42

It is said that Alastor "Mad-Eye" Moody died during the 'Battle of the Seven Potters', but Ron said that it was possible he didn't. Bill said that he saw a green light (avada kedavra) used on him, but he was under attack, so he could have seen wrong due to the pressure of the situation. They also didn't find his body, so he could have run away.

Is there any proof that Moody actually died?

Gallifreyan
  • 20,473
  • 6
  • 103
  • 164
user76021
  • 453
  • 1
  • 4
  • 4

5 Answers5

48

Per the Pottermore article on Moody.

Alastor Moody fact file. | FULL NAME: Alastor 'Mad-Eye' Moody. PARENTS: Both Aurors. SKILLS: A highly accomplished Auror and an outstanding duellist, also skilled in non-verbal magic. DEATH: 27 July, 1997.

Note that even if he wasn't already dead (as a result of the killing curse) he'd have perished in the fall since he had no wand with which to cast a spell like arresto momentum.

‘But Bill saw him hit by the Killing Curse,’ said Harry.
‘Yeah, but Bill was under attack too,’ said Ron. ‘How can he be sure what he saw?’
‘Even if the Killing Curse missed, Mad-Eye still fell about a thousand feet,’ said Hermione, now weighing Quidditch Teams of Britain and Ireland in her hand. ‘He could have used a Shield Charm –’
‘Fleur said his wand was blasted out of his hand,’ said Harry.
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, chapter 6: "The Ghoul in Pajamas" (emphasis added)

Mithical
  • 38,898
  • 17
  • 178
  • 229
Valorum
  • 689,072
  • 162
  • 4,636
  • 4,873
  • 2
    While I won't dispute the answer or the Pottermore source, it's been established that magic can be done without a wand (arresto momentum actually being a specific example, done by Dumbledore). While I don't expect Moody to be just as powerful without his wand, there's definitely precedent for wandless magic, particularly when a wizard is in danger. – Harris Dec 27 '16 at 20:52
  • @HarrisWeinstein - In the novels the spell can only be cast with a wand "‘Dumbledore was really angry,’ Hermione said in a quaking voice. ‘I’ve never seen him like that before. He ran onto the pitch as you fell, waved his wand, and you sort of slowed down before you hit the ground. Then he whirled his wand at the Dementors. Shot silver stuff at them. They left the stadium straight away … he was furious they’d come into the grounds, we heard him –’" – Valorum Dec 27 '16 at 21:04
  • 12
    @Valorum Am I misremembering Neville magically bouncing (no spell) at least once after falling from some heights? – Harris Dec 27 '16 at 21:10
  • @HarrisWeinstein I believe that was when he was a baby and a relative dropped him to see if the magic would save Neville. – Skooba Dec 27 '16 at 21:16
  • 7
    @Skooba Ah, Great Uncle Algie. Pottermore as well does state that magic can be performed without a wand. High-quality magic without one takes great skill, but it's not an impossibility. – Harris Dec 27 '16 at 21:31
  • 5
    I wouldn't call that proof of death. It's possible that he survived through either wandless magic or thorough someone else who happened to be nearby. The Pottermore fact file is just making the same assumptions from the source material that you are, and doesn't really add any extra proof either. – ibid Dec 28 '16 at 02:23
  • 1
    @ibid You'd need to also explain how he lost the magic eye, although this may be easy: it popped out when Moody hit the ground, he ran off and didn't have time to look for it. I think the right answer to the question is that there is no proof, and while it is unlikely that he survived, it's not impossible. – Malcolm Dec 28 '16 at 10:20
  • 2
    @Malcolm - His death notification on Pottermore is solid proof, just not book proof. – Valorum Dec 28 '16 at 10:21
  • @Valorum Your point is clear that you consider it solid proof, but people seem to disagree that Pottermore material can be treated this way. So you need to explain why. – Malcolm Dec 28 '16 at 10:26
  • @Malcolm - I suspect that the problem here is that some individuals hold very strong views about the canonicity of Pottermore whereas the majority of people (including myself) accept it at face value as canon because it's licensed and because it's got JKRs stamp of endorsement on the front page. – Valorum Dec 28 '16 at 10:43
  • 4
    @Valorum It's licensed - that's the problem. Licensed stuff is the least canon material. Video games are licensed too, yet I rarely see someone mentioning them as a proof to something. Pottermore is valuable because it contains writings that come from Rowling herself. However, since Moddy's fact file doesn't seem to be that, it has the same canonicity as the other licensed stuff. – Malcolm Dec 28 '16 at 11:00
  • @Malcolm - Yes, that's certainly how some fans feel. Please show me an official press-release that confirms the canonicity of pottermore. – Valorum Dec 28 '16 at 11:01
  • 9
    @Valorum You want me to show you a press-release though it's you who are trying to prove how canon it is? – Malcolm Dec 28 '16 at 11:03
  • @Malcolm - I've explained my reasoning. It's licensed and endorsed. The issue here is that you don't have any reasoning behind your belief, merely headcanon that x is canon and y isn't based on your own personal opinions. Ultimately, if you feel that this answer is wrong, you're welcome to downvote or better yet, post your own answer that can be upvoted or downvoted as the community sees fit. – Valorum Dec 28 '16 at 11:39
  • 9
    @Valorum I've already explained the reason: licensed stuff doesn't have the same level of canon as Rowling's works or even the works she was involved in. There is even a question where canon levels have been discussed. It's not my personal opinion, it's your personal opinion that licensed stuff is "solid proof" despite what the community thinks. Also I never said that the answer is wrong, but saying that licensed content is a "solid proof" is rather bold. – Malcolm Dec 28 '16 at 12:18
  • @Malcolm - It sounds like you've got the makings of an answer there. – Valorum Dec 28 '16 at 12:24
  • 1
    @Malcolm - Another possibility is that he was saved by death eaters, who planned to torture him. They removed his eye, but Mad-Eye eventually fought his way out. – ibid Dec 28 '16 at 14:40
  • 6
    Wandless magic or not, but do we really believe Moody didn't have a spare wand on him? Some people have a spare phone in glove department of their car just in case. Wand is far more important tool and Moody isn't just your average Joe. I don't think that having so obvious vulnerability fits Moody's style. – Daerdemandt Dec 29 '16 at 01:47
  • The link doesn't work. – ibid Oct 03 '19 at 07:05
32

