Robb did not kinslay

[Stannis's Lawyer]

I'm tired of this "Robb killed Rickard Karstark, so he's a kinslayer!" bullshit.

Alys Karstark wed Lord Brandon Stark, who was Lord Beron Stark's father, who was Lord Willam Stark's father, who was Lord Edwyle Stark's father, who was Lord Rickard Stark's father, who was Ned's father, who was Robb's father. So Rickard Karstark and Robb Stark share a common ancestor who lived approximately seven generations ago.

By that logic, if Robb killed Tytos Blackwood, would it be kinslaying? If Ned executed Lord Locke, would it be kinslaying? If Brandon killed Yohn Royce while jousting, would it be kinslaying? If Jon Snow slew the Flint, would he be a kinslayer? If Rhaegar executed Jon Arryn, would he be a kinslayer? If Stannis executed Aurane Waters, would he be a kinslayer too? (Stannis is a descendant of Daenaera Velaryon)

And Karstark himself says that his "kinslaying" claim derives from Karlon Stark. So, it is apparently kinslaying if you shared a common ancestor approximately 30 generations ago. So if Garlan Tyrell kills Axell Florent, would it be kinslaying?

You might say that the surname is what matters. But the Karstarks have changed their names, their sigils, their words. What makes Rickard Karstark any more Stark than i.e. Jory Cassel? (Cassels might be descendants of Stark bastards)

And why has absolutely nobody called Robb a kinslayer? If kinslayers are cursed by the Old Gods and the Seven, shouldn't lords, frightened of divine wrath, be defecting by the tens of thousands?

Robb is not a kinslayer. That's a fact.

[In A Coat of Gold]

but he is an oathbreaker.

[Stannis's Lawyer]

but he is an oathbreaker.

He's still not a kinslayer.

[Kienn]

Really don't see people saying this much other than Karstark during his execution, so why are you tired of it?

[Gibzit]

oathbreaker is just as bad

[Stannis's Lawyer]

Really don't see people saying this much other than Karstark during his execution, so why are you tired of it?

I mean posters.

[Lharys]

I've only really heard Rickard Karstark himself call Robb a kinslayer but that was probably an attempt to dissuade him from executing him or to make him feel guilty for doing it. In the end, it becomes a semantic-centered argument about kin. In theory, aren't we all related?

[Modelex]

It is a degree of kinslaying, just a very minor one

We can't judge it, the gods do. I would argue that given subsequent events that they did

[aryagonnakill#2]

I never see people get at Robb for this, I call him a moron for it, but not because of kinslaying, because it was moronic.

[Stannis's Lawyer]

I never see people get at Robb for this, I call him a moron for it, but not because of kinslaying, because it was moronic.

Have you read the "In defense of Rickard Karstark" thread?

[aryagonnakill#2]

I didn't bother, the concept seemed stupid, might as well call it "in defense of child murdering".

[James Steller]

Yeah I don't care how many Karstark men deserted Robb for executing Rickard, Robb did the right thing. If they're going to stay loyal to a murderer of children who are also helpless hostages in a war they didn't start, then they can suffer the same fate as the Bolton men will hopefully meet.

[Gibzit]

it dosen't matter what was right to do, it matters what wasen't hopelessly stupid to do, robb's bannermen were allready pissed because he married a westerling, he didn't need a nail in the coffin

[aryagonnakill#2]

I don't see how imprisonment until the war is over and then allowing him to take the black is so bad, I thought everyone got to take the black.

[Minstral]

Perhaps Karstark truly believed the tale he told about Karstark being kin to the main branch. Alys says something similar about both houses being one to Jon. It doesn't really matter in the end. A thousand years of separation from the main branch and several generations that the houses have not married into one another (correct me if I am wrong on the last one) is a bloody huge gap.

oathbreaker is just as bad

Also bollocks. Oaths are kept when they are convenient and broken when convenient in this setting and real life. When chivalric ideals or oaths were broken during the middle ages by royalty or powerful nobility they were more often swept under the rug. During the hundred years war a French king (don't ask me for the name I don't remember right now) negotiated a truce with his son kept as a hostage for a certain time by the English, which the son swore he would uphold. Instead the son escaped and broke his word. What his father did was place himself, the king of France, in captivity for the breaking of the "honorable" oath that was broken by his son. But by doing so he made everyone of the time scratch his head because it was considered absurd.

[Gibzit]

well there is this rule in fuedal society that is fucking key to making it work that states that the liege lord must protect his bannermen, if he dosen't do this than he will find that they probably won't be so loyal to him which is exactly what happend to robb, anyway my point is that robb was stupid when he decided to kill karstark, no matter how "just" or "honorable" robb was

[Minstral]

well there is this rule in fuedal society that is fucking key to making it work that states that the liege lord must protect his bannermen, if he dosen't do this than he will find that they probably won't be so loyal to him which is exactly what happend to robb, anyway my point is that robb was stupid when he decided to kill karstark, no matter how "just" or "honorable" robb was

Which Karstark violated first by murdering those that were under Robb's protection. Ergo guilty, ergo Karstark is in violation of breaking said contract first. It is a situation where no matter what Robb does he ends up losing. He either reacts to Karstark in some fashion or he allows it to go unpunished. He loses support either way of the Karstark contingent, Rickard had already ordered his men to abandon Robb's army before he committed murder.

If he is pardoned then Robb's authority means nothing over his vassals and he still loses the cavalry that Rickard brought, but maybe he could keep his son in line further down the road. Executing the man reinforces his authority of those who remain at the risk of creating an enemy in Harrion.

Edit: We may have gone off topic a little. Either way, oath breaking and kin slaying are not equal examples.

[Lion of the West]

I agree that Robb didn't kinslay. The link of blood was far to weak to matter at that time.

[Universal Sword Donor]

No one called Robert a kinslayer for killing Rhaegar, and they were 2nd cousins.

What Robb did was stupid but not kinslaying.

[Ferocious Veldt Roarer]

Of course he wasn't. They were something like 50th cousins. There's a pretty good chance you and I are as closely related as Rickard and Robb were. Pretty much nobody takes the accusation seriously. That was, simply, Lord Rickard's literally last chance in life to be a dick, and he took it.