Did Melisandre/The Lord of Light actually cause Robb, Joff, and Balon to die?

[ab aeterno]

My last word on this is that I never said that magic couldn't have played a part. All I said is that the most logical argument is that it didn't. Because the explanation works absolutely fine without invoking a magical explanation we can assume that it probably did take place without magic. Could magic have been involved? Of course. I have never said otherwise. As the involvement of magic is unfalsifiable, then the burden of proof is on the person who believes that magic is involved. I don't need to prove that magic wasn't involved. My argument stands without the involvement of magic. If someone believes that magic was involved then it is up to them to prove that.

Mel made mistakes in predicting future events, but suddenly, she was able to predict three deaths? No evidence that magic was involved. Dude, there are literaly no evidence it didn't. Mel said magic worked, but nobody said it didn't.

Simplest solution, is what? Just because someone had interest and wanted to do it, it doesn't mean he will success.

Yes, Roose stick a sword in Robb hearth and wanted him dead. That doesn't mean magic didn't take a part.

The simplest solution is that these people who had the motive, the means and the opportunity to kill the kings and did so of their own accord. If someone else wants to argue that magic made them do it, or made them succeed, they may make that argument, but it is up to them to prove that it did.

Dude, there are literaly no evidence it didn't.

Once again, the burden of proof lies with the believer. As I am arguing that magic probably wasn't involved, I don't need to provide evidence, because my argument rests on precisely the fact that there is no evidence.

There is no evidence that the world wasn't created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. That doesn't mean he didn't play a part in its creation. Just as it is logical to conclude that the world probably wasn't created by the FSM, it is logical to conclude that Mel's magic probably didn't cause or even contribute to their deaths.

[Lady Winter Rose]

You are trying to hide from proving your theory, by making be the 'believer'. You are believer, because you believe something that isn't stated anywhere in the books! Prove it din't take a part, or this is just sad trolling.

I actualy believe that Mel didn't have powers to kill Robb, Balon and Joffrey, I am just telling you that your agruments are bad. Just because people have their free will, that doesn't mean there's no magic in Westeros.

How could I prove magic made some people success? We don't know anything about magic and you want some proves? Your're troling, stop it.

[ab aeterno]

You are trying to hide from proving your theory, by making be the 'believer'. You are believer, because you believe something that isn't stated anywhere in the books! Prove it din't take a part, or this is just sad trolling.

I actualy believe that Mel didn't have powers to kill Robb, Balon and Joffrey, I am just telling you that your agruments are bad. Just because people have their free will, that doesn't mean there's no magic in Westeros.

How could I prove magic made some people success? We don't know anything about magic and you want some proves? Your're troling, stop it.

As I said, my final word on my argument is above. All I am going to do here is to point out that I have not stated a positive belief. All I have pointed out is that logical reasoning suggests that it is acceptable to argue that magic probably didn't play a part. You cannot prove that magic was the cause of their success. That is entirely the point. As it cannot be proven, or even demonstrated that magic is the most likely explanation, then it is logical to say that magic probably wasn't the cause. Any more than that we cannot say. Magic can exist without it necessarily having played a part, and the evidence that it did play a part is purely circumstantial, and is weaker than the evidence that these events would have happened anyway.

To argue that magic is likely to have played a part just because Mel says so is little different from arguing that R'hllor must be responsible for everything that goes on, and that morality is absolute, because Mel says this as well. In fact, as we saw with "Lightbringer," Mel has previously used tricks and deception to advance her cause in the guise of magic, as Aemon seems to have quite convincingly argued that Stannis' sword isn't Lightbringer, as Mel claimed.

Many orthodox people speak as though it were the business of sceptics to disprove received dogmas rather than of dogmatists to prove them. This is, of course, a mistake. If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.

Russel Bertrand.

Apologies to everyone else, I really didn't intend to keep this argument going any longer.

[butterbumps!]

You are trying to hide from proving your theory, by making be the 'believer'. You are believer, because you believe something that isn't stated anywhere in the books! Prove it din't take a part, or this is just sad trolling.

