Join Empire or Stormcloaks? My Thoughts

[Elimc]

@Lachdonin

 

Igmund was Jarl during the Markarth Incident, because his father was killed in the uprising. Ulfric was not Jarl until he was released from prison AFTER the Markarth incident. Some of the prisoners might not even know that Ulfric became Jarl, because they have been stuck in prison since before that happened. When they refer to someone as the Jarl, we can assume it was the person who was Jarl at the time, not a person who became Jarl 15 or so years later. And since the prisoners have no reason to be biased against Ulfric or the Empire, we can assume they are telling the truth. We cannot, however, assume that an imperial scholar(probably biased) who got his information from the FORSWORN(Probably the most biased source he could find) is telling the truth. And if Igmund told Ulfric that somebody was with the Forsworn and needed to be imprisoned, why would Ulfric disbelieve him. Ulfric might have thought that the prisoners were actually guilty. Igmund might have imprisoned them and only exececuted them after Ulfric was arrested. Or Ulfric might have had full knowledge and just had them killed anyway. We don't know. Also the Forsworn could just move if they wanted to govern themselves, and the worship of their gods requires innocent people to be sacrificed, so you really cannot blame Ulfric for stopping that.

[Lachdonin]

Also the Forsworn could just move if they wanted to govern themselves,

I... I... I can't believe you just said that. They should have to give up their homeland, admit defeat by INVADERS and move (to where exactly? It's not like there's much unclaimed territory in Tamriel) and just saunter off? Piss! Double piss! Why doesn't Ulfric and his band of hipocrits just move if they want to

Talos?

 

You are correct about Igmund though (I was thinking Torygg's father for some reason) but you still have Tue same problems, compounded by the fact that no source, anywhere, absolves Ulfric of the claims made in the Bear of Markarth. Some of the eye witnesses use ambitious terms, but no one anywhere contradicts the book.

[Elimc]

@Lachdonin

 

The book says the Markarth Incident took place five years from when it actually did. It also makes many claims that are not validated by anyone. Don't you think the people in Cidhia mine would remember if Ulfric started torturing and killing everybody in sight. If that were true, then Braig or Madanach would probably have included it in their speeches. And the Nords have ruled the Reach since the first era. The Reachmen should have either settled down or moved back to High Rock. I would understand if Ulfric had just taken the Reach, but the Reach has been a part of Skyrim for more than a thousand years. The Nords are hardly invaders after all this time.

Edited April 5, 2015 by Elimc

[MidbossVyers]

The Markarth incident happened in 4E176. The events of Skyrim the game happen in 4E201. And Braig’s daughter would be 23 according to him today if she was still alive. So, that means she was killed after 4E178. Two years after Ulfric was arrested, which is what the Markarth Incident was about. Religious freedom regarding Talos and religious freedom of the Forsworn is slightly different, given that Forsworn religion actually requires bloody sacrifices and the like.

[Lachdonin]

@Lachdonin

 

The book says the Markarth Incident took place five years from when it actually did

 

It most certianly does not. 4E174-176. That matches up with everything else we know about the Reachman uprising and the Markarth Incedent.

 

 

Don't you think the people in Cidhia mine would remember if Ulfric started torturing and killing everybody in sight. If that were true, then Braig or Madanach would probably have included it in their speeches.

 

You'd also think they would have made note of the claims that the Nords offered a peace agreement. Instead, all that's mention is swift retribution, which coincides more with The Bear of Markarth's explanation of the events.

 

In fact, Braig's the only one who even mentions a Jarl, and his story has some discrepancies which indicate he may not have been part of the uprising at all, but the victim of later culls through the Hold. All Madanach says is Thonar 'saved' him.

 

 

The Reachmen should have either settled down or moved back to High Rock. I would understand if Ulfric had just taken the Reach, but the Reach has been a part of Skyrim for more than a thousand years. The Nords are hardly invaders after all this time.

 

The Reachmen ruled the Reach between about 1E700, to 1E1030 (or there abouts) and remained hostile to Alessian occupation throughout. They likely reasserted independance during the collapse of the Alessian Empire around 1E2300 (2331 saw the Colovian Estates succeed from the Empire, which would have isolated the Reach from Alessian authority) and was reconqured by Reman sometime between 1E2700 and 1E2767, and the Reach is divided between Skyrim and Highrock by the Remans. the Reachmen NEVER acknowledge this and keep fighting.

 

By 2E582 the region is once again an independent kingdom ruled by the Reachmen, and of sufficient power that they actually managed to claim the Imperial City for several years under the Longhouse Emperors, which shows the existence of independent Reach rule lasting several decades (from at least 2E541 to 2E573).

 

Sometime following the Alliance War, Skyrim captures the Reach, though conflict with the Reachmen remains ongoing at least into the latter 3rd Era.

 

The Reachmen have far more call to independence than the Nords do, as they have actively worked towards it, under EVERY Empire, for 2000 years.

