In Defense of Rickard Karstark

[Archmaester Drew]

The Wall is always and option. Even Tyrion was considered for the Wall after his trial for regicide/kinslaying! ;)

Good point! ;)

[Ferocious Veldt Roarer]

She committed high treason and she deserved punishment. I can't believe we are actually discussing this.

No one said that he had to kill her, just that the two traitors should had the same punishment. If he wanted to let Cat free he should had done the same to Rickard too, if he wanted her to be a honored guest to Seagard he should had done the same to Rickard too. His idiocy to believe that he and his family were above all laws and social norms is what got him killed the moment he decided that he could do everything he wanted and no one would ever say anything.

If it was "idiocy", if it was a mistake, then surely there are people in-universe considering it so. But I cannot recall any, save for Rickard Karstark himself, and the old man was somewhat grumpy on the account of his pending execution. Does anybody in-universe begrudge Robb the leniency he showed his mother? Does anybody consider it wrong?

[David Selig]

1) Traitors have always paid with their lives

2) There are no gradations of treason (all these peole are guilty of crimes ranging from rebelling to simply sleeping with the King's mistress). Treason is an all or nothing event; once an action reaches a treason threshold it is met with death

3) In the eyes of the law, familial connections are not considered when assessing treason and meting out the appropriate punishment

That's funny since Stannis committed treason in Robert's rebellion himself and nobody punished him. Shocking, right? Hell, pretty much every lord in the realm committed treason in the War of the Five Kings and Robert's rebellion. The vast majority weren't executed for it. Fancy that.

Lords and kings pardon treason all the time. Hell, Stannis did it himself in this same chapter when Renly's lords joined him. There is no law that treason should be punished the same. Sometimes it's pardoned, sometimes lords lose part of their lands, sometimes they are imprisoned, etc.

[Leonardo]

Tractations for the RW (Tywin writing letters, Roose betraying Robb) were in place before Tywin knows Jaime is freed.

Tyrion also realizes in late AGoT that Tywin has kinda given up on Jaime. And Tyrion knows his father like no one else in the books.

You also missed the part where Cat was to be taken alive. They ended up killing her because she went mad, and they didn't need her anyway because Jaime was freed. The plan was to exchange her for Jaime.

Plus, almost none of Robb's bannermen consider what Catelyn did treason, and we never hear anyone (but Karstark, of course) complain about double standards. Robb's bannermen going against his order and murdering children in cold blood, is not the same as Robb's grief-stricken mother doing something stupid out of sheer desperation to get her own children back, and everyone knows it. I'd actually be appalled if Robb treated his friggin mother like he treated Karstark.

Wars won with quills and ravens is in ASOS, so no, most of the work to plan the RW is not in place yet. The Freys were bleeding and dying for Robbie in the west, its not until he comes back with his bride that Frey turns. Bolton is a different story entirely and only one of his banner men

Its not that we want Cat punished, but its a fuckin war for their lives at this point, they needed the karstarks, and beheading him lost them.

[Modelex]

LOL, we are... You are so lenient when it comes to forgiving child murderers, that it comes so normal for you to equalize what Cat and Rickard did. I am sorry, but I kinda find special place for child murderers.

Child murderer is not what Catelyn did. I am sorry, but I am appalled by the fact that anyone can actually equalize what Cat did and what Rickard did. I suppose you also believe that Ned got what he deserved for not bringing Jon so Robert could have killed him. Oh, sorry, I forgot, you love Jon and that changes everything.

Basically, for you, all the children are expendable as long as they are not Jon Snow. I, however, have rather different view on that.

Again the mistake here is that you are introducing gradations of treason when there are none present in the text. Treason is treason, there is no okay treason, terrible treason, so horrible you cant even mention it treason etc. You might think that different treasonous actions are morally different (and that is a different discussion altogether) but in the eyes of the law, they are not. So Catelyn and Karstark are legally equivalent that is the point here

Robb's actions with regards to Catelyn were not just or lawful, they were nepotic. That's it

[Modelex]

That's funny since Stannis committed treason in Robert's rebellion himself and nobody punished him. Shocking, right? Hell, pretty much every lord in the realm committed treason in the War of the Five Kings and Robert's rebellion. The vast majority weren't executed for it. Fancy that.