Pottermore lists Moody's death as 27 July, 1997. It doesn't get more canon than Pottermore.

Not to mention that Umbridge had Moody's eye in her door in the Ministry:

“Careful,” said the wizard beside her, glancing around nervously; one of his pages slipped and fell to the floor.
“What, has she got magic ears as well as an eye, now?”
The witch glanced toward the shining mahogany door facing the space full of pamphlet-makers; Harry looked too, and rage reared in him like a snake. Where there might have been a peephole on a Muggle front door, a large, round eye with a bright blue iris had been set into the wood— an eye that was shockingly familiar to anybody who had known Alastor Moody.
For a split second Harry forgot where he was and what he was doing there: He even forgot that he was invisible. He strode straight over to the door to examine the eye. It was not moving: It gazed blindly upward, frozen.
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, chapter 13: "The Muggle-born Registration Commission"

In the Deathly Hallows we see that the door to Umbridge's room is decorated with a particularly familiar eye:

The door to Umbridge's office. A plaque says "DOLORES UMBRIDGE: Senior Undersecretary to the Minister". Underneath the plaque is a blue eye set into the door. Another plaque underneath the eye says "HEAD OF THE MUDDLE-BORN REGISTRATION COMMISSION".

In the books, she uses it to spy on her employees, using a telescope-like thingy mounted on the inner side of her door. Harry & Co take the eye out when they leave the Ministry, and bury it under the oldest and strongest tree they can find.

Mithical
  • 38,898
  • 17
  • 178
  • 229
Gallifreyan
  • 20,473
  • 6
  • 103
  • 164
  • 18
    It doesn't get more canon than Pottermore. (With the exception of the few writings submitted by Rowling) Pottermore is just an interpretation of the books/movies. For a while they had Lavender Brown listed as "presumed dead". They've made very embarrassing mistakes in the past. I would say that anything written by the Pottermore team is the very example of something which isn't canon. – ibid Dec 28 '16 at 02:18
  • I wrote this because I agreed with this answer. Surely there may be mistakes, but at least Pottermore is always updated and monitored - whatever mistakes there are may be fixed, unlike interviews. – Gallifreyan Dec 28 '16 at 16:39
  • 8
    Quoting from that answer: Note: This only applies to Pottermore content by JKR. Pottermore content NOT known to be by JKR slides down to same level as films.. The distinction between the two is that one is a primary canon source (original content written by Rowling) and the other (recycled content written by the Pottermore team) is just interpretations of other canon sources, which despite how accurate it may or may not be still cannot be considered a canon source in its own right. – ibid Dec 28 '16 at 17:25
  • I see. Thanks for the clarification – Gallifreyan Dec 28 '16 at 17:32
12

No canonical proof

There are several reasons why one would think that Mad-Eye Moody died.