I actualy believe that Mel didn't have powers to kill Robb, Balon and Joffrey, I am just telling you that your agruments are bad. Just because people have their free will, that doesn't mean there's no magic in Westeros.

How could I prove magic made some people success? We don't know anything about magic and you want some proves? Your're troling, stop it.

I don't think Ab is trolling. The significantly more logical and narratively elegant explanation for the deaths of those kings is that they were brought down both by their own actions and the ill-intentions of others.

No one has suggested that there is no magic in Westeros. It's sort of a strawman to make an accusation like that, as. Everyone who has denied Mel's involvement in this particular causation has stated that they believe she does have powers. Just not that the kind of "curse" under debate is within her power, or further, that it doesn't appear magic works this way in Westeros at all.

One way to "prove" that Mel is behind causing or cementing those deaths is to look over descriptions of Mel's magic, combined with passages that detail why he chooses to use magic in different circumstances (like the passage that kissdbyfire wrote), and see if there is a way to extend the magic that we know she has to something like this. Those of us arguing against the causality of this/ "cementing" the deaths are coming from the POV that Mel repeatedly uses "smoke and mirrors" to suggest causalities that are not actually there, as well as tapping into our catalogue of knowledge of the way magic seems to work in Westeros and concluding that this sort of "proxy- cursing" does not seem to produce anything.

[ab aeterno]

<snip>

Yes. Thank you for explaining this better in one post than I have managed over three to four pages.

[Helikzhan]

They don't have to believe that Robb died because he made a mistake though. They need to believe that Roose and the Freys were responsible for Robb's death. I don't think that it is too much of a reach. Blaming Stannis partially absolves Roose and the Freys, and they wouldn't want to do that.

I for one enjoyed this thread and as a big ASOIAF fan, I hope you all welcome me!

Has anyone considered the Roose tie-in with leeching and Melisandre's reach? It is said in the books that Roose is untouchable by age by leeching himself. One has to wonder what connection this had with the leeching in ASOS. Did Roose make a deal with the devil? Immortality for an undying devotion to the cause?

It could be possible that king's blood is used to command and in dark ways used to make dark loyalists do dark things. Roose was close to the Stark king. He was also the most torturous. I don't know how close he'd have to be to be close to Joffrey so perhaps someone else is being influenced by R'hllor? Somebody in King's Landing?

Conversely, someone must have been close enough to the Greyjoy kin to pull that one off. Euron would be the obvious choice to sacrifice his will for immortality.

The only problem tying this together is who in King's Landing would be the agent of R'hillor? There were 3 leeches commanded by King's blood. So it stands to reason there are 3 agents of R'hillor out there. One in King's Landing.

[ab aeterno]

I for one enjoyed this thread and as a big ASOIAF fan, I hope you all welcome me!

Has anyone considered the Roose tie-in with leeching and Melisandre's reach? It is said in the books that Roose is untouchable by age by leeching himself. One has to wonder what connection this had with the leeching in ASOS. Did Roose make a deal with the devil? Immortality for an undying devotion to the cause?

It could be possible that king's blood is used to command and in dark ways used to make dark loyalists do dark things. Roose was close to the Stark king. He was also the most torturous. I don't know how close he'd have to be to be close to Joffrey so perhaps someone else is being influenced by R'hllor? Somebody in King's Landing?

Conversely, someone must have been close enough to the Greyjoy kin to pull that one off. Euron would be the obvious choice to sacrifice his will for immortality.

The only problem tying this together is who in King's Landing would be the agent of R'hillor? There were 3 leeches commanded by King's blood. So it stands to reason there are 3 agents of R'hillor out there. One in King's Landing.

Welcome to the forum!

Ooh, I like this idea. I don't think that they're agents of R'hllor, but the idea that the Boltons might be using a form of blood magic- I believe we are told that historically the Boltons flayed some of the Starks- for their own purposes is an interesting one. As I said, I very much doubt that any of them are agents of R'hllor, because their behavior and beliefs seem to be starkly different from any of the open practitioners of Red God-ism, and I'm more inclined to believe the theories that state that Euron hired a faceless man, but I do like the Bolton idea. I'm not sure that it's for immortality, but the question of what exactly Roose might be doing with his leeches is a good one.