Lords and kings pardon treason all the time. Hell, Stannis did it himself in this same chapter when Renly's lords joined him. There is no law that treason should be punished the same. Sometimes it's pardoned, sometimes lords lose part of their lands, sometimes they are imprisoned, etc.

Yes, the law is not followed to the letter all the time. So if we are opening up the discussion to pardoning traitors (and not going through with execution) I think a case can be made for pardoning Karstark. The idea that his execution was 100% earned is something I disagree with, and I think it was a mistake

[Mladen]

Again the mistake here is that you are introducing gradations of treason when there are none present in the text. Treason is treason, there is no okay treason, terrible treason, so horrible you cant even mention it treason etc. You might think that different treasonous actions are morally different (and that is a different discussion altogether) but in the eyes of the law, they are not. So Catelyn and Karstark are legally equivalent that is the point here

Robb's actions with regards to Catelyn were not just or lawful, they were nepotic. That's it

The mistake here is that you consider it treason, but not Robb. Treason is treason, when King says is treason. How many things were wrongfully named treason? So, no... What Cat did wasn't a treason, and not only that Robb didn't see it that way, none of his lords did. With exception of Karstark who always wanted something he could have never had - vengeance.

[David Selig]

Yes, the law is not followed to the letter all the time.

The law is basically "What the king says". I don't think Westeros even has written laws, only customs and traditions. So if the king says one treason is less terrible than another, that's how it goes. Even Stannis does it all the time.

[Universal Sword Donor]

Tractations for the RW (Tywin writing letters, Roose betraying Robb) were in place before Tywin knows Jaime is freed.

Tyrion also realizes in late AGoT that Tywin has kinda given up on Jaime. And Tyrion knows his father like no one else in the books.

You also missed the part where Cat was to be taken alive. They ended up killing her because she went mad, and they didn't need her anyway because Jaime was freed. The plan was to exchange her for Jaime.

Plus, almost none of Robb's bannermen consider what Catelyn did treason, and we never hear anyone (but Karstark, of course) complain about double standards. Robb's bannermen going against his order and murdering children in cold blood, is not the same as Robb's grief-stricken mother doing something stupid out of sheer desperation to get her own children back, and everyone knows it. I'd actually be appalled if Robb treated his friggin mother like he treated Karstark.

“I did,” Catelyn said firmly. “I understood what I was doing and knew it was treasonous.”

But yeah, the bannermen, for the most part, don't seem to have considered it treason or at least considered it worth mentioning out loud. Glover and Mallister, friends of hers and Ned, were 'notably cool.' Bracken was really pissed off. Edmure basically says "I pray for your girls, but that was a *stupid* thing to do." Only Greatjon and Maege don't seem to mind.

[Chaircat Meow]

Meh.

Karstark murdered the king's prisoners and some of his soldiers. Maybe in some ages of our world in 'feudal time' that wouldn't have been worth a death sentence but it was here apparently. Losing the Karstarks didn't set Robb back in the end and Lord Rickard was clearly going out of control. Robb obviously couldn't give Cat the same punishment as lord Rickard, as she's his mother. I suppose he could have had her arrested like he did in the show. I don't blame him for not bothering; I don't think his attitude to the Karstark business was responsible for his downfall.

[Blow My Horn]

Karstark was killed for his actions in the attempt on Jaime's life not for wanting him dead. The death sentence was very Stark-like. But Rickard has no place to demand Jaime's death. His sons were killed at war not in the dead of night while they slept. Want to blame someone? Blame yourself for not planning ahead Rickard.

Kings are hypocrites, it's what they do. And unless there is some ulterior motive they always favor family. IMO this is why no one questions Robb's decision vis a vis his mother. They crowned him KotN and as such this is no surprise, especially from a Young Wolf.

