Why Ulfric was right to kill the High King

[BrettM]

Ulfric was not an "insignificant jarl's son" at the time he killed Torygg; he was Jarl of Windhelm and had been since being released from his imprisonment following the Markarth Incident. I also seriously doubt that Ulfric could have been disappeared even if he were an "insignificant jarl's son". Supporters like Roggvir who knew that Ulfric went in and didn't come out would spread the word rather quickly.

 

Throwing a sitting jarl, who had committed no crime by Nord tradition, in chains might not sit well with the other jarls no matter what they think of Ulfric personally. Such a high-handed act might have been enough to impel a Nord Runnymede, though I suspect Nord traditions already define the rights and obligations of the jarls vs. those of the High King, much the same as the Magna Carta did for the Barons of England. The custom of the challenge may only be a part of the code that maintains the balance. The Nords have a long tradition of both personal and group independence, going all the way back to Ysgrammor and the 500.

 

I do wonder whether Ulfric is really guilty of simple power lust or whether it's more complicated than that. He seems to be most concerned with building a legend around himself, win or lose. He is concerned with "the dramatic moment" throughout the storyline. I get the feeling he is living some kind of fantasy in his head, like a kid pretending he's Superman except with his own real super power. He wants to ride at the head of an army and Shout his foes from the walls like Tiber Septim, hailed as a great hero and savior. He wants the Dragonborn to be part of his story, even if the Dragonborn is fighting for the other side. He wants to be like a First Era king who crushed his foes and had his people love him for it, in the words of Galmar. In short, Ulfric may not be strictly sane.

 

I have little doubt that his reason for leaving High Hrothgar was a sincere concern for the suffering of those fighting the Great War and a desire to do his part in the Legion. Yet, I suspect this boyhood fantasy was nagging at the back of his mind and he also desired, perhaps subconciously, to test the power of the Voice in actual battle like the Tongues of old.

 

To top it off, remember that the Thalmor convinced him that HE was responsible for the sack of the Imperial City because he provided key information under torture. Ulfric must be carrying around a tremendous load of guilt over that, though we know it isn't true, and much of what he's done since then may be driven by an attempt to compensate for what he believes is his sin.

[imperistan]

Ulfric was not an "insignificant jarl's son" at the time he killed Torygg;

 

Do notice that I was insulting Ulfric. And regardless, in the eyes of the High King, everyone can is an insignificant twerp if he so decides them to be so.

 

I also seriously doubt that Ulfric could have been disappeared even if he were an "insignificant jarl's son". Supporters like Roggvir who knew that Ulfric went in and didn't come out would spread the word rather quickly.

 

And who would actually say anything but a bunch of hotheads from Windhelm? I'm inclined to believe that people came to Ulfric's cause after he declared civil war, not before, so if Ulfric was put in chains by Torygg I doubt there would have been much of a stir. And certainly not so much of a stir that it couldn't be quelled rather swiftly if it was actually a problem rather than a bunch of ranting Nords from Eastmarch.

 

Throwing a sitting jarl, who had committed no crime by Nord tradition, in chains might not sit well with the other jarls no matter what they think of Ulfric personally.

 

Thats the thing, no one would know what actually happened. Torygg could spin any story and the other Jarl's would accept it as true. They'd have to regardless.

 

I do wonder whether Ulfric is really guilty of simple power lust or whether it's more complicated than that. He seems to be most concerned with building a legend around himself, win or lose. He is concerned with "the dramatic moment" throughout the storyline. I get the feeling he is living some kind of fantasy in his head, like a kid pretending he's Superman except with his own real super power. He wants to ride at the head of an army and Shout his foes from the walls like Tiber Septim, hailed as a great hero and savior. He wants the Dragonborn to be part of his story, even if the Dragonborn is fighting for the other side. He wants to be like a First Era king who crushed his foes and had his people love him for it, in the words of Galmar. In short, Ulfric may not be strictly sane.

