Isn't it Unicorn tail hair that is used in wands, as opposed to from anywhere on the body? Given they are like horses, no one hair would be long enough to comprise a wand core unless from the tail, surely? I don't have my books on me at the moment, but if someone would be kind enough to look it up I'd appreciate the help x The General 18:06, May 23, 2011 (UTC)
- Answer 1: The wizarding world, much like the Muggle world, undergoes inflation. This is confirmed in Quidditch Through the Ages. Therefore, it is possible that while a wand only costs 7 Galleons in 1991, by the time of 1996-1997, they've increased in price enough so that even the unicorn hair costs 10. For this to be true, though, one must ignore Pottermore.
- Answer 2: It would be rather unfair of Ollivander to not charge a flat fee for wands, not matter what they are made of. After all, is it your fault if you're chosen by a wand more expensive than you can afford? I can imagine Ollivander to be the kind of person to take that sort of personal loss for the sake of matching up wand and wizard.
- Answer 3: Horace was drunk and couldn't accurately remember what the price of unicorn hair was.
| This discussion is listed as an Active Talk Page.|
Please remove this template when the question has been answered.
Pottermore confirms that the hair used in wandmaking and bandaging is tail hair (see here), which makes, in my opinion, having both this page and unicorn tail hair redundant. -- 1337star (Drop me a line!) 00:37, September 3, 2013 (UTC)