The Elder Scrolls XVIII: "What's So Civil About War, Anyway?"

[Batcathat]

Nords being backwards people with bad priorities is hardly a revolutionary take.

Sure, but the Jarls who sided with the Empire had already shown some pragmatism, so suddenly throwing out all of that and making Ulfric High King seems inconsistent.

Do we know how many of the current jarls were in power at the end of the Great War? It was two decades ago.

True, but clearly they at least accepted the status quo when they came into power and when given the opportunity to try and overthrow it (through Ulfric's rebellion), the Empire loyalists preferred not to.

[LibraryOgre]

So they were alright with banning worship of the country's most popular god but someone declining a fight they had basically no way of winning is too far? I mean... maybe you're right, but it seems like an odd place to draw the line.

No one said anything about right.

As I understand it, prior to Ulfric, Talos was still being worshiped in Skyrim, but without official notice. There's a vocal Talos-worshipper in Whiterun, haranguing the people all day, every day. King Torygg was devout enough that Elisif feels the need to return his medallion to a shrine. There's a temple to him in Markarth. There's plenty of Talos worship around, so I don't know that people were feeling as pressed to make it official as Ulfric said they were. Bear in mind, the White-Gold Concordat is twenty-six years old at this point... the faith is still there and still practiced.

But Torygg refusing to duel someone? That's an open rebellion against tradition.

[Batcathat]

No one said anything about right.

As I understand it, prior to Ulfric, Talos was still being worshiped in Skyrim, but without official notice. There's a vocal Talos-worshipper in Whiterun, haranguing the people all day, every day. King Torygg was devout enough that Elisif feels the need to return his medallion to a shrine. There's a temple to him in Markarth. There's plenty of Talos worship around, so I don't know that people were feeling as pressed to make it official as Ulfric said they were. Bear in mind, the White-Gold Concordat is twenty-six years old at this point... the faith is still there and still practiced.

But Torygg refusing to duel someone? That's an open rebellion against tradition.

Yeah, I suppose that's possible. My line of thought is that someone who accepts the Concordat in order to maintain the peace, no matter how distasteful and dishonorable they find it (surely making worship of your god a crime, even if just officially, is dishonorable? Not to mention the sheer humiliation of agreeing to such terms from your enemy, especially to such a proud and honorable people as the Nords) would probably be willing to accept the High King acting dishonorably in the name of the peace.

[Vinyadan]

Personally, I wonder how such an idiotic institution as this duel even survived. The idea that any bozo with a weapon can just walk up to the king and say "Hello Mr King, may I try to kill you?", and the king is forced to accept it, makes zero sense. What's the point of guards? How is the Brotherhood supposed to get any contracts, in this climate? Maybe the High King of Skyrim is a sacrificial figure, like those sacred Sun Kings in old anthropology textbooks -- a sacred king is chosen as sacrifice, and, each year, he is challenged to a duel by a wannabe successor.

The only explanation I can find is that people really weren't sold on it, and that political connections and military power was still necessary to be king, and the Empire, as long as it could, provided both of them with overwhelming force to any High King subservient to the Emperor. Once the Empire is weak, and a new king is crowned, Ulfric sees his chance: he is physically stronger than the king, his forces are equal to his, and his military skills are as good as any Imperial general's. So the balance is very slightly in his favour, and he goes for it.

But this assumes that everyone has a high level of rationality, because there certainly would have been someone who would have killed the king out of rage for a new law or judgement or any other ill feeling, even if it would have cost him his life, not enjoying the same sort of respect or political protection as Ulfric.

Maybe the King lived as a recluse, so people had to jump through hoops to personally challenge him? Maybe the point of the Bards College was to constantly have such a racket near the king, that he legitimately couldn't hear the challenges, and Ulfric had to use the Voice to deliver it?

[Fyraltari]

Personally, I wonder how such an idiotic institution as this duel even survived. The idea that any bozo with a weapon can just walk up to the king and say "Hello Mr King, may I try to kill you?", and the king is forced to accept it, makes zero sense. What's the point of guards?

I think you have to be a jarl to be eligible to become High King. So that's only eight people at a given time who can issue a challenge.