NB: I realize that I said I liked this and then disagreed with most of it, but I very much liked the implicit question that it raised.

[Helikzhan]

Welcome to the forum!

Ooh, I like this idea. I don't think that they're agents of R'hllor, but the idea that the Boltons might be using a form of blood magic- I believe we are told that historically the Boltons flayed some of the Starks- for their own purposes is an interesting one. As I said, I very much doubt that any of them are agents of R'hllor, because their behavior and beliefs seem to be starkly different from any of the open practitioners of Red God-ism, and I'm more inclined to believe the theories that state that Euron hired a faceless man, but I do like the Bolton idea. I'm not sure that it's for immortality, but the question of what exactly Roose might be doing with his leeches is a good one.

Agent might have been a bad way to put it. A thrall perhaps?

Maybe he was tricked at once to do something for someone? The Westeros people don't genuinely trust much of anything particularly that which comes from outside of Westeros. Melisandre is clearly using Stannis for her own gains. Maybe she or one like her used Roose too at some point?

This would all make sense if we could pin the third thrall down in King's Landing. No idea who it'd be though.

[ab aeterno]

Agent might have been a bad way to put it. A thrall perhaps?

Maybe he was tricked at once to do something for someone? The Westeros people don't genuinely trust much of anything particularly that which comes from outside of Westeros. Melisandre is clearly using Stannis for her own gains. Maybe she or one like her used Roose too at some point?

This would all make sense if we could pin the third thrall down in King's Landing. No idea who it'd be though.

I think that it is possible, but I would argue that it is unlikely and has little support from the text. On the forums we call that sort of idea a "Crackpot," (no negative connotations, necessarily,) but I would suggest that you start a new topic on it. Something along the lines of "Crackpot: Roose, Stannis and others thralls of the Red Priests?"

[kissdbyfire]

I think all the creepy stuff regarding the Boltons - Roose's leechings, his and Ramsay's weird eyes, the flaying, Ramsay hunting women in the woods - goes all the way back to the Dawn Age/Long Night/WWs. :uhoh:

[kissdbyfire]

Agent might have been a bad way to put it. A thrall perhaps?

Maybe he was tricked at once to do something for someone? The Westeros people don't genuinely trust much of anything particularly that which comes from outside of Westeros. Melisandre is clearly using Stannis for her own gains. Maybe she or one like her used Roose too at some point?

This would all make sense if we could pin the third thrall down in King's Landing. No idea who it'd be though.

Actually, Mel believes Stannis is 'R'hllor's chosen one', as we see in ADwD:

The red priestess closed her eyes and said a prayer, then opened them once more to face the hearthfire. One more time. She had to be certain. Many a priest and priestess before her had been brought down by false visions, by seeing what they wished to see instead of what the Lord of Light had sent. Stannis was marching south into peril, the king who carried the fate of the world upon his shoulders, Azor Ahai reborn. Surely R’hllor would vouchsafe her a glimpse of what awaited him. Show me Stannis, Lord, she prayed. Show me your king, your instrument.

[ab aeterno]

I think all the creepy stuff regarding the Boltons - Roose's leechings, his and Ramsay's weird eyes, the flaying, Ramsay hunting women in the woods - goes all the way back to the Dawn Age/Long Night/WWs. :uhoh:

Oh I definitely agree with this too. Partly it serves to make them more sinister. I do wonder whether there is some greater reason behind some of this stuff though. It may just be however that the flaying is effective and the leeches help keep Roose looking gaunt, or that he thinks they'll keep him healthy. Or maybe he likes that it makes him seem creepier and more intimidating.

[Helikzhan]

I think that it is possible, but I would argue that it is unlikely and has little support from the text. On the forums we call that sort of idea a "Crackpot," (no negative connotations, necessarily,) but I would suggest that you start a new topic on it. Something along the lines of "Crackpot: Roose, Stannis and others thralls of the Red Priests?"

