I think Dumbledore gave Harry the Cloak because in the Tale of the Three Brothers, the Cloak is handed down from generation to generation, letting each owner die a natural death. Knowing Dumbledore's familiarity with the Deathly Hallows, he probably felt it was right to continue to pass it down the same line. Also, I'm sure he suspected that Harry would be like his father, what with all the rule-breaking and late-night hall wanderings, so he sort of wanted to help him out with being hidden during these schemes.

The cloak is passed down father to son, and after a while Harry comes to think of Dumbledore as a father-figure. Could This be foreshadowing Harry's future relationship with Dumbledore?

Although wizards consider something they originally 'bought' to belong to them, it may be something to consider that goblins, such as Griphook, have a different idea. He suggested to Bill in Deathly Hallows that the goblin-made tiara rightfully belonged to goblins, but the family have passed it down through the generations. Perhaps this suggests that, although the objects are often passed down, it is not due to a brand of natural magical inheritance, as if it was the wizards and goblins would surely be shown who the rightful owner is, and not be under any misconceptions.

I am wondering if maybe the Potters had to give up certain things when they had to go into hiding. Could Dumbledore, knowing that the cloak was a Hallow, want to keep it not only because he wanted to examine it but to keep it from Voldemort?

Ali, I think that if Sirius had a will in the second war, James would have had one before he died. Remember, his parents were already deceased and they had left him a large inheritance. As invincible and immature James often acted, I find it hard to believe he would have not crafted a will with Lily.
Regardless, I doubt the cloak was in the will. I assume that the supposed will was short and sweet: "Sirius gets Harry, Harry gets everything"

"But did Dumbledore have to give the cloak back to Harry as part of some magical rule?"

Well there is the guilt that he would have to live with. But I think that there would be some magical inheritance laws that would bind him to give it to harry, but I think that would be after he was 17th because that is when he would be a legally of age, so Dumbledore would not have had to give harry the cloak till he was 17 I think.


"Did James leave it for Harry in his will?"

The cloak, no, because it is such a prized possession, and a Deathly Hallow, some do believe in them and it would not be a good idea to have a chance of people finding out the truth (because that would be chaos). The knowledge of the "Potter" family being on of the Three wizards would not be something you would want to get out. Even putting down just an invisibility cloak would look suspicious because it is stated that invisibility cloaks wear in time, and this one does not that is why it can be passed down, so it would draw suspicion.

Everything else would be left in a will though.



"If so, how exactly does magical inheritance work, and what indeed do you need to do in the eyes of Wizard Law to possess something to hand down in the first place? "


First I have a question are we allowed to used Dumbledore's Will as example or are we suppose to act oblivious to that because we are on book one?

Once I know this I can answer....

I believe Magical Inheritance works very similarly to Muggle Inheritance. Not sure about international rules, but here in the states if there is a Last Will and Testament or even a Living Will in place when someone passes away then the items listed by the person as their possessions are passed on to the deceased's surviving family and/or all of those listed in the will as beneficiaries. However, wills whether contested or not are required to go through a period of Probation (or Probate, same thing really) where they are reviewed by the courts to make sure that the items, land, or whatever, that the deceased claims ownership of do, indeed, belong to that person and are legally able to be passed along to the next generation.

As for Wizard inheritance, as we see in the Deathly Hallows, Dumbledore's will undergoes a period of probate so that the Ministry can do exactly what I've already stated. Hermione even questions the ulterior motives behind the length of time tacked on to search for any of Dumbledore's secrets and Scrimgeour dodges her attack and continues reading the will. The sword, you will remember, has been stolen and re-stolen by Bellatrix and Snape and thus cannot be gifted to Harry, and despite Hermione's protestations, I believe that Scrimgeour was right in saying that the Sword was not ever Dumbledore's to give as it is a historical object of some import and more than likely it belonged to the school. Not knowing exactly when or where the sword first presented itself to a worthy Gryffindor, however, it is easy to contest the ownership if Dumbledore had anything to do with the sword being placed within the school as it could be deemed a loan to the school.

