-1

It has been discussed briefly in earlier books but great detail in the 7th book that Harry's Invisibility Cloak is one of the 3 hallows and hides its wearer truly and completely.

It's not any Disillusionment Charmed object whose power will fade with time. It remains as good as new even used repeatedly through generations. In other words, it was intended in the 7th book that there is no other clock that is as powerful and efficient in hiding the wearer as that of Harry's Invisibility Cloak.

Yet, in book 4, Moody's magical eye was able to see through it. I mean if we are talking about legendary Hallows like Elder Wand & Resurrection Stone and we put an Invisibility Cloak on the same platform - infact the cloak was termed as even more powerful than the other 2 hallows - and still some wizard wearing a magical eye, which later was then abused by evil Doloris Umbridge, was able to see through it with apparent ease!

Does it really justify the notion of the cloak that IT HIDES ITS WEARER TRULY AND COMPLETELY?

  • Marauder's Map was also able to see Harry even when he was under invisibility cloak.. – Captain Cold Dec 2 '15 at 8:50
  • So was Homenum Revelio. – CandiedMango Dec 2 '15 at 9:15
  • 1
    I think you're taking things too literally, It's the same as saying "Was the elder wand really Grindelwalds wand because he was defeated and it says the Elder wand makes you unbeatable." Like wise for the stone not actually bringing back the dead. – CandiedMango Dec 2 '15 at 9:33
  • Dumbledore and Mrs Norris also were able to see through it. – ibid Dec 2 '15 at 16:22
  • @ibid: As CreationEdge commented on CandiedMango's answer, "It's not a cloak of undetectability."  And remember that Mrs. Norris had super-human powers of smell and hearing. – Peregrine Rook Dec 2 '15 at 19:38
2

Yes, it was the true Invisibility Cloak created by Ignotus Peverell

Fleamont and Euphemia lived long enough to see James marry a Muggle-born girl called Lily Evans, but not to meet their grandson, Harry. Dragon pox carried them off within days of each other, due to their advanced age, and James Potter then inherited Ignotus Peverell’s Invisibility Cloak.

Pottermore - The Potter Family

The truly and completely notion most likely refers to the innability to use charms on wearers of the cloak, as well as it's everlasting nature.

  • I don't think you understand my question properly. I KNOW it was an invisibility cloak but as mentioned in the book, the definition of the TRUE invisibility cloak is that it hides its wearer totally and completely. But in this case, as per the plot convenience, Harry's invisibility cloak let people wearing magical eyes or using Marauder's Map see through it without any problem. I mean anyone using a magical eye or using the Marauder's map will be able to locate anyone under this cloak. Then how is this cloak a TRUE INVISIBILITY CLOAK - THAT HIDES ITS WEARER TOTALLY AND COMPLETELY? – Harsimrat Dec 2 '15 at 9:04
  • I think you misunderstand my point, the true invisibility cloak was by all counts created by Ignotus Peverell, at time of creation it is unknown if anyone had Magical Eyes or if a Marauders Map like object existed. In fact for both of these objects we only know of one instance of each in canon. If either were so easy to create there would most likely be a lot more of them floating about. If however you insist on applying that and only that as the one defining condition of the true cloak then, no it isn't the true cloak. If you go by all other facts and definitions then yes it is the true cloak – CandiedMango Dec 2 '15 at 9:11
  • 2
    @Harsimrat It makes you invisible to normal sight, which is kind of the definition. It's not a cloak of undetectability. – user31178 Dec 2 '15 at 13:54
  • @CreationEdge - Yes, if it were a cloak of total undetectability, people wouldn't even be able to detect the person's presence by physically colliding with them. – Hypnosifl Dec 2 '15 at 15:12
  • @Harsimrat: you're forgetting where that quote came from. Luna's father was not exactly the most reliable source imaginable. – Harry Johnston Dec 3 '15 at 0:23
0

Well, apparently the Magic Eye and the Marauder's Map are also in the same class as the cloak and other hallows: single-item irreplaceable artifacts with imbued magic that is not just the work of a spell and thus repeatable or subject to aging. Those items are magic, they are not merely enchanted.

So they need to work out compromises among themselves as opposed to objects of lesser power.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.