45

To begin, I am aware that at some point in time Dumbledore borrowed the cloak from James Potter. If James Potter either had possession of the cloak at the time, or knew that he could get it back from Dumbledore - why not use the cloak to hide his family, or at least Harry, from Voldemort?

R.A Questions
  • 419
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 4
    Possible duplicate of Why did Malfoy's Petrificus Totalus work on Harry while he was wearing the Invisibility Cloak?, see last quote of Slytherincess' answer. – Gallifreyan Nov 30 '16 at 08:33
  • 14
    In what practical way could the cloak have helped? The family (even if they could all fit underneath it) can't live out their lives stuck together under a shawl! – DavidS Nov 30 '16 at 09:35
  • Don't know why they didn't use it, but imagine what would have happened if Voldemort bumped into them by accident and ended up with the Cloak in his possession! – Martin Vandersteen Nov 30 '16 at 10:57
  • 1
    the didnt even have their wands on them during the attack. – Himarm Nov 30 '16 at 13:43
  • 3
    Can't put a proper answer together right now, but Moody could see through the cloak and the Marauder's Map showed cloaked people, so it's not 100% invisible. It's highly likely that if an Auror could enchant an eye to see through it and a few students could detect it (talented, yes, but still students) then Voldemort himself almost certainly could – Joe Nov 30 '16 at 14:09
  • James didnt ask for his cloak back and didn't have his wand and the reason for this negligence was probably blind faith in the fidelius charm, his friend Peter and in D. As in - if D asked for the cloak, then it must be important, and he shall have it. –  Nov 30 '16 at 15:58
  • 1
    Because hiding the entire house was a better option than just hiding an entire family under a single cloak. – Möoz Nov 30 '16 at 23:38
  • http://scifi.stackexchange.com/a/52014/17235 this answer has an interesting quote that has Harry himself claiming that it wouldn't have mattered – Jasper Dec 01 '16 at 17:32

5 Answers5

86

The Potters did not have the cloak at the time of the attack.

Dumbledore explicitly said in Philosopher's Stone that James left the cloak in his possession "Before he died". Here is an excellent article that discusses the issue.

So, the question becomes "Why did James leave his invisibility cloak with Dumbledore?" Most likely because Dumbledore was actively researching the Hallows at the time, and suspected that the cloak was one of them. After all, if the Potters are in hiding behind the impregnable Fidelius Charm, they would have no need for the cloak, making this the ideal time for Dumbledore to borrow it for study.

So, why use the Fidelius charm rather than the cloak?

The cloak is a tactical asset, not a strategic one

Because it's much, much more effective, and because Dumbledore advised them thus.

The cloak isn't perfect; we know that Mad-Eye Moody's magical eye was able to see straight through it, there's no telling what other spells or powers Voldemort had access to which could penetrate the cloak just as well. The Fidelius Charm, on the other hand, has displayed no such weakness.

The cloak isn't big - it could cover three children, just about, but the older the children got in the books the harder it was to cover them all. It was, after all, designed to hide one person, not three. The Fidelius Charm we know is capable of hiding entire buildings.

The cloak doesn't make you inaudible - if you've ever tried to deal with a fussing baby, you'll know that the chances of baby Harry staying quiet the whole time they needed to hide were below zero.

The cloak doesn't make you immaterial or invulnerable. I may not be able to see you, but so what? If I can hear that you're in the room, all I need to do is set fire to the place, or collapse the roof, or just fling killing curses all over the place over and over.

The cloak is great for immediate use, for hiding from your enemies for a while, but it's not something you could rely upon to hide a whole family for more than a couple of minutes.

