What Dark Lords?

There has only ever been one person using the title Dark Lord and that's Voldemort.

 

You know what I meant! I guess "powerful dark wizards" is a bit more accurate but it just doesn't have the same ring to it.

Quantity only works if you can actually find your target and somehow wear it down. In the scenario you presented, a wizard could simply disillusion themselves or fly away if they wanted to avoid conflict or unleash some AOE spells to kill the attackers.

 

First of all, I find the implications of a Euro-centric Statute of Secrecy strangely fascinating, since it leaves me wondering what happened when a Native American shaman says no to hiding. Obviously not well for the shaman, but still.

Also, I agree it is kind of odd that they decided to form the Statute of Secrecy. Rowling made it clear in Prisoner of Azkaban that burning witches was completely useless, thanks to that flame-freeze charm. So what did they really have to fear from muggles? De facto separation is one thing, but why bother fully separating themselves, especially when you realize just how much work it must have taken to purge Europe of any traces of Magic actually existing (including dragons and centaurs and other such beasts and beings).

Hell, I think the Dresden Files did a better take on this: wizards don't really interact with non-wizards and their existence isn't well known, but no one cares if Dresden is listed as 'wizard' in the phone book.

 

Did you read the rest of the thread? There are plenty of reasons to remove oneself or a group from society besides fear .

 

I think there was mention of a wizard who flew to the moon on a broom, but I'm in an airport and can't be arsed to find the quote.

 

I get why many of them would unofficially separate themselves from the muggle world, but why would they go through the massive effort to forcibly separate the two societies? Do you have any idea how much work it must have took to actually begin the Statute of Secrecy? You have to obliviate every village you can find, erase any documentation of Magic being real, get every magical beast big and small into separate areas, convince magical beings who don't exactly like wizards (like centaurs and goblins) to keep the secret, and make sure non-European wizards keep silent (one way or another)?

And that's just starting the Statute. The effort it takes to maintain must be absolutely insane.

Again, it's one of the reasons I prefer the Dresden File's magic system: they don't go out of their way to tell the world magic is real, but they don't care if someone is openly a wizard either.

 

1.The Statute was a reflection of the de facto state of society. Most wizards had already separated themselves from Muggle society through a gradual process and they didn't just all leave one day.
2.There's no need to obliviate unimportant villagers, just the important people. Then wait a generation or two and the kids will roll their eyes every time grandpa talks about the wizard in town.
3.Documentation? It's not like there were photographs back then. The accounts about magic and magical creatures like dragons would probably be disregarded as superstition, hyperbole or ignorance like they are today.
4.It's very likely that the sentient races already lived apart from human society and rarely interacted with them. Centaurs and Goblins from canon certainly don't like interacting with humans.

 

Again, I get the de facto separation part. I can see why most wizards wouldn't bother interacting with muggles.

But why bother with creating the Statute of Secrecy? Why should they care if muggles know Magic is real and the occasional wizard interacts with them? It's not like muggles could find wizards that don't want to be found, and even in the worst case scenario wizards can still Magic themselves away. Hell, we know some important families (like the Malfoys) regularly interacted with muggles (albeit the important ones) and even had the occasional marriage between them.

One of these days, Rowling needs to take the time to come up with the real reason why wizards would create the Statute of Secrecy instead of just continue with the status quo of de facto separation.

 

I think the point he's making is that if wizards don't want to interact with Muggles, they don't have to do so. Making it law that they can't is taking an extra step, one which seems unnecessary if all you want to do is codify the de facto state of affairs of avoidance. Secrecy by being forgotten due to lack of interaction and secrecy by active interference are two different things.

In short, the wizarding world didn't just want to avoid Muggles, they wanted to be forgotten by Muggles.

Largely this can be explained by saying that being forgotten makes avoidance much easier, as it means you just have to cover up breaches of secrecy rather than constantly be on guard for Muggles trying to find you.

I think you could also say that emotionally, a clean break is an attractive concept. If wizards just sort of faded away without ever making it official, then they'd still have technical de jure ties to the Muggle world. What they did instead was give themselves complete independence -- the wizarding government is not subject to any Muggle oversight, not even by the monarch.

This might have been a reaction to the fact that King William and Queen Mary refused to grant wizards special rights. In response, wizards essentially declared themselves a republic and severed all ties with the Muggle monarcy.

 

Thanks for putting it in better words, Taure.

I still think there had to be a really good reason for the European wizard community to decide to go with the Statute of Secrecy, especially since we know some powerful families (the Malfoys) opposed it initially.

At the moment, I am quite partial to Scrubb's theory that it evolved from an understanding with key muggle leaders: wizards won't involve themselves in muggle affairs (which can produce disastrous results, like the Thirty Years War), and wizards will formalize their separation from the muggle world with the Statute. It would explain why wizards even bother to let modern leaders in the know.

 

According to Wiki, the Statute was proposed in 1689 and fully ratified in 1692. Given the Anglocentric nature of the source material, I think it's a safe bet that these dates intentionally correspond with the Glorious Revolution in England and the Salem witch trials, and that it reflects those particular historical religious and political tensions. (As this would imply that there was a substantial Wizarding population among New England's first English settlers, who wouldn't love to see a fic where an insufferably independent Harry and his hangers-on hightail it out of Britain to escape its obvious barbarism, only to find Wizarding America in the grips of a seventeenth century–style Puritan theocracy?)

