Skip to main content

harry potter - Why didn't anyone break the Elder Wand?


The Elder Wand is an extremely powerful artifact that many a wizard would lie, cheat, steal and kill for. Dumbledore had hoped that he might die undefeated as it's owner, so that the wand's power would be broken. In the end of The Deathly Hallows, Harry too put it away in the hope that he will die undefeated and break the wand's power. For Harry this is an unlikely outcome, given his choice of professions.


But why did neither Dumbledore or Harry think of simply snapping the wand (as in the movie), and thus effectively destroy it? As we learn in The Deathly Hallows, a broken wand is no easy thing to repair. Harry's powerful phoenix feather wand could only be repaired by the power of the Elder Wand. A wand as powerful as the Elder Wand likely could not have been repaired, or if it could it probably would recover a mere shadow of it's former power.
And on the off chance that someone could repair it to full potency, two or more pieces would be easier to hide more effectively than one whole one. Or in Harry's case he would have had knowledge of muggle methods that could have rendered it into dust or utterly burned it away.


So why did no one in the books think to physically destroy the wand, instead of trying to sit on it until death?



Answer



In the case of Dumbledore, I think he was very clear while talking with Harry in the King's Cross scene in Deathly Hallows that the Hallows were pretty irresistible to him. I'd suggest that Dumbledore was able to harbor the Elder Wand, but perhaps he was just unable to destroy it. By that I mean he was emotionally unable to destroy it - he just couldn't bring himself to do it because that latent connection between wand and master was still intact.


Tales of Beedle the Bard suggests that the Elder Wand may not have been able to be destroyed. It might not have been a physical possibility:




Believers in the Elder Wand, however, hold that because of the way in which it has always passed allegiance between owners – the next master overcoming the first, usually by killing him – the Elder Wand has never been destroyed or buried, but has survived to accumulate wisdom, strength and power far beyond the ordinary.

Tales of Beedle the Bard - page 102-103 - Bloomsbury - The Tale of the Three Brothers



The wand was created by Death, according to the legend. It passes from one wizard to another usually through death. Tales of Beedle the Bard notes that the manner in which it is passed from one wizard to another - death - is what keeps the wand strong and safe from destruction. Perhaps the wand cannot be destroyed by any human or wizard means, even if someone wanted to deliberately do so. Perhaps the wand can only be destroyed by Death (its creator). I know that @Pureferret already touched on this in his answer, but I wanted to expound on why the Elder Wand possibly cannot be destroyed.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

harry potter - Did Dolores Umbridge Have Any Association with Voldemort (or Death Eaters) before His Return?

I noticed that Dolores Umbridge was born during the first Wizarding War, so it's very likely she wasn't a Death Eater then (but she is pretty evil -- who knows?). After that Voldemort was not around in a way that could affect many people, and most wouldn't know he was planning to rise again. During that time, and up through Voldemort's return (in Goblet of Fire ), did Umbridge have any connection with the Death Eaters or with Voldemort? Was she doing what she did on her own, or was it because of an association with Voldemort or his allies? Answer Dolores Umbridge was definitely not a good person. However, as Sirius points out, "the world isn't split into good people and Death Eaters". Remember that he also says that he doesn't believe Umbridge to be a Death Eater, but that she's evil enough (or something like that). I think there are two strong reasons to believe that: Umbridge was proud to do everything according to the law, except when she trie...

What is the etymology of Doctor Who?

I recently decided to watch Doctor Who, and started viewing the 2005 version. I have the first two episodes from the first season, and I can't help but wonder what is the etymology of the name "Doctor Who"? And why does the protagonist call himself "the Doctor" (or is it "the doctor")? Answer In the very first episode of Doctor Who (way back in 1963), the Doctor has a granddaughter going by the name "Susan Foreman", and the junkyard where the TARDIS is has the sign "I.M. Foreman". Barbara, who becomes one of the Doctor's companions, calls him "Doctor Foreman" (probably assuming that is his name given his relationship to Susan), and Ian (another early companion) does the same in the second episode, to which the Doctor says: Eh? Doctor who? What's he talking about? "Foreman" is most likely selected as a convenient surname for Susan to use because it happened to be on display near where the TARDIS landed....

story identification - Animation: floating island, flying pests

At least 20 years ago I watched a short animated film which stuck in my mind. The whole thing was wordless, possibly European, and I'm pretty sure I didn't imagine it... It featured a flying island which was inhabited by some creatures who (in my memory) reminded me of the Moomins. The island was frequently bothered by large winged animals who swooped around, although I don't think they did any actual damage. At the end one of the moomin creatures suddenly gets a weird feeling, feels forced to climb to the top of the island and then plunges down a shaft right through the centre - only to emerge at the bottom as one of the flyers. Answer Skywhales from 1983. The story begins with a man warning the tribe of approaching skywhales. The drummers then warn everybody of the hunt as everyone get prepared to set "sail". Except one man is found in his home sleeping as the noise wake him up. He then gets ready and is about to take his weapon as he hesitates then decides ...