 

He is quite sane. This obsession with his own life story is rather common among Nords and has its roots in the honour concepts. In the Norse cultures that the Nords were based on, many great warriors (and particularly those who were royal) were also poets and they always put down stories and sagas in song. Indeed, one of the most famous Norse kings of all time sung a song just before he died that helped cement him in legend. Honestly, read the death song of Ragnar Lodbrok:

 

It gladdens me to know that Baldr’s father makes ready the benches for a banquet. Soon we shall be drinking ale from the curved horns. The champion who comes into Odin’s dwelling does not lament his death. I shall not enter his hall with words of fear upon my lips. The Æsir will welcome me. Death comes without lamenting... Eager am I to depart. The Dísir summon me home, those whom Odin sends for me from the halls of the Lord of Hosts. Gladly shall I drink ale in the high-seat with the Æsir. The days of my life are ended. I laugh as I die

 

Then read up on what this man actually did in his lifetime: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ragnar_Lodbrok

 

Ulfric is channeling that same general spirit in his draw towards his own legend.

 

Ulfric must be carrying around a tremendous load of guilt over that, though we know it isn't true, and much of what he's done since then may be driven by an attempt to compensate for what he believes is his sin.

 

Its doubtful that a man like Ulfric wouldn't eventually figure out that he did not in fact actually help the Dominion any during the war.

[Archone]

Ulfric was not an "insignificant jarl's son" at the time he killed Torygg; he was Jarl of Windhelm and had been since being released from his imprisonment following the Markarth Incident. I also seriously doubt that Ulfric could have been disappeared even if he were an "insignificant jarl's son". Supporters like Roggvir who knew that Ulfric went in and didn't come out would spread the word rather quickly.

 

 

Yes, that's something I have noted previously. Ulfric was more than that, in fact. He was a war hero, a living legend in Skyrim even before the civil war began. Torygg idolized him. Ulfric is a combination of practical, idealistic, and... ruthless, yes. That's one of my main disputes with his choice of actions. He chose to divide rather than unify. Had he shown up to talk, Torygg might well have said, "Ulfric, you're right - I'll give you the support of all of Skyrim when we march against the Thalmor and drive them from our lands!" Instead, Ulfric said ,"Fus-rah-doh!" and made things a lot bloodier and nastier than they had to be. The civil war between Stormcloak and Imperials is distracting everyone in Skyrim from a common, unifying factor, something they ALL have in common: a hatred of the Thalmor.

 

I'm actually wondering if the Dwemer will come back in the next game. That'd be SO cool; have them return from whatever place they ended up in after their foolish experiment wiped them from the face of Tamriel (as recounted in Morrowind), and then bring their technological creations to bear against the Thalmer. OH, would that make for some interesting stuff in the next TES game... ^.^

[imperistan]

Had he shown up to talk, Torygg might well have said, "Ulfric, you're right - I'll give you the support of all of Skyrim when we march against the Thalmor and drive them from our lands!" Instead, Ulfric said ,"Fus-rah-doh!" and made things a lot bloodier and nastier than they had to be.

 

What good would a boy-king do against the Dominion? Against the Empire? Regardless of whether Torygg died or not, he was eventually going to be deposed of his position, even if he still held it by name, simply because he never had the capacity to lead his nation, very much less a war effort.

 

And just so you know, the Imperials have been rather busy over the last 30 years making sure the Empire ignored the Dominion. At least the Stormcloaks want to actually do something about them rather than sit around endlessly doing nothing.

[fraquar]

Yeah, it's really hard to make a case for the Imperials when 30 years (an entire generation) passes and the Thalmor are still marching off Nords to be tortured/executed in their own homeland.

 

How long must this continue? another 30 years? 50? 100? Infinity?

[MacSuibhne]

The thing about this is that if you start with some basic understanding (nothing too technical) of law and civics and people, Ulfric does pretty much the only thing he can do.

 

Start by understanding what constitutes a legitimate government...in any age. To one degree or another legitimacy derives from the willingness of a government to secure the natural rights of its citizens and protect them from foreign powers and the depredations of foreign invaders. Think Saxon Shore.

 

By that definition, the Empire has failed miserably and has no objective legitimacy in Skyrim.

 

Ulfric understands that the Empire is not protecting citizens and by allowing Talos to be suppressed, is abrogating the natural rights of Nords to their Traditional pantheon.

 

The Empire is also exploiting Skyrim for its natural resources, presumably without just recompense--maybe the only reason they don't just simply let Skyrim go.

 

Ulfric genuinely yearns for independence for Skyrim. There is no evidence that his goals in that regard are not real.

 

Torygg is High King and under Nord law, the High King has absolute authority.