You're right. It would have to come from left field. Just something that occurred to me while reading this thread.

Thanks for the welcome!

[Associate Maester]

Okay, this is my first topic. I doubt it'll have a canon answer, but I'm just curious on what the amazing asoiaf fanbase thinks.

Forgive me if I omit some of the details, I'm lending a friend the books right now.

In ASoS, Melisandre takes leeches with Edric Storn's blood in them (At least, that's what Davos thinks) and tells Stannis to throw them into a fire, while uttering the usurper's names ( Robb Stark, Balon Grejoy, and Joffrey Baratheon). Melisandre states that the three false kings will die, and they do. Joff is poisoned by the Tyrells and LF, Robb is killed at the RW, and Balon falls( or is pushed, if you prefer) and dies. We've seen Melisandre's power before, many times, and I think everyone can agree that The Lord of Light is likely real.

I personally don't think it was coincidence, but I'm eager to see what you all think. :cool4:

Melisandre has some potent magic, however I don't think she had a hand at all in the deaths of: Balon, Robb, and Joffrey. It isn't even consistent with times we've seen her working her magic. She saw the deaths in her flames and did the ritual as said smoke and mirrors to convince Stannis to try the surer path of burning Edric. She left herself some wiggle room. Her line about more kings rising doesn't even require magic--just a basic understanding of how power works when a realm is in chaos (ie. more people make grabs for power). And as we learn from her chapter in Dance, Mel knows about power and it's trappings and it's illusions.

[Lion of Judah]

I would love to say she didn't but when Davos spoke against her and said to Stannis 2 is not 3. Then Joff dies bringing the total to 3, that creeped me the hell out! She does see things in the fire and it could very well be that she played it so that Stannis would see her as more valuable. I don't think she directly caused the wind to blow Balon off the bridge or any of the events that led to Robb's demise etc. But what Stannis doesn't know can't hurt her cause whatever it may be.

[The Other Others]

It wouldn't have directly caused it but possibily started a chain of events that did?

[Helikzhan]

I would love to say she didn't but when Davos spoke against her and said to Stannis 2 is not 3. Then Joff dies bringing the total to 3, that creeped me the hell out! She does see things in the fire and it could very well be that she played it so that Stannis would see her as more valuable. I don't think she directly caused the wind to blow Balon off the bridge or any of the events that led to Robb's demise etc. But what Stannis doesn't know can't hurt her cause whatever it may be.

What I find to be indisputable is how Melisandre's hand is played. She doesn't kill anybody. She inspires the killing blow and makes such things accessible and possible.

Take for example the shadow fiend. That was Stannis. She was his concubine, his facilitator but nonetheless it was by his hand ultimately. The three would simply have been killed by Stannis as well via his concubine and (theoretically, crackpot?) her thralls. Kings blood does the bidding of the King.

[The Frosted King]

I honestly think so.

Think of it like this....If you give Melly the credit for the ability to read the flames so as to accurately predict the deaths of 3 of the kings, why would you not place her power in the realm of being the spur?

She can see the future......but she can't offer kingsblood to affect it, even though we know that blood magic is very real, since it birthed dragons back into the world?

i'm willing to put the deaths at her door, which makes the hesitation Stannis showed when looking at the last leech so very disheartening.

I see Stannis and his family dying in the north. And maybe, if he hadn't caused Robbs death in the first place, he wouldn't have had to try to heal his realm at all.

[Dr. Pepper]

I honestly think so.

Think of it like this....If you give Melly the credit for the ability to read the flames so as to accurately predict the deaths of 3 of the kings, why would you not place her power in the realm of being the spur?

She can see the future......but she can't offer kingsblood to affect it, even though we know that blood magic is very real, since it birthed dragons back into the world?

i'm willing to put the deaths at her door, which makes the hesitation Stannis showed when looking at the last leech so very disheartening.

