I hope you don't mind, I read the first chapter on AO3, but I wanted to reply with my thoughts here on Tumblr.
And this will also be a woefully incomplete reply, since I did not watch the fantastic beasts movies and so I can't comment on them in any way without making things up at worst or missing major context at best, so I'll try to limit any arguments to them as much as possible.
Mastery of More Sophisticated Magic (Astronomy, Study of Ancient Runes, etc): Dumbledore Extreme Diff
This is interesting, in the books we don't see ancient runes have any sort of magic, it isn't mentioned when Hogwarts mounted it's defense in the last book, it isn't mentioned by Voldemort in the making of his new body, nor by Hermione in any way after she took the courses. It seems to just be a language without any magical power.
Astronomy on the other hand is linked to divination via the centaurs, but that's about it.
“(....) He even casually admitted to Slughorn, when Slughorn asked about what happened to his hand, that he could feel his age slowing his reflexes and dulling the potency of his magic.
“Well, maybe you ought to think about retirement yourself,” said Slughorn bluntly. His pale gooseberry eyes had found Dumbledore’s injured hand. “Reactions not what they were, I see.”
“You’re quite right,” said Dumbledore serenely, shaking back his sleeve
to reveal the tips of those burned and blackened fingers; the sight of them made the back of Harry’s neck prickle unpleasantly. “I am undoubtedly slower than I was. But on the other hand…”
This is the quote yes? There is no mention of the potency of magic dulling with age.
I want to focus in on the magic diminishing with age thing, because it is not mentioned at all in the books, there's no mention of say, Moody saying that his magic's dulled with age or retirement, nor with Slughorn, nor with Minerva or anyone really. Voldemort doesn't have a quote saying something like "Your magic must have dulled with age" to mock Dumbledore, nor does he boast about inventing magic to stop his own dulling. Magic is something that's inherently not linked to physicality at all beyond the wand gestures needed, Harry doesn't feel exhausted after a long time casting spells or something, all it seems to take is mental focus.
Again It's just something that's never mentioned at all in the books for anyone and for Dumbleodre, so I don't believe his magical power (whatever that is, it's something that exists in the books but is so very vauge ) has dulled with age at all.
And other than that the quote is suspect, Dumbledore is already lying here, Slughorn implies with his look that he thinks Albus's injury is due to a weakening of old age rather than Dumbledore's weakness with the hallows and Ariana taking over, and Dumbledore readily agrees.
But taking it into account, as it does imply that Dumbledore's reactions could decrease with age, it would mean that Dumbledore's reaction time had decreased with age... maybe, or maybe it's the blackened hand with the death sentence that reduced it. And anyways his reaction time would be dulled by an unknown degree- given that we see him do perfect breaststrokes even with his rotting hand in the cave.
Whether that unknown amount of reaction time damage pre curse would beat out his unknown increase in magical knowledge in the near-century after Grindelwald's defeat is unknwon.
It would make no sense if Dumbledore defeated Grindelwald by being slightly better if Grindelwald had a decisive edge in terms of raw power. If the Elder Wand made him that powerful to where Dumbledore couldn’t fight him head-on, then even if Dumbledore was more skilled, he would likely have lost against an opponent who was very near his level of skill AND powerful enough to ensure it wouldn’t matter much.
Ah! This is where I could bring up my own theory. Because yes it is weird that someone only a shade more skilled than the other would beat a deathly hallow.....and here's my explanation.
Grindelwald was the elder wand's owner, but he wasn't it's master.
“Maybe a man in a million could unite the Hallows, Harry. I was
fit only to possess the meanest one of them, the least extraordinary.
I was fit to own the Elder Wand, and not to boast of it, and not to
kill with it. I was permitted to tame and to use it, because I took
it, not for gain, but to save others from it.
Here Dumbledore implies a sense of greater sentience to the wand, it checks the user's intentions before allowing them to use it's full potential, kind of like Gryfindor's sword and it needing an act of valor to be used
He was not being kind or generous. As certainly as he had known that the doe was benign, he knew that Ron had to be the one to wield the sword. Dumbledore had at least taught Harry something about certain kinds of magic, of the incalculable power of certain acts.
And furthermore, we already have an example of a hallow not working due to the wrong intentions: the cloak.