[LibraryOgre]

Personally, I wonder how such an idiotic institution as this duel even survived. The idea that any bozo with a weapon can just walk up to the king and say "Hello Mr King, may I try to kill you?", and the king is forced to accept it, makes zero sense. What's the point of guards? How is the Brotherhood supposed to get any contracts, in this climate? Maybe the High King of Skyrim is a sacrificial figure, like those sacred Sun Kings in old anthropology textbooks -- a sacred king is chosen as sacrifice, and, each year, he is challenged to a duel by a wannabe successor.

The UESP has some more details.

According to Ulfric, he challenged Torygg for the right to be High King, knocked him to the ground with the thu'um, then dispatched him with a sword. Some others say Ulfric "shouted him to pieces" or "ripped him asunder". The Empire and a number of the Jarls, however, viewed the killing of Torygg not as the result of an honorable duel, but as regicide, due to the fact that Torygg was young and had only limited martial training, while Ulfric was a war veteran wielding the power of the thu'um, and moreover, that the duel had been Ulfric's first choice of action, rather than diplomacy.

(I take the "shouted apart" with a grain of salt, but also don't know of a corpse for Torygg)

On the topic of the Moot:

The Moot can also reconvene during a living High King's reign if he breaks some taboo which makes the jarls lose confidence in him, such as refusing a challenge made in accordance with the old Nord traditions of martial combat.

The fact that Torygg stood, even though clearly overmatched by Ulfric, argues against the idea of champions (or, at least, their acceptability in challenge combat), but then you have Skald the Elder at Dawnstar and Igrod Ravencrone in Morthal, both of whom are elderly, and Skald is not liked.

[Batcathat]

Personally, I wonder how such an idiotic institution as this duel even survived. The idea that any bozo with a weapon can just walk up to the king and say "Hello Mr King, may I try to kill you?", and the king is forced to accept it, makes zero sense. What's the point of guards? How is the Brotherhood supposed to get any contracts, in this climate? Maybe the High King of Skyrim is a sacrificial figure, like those sacred Sun Kings in old anthropology textbooks -- a sacred king is chosen as sacrifice, and, each year, he is challenged to a duel by a wannabe successor

Agreed. Having fights to determine anything but who's the best fighter under those particular circumstances is one of my least favorite tropes (especially if anyone can do it, but even if it's limited, it's still so stupid).

[Grim Portent]

[URL="https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Torygg"]The fact that Torygg stood, even though clearly overmatched by Ulfric, argues against the idea of champions (or, at least, their acceptability in challenge combat), but then you have Skald the Elder at Dawnstar and Igrod Ravencrone in Morthal, both of whom are elderly, and Skald is not liked.

I would presume that custom dictates that only Thanes can challenge their Jarls. Housecarls might be able to challenge Thanes in turn, and randoms challenge Housecarls, or the landholders subject to a Thane might be able to challenge them. Either angle makes sense depending on the exact role of Thanes and Housecarls in Skyrim.

Pesumably the general custom in Skyrim is anyone can challenge anyone to a fight, to the death or otherwise, but it's only shameful to refuse someone who is your nominal peer or direct vassal. Consensual brawls are perfectly legal, even without witnesses, and not actually that rare based on the amount of people we can brawl with for random reasons.


Torygg's case doesn't necessarily mean champions aren't allowed mind you, just that Torygg did not want to use one. Letting someone else die fighting Ulfric would be shameful, to himself even if no one else cared. Torygg embraced his death willingly, and with perfect foreknowledge that he was going to die when he accepted the challenge. He seems proud of it when we meet his soul in Sovngarde.

[Resileaf]

Agreed. Having fights to determine anything but who's the best fighter under those particular circumstances is one of my least favorite tropes (especially if anyone can do it, but even if it's limited, it's still so stupid).

You sure must hate History then, because honor duels have been ridiculously common throughout it.

[Grim Portent]

You sure must hate History then, because honor duels have been ridiculously common throughout it.

Also trial via duel, succession by duel, duelling for fun, and dueling because it was fashionable.

[Fyraltari]

I would presume that custom dictates that only Thanes can challenge their Jarls. Housecarls might be able to challenge Thanes in turn, and randoms challenge Housecarls, or the landholders subject to a Thane might be able to challenge them. Either angle makes sense depending on the exact role of Thanes and Housecarls in Skyrim.

Pesumably the general custom in Skyrim is anyone can challenge anyone to a fight, to the death or otherwise, but it's only shameful to refuse someone who is your nominal peer or direct vassal. Consensual brawls are perfectly legal, even without witnesses, and not actually that rare based on the amount of people we can brawl with for random reasons.


