The books have stressed over and over again the brilliance of these two men at magic, particularly in their youth.

So, who is the greatest of the two? You decide.

And to add a little more into the mix, you can add Grindlewald to the mix too. I see it thus:

1. Dumbledore
2. Grindlewald
3. Voldemort

 

I gotta go with Dumbledore. Voldemort is certainly more powerful, but Albus is smarter. Truly Ariana was all that prevented the rise of a fearsome Dark Overlord.

Peace be upon her name.

Big D

 

Voldemort is stronger in magic, as he is not afraid to use magic to its full potential, but Albus is smarter and craftier.

 

The way I see it, canon speaks for itself. Dumbledore dies before Voldemort. You can argue that he orchestrate his own death, but he would have died anyway after a year due to poisoning. I think that a part of power is self-control, and Dumbledore obviously didn't have that.

Also, Voldemort's death is death-by-deux-ex-machina. Dumbledore's is... well.. also death-by-deux-ex-machina (horcrux), but at least he got a scheme and an AK.

I personally think that JKR's Voldemort is one of the lamest villains of all time, but...

EDIT @Big D, because I don't want to post too much- Dumbledore never had a challenge by someone who was equal to him (It's canon that Voldemort pwns Grindelwald). I also give Voldemort a lot credit for his resurrection. He had the foresight to create horcruxes, and the power and intelligence to survive for so long and to create himself a new body. Voldemort is Jesus!

Another point I just remembered- Dumbledore himself said that Voldemort is stronger then him. See chp. 1 of SS. Don't know how valid that is, because it could be Dumbledore being modest, but no one brought this up yet so here it is.

 

Actually, Voldemort died first (1981). And even if you give Voldemort credit for surviving longer, Dumbledore was still older.

Big D

And Dumbledore never got curb-stomped repeatedly by a punk kid.

 

I vote Dumbledore, but not because of power or smarts.

Dumbledore, like Voldemort, knew how to apply the knowledge he had. Unlike Voldemort, however, Dumbledore knew his limits of both power and knowledge. Yes, he still made mistakes, but so did Voldemort. The difference, in my mind, is that Dumbledore's mistakes didn't backfire on him to the point of ruin. Even his worst mistake - wearing the Gaunt ring - still provided him a means to an end (bad pun not intended). Anyone that can turn a defeat into a strength is someone to applaud.

Ultimately I think it just comes down to basic life lessons. Dumbledore learned from his mistakes and life where Voldemort never did. That, more than anything else, makes Dumbledore the greater wizard in my book.

 

Dumbledore > Voldemort. Like said before, Voldemort never learned from his mistakes or even realized he made any most of the time. Dumbledore was more of a Slytherin than he was.

 

I always wanted to know the true answer to this question. I think that Dumbledore wins. Voldemort may have him in raw power, but I think that Dumbledore is the more advanced fighter. Didn't they say in his youth Dumbledore studied the Dark Arts? I think that if Dumbledore became a Dark Lord, used Dark Magic and performed rituals on himself like LV did he would never be defeated, even by Voldemort. (Bless you Ariana and your fine ass)

I also think Kender hit it perfectly. Voldemort's arrogance and ego didn't allow him to learn from his mistakes. In Voldemort's book, when one of his plans goes wrong it wasn't his fault, it was someone else's. Thus he never learns from his mistakes if he never admits them.

 

Thats not quite true though. In the first chapter of DH, he says something along the lines of "Harry Potter's continues existence has more to do with my failures than his successes."

So he can admit he is wrong, just not about the most important things, such as Wand Ownership Rights, which were his downfall (the power he knew not?).

 

I agree that Dumbledore > Voldemort. Dumbledore knew his limits, and could, at times, admit that when he blows it, he REALLY blows it. (Get your minds out of the gutter, people. )

Voldemort is the epitome of narcissism, because everything he does is about him. HIS immortality. HIS power. HIS wizarding world, and so on. He kills Frank Bryce for no other reason than to make Nagini a horcrux, to cite just one example.

Another example is the amazingly tortuously complicated plans he makes. Use Harry Potter's blood to ressurrect his body? Oh, don't just pay off Lucius Malfoy to portkey him out at the first Hogsmeade weekend, or send Peter Pettigrew in rat form to snag him at a convenient time, let's send Barty Crouch to guzzle gallons of polyjuice and maneuver Harry through a year's worth of Triwizard tasks just to finally nail the kid at the end of the school year.

Or take the events of OotP. Voldemort eventually DID just barge into the Ministry with only his top Death Eaters, contrary to the blatherings of some character in the beginning. He could have just snatched up the prophecy then - but oh no, he has to fiddle with the link in his mind to Harry, nudge him along and finally send an outrageously fake vision he had to have known Harry could confirm the falsity thereof, just to get Harry to come and grab up the prophecy - which, thanks to Voldemort's scheming and the chaos that results, ends up getting destroyed anyway.

Jesus Crumpet, Voldemort!

 

Voldemort is portrayed as a lame idiot by JKR at times, but if one cannot believe it blindly. Why?