“But the Cloak, I took out of vain curiosity, and so it could
never have worked for me as it works for you, its true owner. The
stone I would have used in an attempt to drag back those who are
at peace, rather than to enable my self-sacrifice, as you did. You
are the worthy possessor of the Hallows.”
Dumbledore doesn't say that it didn't work for him because he was not of the Peverell line, but because his intentions with the cloak were just for curiosity, and that somehow affected the cloak and made it not work as well for Dumbledore, why would the elder wand be any different? Especially when Dumbledore straight up tells us about it?
And that's my theory, Grindelwald took the elder wand for pure power, not to protect others from it, so even though he was it's owner, it could never have worked well for him as it would later do for Dumbledore and Harry, the wands' true masters.
There is also the fact that while he used the Elder Wand time to time, it’s highly unlikely he ever used to it’s FULL potential:
I agree with what's said here. The fact that no one ever talks about Dumbledore doing seemingly impossible stuff, and only about how bonkers of a wizard he is does imply that he never breaks the rules of magic with the wand. Same with there being no mention of Dumbledore gaining an unknown power boost after the duel with Grindelwald.
Though as you say later (and before)
Even leaving aside Grindelwald and Dumbledore’s lingering love, if that wand was able to enable perfect spellcasting, then how did Egbert the Egregious “slaughtered” Emeric the Evil in a duel to claim the wand?
The wand's power is clearly not limitless, which is the major theme for it in DH with Harry having to let go of the hallows and focus on Horcruxes, and how the 'master of death' title wasn't some sort of awesome power boost for someone able to unite the hallows, but instead a metaphorical title for someone who accepts death.
The other two hallows are similarly underpowered, the stone brings back the dead as shades and not fully alive people, and Harry was able to be detected even while under a cloak, a kneazel could smell him, and mad-eye's eye could see him through it, (As could Dumbledore, but he has the elder wand so...).
What I'm trying to say is that the elder wand's power is really unknown and only up for guesses, we know it allows one to do impossible magic, it could repair broken wands, but a basilisk's gaze would be too strong for it (Or maybe this was during the second book where I'm reasonably sure that the hallows weren't a thing at all then, but that's a Doylist argument.) It provides an unknown boost to power.
(and given my arguments against magic diminishing with age, I would also disagree with the argument of the elder wand bringing Dumbledore back up to prime level,)
and sending away an entire group of Dementors with an incorporeal Patronus (To compare, Harry needed a Love-infused corporeal Patronus to drive that many Dementors away)
That one's a fair point, and why didn't Dumbledore cast a full corporal Patrounas to drive away the dementors? We know it's incorporeal since it's referred to as 'silver stuff' rather than a phoenix, it's super weird.
This isn't an argument btw, just genuine confusion.
Even the one time where he actually used a truly destructive spell, Protego Diabolica, it made Voldemort’s use of fire look like an amateur. And when we see him fight Dumbledore directly, unlike how even an older Dumbledore could casually handle Voldemort while not even trying to KILL him,
Voldemort's pure force attacks was not a wide range destructive move, but an unlockable spell that instantly kills people, why wouldn't he use and rely on it?
Voldemort did use other spells than Avada, he invented flight, and in his duel in the ministry he is able to conjure shields and even take control of Dumbledore's spell.
it made Voldemort’s use of fire look like an amateur.
Dumbledore had drawn back his wand and waved it as though brandishing a whip. A long thin flame flew from the tip; it wrapped itself around Voldemort, shield and all.
For a moment, it seemed Dumbledore had won, but then the fiery
rope became a serpent, which relinquished its hold upon Voldemort
at once and turned, hissing furiously, to face Dumbledore.
Voldemort's use of fire was to turn Dumbledore's existing spell against him and set up a pincer attack against a single target, an attack that would have worked if not for Fawkes appearing to save Dumbledore.
Other than that Voldemort never used a fire spell at all IIRC.
I don't think you can compare it to Grindelwald's fire, which from watching the movie seems to be a big multiple target fire attack, they serve different purposes.
I find that how Voldemort was able to take control of Dumbledore's own spell to be the most impressive thing here.
unlike how even an older Dumbledore could casually handle Voldemort while not even trying to KILL him,
I would also like to say that we don't know if Dumbledore was also trying to kill Grindelwald in his duel or not.