 

 

Religious freedom regarding Talos and religious freedom of the Forsworn is slightly different, given that Forsworn religion actually requires bloody sacrifices and the like.

 

Is it? In a world where human sacrifice has been used by the Divine Temples (it was particularly common under the Alessians) religiously sanctioned prostitution is relatively common and even cannibalism is accepted (under some specific circumstances, for Bosmer) where's the line saying the Foresworn are wrong? The only reason their faith is outlawed is because they worship the Daedra rather than the 8 and 1.

[Elimc]

@Lachdonin

 

Braig states that his daughter was killed in the persecution and would be 23 this year (201 4E), setting the date of her birth in 178 4E, which is two years after the arrest of Ulfric Stormcloak, making it impossible for Ulfric to be behind the persecution of the Forsworn. So either the book is wrong, or Igmund waited until after Ulfric was arrested to start killing the Reachmen. I think the first is much more likely, but the second is still possible.

 

 

I don't see what your second point is trying to prove. We know Igmund was overzealous in hunting down Forsworn, but none of the Forsworn even mention Ulfric ONCE. They never talk about wanting revenge on him. The only thing they say is that Igmund started executing anyone who had anything to do with the Forsworn.

 

On your third point, the Nords have still ruled the Reach for a thousand years(or therebouts), which makes it just as much their home as it is the Forsworn's. Before Madanach started the uprising, the Nords and Reachmen had been living peacefully, and most of the Reachmen are still living in Markarth now.(And I know there are many more Forsworn than Reachmen in the game, but that is just a game mechanic of needing more enemies than friends.) So even though the Forsworn have a claim to the Reach, the Nords have one too, backed by the fact that they have ruled it for a thousand years.

 

For number four, neither the Alessian empire(which was before Talos existed) nor the Bosmer have anything to do with the Nordic worship of Talos, when in the game do you find Nords sacrificing people at shrines of Talos? Never. Also, there is a shrine to Azura near Winterhold, do you ever see Ulfric going up there to kill the priestess? No. There is no persecution of those who worship the "good" Daedra in the game. No where do Ulfric or the Stormcloacks or anyone sacrifice anyone else to Talos. I don't see how you can defend the Forsworn killing innocents no matter what reasons they have.

Edited April 6, 2015 by Elimc

[kimmera]

@Lachdonin

 

Braig states that his daughter was killed in the persecution and would be 23 this year (201 4E), setting the date of her birth in 178 4E, which is two years after the arrest of Ulfric Stormcloak, making it impossible for Ulfric to be behind the persecution of the Forsworn. So either the book is wrong, or Igmund waited until after Ulfric was arrested to start killing the Reachmen. I think the first is much more likely, but the second is still possible.

 

 

I don't see what your second point is trying to prove. We know Igmund was overzealous in hunting down Forsworn, but none of the Forsworn even mention Ulfric ONCE. They never talk about wanting revenge on him. The only thing they say is that Igmund started executing anyone who had anything to do with the Forsworn.

 

On your third point, the Nords have still ruled the Reach for a thousand years(or therebouts), which makes it just as much their home as it is the Forsworn's. Before Madanach started the uprising, the Nords and Reachmen had been living peacefully, and most of the Reachmen are still living in Markarth now.(And I know there are many more Forsworn than Reachmen in the game, but that is just a game mechanic of needing more enemies than friends.) So even though the Forsworn have a claim to the Reach, the Nords have one too, backed by the fact that they have ruled it for a thousand years.

 

For number four, neither the Alessian empire(which was before Talos existed) nor the Bosmer have anything to do with the Nordic worship of Talos, when in the game do you find Nords sacrificing people at shrines of Talos? Never. Also, there is a shrine to Azura near Winterhold, do you ever see Ulfric going up there to kill the priestess? No. There is no persecution of those who worship the "good" Daedra in the game. No where do Ulfric or the Stormcloacks or anyone sacrifice anyone else to Talos. I don't see how you can defend the Forsworn killing innocents no matter what reasons they have.

 

There is a problem with your theory, namely that Ulfric was imprisoned because of his actions at Markarth. If he was in prison at the time of the incident, precisely what was he in prison for?

 

As for the Foresworn not saying anything about Ulfric, the vast majority don't talk and it doesn't come up in dialogue. Programming limitations do not constitute evidence.

[Lachdonin]

@Lachdonin

 

Braig states that his daughter was killed in the persecution and would be 23 this year (201 4E), setting the date of her birth in 178 4E, which is two years after the arrest of Ulfric Stormcloak, making it impossible for Ulfric to be behind the persecution of the Forsworn. So either the book is wrong, or Igmund waited until after Ulfric was arrested to start killing the Reachmen. I think the first is much more likely, but the second is still possible.

 

Or that Igmund has been enganged in a long running campaign of suppression and execution throughout the hold well after the fact. Braig never once mentions being involved in the uprising or the seige, and only states that he spoke to Madanach once. We happen to know that igmund has been putting out contracts against the Reachmen, and that Thonar has been muscling them off their land, so its just as likely that Braig's imprisonment happened during witchman-hunts (get it? the Reachmen are also known as Withcmen?bah...) after the Markarth Incident.

