while it is clear that Grinderwald has stolen it.In that case, has it ever been Gregorovich's in the first place, for not to recognize Grinderwald as his owner?
And if Grinderwald isn't the true owner, what makes it loyal to Dumbledore upon defeating him in duel?Dumbledore clearly states in the book that he was superior to Grinderwald in magical ability, but afraid to face him.

So, a possible explanation would be that the wand itself chooses anew its owner, and that its allegiance lays with its judgement of a "worthy" master.Apparently, that is a multiple factor evaluation, as Draco Malfoy "overpowered" Albus Dumbledore.

Personally, it seems to me that Rowling wants the point to come across strongly, and leaves it to the reader to compose their own logic of the matter.


message 13: by Ruby (last edited Jan 04, 2014 04:14PM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Ruby While Ron and other people view the wand as "unbeatable", it was my opinion that, while being an abnormally great wand, the elder wand wasn't some perfect, completely unstoppable wand given to Harry's ancestor, the youngest Peverell, from Death himself- it was just a really good wand that obeyed the whole: I won it from you and so now it obeys me best- thing.

We mustn't forget that Dumbledore is really, really good at spells, and that he's really clever. I wouldn't be surprised at all if he beat Grindlewald without having to have the elder wand.

It also could be that the fact that he beat Grindlewald when Grindlewald had the elder wand was a minor fluke that went unnoticed. I wouldn't be surprised at that, either, because the thing with the who-has-ownership-of-the-wand was peppered with other flukes like this.


back to top