This HP fanfic got me thinking. Was Hagrid an Occlumens? If not, why didn't Quirrell simply use the spell Leglimency on him to find out how to beat Fluffy?

  • 6
    I would guess not, but I don’t think it’s addressed in the canon either way. As for why Quirrell wouldn’t use Legilimency: when Voldemort uses Legilimency on Harry, he’s aware that ~something is happening, even if he’s not sure what. If Hagrid realised something funky was happening inside his head, he might tell Dumbledore and blow Quirrell’s cover. – alexwlchan Mar 2 '14 at 21:54
  • 3
    Also, is there any canon mention that Quirrel was a Leglimens? – DVK-on-Ahch-To Mar 2 '14 at 22:10
  • @DVK The point was that Voldemort would do the Leglimency. (Although any Defense Professor worth his salt would be one). – ike Mar 2 '14 at 22:25
  • 2
    What is an Occlumens? – Izumi-reiLuLu Mar 3 '14 at 0:13
  • 2
    Strange though it seems, I think Hagrid had natural magic resistence, which is how he could shrug off the stunning spells sent to him in Order of the Phoenix. Professor Quirrel might have know that this partly protects him from Legilimency attempts. – b_jonas Mar 3 '14 at 10:58

There is absolutely no canon suggestion or indication that Hagrid was an Occlumens. Your question refers to the possibility of Quirrell using Legilimency against Hagrid in order to figure our how to subdue Fluffy, but this took place in book one, when Hagrid had not yet been cleared of the Chamber of Secrets incident -- Hagrid was not allowed to use magic at that time and magic would include Occlumency. Personally, I don't want to parry questions based on the plot of fan fiction. I know others don't agree with me on this and that's fine.

| improve this answer | |
  • “Hagrid was not allowed to use magic at that time and magic would include Occlumency” <- adding to this, we know Occlumency is a fairly advanced skill. Even if Hagrid was allowed to use magic, it’s unlikely he would have mastered it in three years of education. – alexwlchan Mar 3 '14 at 0:23
  • "magic would include Occlumency" being as Occlumency doesn't require a wand and is basically a way of thinking, can you prove this? – ike Mar 3 '14 at 1:02
  • 3
    It could also be the fact that he was half giant and maybe impervious to legilimency, since most spells bounce off giant skin – Ajo Koshy Mar 3 '14 at 8:05
  • 1
    @Ike - Occlumency does require a wand if the person cannot repel Legilimency with their mind: ‘Well, for a first attempt that was not as poor as it might have been,’ said Snape, raising his wand once more. ‘You managed to stop me eventually, though you wasted time and energy shouting. You must remain focused. Repel me with your brain and you will not need to resort to your wand.’ (OOTP) Harry didn't master Occlumency in canon. He might have always required a wand to fend off Legilimency. Perhaps not. I think Occlumency is really complex. Some people might always require support from a wand. – Slytherincess Apr 3 '14 at 20:03

Well, first of all, you're assuming that Quirrell is an accomplished legilimens but since he was carrying someone around who is known to be one that is a fair assumption.

However, there are several indications in the books that giants were resistant to magic. As explained here:

Gifted with overwhelming raw strength proportionate to their prodigious size, they are difficult to detain by wizards since most spells tend to have little to no effect upon them [...]

The same site states that half-giants share this resistance (and we know that Hagrid does):

They also retained the natural resistance to most types of magical attacks from their giant blood.

So, since Legilimency is magic, I see no reason why Hagrid would not be as resistant to it as he is to other spells, like stunning, a spell we have seen him ignore when the Aurors were attempting to arrest him in The Order of the Phoenix. Therefore, his resistance would have stopped Quirrell from using Legilimency on him.

| improve this answer | |
  • While I agree with this answer, -1 for the excessive use of the wiki, when there are plenty of actual canon quotes available. – ibid Mar 2 '17 at 3:02

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.