2

In Chapter 7 of GoF this happens:

Their fellow campers were starting to wake up. First to stir were the families with small children; Harry had never seen witches and wizards this young before. A tiny boy no older than two was crouched outside a large pyramid-shaped tent, holding a wand and poking happily at a slug in the grass, which was swelling slowly to the size of a salami.

Seeing as the boy seems too young to actually know spells, does this mean that wands allow wild underage magic to be controlled more easily?

  • yes, as a wand funnels a wizards magic. – Himarm Nov 10 '14 at 20:09
  • 2
    Not an answer to the question you asked, but it's possible it wasn't his wand. (Thinking about how early my children woke before me when small, and what mischief they managed!) – NiceOrc Nov 11 '14 at 1:39
  • @niceorc i believe in the next sentence the mom runs out and goes stop playing with daddys wand, then steps on or the slug explodes haha. – Himarm Nov 11 '14 at 14:02
  • 1
    No, it definitely wasn't his wand, but that's irrelevant. – Winter Knight Nov 11 '14 at 16:07
4

It does seem that way since it is only when they receive their wands that they are accountable for using magic in front of muggles.

Also, since House-Elfs and Goblins are not allowed to use wands, it is implied that "wand-holders" are able to better channel magic.

  • This a good answer, but if you could add references from the book to support your statement, it could become a great answer. – Alfredo Hernández Nov 15 '14 at 9:40
1

In the Philosopher's Stone, Olivander states that Voldemort's wand was very powerful. Also, the Elder Wand is fabled to be the most powerful wand.

I think from these statements that wands are not only tools to channel a wizard's magic, but that they have magical power in themselves which supplements their owner's.

Describing the time Harry and Voldemort's wands connected, Dumbledore says that Harry's wand "imbied some of the power and qualities of Voldemort's wand", implying that wands could also retain wizarding power.

Therefore, I believe that the underage wizard poking the slug with the wand was not really attempting to make the slug grow - they were just randomly poking it, and the slug was growing because a) the wand's own power was being transferred in some random fashion or b) the father's power stored within the wand was being transferred. a.k.a. If the boy were a Muggle, the wand would behave the same way in that situation. Also consider that if possessing a wand was enough to see magical abilities come to light this way, wands would be given to suspected squibs like Neville to see if any magical ability was present - but this doesn't appear to happen - rather, he is dangled out the window.

Therefore, I think that you cannot draw any conclusions about wands making underage magic more easy to control from that passage.

Final note: I say that wands have their own power, so people may think - then what's stopping Muggles from using that in a much weaker way? My answer to that is that it would be just as random as the kid poking a slug, and not particularly useful for Muggles to allow them to get their own wands. You need to be a wizard to direct the wand, I think.

0

The child was just messing around, wanting to amuse itself. When you ask if, "wands allow wild underage magic to be controlled more easily?" The answer I would suggest is yes.

I would obviously think that the child did not know spells, unless its parents said and/or tried to teach him a spell. But the wand would be able to "allow wild underage magic to be controlled more easily," due to the fact that underage magic is usually reckless. Harry blowing up his aunt for example.

This does not mean that the child knew spells though.

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.