 

There's also the possibility that he's been in a hole so long he doesn't know how much time has passed.

 

Either way, his testimony doesn't invalidate all other known information.

 

 

I don't see what your second point is trying to prove. We know Igmund was overzealous in hunting down Forsworn, but none of the Forsworn even mention Ulfric ONCE. They never talk about wanting revenge on him. The only thing they say is that Igmund started executing anyone who had anything to do with the Forsworn.

 

None of them mention Igmund either. They mention the nondescript 'Nords' and the 'Jarl'. And only Madanach references events which we can conclusively place at the Markarth Incident.

 

 

On your third point, the Nords have still ruled the Reach for a thousand years(or therebouts), which makes it just as much their home as it is the Forsworn's. Before Madanach started the uprising, the Nords and Reachmen had been living peacefully, and most of the Reachmen are still living in Markarth now.(And I know there are many more Forsworn than Reachmen in the game, but that is just a game mechanic of needing more enemies than friends.) So even though the Forsworn have a claim to the Reach, the Nords have one too, backed by the fact that they have ruled it for a thousand years.

 

No, they had not been living peacefully, and the Nords had not ruled the Reach for thousands of years. They had maintained intermittent control over the region through almost constant campaigns out of Solitude (indicating an inability to maintain a central authority within the Reach its self) but the Reachmen had ruled it independently for at least 1000 out of the last 2000 years. And for the remaining time, at least until the end of the 3rd Era, remained active aggressors against Nordic occupation in the region.

 

This is in stark contrast to the Nords, who were WILLING PARTICIPANTS in the entirety of the 3rd Empire, up until Ulfric's little bout of brain trauma. He put down a rebellion against a people who had actively resisted occupation, religious persecution and outright slavery for THOUSANDS OF YEARS, and then turns around and starts his own revolt based on the same rallying cry with none of the historical precedence for resistance. That is hypocrisy at its most rank.

 

 

 

For number four, neither the Alessian empire(which was before Talos existed) nor the Bosmer have anything to do with the Nordic worship of Talos, when in the game do you find Nords sacrificing people at shrines of Talos? Never. Also, there is a shrine to Azura near Winterhold, do you ever see Ulfric going up there to kill the priestess? No. There is no persecution of those who worship the "good" Daedra in the game. No where do Ulfric or the Stormcloacks or anyone sacrifice anyone else to Talos. I don't see how you can defend the Forsworn killing innocents no matter what reasons they have.

 

 

Are you aware of the fact that Boethia and Mephala are 'Good Daedra'? I also don't recall anyone, anywhere, killing anyone at Daedra shrines... Hell, the guy in Dawnstar can open a museum to the bloody Mythic Dawn without any consequences. Despite, you know... the fact that Daedra worship has been illegal for almost a thousand years.

 

You are also missing the point. The Stormcloaks are rallying against religious persecution, when they themselves are flagrantly guilty of the same thing. It doesn't matter that the Foresworn are unsavoury (for the record, so are the traditional Nords, who Ulfric and his cohorts desire to emulate. The ancient Nords were genocidal warmongers who butchered at least two races to near extinction and had an institutionalised system of sex slavery... And Talos wasn't much better... He's a war god whose tenants advocate the swift and unflinching annihilation of ones enemies and the savage subjugation of their people) its about the simple fact that denying someone their religious freedoms, while demanding someone else respect yours, is totally unjustifiable.

Edited April 6, 2015 by Lachdonin

[MidbossVyers]

Wait, I thought that Daedra worship, itself, along with necromancy, were culturally controversial, but legally accepted (as opposed to actions that are often required of Daedra worshipers, such as murder), due to that the fact it is hard to tell the difference between Daedra worship and Mages Guild secular summoning of Daedra familiars? The only people who actively hunt Daedra worshipers are vigilante groups, such as the Vigilants of Stendarr.

[kimmera]

Wait, I thought that Daedra worship, itself, along with necromancy, were culturally controversial, but legally accepted (as opposed to actions that are often required of Daedra worshipers, such as murder), due to that the fact it is hard to tell the difference between Daedra worship and Mages Guild secular summoning of Daedra familiars? The only people who actively hunt Daedra worshipers are vigilante groups, such as the Vigilants of Stendarr.

 

 

 

 

Are you aware of the fact that Boethia and Mephala are 'Good Daedra'? I also don't recall anyone, anywhere, killing anyone at Daedra shrines... Hell, the guy in Dawnstar can open a museum to the bloody Mythic Dawn without any consequences. Despite, you know... the fact that Daedra worship has been illegal for almost a thousand years.

 

 

 

There is an old Chinese saying attributed to the area around Hong Kong: "The mountains are high and the Emperor is far away" meaning that imperial influence is greatly reduced in that region. It likely applies to Skyrim.