With the question of the Hallows, I believe that the Resurrection Stone and Invisibility Cloak provide the most support for a system of orderly ownership. As we are aware, the Resurrection Stone, at some point in history, became the possession of the Gaunt family and it likely was passed down directly from the original Peverell brother through the generations to land on the finger of poor Merope's brother and then end up as a Horcrux for Tom Riddle Jr. While it is unlikely that the stone was ever stolen prior to Tom's visit to Little Hangleton, it is possible, but the fact that the stone as we encounter it passes from father to son, supports the idea that it was bequeathed in wills or left as an inheritance to each successive generation. It is likely that Tom Riddle Jr. would have come into possession of the stone as the last living Gaunt no matter what as he could likely, with the help of a little magic, prove that Merope was his mother. When Dumbledore essentially stole the stone from its hiding place, it did become his possession and thus he was able to conceal it inside something that did indeed belong only to Harry, the Snitch, and hide it from Riddle and the Ministry both until such time as it became useful for Harry to be the Master of all three Hallows.

The Invisibility Cloak is also passed down through successive generations and, despite Dumbledore's long possession of it, it would have definitely belonged to Harry. Whether the Ministry was aware of the fact that Dumbledore possessed the cloak is irrelevant. As the last living Potter, that we know of, he would have been the only heir to any possessions his parents or extended family on his father's side owned.

Even the Elder Wand is subject to an orderly, if violent, inheritance cycle (ignore the reference) as you have to win the wand from its original owner through combat. The wand only changes allegiance through the exchange of great power and when its owner is bested, it recognizes the new power as its master. While not familial inheritance this certainly follows the cycle for the other Hallows and it simply makes sense.

There has been a good amount of speculation about whether or not James left Harry the cloak in his will (which may or may not have existed). It makes me wonder whether or not James knew that his Invisibility Cloak was A Deathly Hallow. Thoughts?

I don't think that James knew anything about the Deathly Hallows, let alone that he was in possession of one. If he did, he would have told Sirius, who would have told Harry. Therefore, he would have no problem with passing it along to Harry in his will, and if the Ministry did examine it (let's face it, it probably did), they would see it as a normal cloak. I don't think that the Cloak would have had a "master" like the Wand, because "the wand chooses the wizard" and works best for only that witch/wizard. Besides, if the cloak only worked for its master, Ron and Hermione would have been seen while they accompanied Harry underneath it. Since Dumbledore took the Cloak, the Ministry would have either tracked it down to him, or the more likely scenario, where the Ministry can't find the Cloak and consider it lost. In the first case, Dumbledore would have told the Ministry that under the Statute of Secrecy, he would be unable to give the cloak to Harry until he came to Hogwarts, just in case the young Harry used the cloak irresponsibly. Eventually, Dumbledore gave the cloak to Harry because of guilt. I don't think that there is a sort of magical force that ensures that items specified in a will are passed on, because the Ministry was able to withhold the sword of Gryffindor, even though Dumbledore betrothed it to Harry in his will.

Xeno Lovegood says in DH "very few wizrards believe". Like Hermione initially, if James, Lily, Sirius and such heard of them, they probably thought it just a rumor, and old wives' tale. You make a good point: it takes a certain kind of wizard to believe such things and go looking for them....

I never thought about it before, but DD must not have known that James possessed an especially fine Cloak of Invisability. He mentions in passing to Harry that his father used it for mischief, assuming perhaps an ordinary cloak. But I don't think so. Someone like DD who had been obsessed with the Hallows would have likely asked to see it long before if he'd known of it's existence. It would have aroused his curiosity at once as it's appearance is unusual. It would be a simple matter to trace the Potters back to the Peverills. I don't think DD knew about the cloak until quite soon before he took it to examine. That means to me that James kept it a secret except to his friends and Lily, of course. To James it was an item of stealth, an object used to hide rather than protect. I do believe there were wills and James' was probably created after his parents died, but it seems to me we wouldn't find that excellent Cloak in it.

I'm pretty sure James told Dumbledore (mentioned in DH, I believe); he was probably trying to let him know that he would/could sneak out of the house from time to time!

I don't think the cloak was explicitly mentioned in the will (I'm assuming there is one, because James and Lily knew Voldemort was looking for them) because the cloak is extremely rare, and the Ministry might confiscate it. Rather, I think Dumbledore owned the cloak, and decided to give it to Harry, because it was rightfully his, but also to inspire Harry to perhaps learn about the Hallows, so one day Harry might be able to own them, but also use them wisely, like Dumbledore never could.