And other than that, the duel between Dumbledore and Voldemort was much more even than it seems.
While indeed a character being so calm and fearless would imply superiority against the opponent who's raging and emotional, I don't think that's the case here.
Looking at the duel in totality, Voldemort had destroyed almost every protection that Dumbledore had with the statues, Golden ministry statues by the way, statues that seemed to be able to withstand Avada Kedavaras (unlike the table that was instantly destroyed) and multiple spells from Bellatrix, it's unknown if the statues were that powerful due to Dumbledore' spells, the elder wand, or due to them being made of gold, so I won't count them as an outside advantage for Dumbledore..... unlike Fawkes. Whom Dumbledore needed to protect him from a killing blow, Voldemort was about to win here.
(Upon further thought, the statue thing is still questionable, Dumbledore's defenses were being destroyed, why didn't he take the time to conjure, transfigure, and animate other objects to act as shields?)
After that. Dumbledore used that moment granted to him by Fawkes to entrap Voldemort in a sphere of water, and Voldemort was able to apparated away...kind of? As in, I don't know if Voldemort escaped it due to his own power, or due to his connection with Harry.
For a few seconds Voldemort was visible only as a dark, rippling,
faceless figure, shimmering and indistinct upon the plinth, clearly
struggling to throw off the suffocating mass —
Then he was gone, and the water fell with a crash back into its
pool, slopping wildly over the sides, drenching the polished floor.
“MASTER!” screamed Bellatrix.
Sure it was over, sure Voldemort had decided to flee, Harry made to
run out from behind his statue guard, but Dumbledore bellowed,
“Stay where you are, Harry!”
For the first time, Dumbledore sounded frightened. Harry could
not see why. The hall was quite empty but for themselves, the sobbing
Bellatrix still trapped under her statue, and the tiny baby Fawkes
croaking feebly on the floor —
And then Harry’s scar burst open.
Dumbledore instantly began to look afraid after Voldemort escaped, was it a fear of "Oh no I don't know where he is, Harry could be in danger!" Or is it a fear of "Oh no, Voldemort would not be able to escape this prison, unless... the connection with Harry?!"
The fact that Dumbledore's fears from the beginning of the book was that Voldemort would possess Harry might imply the second option, but I disagree, for one the broader fear for Dumbledore wasn't just possession, but Harry being harmed and used against him in general, and so him not knowing Voldemort's location would imply danger to Harry and it could work... and other than that I have no idea how Voldemort would use the connection between him and Harry to escape, but that point is redundant because we don't know much about magic at all.
What was I saying again? Oh right, The fact that Dumbledore was fearless and calm doesn't imply total superiority over Voldemort to me, but instead just superiority over his emotions and fears, after all one of Voldemort's biggest traits and weaknesses was his fear of death, meanwhile Dumbledore welcomes (his own) death and sees it as the next great adventure.
Again Looking at the battle it seems much more blow for blow, they each countered each others' spells, they each destroyed or dealt with the others' protections, and Dumbledore's objective being to stall for time and protect Harry, Dumbledore won by virtue of the timer running out.
Dumbledore had an unquantifiable advantage with the elder wand, and an unquantifiable disadvantage with him setting a statue to protect Harry.
as Voldemort, in contrast, only handled opponents who were powerful enough to be a threat to him and even then, those people could somehow provide a good fight to him. Grindelwald also had a much more solid foundation of defeating multiple opponents at once:
We never see Voldemort win against 20+ opponents true, but at the same time we never see Voldemort fear those many opponents or lose to them.
We do see Voldemort beating three people at one, but it's a much much greater feat than just the number, those three people were implied to be highly skilled, they were under Harry's sacrificial magic which made Voldemort's spells almost useless against them, and Voldemort was using a wand that he was not the master of. Voldemort won against 3 highly skilled wizards while heavily, heavily nerfed.
The fact that nobody ever brings up ganging up on Voldemort as an option, and that he had his whole crowd of death eaters shivering and afraid before him at the end of GOF implies to me that he could also handily win against a large number of people.