 

But because the High King must swear an oath of fealty to the Emperor, Torygg is also a vassal of the Emperor. His authority is at the sufferance of the Emperor. And fundamentally that makes Skyrim a client state...a vassal state of the Empire. For all intents and purposes...esp. as it applies to the High King...it is Imperial law that takes precedence--precedence over Skyrim's laws.

 

Just as importantly, the Empire is a vassal state of the Dominion. As the Thalmor make clear both in their statements and in the capitulation of Imperials from Torygg to Tullius, the Empire exists at the sufferance of the Dominion. And as is made clear by the actions of everyone from Titus meade to Torygg, it is Thalmor law that takes precedence over Imperial law.

 

The High King is essentially incapable of changing anything in that regard. He simply does not have the legitimacy to defy either the Emperor or the Dominion.

 

It's a clever sophistry to suggest that Torygg would have gone along with Ulfric to declare independence if Ulfric had only said "pretty please." But it is false and it is propaganda. Torygg swore an oath of allegiance to the Emperor and to Imperial law. Under Imperial law, he doesn't have the authority or legitimacy to declare independence. Not only would renouncing his oath have been an irreversible stain upon his honour, the Empire or the Thalmor would have replaced him post haste.

 

Nord law gives a Jarl the right to challenge the High King as to his fitness to lead the people. Some form of that challenge mechanism exists in all feudal societies so that "oath breaker" doesn't haunt the reputation of someone who challenges/replaces an unfit King.

 

To declare independence from an illegitimate government--Empire/Dominion--would require a High King not aligned with that government...or a legislative body with enough authority/legitimacy in its own right.

 

Neither of those existed.

 

When Ulfric challenged Torygg he removed the biggest obstacle to a Declaration of Independence...maybe the only obstacle. Upon the death of Torygg at Ulfric's hand, Ulfric was the rightful High King by Nordic law and Tradition. He needed only the confirmation of a Moot that would not force him into a situation where he had to pledge his fealty to the Emperor.

 

Since that Moot did not exist, and could not exist until those that comprised the Moot were not overwhelmingly Imperial sympathizers, Ulfric is giving those on the fence an opportunity to also cut ties to the Empire. He bends over backwards to give Balgruuf time to see reason. The fact that the Moot cannot, will not, resolve the issue independently by selecting someone like Balgruuf to succeed Torygg is proof enough that they are both powerless and confirmed vassals of the Empire.

Edited June 27, 2012 by MacSuibhne

[breakwind]

@Macsuibhne, what makes you think that the high king has absolute authority? As for Nordic law...I hear more about Nordic customs and traditions regarding Nord rule, than 'law'. Ulfric challenged Torygg while he was holding court. According to Nord custom, if he had refused, there would have been a Moot to decide the outcome. Not a likely scenario for someone who holds 'absolute authority I would have thought. Even the quest to get the Jagged Crown at the start of the Civil War quests is confusing. Tullius was confused as to what impact ownership of the crown would have regarding ruling the Nords and Rikkes answer is even more confusing really. Tullius thought whoever wore the crown, would rightfully be High King, but Rikke replied that was not the case, but that it would have influence. Tullius is a man who lives by laws and rules, and doesn't understand a people who live by traditions and customs whose interpretations change from one person to the next. Well, thats the way I see it anyway

[MacSuibhne]

@Macsuibhne, what makes you think that the high king has absolute authority? As for Nordic law...I hear more about Nordic customs and traditions regarding Nord rule, than 'law'. Ulfric challenged Torygg while he was holding court. According to Nord custom, if he had refused, there would have been a Moot to decide the outcome. Not a likely scenario for someone who holds 'absolute authority I would have thought.

 

None of that is true...

http://www.imperial-library.info/content/skyrims-rule

 

"But as mighty and influential as each individual Jarl is, Skyrim's true power comes from the strength of its High King. The High King is ruler above all, and is always one of the Jarls, selected by a body called the "Moot" - a specially convened council of all the Jarls, who meet with the express purpose of choosing Skyrim's High King. Or so it is, in theory.