Several times JKR makes Dumbledore himself say that Voldemort was the most brilliant student ever to walk the halls of Hogwarts. He was best in everthing and all teachers except Dumbledore adored him. He killed at 16, made a Horcruxes out of a diary and a ring, gathered some followers.

Now Dumbledore was brilliant too, wanted to be (not exactly dark lord, but a supreme ruler maybe) powerful, famous man. He plotted to enslave muggles and was stopped only by the death of his sister.

Now think of motives of the two. Voldemort was forced to lead a miserable life in an orphanage were he was abused totally only due to the fault of his muggle father. Now its quite natural to have 11 years of abuse manifest in this way (anger, hate etc). What excuse did Dumbledore have? That he was forced to abandon his world tour?

Now back to main point, we have to agree that both chose their own ways and honestly who was more powerful? Take their duel that we know of. Ignoring the fact that Dumbledore had an unbeatable wand in his hand, it was still narrow escape for Dumbledore. If Fawkes hadn't swallowed that AK he would have been toast.

So I will have to say, its Lord Voldemort.....

 

Dumbledore
Voldemort
Grindlewald

The reason I have them in such order is because in one of the books it is expressly said that Dumbledore knows a lot of dark magic, he just chooses not to use them. Voldemort on the other hand completely negates aspects of magic that he views as weak and worthless. Also it must be taken into account that Dumbledore did defeat Grindlewald, who at the time was in possession of the elder wand.

 

Could it, perhaps, have been the attack on his sister by muggles? An attack, that if you recall, lead to a) his father going to Azkaban, and b) his sister bottling up her magic inside her resulting in dangers to those around her. Lets not forget that item b then lead to the death of his mother.

Somehow I don't think it was the missed trip that did it.

 

Was it actually said that Voldemort was abused at the orphanage? I swear that is Fanon, but I am not to sure. I know he abused the other kids with his magic.

JKR was pretty clear that Voldemort was showing signs of being a megalomaniac/sociopath at a very early age. I think his mental imbalance is from the generations of inbreeding on his mothers side.

 

Voldemort was not abused. When at the orphanage the children were described as well cared for, though the place shouldn't be wished on anyone. I think the point was that he was evil from the start, so that there would never be a chance of redemption.

 

But nowhere is it said that Dumbledore was plotting the takeover of the world before Hogwarts. It is said that he accepted the fact that his father was a criminal who deserved Azkaban. And his tour got cancelled because his mother died, so you may have a point there Kendercleric. The reasons you mentioned are valid. I concede.

Evilspanker and Anlun, I can't accept that he was cared for in the orphanage. Sure it is not mentioned in the canon, but one can easily see how life was there.

Voldemort had exceptional control over his magic by eleven. A magical child uses magic only when extremely upset or startled and doesn't have much control due to lack of practice. So the very fact that Tom had enough control says that he had to use it a lot more than usaual. One can also argue that he was more powerful, but still I don't think that a well cared for child will resort to magic much.

 

Don' know why you can't accept it. Canon has not said otherwise that he was abused. It is a purely fanon concept that he was ritually abused at the orphanage. The only bad thing about the orphanage it seemed was bullies, but Tom quickly stopped that when he learned to control his magic. Tom was unstable he is the type of person that would personally learn how to control his ability to harm other people.

Voldemort being able to control his magic doesn't mean he is emotionally upset, Lily showed in DH that she too could control her magic easily. He didn't learn to control it to protect himself from abusive orphanage workers. He learned to so he could rule over the other orphans.

 

But there has to be a reason for his behaviour. For every crime there is a motive. Why did Tom turn against the muggles and mud-bloods?

Look at it the other way. He was cared for in orphanage you say. So why did he feel the need to torture other kids? Instead he could have made them his followers or servants or what-not. Instead he abused it. Whatever you say I can't believe little kids would hate another kid for no reason at all. And Tom didn't hate on a normal level at all.

 

I had a giant tl;dr post typed out for you, but my computer restarted. I'll try to paraphrase what I wrote.

007_rock- there are three reasons for Tom to turn against the muggle world that don't necessarily mean abuse.

1. Tom Riddle didn't know that his mother used love potions. All he knew was that his mother, a witch, died giving birth to him, and that his father the muggle abandoned him. While he wasn't abused, he was an orphan, who don't exactly have the best social status or financial means. I can see why he would resent his father.

2. The Wizarding world is not exactly fond of the muggle one. Even the pro-Muggle families regard them like an animal to be studied. Tom was most likely assumed a muggle-born, so he was most likely a victim of prejudice, however inadvertent it was. This prejudice was probably even more apparent in Slytherin House then in the HP books, so he probably grew to resent muggles from that.

3. Riddle likely discovered he was the heir of Slytherin early at Hogwarts. He probably realized that it was the only chance he had to be considered 'worthy' by select members of the Wizarding world, so he attempted to adopt the traditional views of Slytherins, i.e. muggle-hating.

Combine that with inbreeding, the Gaunt psychosis, and his already enormous thirst for power, and you have Lord Voldemort.