I see Stannis and his family dying in the north. And maybe, if he hadn't caused Robbs death in the first place, he wouldn't have had to try to heal his realm at all.

Reading flames and controlling the wills of individuals (or weather) are very different things. She would have needed to control the will of at least a dozen different people in order to spur on the deaths of the three kings. Later she claimed that her power, along with burning Axel Florent, altered the weather in their favor for their trip to the wall. That's a lot of power, almost total and absolute power. The problem with this is she's now at the wall where she claims that everything she does (which she also notes is 'smokes and mirrors', i.e. just awesome displays instead of actual god-like power) is more powerful. This would mean that she could logically accomplish much more than controlling the wills of a dozen individuals to kill a few people. She could decimate the entire power structure of Westeros or, even better, just mind control them all to convert to the Red God and get on board with her plan.

But she isn't doing this. Despite having quite a few people at the wall with verified king's blood. There was Aemon and Sam, Stannis, Selyse, Shireen, Mance and his baby, Jon, Gerrick Kingsblood and his three daughters. A tiny bit of interrogation could lead her to discover just how many others have even a drop of king's blood in their veins (then we get to the obvious where king's blood isn't all that special since generations of intermarriage would have given nearly everyone at least a drop). But she doesn't do anything. She doesn't burn anyone else in order to offer Stannis fair weather on his mission nor does she toss a couple bloody leeches on the flames to aid in his quest of gathering support for his cause.

Melisandre can certainly affect the will of others via the typical means; powers of persuasion. But she hasn't proven to be an omniscient god who can control the will of others via magical smoke and mirrors. This isn't to say that she doesn't have power. She's proven that she is well-versed in the arts of magic. She's a proven shadowbinder, can make flames pretty colors, can light up a sword, can read flames (though rarely with any sort of helpful accuracy), can glamour, etc. These things make her a magician, not a god.

At this point, Varamyr Six-Skins and Bran are more godlike than she is because they have altered the minds and wills of actual people when they attempted, successfull or otherwise, into people or animals that skinchangers were living their second lives in.

[The Frosted King]

Reading flames and controlling the wills of individuals (or weather) are very different things. She would have needed to control the will of at least a dozen different people in order to spur on the deaths of the three kings. Later she claimed that her power, along with burning Axel Florent, altered the weather in their favor for their trip to the wall. That's a lot of power, almost total and absolute power. The problem with this is she's now at the wall where she claims that everything she does (which she also notes is 'smokes and mirrors', i.e. just awesome displays instead of actual god-like power) is more powerful. This would mean that she could logically accomplish much more than controlling the wills of a dozen individuals to kill a few people. She could decimate the entire power structure of Westeros or, even better, just mind control them all to convert to the Red God and get on board with her plan.

But she isn't doing this. Despite having quite a few people at the wall with verified king's blood. There was Aemon and Sam, Stannis, Selyse, Shireen, Mance and his baby, Jon, Gerrick Kingsblood and his three daughters. A tiny bit of interrogation could lead her to discover just how many others have even a drop of king's blood in their veins (then we get to the obvious where king's blood isn't all that special since generations of intermarriage would have given nearly everyone at least a drop). But she doesn't do anything. She doesn't burn anyone else in order to offer Stannis fair weather on his mission nor does she toss a couple bloody leeches on the flames to aid in his quest of gathering support for his cause.

Melisandre can certainly affect the will of others via the typical means; powers of persuasion. But she hasn't proven to be an omniscient god who can control the will of others via magical smoke and mirrors. This isn't to say that she doesn't have power. She's proven that she is well-versed in the arts of magic. She's a proven shadowbinder, can make flames pretty colors, can light up a sword, can read flames (though rarely with any sort of helpful accuracy), can glamour, etc. These things make her a magician, not a god.

At this point, Varamyr Six-Skins and Bran are more godlike than she is because they have altered the minds and wills of actual people when they attempted, successfull or otherwise, into people or animals that skinchangers were living their second lives in.

She's not doing it though. Her god is doing it, because she made the proper offerings(kings blood) and asked him to.