[Ferocious Veldt Roarer]

Robb's actions with regards to Catelyn were not just or lawful, they were nepotic. That's it

Guess what: that's how it's supposed to work. Blood ties are the foundation of the entire system. That's how rulers are picked, that's how appointments are made, that's how alliances are forged. You accuse a feudal prince of nepotism? It's like accusing an actor of impersonating someone he's not, or blaming a stripper for immodesty. They're expected to do that.

[Archmaester Drew]

Robb should not have beheaded either of them. He should have sent Rickard to the Wall. Period.

[thelittledragonthatcould]

Losing the Karstarks didn't set Robb back in the end

It did. The 3,500 with Roose at the Red Wedding had a contingent of Karstark men. Had those Karstark men stayed loyal to Robb, maybe Roose would have had second thoughts about betraying the Starks.

[Jasta11]

Yes, the law is not followed to the letter all the time. So if we are opening up the discussion to pardoning traitors (and not going through with execution) I think a case can be made for pardoning Karstark. The idea that his execution was 100% earned is something I disagree with, and I think it was a mistake

Whenever Karstark had to die is another discussion. Robb wanted to send a message about his honor, and IMO it wasn't the best idea. Putting him in the dungeons or sending him to the Wall was a better idea.

And anyway, as David Selig puts it, ''the law'' is whatever the King says it is at the time. If Robb doesn't consider what Cat did treason, then it's not treason and he is under no obligation to punish her.

[Buried Treasure]

One difference is that Cat wanted forgiveness from Robb and Karstark was looking for none. If we set aside the vast difference in their level of crime and treat them both as guilty, it's still common enough to only grant the mercy of a pardon in the face of true repentance.

Karstark knew full well that the Nights Watch existed, so he could have cried mercy and ask to be sent there. Perhaps Robb might have even considered granting that as he would have then had the option of being merciful rather than using the NW as a way to avoid a hard choice. Karstark was stubborn in his grief and I am sure if he had been offered the NW he would have just spat back in Robb's face that it was proof he was too soft.

[Acnologia Targaryen]

Cat got fortunate because she is closer kin if you ask me. I mean come on killing his mom everyone would have labeled him as a kin slayer and not even people like tywin and roose want that tag (it tells you something), robb being a stark isn't gonna want that tag following. Especially since he was their 1st king in 300 years.

Still it was a double edged sword just like him breaking his vow and it all bit him in the bum. Still Karstrak went out like a G though "kill me and be cursed, you are no king of mine" those are some epic ass last words. To be fair to robb too i mean come on his sons were killed on the battle field so Karstark complaining was annoying, but hey revenge is not a clear path. Even devan wanted revenge for his dad and he also was killed on the field.

[SeanF]

Yes, the law is not followed to the letter all the time. So if we are opening up the discussion to pardoning traitors (and not going through with execution) I think a case can be made for pardoning Karstark. The idea that his execution was 100% earned is something I disagree with, and I think it was a mistake

Karstark murdered prisoners, and Ser Edmure Tully's men. He sent his men to ravage the Riverlands. He was therefore guilty of murder and mutiny, in addition to treason. Execution was the appropriate punishment for his behaviour. He was lucky to be beheaded, rather than hanged.

[Robb_Warged]

I love all this hating on Robb's leadership ability when he has contemporaries including the likes of Dany, Jon, Joffrey, Cersei, Stannis, etc

[SeanF]

I did, Catelyn said firmly. I understood what I was doing and knew it was treasonous.

But yeah, the bannermen, for the most part, don't seem to have considered it treason or at least considered it worth mentioning out loud. Glover and Mallister, friends of hers and Ned, were 'notably cool.' Bracken was really pissed off. Edmure basically says "I pray for your girls, but that was a *stupid* thing to do." Only Greatjon and Maege don't seem to mind.

Catelyn's POV makes clear that she knew she could be hanged for what she had done, because of anger amongst Robb's Bannermen. She certainly did commit treason, albeit with strong mitigating factors in her favour. Most of the Bannermen seemed to think it understandable that a grieving mother would act as she did.