Skip to main content

harry potter - Who was the rightful owner of the Sword of Gryffindor?



Who was the rightful owner of the Sword of Gryffindor?



‘So where is it?’ Harry asked suspiciously.

‘Unfortunately,’ said Scrimgeour, ‘that sword was not Dumbledore’s to give away. The sword of Godric Gryffindor is an important historical artefact, and as such, belongs –’

‘It belongs to Harry!’ said Hermione hotly. ‘It chose him, he was the one who found it, it came to him out of the Sorting Hat –’

‘According to reliable historical sources, the sword may present itself to any worthy Gryffindor,’ said Scrimgeour. ‘That does not make it the exclusive property of Mr Potter.’

Deathly Hallows - page 109 - Bloomsbury - chapter seven - The Will of Albus Dumbledore



Scrimgeour doesn't go on to say the Sword of Gryffindor belongs to the Ministry, although he does say it does not belong to Harry. Even so, I'm sceptical enough of the Ministry's motives to conclude that a case could probably be made for Harry being the sword's rightful owner. But was he?


Is there a canon answer to this question? If not a direct answer from the books, a speculative answer in the spirit of canon is welcome.


Who was the rightful owner of the Sword of Gryffindor?



Answer



Western Law and the Right of Property


Without a copy of the wizard world's equivalent of the "Commentaries on the Laws of England", it's impossible to determine who the true owner of the sword would be. If, however we assume that the laws are broadly equivalent to English Common Law then the answer is actually pretty straightforward:



Blackstone's commentary states that...



"...things personal...are goods, money, and all other movables which may attend the owner's person wherever he thinks proper to go".



Since Godric Gryffindor was instrumental in creating the Sorting Hat for the exclusive use of Hogwarts and since he subsequently enchanted the Sword to appear within the hat in times of need, it follows that the sword can be treated as a bequest of assets to the School.


As Headmaster, it's highly unlikely that Dumbledore has the authority to dispose of a valuable asset belonging to the School without the express permission of the School's Board of Governors. This means that the most likely answer is that the sword is (and remains) the property of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry in perpetuum until such time as it is disposed of in a lawful manner.



With regard to Scrimgeour's decision to take the sword into custody, it's highly likely that the Ministry of Magic has sufficient legal authority to justify (temporarily) confiscating it in a time of national crisis. This wouldn't affect who the ultimate owner was and they could expect to have it returned once the crisis was at an end.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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 ...
Post a Comment
Read more

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...
Post a Comment
Read more

tolkiens legendarium - Did Gandalf wear his Ring of Power throughout the trilogy?

After Gandalf discovered that Sauron was back and sent Frodo on his quest to Rivendell, did he continue to wear Narya (one of the Three Rings)? It seems like a huge risk to continue to wear it after the Nazgûl (Ringwraiths) started to try and reclaim the One Ring; if they managed to get the ring to Sauron, couldn't he be corrupted by his power? Whatever powers Narya bestows upon him couldn't possibly be worth the huge risk, could it? Answer When Sauron forged the one ring and put it on his finger, the other ring bearers were immediately aware of him and his intentions and removed their own rings. There is no reason why they couldn't merely do so again. As soon as Sauron set the One Ring upon his finger they were aware of him; and they knew him, and preceived that he would be master of them, and of all they wrought. Then in anger and fear they took off their rings. "Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age," Silmarillion
Post a Comment
Read more