Community
  • 1
Werrf
  • 15,927
  • 5
  • 67
  • 81
  • 2
    What about a silencing spell on the baby? What about distracting V while Lily, covered with the cloak escapes with Harry, as in runs outside and apparates? –  Nov 30 '16 at 15:56
  • @R.Skeeter Hard to cover Lily with the cloak when they didn't have it... The point is that the cloak is ill-suited to hiding three people for a long time, and the Fidelius Charm is much more reliable than the cloak. – Werrf Nov 30 '16 at 15:59
  • @Werrf but why not have both? Just in case? –  Nov 30 '16 at 16:05
  • 7
    @R.Skeeter Just in case of what? The whole point of the Fidelius Charm was that they trusted their Secret Keeper completely and absolutely knew he wouldn't give them up. Should they have kept the cloak, unused and useless, while their friends were potentially dying because they didn't have it, while they believed they were completely safe?? – Werrf Nov 30 '16 at 16:08
  • @Werrf so James thought the cloak was being used to protect members of the Order? –  Nov 30 '16 at 16:12
  • 6
    @R.Skeeter Does it matter? James knew that Dumbledore had asked to borrow it; James trusted Dumbledore; James didn't need the cloak. Why would he say no? – Werrf Nov 30 '16 at 16:19
  • Iirc there's also an instance in the philosopher's stone where Dumbledore detects Harry in the room with the mirror of erised, despite him being under the cloak – gandalf3 Nov 30 '16 at 20:20
  • 1
    @Werrf the thing is, James knew Peter wasn't immortal and they suspected there was a spy in the Order. In case Peter (whom James trusted) was killed there was a chance that the spy would be the next secret keeper. Keeping the cloak is useful and it doesn't have to be the fidelus OR the cloak - he could have had both and there might have been a chance of Lily sneaking out under it with Harry. The only reason he didnt have it was that D asked for it and James as all the Order blindly obeyed D. –  Nov 30 '16 at 20:35
  • 4
    @R.Skeeter "James knew Peter wasn't immortal and they suspected there was a spy in the Order. In case Peter (whom James trusted) was killed there was a chance that the spy would be the next secret keeper." No, there wasn't. Peter never told anyone else where the Potters were - not even Dumbledore. If he had, they would have known that Sirius wasn't the Keeper, and that he was innocent - but nobody did know that. Not even Dumbledore. – Werrf Nov 30 '16 at 20:56
  • If James had had the cloak, the smart thing to do would've been to wear it and then silently cast avada kedavra or something as Voldemort's back was turned or as he walked by. James likely wouldn't have done this, though because it probably would've seemed cowardly and it would have put Lily and Harry at greater risk (in James' eyes, at least; obviously they were at risk just as much with James defending them, because he did absolutely nothing to slow Voldemort down by facing him). The cloak also might have let him run to grab his wand. – TylerH Dec 01 '16 at 17:16
  • 2
    I think this question argues that the cloak is not as good as the Fidelius Charm, but I think the real question to answer is why the cloak plus the fidelius charm has no value over the fidelius charm alone. If you have something as useful as the cloak and you are in a dangerous situation, why not use it and add it to your list of protections? – xdhmoore Dec 02 '16 at 02:30
  • 3
    Because the charm is foolproof and your friends need the cloak. If you're in a nuclear bunker and your friends are outside, would you keep the only bullet proof vest for yourself? – Werrf Dec 02 '16 at 04:03
  • @xdhmoore like Werrf said, given the info James and Lily had at their disposal, it did not seem necessary. Obviously hindsight shows that Death's own invisibility cloak would be quite useful to have, tactically, that night, but from a strategic point of view, James and Lily felt safe enough that the cloak would've been infinitely more useful to a wizard of Dumbledore's caliber, who might have employed it any number of stealth missions against the Bad Guys. – TylerH Dec 02 '16 at 16:29
  • 1
    @Werrf Though I wouldn't necessarily call the charm foolproof, because it clearly wasn't ;-) – TylerH Dec 02 '16 at 16:29
  • The charm itself didn't fail; their choice of secret keeper did. But if that was a contingency they were considering, they wouldn't have used that secret keeper. – Werrf Dec 02 '16 at 16:39
  • So, the argument is that James and Lily had a false sense of security and didn't think they had anything to fear or need for more protection? I could see that argument being made, but I just don't think that is as likely as it just being an author oversight or @Alexander C. Solon's answer. Agree to disagree :) – xdhmoore Dec 03 '16 at 01:49
32

Peter Pettigrew was James' Keeper and implicitly trustworthy. Therefore when Peter turned up on that fateful day, there was no need to rush for the cloak. James and Lily had no reason to expect and prepare for the attack, leaving them only with their wits and their wands with which to defend themselves.

'Harry,' said Lupin hurriedly, 'don't you see? All this time we've thought Sirius betrayed your parents, and Peter tracked him down - but it was the other way around, don't you see? Peter betrayed your mother and father - Sirius tracked Peter down -'

'THAT'S NOT TRUE!" Harry yelled. 'HE WAS THEIR SECRET KEEPER! HE SAID SO BEFORE YOU TURNED UP, HE SAID HE KILLED THEM!'

He was pointing back at Black, who shook his head slowly; the sunken eyes were suddenly over-bright.

'Harry ... I as good as killed them,' he croaked. 'I persuaded Lily and James to change to Peter at the last moment, persuaded them to use him as Secret Keeper instead of me ... I'm to blame, I know it ... the night they died, I'd arranged to check on Peter, make sure he was still safe, but when I arrived at his hiding place, he'd gone. Yet there was not sign of a struggle. It didn't feel right. I was scared. I set out for your parents' house straight away. And when I saw their house, destroyed, and their bodies - I realised what Peter must have done. What' I'd done.

PoA - Chapter 19 - Servant of Voldemort

Reading more of this chapter unravels more of Pettigrew's treachery, but it's implicit that Pettigrew was within the Potter family circle of trust.

The Cloak of Invisibility was never used (mentioned) during the attack. Voldemort was only repelled by Lily's magical defense.