 

To be fair, I picture Magical Britain as more quasi-Victorian than Glorious Revolution.

 

I dislike comparing magical Britain to any muggle periods.

Instead, we should view it as a society which evolved in a different direction than ours.

 

Sadly, there is a distinct lack of Wizarding culture that is not a copy or archaic version of the real world's culture. I am preparing a story that focuses on social climbing in the Wizarding World, and I have to make up just about everything about a real Wizarding culture that isn't just "old Britain, with some magic added". Religion? Nothing. Unique customs? Not much. Any explanation in how the government works, how the Wizengamot members are chosen? Nothing.

There idea that Magical britain evolved needs more canon facts to be more than some baseless assumption.

 

We have to make an assumption either way, and the one that should be favoured is the one that should be considered more likely.

Assumption 1: The culture of a society of people did not change in any way in over 300 years, in spite of new members joining the society every year.

Assumption 2: The culture of a society of people changed in a different way than was taken in a different direction to the similar neighboring society, with small changes over time amounting to large changes after 300 years, to the point where the two societies are superficially very different in culture.

Of those two, the second seems a lot more likely to me than the first does, considering everything. At least to me.

 

We don't actually know that. Plus when you are running away, you can't just pull a Rincewind and not give a damn where to. There has to be a destination. Because food and shelter. Basically. Also, brooms are easily destroyed, can be spotted, etc etc. Brooms I don't think have always been that fast. Even 25mph is a fairly fast clip before the automobile, and going that fast for hours would kill most horses. But not for minutes....

Depends. Giant walls of flame like what Dumbledore conjured in the movie would be disturbingly effective.

I get the feeling that its use isn't that common or even the knowledge of how to conjure it isn't that far spread. Especially expertise on how to no kill yourself with it.

That's one powerful fucking Banishing Charm. :fire

I say it, as my thing, to include both male and females without having to type Wizards and Witches and such. It's my lazy shorthand, which will continue forever.

True. But exactly how fast would you want to go on one without a Ass Sticking Charm?

Exactly. And even then, Apparition has that danger of splinching....

Or maybe their magic just wasn't as advanced, and it was less organized governments and more settlers, militias and posse's. And mass epidemic wiping out knowledge bases.

I get the strange sensation of lack of shits to give of the European Wizards. They wanted to keep their specific societies a secret. Letting the rest of the world, that is, non Eurasia, do whatever and let supernatural encounters happen occasionally and keep the homelands believing that it is all superstitious nonsense.

Remember, its not the discovery of magic or belief in its existence, but the discovery of the Hidden Society that is the danger to Wizarding kind.

Especially early on when most nations grew 100% of their own food and such. Not to mention surprise lynchings and such. I view Magic and Magicals as advancing and growing more dangerous and powerful in the same way Muggle Technology did. With both sides bringing game changers along for the last few centuries. Even I concede that it's mostly the supreme difficulty in forcing the Wizards to battle that gives them the advantage now. Without the ability to mass evacuate and erect powerful shelters, Magicals become much more vulnerable. And killable. AK, Fiendfyre, is all wonderfully, but I suspect that until recently, Magicals were still highly vulnerable to arrows, swords and the rope.

Medical advancements have drastically lessened this, but when a 1000 to 1 loss ratio still counts as a winning exchange in an attritional war, then Wizards and Witches were still horribly vulnerable.

Do we actually know this, or is it just that Voldemort made it stick?

Muggles shot him in the face. So it wasn't much of an issue.

"It's all a myth" "Just superstitious nonsense" "We ordinary humans are completely in control"

 

Yes, but where are those differences in canon? Why does the magical world look like someone took a shot of the medieval ages, and added some Victorian and modern touches in random spots? Where is this "different but equal" wizard culture so many fanboys wank off to?

 

How did they get Asia, the native magicals (that is to include wizards, witches, shamans and what not) of the Americas and Australia on board?

They could use either XXXXX-class creatures, wide-range spells (there some explosive spells or Fiendfyre) or create magical bio-weapons.

It was implied to have been bullshit he tried to impress Fleur with, IIRC.

 

I think it was because of divided loyalties, especially muggleborns and/or muggle sympathizers.

There is no doubt what prevails in a Magic vs Non Magic clash, which I have no interest in getting into, but it's not as simple as that.

Muggleborns, some if not most, would have had divided loyalties. There is also the fact that greed, love and other factors might affect a wizards loyalty to his own. It's not a simple black and white situation where all wizards would automatically side with wizards, especially not in those times when there was nothing to force the separation of wizards and muggles.

I think that while muggles, on their own, even in their sheer numbers, wouldn't be able to really do anything to wizards, the fact that divided loyalties could give muggles the access to perhaps negate some of the magic advantage (with the help of a wizard) might have been the cause of some fear.

This might have lead wizards to put the entire separation into law forcing the hand of those who might have otherwise chosen to side with muggles. We do know that wizards at the time had achieved a high degree of separation already, so a law could have been made the popular opinion with the right propaganda.