Torygg's case doesn't necessarily mean champions aren't allowed mind you, just that Torygg did not want to use one. Letting someone else die fighting Ulfric would be shameful, to himself even if no one else cared. Torygg embraced his death willingly, and with perfect foreknowledge that he was going to die when he accepted the challenge. He seems proud of it when we meet his soul in Sovngarde.

Did you forget about the bit where challenging someone to a duel to take their spot (assuming that applies to other position than High King) doesn't happen anymore and Ulfric and Torygg's case was the first in centuries?

You sure must hate History then, because honor duels have been ridiculously common throughout it.

There are a lot of abhorrent things that have been ridiculously common throughout history.

[Grim Portent]

Did you forget about the bit where challenging someone to a duel to take their spot (assuming that applies to other position than High King) doesn't happen anymore and Ulfric and Torygg's case was the first in centuries?

That doesn't make the tradition invalid, it just means no ones actually lived up to the values it was supposed to enshrine for that length of time. Or everyone has lived up to them so no one needs to challenge, but we know that to be false.

Customs and laws don't just go away, unless another law says 'no' then the old one is still valid. The fact that there are Nords who support the tradition even though it's not been actively invoked in a long while indicates that it is still important to them. Hell, we know the tradition still carries on in informal groups and warrior lodges like Thirsk.

What really matters to me, is it was important to Torygg. Not politically important or anything like that, personally important. He was challenged in the manner of his forefathers, and though he was not a good warrior his personal ethics demanded he answer in the manner of his forefathers.

[Keltest]

That doesn't make the tradition invalid, it just means no ones actually lived up to the values it was supposed to enshrine for that length of time. Or everyone has lived up to them so no one needs to challenge, but we know that to be false.

Customs and laws don't just go away, unless another law says 'no' then the old one is still valid. The fact that there are Nords who support the tradition even though it's not been actively invoked in a long while indicates that it is still important to them. Hell, we know the tradition still carries on in informal groups and warrior lodges like Thirsk.

What really matters to me, is it was important to Torygg. Not politically important or anything like that, personally important. He was challenged in the manner of his forefathers, and though he was not a good warrior his personal ethics demanded he answer in the manner of his forefathers.

No, I think definitionally a tradition that hasnt been invoked in hundreds of years has gone away. Its just history at that point.

[Grim Portent]

No, I think definitionally a tradition that hasnt been invoked in hundreds of years has gone away. Its just history at that point.

How often do you think the Jarls invoked this tradition in the first place?

We're talking about a law that was probably used on average less than once a generation. It's for heirs to fight over inheritance or nobles to fight over political arguments without war. Those aren't common occurrences.

[Batcathat]

You sure must hate History then, because honor duels have been ridiculously common throughout it.

Anything having duels in it doesn't mean I hate it, but yes, I do find honor duels quite stupid (if not nearly as stupid as "you can challenge the king for the throne" duels).

[Vinyadan]

You know, I'm starting to get McNinja vibes.

[veti]

Just a reminder that our main source of information about the duel is Sybille Stentor. And I for one think that her account should be taken with several large teaspoons of salt.

One, remember she's a long-term liar. For at least 25 years she's been living a double "life" as respectable courtier, and vampire. Some people seem to be aware of this, but not everyone, it's certainly not openly talked about, and she shuts you right down if your questions start to veer in the direction of her longevity. People who lead such a secretive life - learn to bend the truth constantly, instinctively, to make it more like what they want to project.

Two, she has terrible judgment. She's the one who mostly talks Elisif out of doing anything about Wolfskull Cave. This is the only time we see her actually doing her job as a court advisor, and on that one time - she screws up badly.

Three, there's also a piece of dialogue scripted and recorded for her, at the beginning of "The Wolf Queen Awakened", which makes it clear that her absolute main priority is making sure the Dragonborn is the one who gets the blame for releasing Potema on the world. She's a courtier - a politician - and her mind always runs to the political implications of whatever is the hot topic of the day. Fortunately for her reputation that scene didn't make it into the final quest, but let's just bear it in mind anyway. (It's also of a piece with the general dishonesty of the court in Solitude. Elisif is a puppet, Erikur frankly admits to being a crook, Falk is happy to deceive Elisif on a routine basis, and even the outspoken Bryling is concealing her romantic attachment to Falk.)

