In the seventh book (and the 7th & 8th movie) of Harry Potter, it shows that a wand doesn't belong to a person anymore, or loses its loyalty if another witch or wizard disarms or defeats them.
Given that, why don't more children from earlier films and novels have to buy new wands? It shows students being disarmed many times.
Why was the disarming wand rule only valid in the 7th book?
Answer
The wand disarming rule only applies so ruthlessly in the case of the Elder Wand, which only shows up in the final book.
Wands choose their owner, and most wands seem to stay loyal to their original owners. The Elder Wand is an exception to the rule and chooses the stronger witch/wizard, hence switching owners when its previous owner was defeated.
Edit, to clarify a bit, from Wikipedia:
As stated by Mr. Ollivander the wandmaker, the [Elder] wand will never fully work for the new user unless he or she directly disarms, stuns or kills (even in Muggle fashion) the previous master. Rowling has stated that the wand is brutal in its choice of master, and that, while most wands have some allegiance to their own masters, the Elder Wand only responds to power. If a master dies naturally without ever being defeated, the wand's power will die for any following owner, since it was never won from the former.
Comments
Post a Comment