4

Hagrid is expelled from Hogwarts as a student, but he said that the courtesy of Dumbledore let him stay as a gamekeeper. Why did Hogwarts expel him?

  • 2
    Have you read the books or seen the movies? It is explained in both. – TylerH Sep 11 at 19:58
  • 1
    @TylerH – it isn't helpful to answer a question by saying "go read thousands of pages and watch hours of movies" – JeffThompson Sep 12 at 15:34
  • 5
    @JeffThompson Actually it is, since it forms a major subplot of Chamber of Secrets. Any answer is therefore by definition a spoiler. It's not even something which anyone reading it could possibly misunderstand. So in every way this is a bad question. The only correct answer is "read the books" (or "watch the films"), and the only correct verdict on the question is -1. – Graham Sep 12 at 17:07
  • 6
    @Graham this question is perfectly fine and that is not a reason to vote to close. Maybe downvote but certainly not close. Also you might want to sort out your attitude and be a bit nicer to folks. – TheLethalCarrot Sep 12 at 17:32
  • 3
    @Graham then downvote and move on. Others clearly feel differently and that doesn’t change the fact that, that isn’t a reason to vote to close. – TheLethalCarrot Sep 12 at 22:24
27

In The Chamber of Secrets, it is revealed that Hagrid was expelled because it is suspected that he is responsible for the death of a Muggle born witch.

Now known as the ghost "Moaning Myrtle".

This death was the result of the creature that resides in the Chamber of Secrets, which had been opened by the "Heir of Slytherin":

Tom Riddle, aka Lord Voldemort.

However, Hagrid was framed, because the headmaster at the time, Armando Dippet, was convinced that the death was instead caused by Hagrid's "pet":

Aragog, the Acromantula.

The reason that he was expelled and allowed to remain on as gamekeeper is that the existence of the Chamber of Secrets was not generally known. Cuthbert Binns says as much in The Chamber of Secrets:

But these honest facts have been obscured by the fanciful legend of the Chamber of Secrets. The story goes that Slytherin had built a hidden chamber in the castle [...]

And Hagrid is not believed to have intentionally killed the victim, just that he brought dangerous creatures into the castle:

I don't think you meant to kill anyone. But monsters don't make good pets. I suppose you just let it out for exercise and -

This indirect association with the death, combined with Dumbledore's intervention, meant that he was only expelled, and not given a more serious punishment. The school administration treated it as an accident.

Only the Transfiguration teacher, Dumbledore, seemed to think Hagrid was innocent. He persuaded Dippet to keep Hagrid and train him as gamekeeper. Yes, I think Dumbledore might have guessed. Dumbledore never seemed to like me as much as the other teachers did…

| improve this answer | |
  • 23
    I always thought that there was a subtext to the story where substantial bias against Hagrid existed because he was part giant. And that he was expelled as soon as any whiff of an accusation could be brought against him, to make sure that a part-giant wouldn't become a wizard - even though the accusation was not very plausible, and everyone knew that there wasn't any evidence that would support sending him to Azkahban. – tbrookside Sep 11 at 12:23
  • 4
    @tbrookside I think racism certainly played a role, but honestly he got off pretty lightly considering the circumstances. From their point of view, he knowingly brought a dangerous creature into the castle, and it escaped and caused a death. That's reckless endangerment (he knew or should have known the creature was a deadly threat, and did it anyway) leading to involuntary manslaughter, which is either a high degree misdemeanor or a low end felony. Getting off with just expulsion is a pretty good outcome on a charge that could easily have carried up to ten years in prison. – Darth Pseudonym Sep 11 at 14:43
  • 6
    @tbrookside I disagree; Tom found out Hagrid was raising an acromantula and intentionally framed him for the death. While racism may have played a part in not looking deeper than the obvious, if somebody gets shot and you're in possession of the only (known) gun in town, "you don't KNOW that I pulled the trigger" isn't much of a defense. The lack of conclusive direct evidence is likely one of the factors Dumbledore used to argue for mere expulsion. – Darth Pseudonym Sep 11 at 16:15
  • 4
    @DarthPseudonym That's fair. To me it seemed unlikely that the staff of Hogwarts, with all the abilities at their disposal, sincerely mistook injuries from a basilisk attack for injuries from an acromantula attack. But I'm making that determination by implication and inference, so it's certainly possible I'm wrong and you're right. – tbrookside Sep 11 at 16:33
  • 4
    @DarthPseudonym : the problem in the case of Hagrid is also that there were no Acromantula (or any) bite marks on the victim. It must have been a really sloppy investigation, especially as with magic you could probably have much better ways of identifying the cause of death. – vsz Sep 11 at 19:42

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.