Community
  • 1
  • 1
    If you add a quote that would be an invaluable answer. – Gallifreyan Nov 30 '16 at 08:24
  • @Gallifreian - Kindle to the rescue. Any mis-spellings/omissions in my quote are entirely down to my poor transcription skills. –  Nov 30 '16 at 08:50
  • 4
    Good answer, but just a brief comment. There's no indication in any of the books that Wormtail "showed up on that fateful day," as you put it. Indeed, in one of the books (forget which one) Harry is reliving his parents' deaths from Voldemort's point of view, and it strongly appears that Voldemort was alone. There doesn't seem to be a requirement that the secret-keeper personally show the hiding place, just that he reveal it (as evidenced by Dumbledore revealing the HQ of the Order to Harry in written form). – Deacon Nov 30 '16 at 14:53
  • 1
    There's no need to go into the secret-keeper being trustworthy - the problem was that they didn't have the cloak with them. – Werrf Nov 30 '16 at 14:56
  • @DougR. Wormtail was there that day though. Perhaps not prior to, or with, Voldemort, but he did leave his finger behind. – Michael Richardson Nov 30 '16 at 19:50
  • 4
    @MichaelRichardson That was a very different occasion. Sirius tracked Pettigrew down later, at which time he cut of his finger to fake his own death. This did not occur immediately after the Potters were killed, but after the Ministry was restored to its former power (given the fact that Sirius was arrested and appeared in court). – 11684 Nov 30 '16 at 20:33
4

The cloak, as I understand it, is not designed for permanent hiding. It is for sneaking past death (and everyone else) unseen. The Potters had gone into hiding to protect themselves from Voldemort. It would not have been considered necessary for them to use the cloak, because they thought their secret location was safe. If James had been in possession of the cloak on the night that Voldemort attacked, he might have been able to hide his wife and child under it, but I doubt all three of them would have fit under it. As it is, had the cloak been with them, it might have ended up in Voldemort's possession.

Cadence
  • 257
  • 1
  • 1
  • Can you provide some support for this? – Adamant Nov 30 '16 at 07:00
  • Peverell certainly used it to hide from death for decades. That does sound like "permanent hiding", whether he used it sparingly or continually. – Luaan Nov 30 '16 at 14:21
  • 2
    @Luaan The Three Brothers Tale is just a story that sprang up around the 3 powerful artifacts, they aren't literally true. Even in-universe it's just a metaphor. – DavidS Nov 30 '16 at 15:33
1

My best guess for why James Potter didn't use the invisibility cloak to protect his family during Voldemort's attack is that it would have been a futile effort. I specifically remember a moment in the book where Dumbledore and Harry Potter are speaking of the time when Harry was in the room with the mirror that allowed him to see his family (or rather what he most desired at the time). What's important about this conversation is that Dumbledore confesses that he could see through the invisibility cloak, because his power was too great for it to stop him. Therefore, I suspect that Voldemort, being a very powerful wizard, would also have that same power/ability; rendering the invisibility cloak useless in protecting Harry's family against Voldemort's attack.

Tldr: Dumbledore can see through the cloak so Voldemort probably can too.

Disclaimer: I am in no way well versed in the books, but I have read them. I also wont be fact checking or quoting so take what I say with a grain of salt per-say. Let me know if I'm wrong and/or misinformed on anything; I always enjoy learning new things.

Alexander C. Solon
  • 11
  • 3
  • Fact checking and quotes are very much appreciated here. – Blackwood Dec 01 '16 at 20:27
  • My apologies, but these are things that happened in the book; that much I know. This is just my best guess as to why. What I meant by not fact checking is I didn't go and look at the book to find fallacies in my answer and whatnot. – Alexander C. Solon Dec 01 '16 at 20:30
  • I think this is the best answer, if there is a good answer. I think the cloak would still be useful against anyone other than V-------t though, so I'd keep it around. – xdhmoore Dec 02 '16 at 02:33
-2

Like what others said, I personally think if I could still have the time of thinking for an invisibility cloak, hereby stated that the scenarios are too conflict.

Since they did not expect the attack of Voldemort, they would just think of,

what do we do now?

defend harry!

And I am confidently sure that James already knew that Voldemort is a great sorcerer! He is a dark wizard, a very wise Tom Riddle. Voldemort would not ascend the stairs without knowing that the Potters are there, he would surely doubt if they have used some kind of magic, and there are lot of spells to detach the cloak from them. Tom Riddle would not go there unless if he is wandless

One more reason, that is the way Lily wanted to draw the whole story. Without that dark tragedy, THE WHOLE STORY PLOT WOULD BE WRECKED. What do I mean? Accept the fact, that Lily was the one who defended Harry and do some kind of enchantments, making the story more unpredictable and leading its way to the 7th book. Without that scenario, there could be no reason for Harry to beat every challenges he faced at Hogwarts, he could be even dead.

Invoker
  • 4,550
  • 2
  • 33
  • 64