There was also that while Voldemort was considered the most dangerous dark wizard of all time, it was ON Britain. Grindelwald operated at a much more international scale, and it was never stated that if the rest of the world believed Voldemort was truly the most dangerous dark wizard. Even Rita Skeeter acknowledged that Britain, having not experienced Grindelwald, might not be entirely accurate to judge Grindelwald as beneath Voldemort, and it was equally likely that Voldemort was considered more dangerous because he was FAR more worse than Grindelwald ever was morally.
That is not what Rita says.
The name of Grindelwald is justly famous: In a list of Most Dangerous Dark Wizards of All Time, he would miss out on the top spot only because You-Know-Who arrived, a generation later, to steal his crown. As Grindelwald never extended his campaign of terror to Britain, however, the details of his rise to power are not widely known here.
Her statement isn't on shedding doubt on her statement of Grindelwald being less dangerous, but merely saying that the finer details of his rise to power is unknown.
I'd just use the fact that it's known frequent liar Rita Skeeter as more of a basis for the statement being untrue.
If Voldemort was capable of that, reanimating fallen Aurors or magical beasts while retaining their specific magical traits to build a conscious, functional puppet army, he absolutely would have as that would have been more preferable than Inferi. This implies he actually COULD not while Grindelwald HAD the knowledge to perform that kind of esoteric necromancy.
I have no argument against this. And I don't have the context for the zombie quinin so I can't argue on this point really.
...I quickly skipped through the third movie for all the qulin scenes I could find, and I know I could be totally lacking lots of context here, and that it really isn't on you at all to tell someone who's trying to debate you on something they should have watched before entering said debate, but could you answer my those questions?
What magical power did the resurrected quilin show? Did the members of the ICW check to see if the quilin was real magically or is it just by looks? Watching the scenes it looks like the dead quilin did not recognize it's twin at all, and the ICW was able to recognize the real one by just looking at the two side by side.
The consciousness thing is a point that I can argue against though, Voldemort had a mindless army (that IIRC was made up mostly of muggles) that were unaffected by spells such as sceptumsepra and were extremely powerful, that seems to be a different purpose than the single quilin resurrected for the purposes of fooling people.
For fooling people, Voldemort used the imperius curse for that, which netted him fully thinking soldiers that were able to cast spells.
Though I still have to concede here that yes, Grindelwald's feats of necromancy are greater than Voldemort's.
And even if we count the fact that Dumbledore himself admitted Voldemort was the most dangerous, it’s clear there was a subtle word-play there.
There could be. But 'dangerous' works for both power and morals, and regardless, Grindelwald's morals of wanting to kill and enslave muggles put's him at the same ballpark of Voldemort where it wouldn't make much of a difference. Maybe it would when random wizards and rita says it since they wouldn't care about muggles much, but when Dumbledore says it?
He didn’t want anyone to know about what happened between him and Grindelwald, so why would he compare Grindelwald’s powers to Voldemort.
I don't understand this point? What would commenting on Grindelwald and Voldemort's power have to do with Dumbledore not wanting people to know about his past with Grindelwald as teenagers? That has less to do with powers and more to do emotions no?
Plus Dumbledore says that Voldemort is the most dangerous dark lord of all time, not just with Grindelwald, so that more so implies power since him not mentioning Grindelwald by name already removes removes the emotions point.
Other than that, that is not the only quote that's used.
Dumbledore also in several times implies that Voldemort is more superior to himself. And Dumbledore is stronger than Grindelwald.
I knew that Voldemort’s knowledge of magic is perhaps more extensive than any wizard alive.
This includes both himself and Grindelwald, and it's in the conversation of Dumbledore telling Harry that he's sure that Voldemort would be able to break even the strongest protections that he could place.
‘Brilliant,’ he said softly. ‘Of course, he was probably the most brilliant student Hogwarts has ever seen.’
Dumbledore is also a student of Hogwarts, so Dumbledore is saying that Tom was more brilliant than him.
So if it was just the quotes of Voldemort being more dangerous, then the moral thing could apply (even though it goes against what I believe is the intent of the text, with it being due to both power and morals.), but then you have multiple quotes of Dumbledore admitting inferiority to Voldemort and saying that he's more talented than him.
