How can you kill a wizard? (Was: Hagrid)

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 116434


I (Carol) wrote:
> [snippy snip snip]
> > Could a wizard die if an arrow from Hagrid's crossbow struck his
heart?
> [further snippage]
> 
Christopher Nehren responded:
> I don't believe that Hagrid's crossbow is a Muggle crossbow. I'm not
> sure what that implies, but I don't believe that he'd use something
> "ordinary" if he could employ a wizarding version. The wizarding
version would logically be enchanted, and thus able to deal physical
damage to a wizard or other magical being. Further, I doubt that a
Muggle crossbow would do much good against, say, a Centaur. They've
probably long since evolved -- either intrinsically or via magic -- to
shrug off the effects of Muggle crossbows. I imagine that many Muggles
have tried to hunt /exterminate them with crossbows and other mundane
weaponry. It'd be foolish to not develop an easily-maintainable
defence against such common implements.

> Let's set aside non-human magical life forms and their possible
> aggregate byproducts (potions, powders, etc.) for the moment. I
posit that wizarding weapons are embued with magic just like the very
people who make them. This magic is necessary, IMO, to harm magical
beings, as they're resilient to mundane forms of physical harm. <snip>
These points lead me to believe that there's something "extra" about
wizarding weaponry which enables said weaponry to effect damage upon
its targets.

Carol again:
I agree that wizards are "resilient to mundane forms of physical
harm," a point that was part of my original post and one of my reasons
for asking the question, "How can a wizard be killed other than an
AK?" (paraphrased). Hagrid's crossbow, which triggered my question but
is not my main concern, is just an example of a weapon that might or
might not be capable of killing a wizard. 

Hagrid is not, AFAWK, a particularly powerful wizard, and what magic
he can perform is done with a broken wand hidden inside an umbrella
handle. If the crossbow is actually enchanted, I don't believe he did
it. And note that Nearly Headless Nick, according to the poem that was
edited out of SS/PS, was executed by a (badly wielded) Muggle axe. It
could be argued that his wizard neck resisted the axe, but it did
ultimately kill him. And the members of the Headless Hunt, all former
wizards, were all properly beheaded, quite possibly by Muggle royalty
or nobility. That being the case, Macnair's axe could be used to hew
wizards' necks as well as those of beasts. (Voldemort promises him
more fitting prey or something like that. Yes, he uses a wand in the
MoM, but he didn't go there intending to fight a battle, only to help
subdue Harry.

I (Carol) wrote:
> > The reason I'm asking [how it's possible to kill a wizard without
an AK] is that maybe Alastor Moody (the auror, not the imposter)
killed the few DEs he couldn't subdue using something other than the
Killing Curse (Avada Kedavra) despite the fact that Barty Sr. had
okayed the use of Unforgiveable Curses by the aurors. (Young wizards
have been killed during past Triwizard Tournaments. Surely they
weren't AK'd by their opponents.) How, then, can witches and wizards
be killed other than by an AK?
> 
Christopher responded:
 
> Now, let's return to non-human magical life forms and their
byproducts. As Chancie noted in another reply to Carol's post, things
like . . . Dementors pose great risk to wizards <snip> And there's
dragons, unicorns, blast-ended skrewts, etc. Sure, wizards do seem to
be protected from the most mundane forms of physical harm -- but
there's also a great deal of other things out there in the Wizarding
World which are very capable of causing great harm. If there weren't,
the Weasleys' clock wouldn't need spots for "Mortal Peril".
> 

Carol again:
Yes, as I've noted in several posts, I'm expecting that clock to point
to mortal peril (as it must have done for Mr. Weasley in OoP though we
didn't see it) in Book 6 or Book 7. And it does seem that magical
beasts, notably the snake that bit Mr. Weasley (a Voldemort-possessed
Nagini?) are capable of killing wizards, as are dragons (alas for
Charlie?), manticores, and others. They can have their souls sucked by
Dementors, a fate quite literally worse than death. But I don't think
those creatures will play a role in the final battle. I think it will
be wizard against wizard, the DEs using the Unforgiveable Curses when
they can, though it seems difficult to use them in the heat of battle.

What other possibilities might there be? Can a wizard drown? (Harry
thinks he can during Task 2 of the TWT.) Evidently wizards can be
blasted into pieces (Benjy Fenwick; the supposed death of Peter
Pettigrew).

I must appear very bloody-minded in this post, but I'm really not. I'm
just trying to figure out 1) how JKR can present a battle scene that's
more exciting and perilous than the DoM battle (AKs from every side
will be boring and monotonous; "stupefy" and similar curses seem like
inadequate weapons), and 2) how the good guys can kill the bad guys
without resorting to the evil weapons of the enemy (the Dark Arts are
not taught at Hogwarts).

Christopher's enchanted weapons are one possibility. (I can just see
the Hogwarts staff and students putting on the enchanted armor from
the Hogwarts corridors to protect themselves.) And Godric Gryffindor's
sword, which always struck me as a very Mugglish weapon despite its
magical properties, may come in handy as well.

Any other ideas?

Carol