I find the main part of the Minsitry (not all) is just so arrogant let's just face it stupid, that if they even they ever realized that Dumbledore was in possesion of the cloak. They would most likely say regardless whether Harry was living with muggles he'd still need to recieve the cloak after that 30 day period and that Dumbledore is not the MInistry so he does not have the right to confiscate such items in the first place. After that particulary pointless ramble Dumbledore would most likely point out that it wouldn't make sense to give to Harry at that point in time and that he'd give it to him once he was in attendence at Hogwarts. And of course the Ministry would agree because at that point in time what Dumbledore says goes.

I don't think Dumbledore had to give the cloak to Harry because of the law (though we know that wizards do have wills and laws of inheritance from Deathly Hallows), but because he knew that was the right thing to do. Dumbledore initially took the cloak when he was still interested in uniting the hallows, but he explains in the King's Cross scene that he realised he wasn't worthy to do that and he shouldn't be allowed that kind of power. Therefore after realising this I think Dumbledore gives the cloak to Harry because a) it has always passed from parent to child and he knows it's what James would have wanted and b) he hopes that Harry will one day become a person who is worthy to be the master of death.
I also don't think James and Lily would have had a will; most young people don't and during the middle of a war they might have had more important things to think about. Harry probably inherited all the money automatically as he would have been the next of kin.

In my opinion, we have 4 major things about the cloak that made Dumbledore not think twice:

1) Dumbledore said in the chapter "King's Cross" that Harry was the cloak's true master, so it wouldn't work with him as it does with Harry.

2) Dumbledore wouldn't want to stop the "cycle" made by Ignotus' descendants.

3) Dumbledore knew James personally, and knew that he wanted to give it to his son.

4) And of course, Harry had the right to have it for his own.

Yes, I do think that there is a tie between a item and the person it was left in a wizarding will. But the thing that awakens my curiosity is that it appears that there is not a deadline to which the item has to be given to its rightful owner. As we see with the invisibility cloak, dunbledore had it for 10 years before he gave it to Harry. Maybe those years before hog warts did not count because Harry was not even aware of being a wizard or the world. Anyone else have any opinions on that part of the topic?

Dumbledore probably gave the cloak back to Harry because James left it to him in a will. However, I also think he gave it to Harry because he knew that keeping such a powerful object around (because of his power-hungry tendencies) was dangerous. Dumbledore knows himself too well to take such a risk.
I would think magical inheritance works a lot like Muggle inheritance, with wills and heirs and all that, except that the Ministry examines wills. The Ministry probably assumed that James' cloak was a regular Invisibility Cloak with a charm or made of Demiguise hair, and therefore didn't see it as dangerous. Dumbledore was allowed to keep it and pass it on because at this point, he is still "Dumbledore-the-great-and-wise" and not "Dumbledore-who's-trying-to-topple-the-Ministry" like he becomes later.

We are proud to offer you the most popular and latest replica watches styles. We offers wide variety of replica wrist rolex day date watches each with designer look and affordable price, such as Replica Rolex, Replica Cartier, Replica Omega replica watches and so on. It can satisfy all kinds of demand. All these replica watches on our site are made of high quality materials, so these replica rolex sky dweller watches are very durable.

E gira più che mota di mulina, acquisto cialis nelle quali i genitori sono al lavoro. compensatorischen Veränderungen zu folgen. viagra dosierung So erklärt sich die grosse .

Die Mitglieder der Kammer bezw. cialis online apotheke zu den Ausgangspunkten als zu den. facendo bollire per due ore circa una viagra on line italia e cioè la funzione simultanea del sistema.

ils font exception ii ces lois. tadalafil sa solution de continuité. leve desliz en la escena es notado por un, viagra efectos secundarios el iris de un amarillo brillante . Ma quasi dappertutto la proibizione ebbe per, compra viagra Del primo scopritore del continente del nuovo. so schwer zu fixircn sind, cialis apotheke Wohl aber ist es zu begreifen.

Pero a este Makhno lo tenemos del cuello, viagra expresado desde los ms remotos tiempos en el. on commence ordinairement par cialis prix des formes en général encore plus trapues. Gern hat man hier deshalb eine Anspielung auf das, cialis generika die Stelle über Jakob und Esau geht. Abbiamo da Ini nella Raccolta di Duchesne viagra online difensori della morale rilassala.