In the books we don't get any quote implying that Grindelwald is or used to be more powerful, and we have a quote of Dumbledore straight up admitting a (slight) superiority over Grindelwald, meanwhile we have multiple quotes in the books saying how Voldemort is the most dangerous dark wizard, one quote saying his more dangerous than Grindelwald, and multiple quotes from Dumbledore saying how Voldemort is more talented than himself.
Grindelwald might have lost, but he went down swinging and STILL lived.
Wouldn't that speak more so that Dumbledore was more powerful rather than less? It generally takes more effort to capture someone alive rather than to kill them, and again, we don't know if Dumbledore went in that duel with the intent to kill or not.
Though fair point on Harry being a limiting factor to Dumbledore in the ministry duel. It's true that Voldemort did not target him until the very end, but Dumbledore could have used that statue from Harry as extra protection (Though once again, unknown if the statue counts as external forces or not), and we don't know if maintaining that statue's actions and stuff required constant concentration from Dumbledore or not, so it is a limiting factor in that duel.
And you're also 100% right on Voldemort's utter fear of death being a point of weakness to him.
(Note, Callum even stated, when he and the cast were asked on who they think would win in a duel between Grindelwald or Voldemort, that “Harry took him down”
Voldemort lost not because he was weaker in a power sense, but because of the deeper morals of the power of love.
Grindelwald also seeked out the power of the elder wand and lost.
The writer's flippant quote is what made me mad thoug, because it ignores so so much of the context of the books for what seems to be a meme-y "My character is stronger!" statement!
Harry didn't out-muscle Voldemort! He wasn't more skilled in magic! It wasn't due to faster reflexes that he won!! In every single time he and Voldemort meets, it's due to sheer luck and the deeper rules of magic for why Harry survives!!
In COS Harry was protected by Lily's sacrifice still so Riddle couldn't do anything to him, and had the sword of Gryfindor and Fawkes to help!
In GOF, it's shown how Voldemort was toying with Harry for the whole time until the priori incantanum happened, something that evened the playing field and made it more so a battle of wills all while playing a phoenix song that gave Harry courage and strength and gave Harry fear!
And even then Harry still had to run and had to have the ghosts distract Voldemort.
DH is the most prevalent one though, every time it's Harry desperatly running away from Voldemort, with his every victory being due to again, deeper magic rather than skill. In the first interaction it was Harry's wand using Voldemort's power that saved him. And in the last fight it was due to Harry being the master of the wand, not because Harry is more skilled or due to Voldemort's lack of skill!
Yes it's all still power, yes it's still Harry's achievement because he understood the power of love and sacrifice better than Voldemort, but it wasn't like that quote is implying!! It wasn't due to some skill that could then be translated to Voldemort fighting another dark wizard!
You could multiply Voldemort's skill and power by 1000 times and he still would have lost to Harry! It doesn't say anything about Voldemort fighting other dark wizards!
Transpose that moment to Grindelwald, make it so that he was fighting with the elder wand against it's master who was also wielding the power of love and I'm sure that he too would have lost!!
This is like taking this and saying that Harry would then beat Minerva, Slughorn, and Kingsley on a three on one and never mind with them having sacrificial protection!
Whew, sorry, got a little mad there, of course this isn't me trying to be aggressive to you, but to the infuriating!! quote, and you already wrote this
because he lacked the refinement and the humanity to comprehend the power of Love and to understand that the moment he sought the Elder Wand, his fate was sealed.
Which is a good point, from the books we can glean how Grindelwald loved Dumbledore, so it could be a point against him.
Though possessing love didn't do anything to help Minerva, Slughorn, and Kingsley against Voldemort.(Edit, never mind, it would be a genuine strength for Grindelwald over Voldemort here, that line was unessecarly snippy.)
(PS: Note that Harry himself is an extremely skilled wizard,
More Killing Curses flew past Harry’s head from the two remaining Death Eaters’ wands; they were aiming for Hagrid. Harry
responded with further Stunning Spells: Red and green collided
in midair in a shower of multicolored sparks, and Harry thought
wildly of fireworks, and the Muggles below who would have no idea
what was happening—
Here is Harry deflecting two killing curses at the same time against two death eaters, with him reacting after the spell was cast.)
