5

According to canon, the wand's allegiance is passed down to the person who defeats the original owner. We have many examples of that (An assassin murdering one of the Peverell Brothers for the Elder Wand; Harry disarming Draco for both the Elder Wand and Draco's Wand). The allegiance only passes down if it's taken without the owner's consent (Dumbledore planned on having the wand's allegiance die with him, as his Death by Snape was consented).

But what would happen if, let's say, Voldemort had used the Imperius curse on Draco, and Draco disarmed Dumbledore?

On one hand, Draco would have been the one disarming Dumbledore, but then again, it wasn't of his own volition, as Voldemort would have been the one controlling Draco. In that case, who would be owning 1/3 of the Deathly Hallows?

Preferably canon answers

Improve this question

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
5

Wands that switch allegiance in this way (and not all switch so easily as the Elder Wand) are responding to the strength or power of the new master. I have not seen Imperius granting the controlled the strength of the controller, just the intent. While the intent to defeat the current owner of the wand may come from the caster of Imperius, certainly the strength comes from the one who actually defeats the previous owner.

This answer (and the discussion on that question) discusses wands (specifically the Elder Wand) responding to power.

Improve this answer
4
  • But isn't the Imperius caster overpowering the castee? (is this a word?)
    – Oak
    May 12, 2014 at 23:05
  • 1
    @Oak They did when Imperius went into effect. Not sure it counts afterwards, and Elder Wand ownership isn't retroactive
    – Izkata
    May 12, 2014 at 23:22
  • Fair enough, seems legit
    – Oak
    May 13, 2014 at 0:30
  • 1
    @Oak It comes to my mind that if I were the Elder Wand, I may not want to have allegiance to someone who is too much of a wuss to come and get me myself. Suppose it came down to a wizard endowed with more cunning than dueling skill, who fights his battles with proxy champions dominated by Imperius? Such a wizard would cast Imperius on a more powerful or skilled wizard at a time when, say, that wizard was asleep, and use him thereafter as a disposable pawn in duels, risking nothing. No pain no gain, would say the Elder Wand. Qui ne risque rien n'a rien.
    – Iwillnotexist Idonotexist
    Feb 21, 2015 at 17:51
8

I don't think this is addressed in canon at all so far (books/interviews/pottermore).

BUT, logically speaking Draco was already controlled by Voldemort, albiet via old-fashioned blackmail/influence and not Imperius. So conceptually, I don't see a major difference as far as wand ownership would be concerned... and we know that Draco became the owner, not V.

Improve this answer
3
  • Firstly, the question is regarding any possible alleigeance changes while under someone else's control, and regarding Draco, while he was working for Voldemort, he was able to control his own body, while the Imperius curse doesn't
    – Oak
    May 12, 2014 at 14:20
  • Although that actually makes a tad bit of sense
    – Oak
    May 12, 2014 at 14:25
  • It's a question of free will. There is a huge conceptual difference here. In a world where the power of love is a literal force of magic, blackmail vs puppet magic matters
    – user16696
    Apr 13, 2015 at 14:50
2

Wands owe their allegiance to the wizard that won them. A wizard under the control of Imperius is still the wizard who won the wand.

Improve this answer
4
  • Take Madam Rosmerta for example, she was under the Imperius curse when she used the Imperius curse on Katie Bell. Imagine that if, instead of her almost dying, Katie would cast Avada Kedavra on Harry. It wouldn't be her fault, nor Madam Rosmerta's fault, why would the wand ally itself with the person being controlled?
    – Oak
    May 12, 2014 at 15:58
  • (btw it's not that I don't believe you can be right, but I like to refute everything until I run out of arguments so I know I have the best awnser possible, don't take me wrong)
    – Oak
    May 12, 2014 at 15:58
  • 2
    Do wands necessarily understand a wizard's intent when they cast powerful curses? Does loyalty only switch if the wizard meant to do whatever caused the wand to switch loyalty?
    – Jesan Fafon
    May 12, 2014 at 16:03
  • 2
    The Elder Wand is "known" to obey the strongest Wizard. Now, if it is able to recognize if the power comes from the 'controlled' or the 'controller' beats me. Which actually raises another question, Imagine that someone uses Imperius on the owner of the Elder Wand, what then? The owner is bested by someone else, but then again, isn't disarmed, per say
    – Oak
    May 12, 2014 at 16:20

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

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