The only part of the chain of wand possesion that I had trouble with was how Grindelwald got it. I can kind of explain it away as "Grindelwald disarmed Gregorovich, but Gregorovich somehow got back physical posession of the wand in a non-magical way, and then Grindelwald stole it," but that's a lot of convolution to not be explained, especially since it's a pretty major point later that just taking it in a non-magical-fight way isn't enough.

I think that none of the houses are that different- they all just have a different emphasis on the same values.

Yeah, this.

With all the callbacks, I really feared that the beaming blonde thief in Gregorivitch's place was going to be Lockhart. Soooo glad that we didn't have to see that prat again - insane or otherwise.

OMG, me too! On both counts.

Finally, I realized that he was catching the Elder Wand, and that made me realize that the shot of Voldemort on the back wasn't him trying to reach Potter before he completed some action, but that Voldemort was actually falling backwards dead. Really, brilliant misdirection in that cover.

Okay, that's really cool!

I haven't really looked at the cover, too busy devouring the book.

Regarding the wand, I think the act of Grendelwald stealing it from Gregoravitch was considered "beating" Gregoravitch. It didn't have to be won in battle per se, else the original Peverell brother's getting his throat slit while he was passed out wouldn't have been enough to transfer power.

Perhaps it must be taken from the owner against his will.

Regarding the wand, I think the act of Grendelwald stealing it from Gregoravitch was considered "beating" Gregoravitch.

So then why wasn't stealing it from Dumbledore's grave considered "beating" Harry? Same sort of thing -- taking it while the current owner's back is turned. Just that in this case, the current owner didn't know he was the owner.

Hmm. Maybe that's it? The current owner has to be aware of being beaten?

Ollivander says, "Of course, the manner of taking matters. Much also depends upon the wand itself. In general, however, where a wand has been won, its allegiance will change." And also, "Wandlore is a complex and mysterious branch of magic."

If Harry was just undermining Voldemort's confidence by making up some plausible nonsense about something he knows V is ignorant, all those problems just melt away. And Harry wins because he's younger, faeter, and has his soul all in one place.

Eta: Alternatively, Harry was trying to convince the wand

Eata: I never did fully grasp what H's wand moving on its own meant.

I never did fully grasp what H's wand moving on its own meant.

Dumbledore says that, the night at the cemetary at the end of Goblet of Fire, when Harry's and Voldemort's wands connected, Harry's wand absorbed some of Voldemort's magic. Then, when Voldemort was close by again, the wand threw that magic back at him.

Maybe intent *and* awareness matters? It is definitely a confusing twist of events. Grendelwald stole--and intended to steal--from Gregoravitch (I really hope I'm getting these names right), but Voldemort taking the wand from an unprotected grave can't really be viewed as stealing from Malfoy, so he never "beat" Malfoy, as viewed by an inanimate object's understanding of events.

Also, does anyone have the book handy? Didn't Grendelwald take a shot at Gregoravitch before he jumped from the window? Did he do anything with the shot (i.e. hit/stun/disarm him)?