“We were just talking about Mad-Eye,” Ron told Harry. “I reckon he might have survived.”
“But Bill saw him hit by the Killing Curse,” said Harry.
“Yeah, but Bill was under attack too,” said Ron. “How can he be sure what he saw?”
“Even if the Killing Curse missed, Mad-Eye still fell about a thousand feet,” said Hermione, now weighing Quidditch Teams of Britain and Ireland in her hand.
“He could have used a Shield Charm —”
“Fleur said his wand was blasted out of his hand,” said Harry.
“Well, all right, if you want him to be dead,” said Ron grumpily, punching his pillow into a more comfortable shape.
“Of course we don’t want him to be dead!” said Hermione, looking shocked. “It’s dreadful that he’s dead! But we’re being realistic!”
(Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Chapter Six)

  • Bill saw him being hit with killing curse. He may have thought he saw the wrong thing in the rush of battle.
  • He fell about 1,000 feet There are canonical spells such as Arresto Momentum which can save someone who falls off a broom.
  • He didn't have his wand. Again we could doubt Fleur's testimony, but there are other answers as well. Wandless magic is something which is possible in the HP universe. Alternatively, someone else may have cast the spell, such as death eaters who intended to capture and torture him.
  • Umbridge ends up with his magical eye If Mad-eye was captured by Death Eaters, they would have undoubtedly removed the eye, and he may have been unable to retrieve it before escaping. If he wasn't captured, it's still possible that it bounced out when he did hit the ground and he had to quickly flee the scene.

However, the main problem with him being alive is that he never appears again in canon, and Rowling has given no indications that he is still alive. So it's probably safe to assume (like all the characters do) that Mad-Eye dies, but there is no actual proof.

Out-of-Universe, the name of the chapter is Fallen Warrior, and Mad-Eye's death does serve a purpose in setting the tone of the story. These would all indicate that Mad-Eye died, but again not actual proof.

ibid
  • 93,732
  • 37
  • 488
  • 567
  • 1
    Yeah. Overall, I am under the impression that Fleur didn't know if Moody don't really has a wand because they were under attack. And as far as I know, some wizard/witch can produce spell without even a wand, Albus Dumbledore is one of them. Correct me if I'm mistaken. – Invoker Dec 29 '16 at 16:22
  • @BookStriker - Dumbledore is more of an exception than a general rule. – Gallifreyan Dec 29 '16 at 19:09
  • @Gallifreian - http://scifi.stackexchange.com/a/118239/55866 – ibid Dec 29 '16 at 19:28
  • wandless magic can attain great complexity, but Charms and Transfiguration are very difficult without one - IIRC, Harry wasn't even able to summon his wand, which was lying 1 meter away from him. I agree that there's no actual proof though. – Gallifreyan Dec 29 '16 at 19:30
0

I’m starting to think that he may have lived. The main reason is that when Dumbledore died, his freeze jinx that he put Harry (at the top of the tower) broke as soon as he dies. Also, the fact that he was secret keeper got transferred to everyone he had told the secret to. So from that we know that enchantments break when the wizard/witch dies. But the tongue tying jinx and the Dusty Dumbledore both still work when the trio go to #12. It’s possible that Voldemort had Death Eaters patrolling for anyone that was injured/stunned and falling. Then that could save their own people and capture any Order members. It wouldn’t be hard to take Madeyes eye- it was already done in Goblet of Fire and that was only one Death Eater.

Breezy
  • 21
  • 3
    This is highly speculative, do we have any evidence? For example a quote from the book saying that Moody set the enchantments at #12 would help support the idea that since they are not broken, he is not dead. – amflare Jul 19 '18 at 16:59
  • 2
    It's not unknown for an enchantment to outlive the wizard. Think the Sorting Hat, or some cursed object in the Blacks' cupboard. Dumbledore probably never intended for Harry to be frozen for long (we know that his death was by his own plan), while Moody could as well have intended the ghost and tong-tying jinx to outlive him. Good reasoning, but hardly backed by canon information. – Gallifreyan Jul 19 '18 at 19:30
0

In Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, re-read the part where they go to Gringotts to get Hufflepuff's Cup. Just as they arrive in Diagon Alley, there is a description of all these poor wizards kind of begging for money. There's this one description of a guy holding a hand over a bloodied eye-eye socket. As soon as I read this I thought it might have been Mad-Eye.

A number of ragged people sat huddled in doorways. He heard them moaning to the few passersby, pleading for gold, insisting that they were really wizards. One man had a bloody bandage over his eye.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Chapter Twenty-Six "Gringotts"

Steph
  • 1
  • 1
  • 3
    I've edited in the book quote to which you are referring to, however, I think the next passage with this character disproves the theory: "Hermione looked after them curiously, until the man with the bloodied bandage came staggering right across her path. “My children!” he bellowed, pointing at her. His voice was cracked, high-pitched; he sounded distraught. “Where are my children? What has he done with them? You know, you know!”" – TheLethalCarrot Oct 24 '18 at 10:00