The reality, however, is that the High King swears fealty to the Emperor, and as Solitude is the city most directly influenced by Imperial culture and politics, the Jarl of Solitude has served as High King for generations. The Moot, therefore, is more formality and theater than anything else." excerpt from Skyrim's Rule:An Outsider's View by Abdul-Mujib Ababneh

 

http://www.imperial-library.info/content/pocket-guide-empire-first-edition-skyrim

 

"By the early years of the First Empire, Skyrim was already divided into Holds, then ruled by a patchwork of clan-heads, kings, and councils (or moots), all of which paid fealty to the King of Skyrim. During the exceptionally long reign of King Harald, who died at 108 years of age and outlived all but three of his sons, a Moot was created, made up of representatives from each Hold, to choose the next King from qualified members of the royal family. Over the years, the Moot became permanent and acquired an increasing amount of power; by the reign of King Borgas, the last of the Ysgramor dynasty, the Moot had become partisan and ineffective. Upon the murder of King Borgas by the Wild Hunt (see Aldmeri Dominion - Valenwood), the Moot's failure to appoint the obvious and capable Jarl Hanse of Winterhold sparked the disastrous Skyrim War of Succession, during which Skyrim lost control of its territories in High Rock, Morrowind, and Cyrodiil, never to regain them. The war was finally concluded in 1E420 with the Pact of Chieftans; henceforth, the Moot was convened only when a King died without direct heirs, and it has fulfilled this more limited role admirably. It has only been called upon three times in the intervening millenia, and the Skyrim succession has never again been disputed on the field of battle." excerpt from Pocket Guide to the Empire and its Environs, First Edition: Skyrim

Edited June 27, 2012 by MacSuibhne

[Archone]

I should like to note that I just finished the part in the Imperial side of the civil war story arc where the Dovakhin must help defend Whiterun along with the Empire. And... one: the Jarl is NOT happy about being pushed into a corner like this. He finally chooses to side with the Empire largely because Ulfric literally gave him no alternative. Two: Ulfric makes a point of using fire in his catapults. He's not trying to batter down the walls; he wants the fortifications left intact even as he uses fire on a civilian population. This further disenchants the Nords with him, even those who had sympathized with him prior to his raining fire down on their heads and the heads of their friends and relatives and neighbors. Three: it's neither sophistry nor false to claim that Torygg would have listened to Ulfric had Ulfric used words other than "fus-rah-do." Elsif specifically states, "my husband idolized Ulfric. He would probably have joined Ulfric's cause had Ulfric come to talk, not fight."

[imperistan]

the Jarl is NOT happy about being pushed into a corner like this. He finally chooses to side with the Empire largely because Ulfric literally gave him no alternative.

 

And this is a problem, how?

 

And honestly, he chooses the Empire not only because he was backed into a corner, but also because he was likely to align with the Imperials anyway. I may not remember all of the dialogue, but from what I do remember nothing ever indicated that Balgruff would have taken the side of the Stormcloaks.

 

Ulfric makes a point of using fire in his catapults. He's not trying to batter down the walls; he wants the fortifications left intact even as he uses fire on a civilian population.

 

Its strategy. Whiterun City and its hold is a very key location in Skyrim and opens up either side to to the other more easily (to the Stormcloaks advantage more than the Imperials). To break the city walls would be, to put it bluntly, stupid. And I've seen nothing that shows that him using fire with his catapults disenchanted anyone. Do notice that the vast majority of Stormcloak supporters in Whiterun would have either evacuated and/or joined the invading army. Same with much of the rest of the civilian population for that matter.

 

(note that this is looking at it in a realistic way, not in the way that the game portrays. The fact that business goes on as usual in Whiterun while you rush to defend it on the Imperial side (while fire rains down from the sky no less) proves that the game isn't the best witness to the Battle of Whiterun)

 

. Three: it's neither sophistry nor false to claim that Torygg would have listened to Ulfric had Ulfric used words other than "fus-rah-do." Elsif specifically states, "my husband idolized Ulfric. He would probably have joined Ulfric's cause had Ulfric come to talk, not fight."

 

And we're supposed to take her word for it? Without even considering the fact that she would have a vested interest in portraying Ulfric as an evil bastard regardless of whether there's truth behind it or not?

 

And even if we presume Torygg would have done that, its still rather terrible. As I've said before, a High-King doesn't wait on the whims of some Jarl's son. He makes up his own damn mind like a man.

 

 

And you know, it still begs the question of why Torygg's death is such an issue. Are people actually concerned about the ramifications of his death and what could have been had he not died or are people just getting worked up because they got caught up in the propaganda machine against Ulfric thats thrown in your face from the beginning the game? Hell, from the loading screen if you got the right one?

 

Something tells me that more people are getting caught up in the buzzwords and spin more than the actual facts.

Edited June 27, 2012 by imperistan