So with all that in mind, here's what she actually says about the duel:

(1) Were you there when High King Torygg died?: "I was, to my shame. The whole court was in attendance. I've seen much in my time, but that was a gruesome day."

(2) Why was Torygg killed?: "Because Ulfric needed a symbol. Someone he could defeat that represented the Empire, the White-Gold Concordat, the banning of Talos worship. Torygg's father Istlod had held Skyrim together for nearly twenty-five years. When he died, Torygg became that symbol."

(3) So the war started when Istlod died?:"No. Even after Istlod died, the moot voted to make Torygg High King of Skyrim. But Ulfric was at that moot, continually talking about Skyrim's independence in terms just shy of treason. I don't think Ulfric knew how much Torygg respected him for that. If Ulfric had asked Torygg directly to stand up, to declare independence, Torygg might have done it."

(4) Why didn't Torygg ever declare independence?: "Because the Dominion is a sleeping beast that Skyrim cannot slay alone. Because many Nords are part of the Imperial army even now. Because the food and resources we get from the Empire are important to our people. Because even if we can't openly worship him, Talos the god was once Tiber Septim the man, and this is his Empire. And Torygg wasn't ready to let it fall apart."

(5) How did it happen?: "Ulfric showed up at the gates of Solitude requesting an audience. We thought he was here to ask Torygg to declare independence. By the time we realized Ulfric was here to challenge Torygg... it was already too late."

(6) Why was it too late?: "By Nord custom, once the challenge was issued in court, Torygg had no choice but to accept. Had he not, Ulfric would have had cause to call a new moot and a new vote for High King. Torygg had some martial training, of course, but it mattered little that day. When Ulfric's lips parted, when he unleashed the power of the Thu'um... That Shout, that ancient and terrible tongue... ripped Torygg asunder."

(1) She starts by acknowledging a share of blame, but like a true politician, immediately shifts to sharing it out with the whole court, and casts herself as a mere observer. Gosh, if only the king had had one advisor in particular whose job it was to forewarn him against supernatural/magical threats...

(2) "Why" questions invite speculation, which is what this is. It sounds reasonable, so far as anything about this story does, but let's not start treating it as attested fact.

(3) OK, this is interesting. So there was a moot, and Ulfric and Torygg were both there... but (apparently) that's not where the duel happened. Why not? If Ulfric was willing to challenge Torygg over this, why didn't he do it then? That's something we can speculate about at great length, but sadly nobody in the game seems to touch on it at all.

(4) Another "why" question. To me the reasons that follow, while plausible, look like post-hoc rationalisations. That is to say - they may be true, but they're not necessarily very convincing reasons. It's already been suggested in this thread how Torygg could have squared that circle - if he'd really wanted to, if he'd had a bit more political nous, if he'd maybe had better advice... But again, all speculation.

(5) More blame-shifting. "We thought he was here to ask Torygg..." "We". That'd be "me and all the other court advisors whose job it is to scry and identify approaching threats".

(6) Sybille thinks that if Torygg had refused, what would follow would be a new moot. That moot might have acclaimed Ulfric as king, although it's also possible that another candidate such as Balgruuf might have come forward. (I guess it's even possible that it might have voted for Torygg again, if he could make a suitably convincing speech.)

But Torygg chose to fight instead. He himself talks of dying with "honour intact", but to me that too smacks of rationalisation. To be frank, I think he didn't understand that the duel would be to the death - he thought he would survive even if he lost, so the risk was worth it. I'd like to know what his "advisors" said to him at the time, but funnily enough no-one seems to want to talk about it.

So what does all this mean? I don't think Sybille is wilfully misleading us about any of the facts of the case. But I do think she's carrying a lot of guilt over it, and that colours her account quite a lot, particularly the more speculative parts of it.

[Vinyadan]

(3) OK, this is interesting. So there was a moot, and Ulfric and Torygg were both there... but (apparently) that's not where the duel happened. Why not? If Ulfric was willing to challenge Torygg over this, why didn't he do it then? That's something we can speculate about at great length, but sadly nobody in the game seems to touch on it at all.

The challenge had to be issued in court, and the Moot so probably didn't count.

Number 4 also seems generally convincing. It explains why the Stormcloak territories seem so poor (no goods from the Empire) and why half the Jarls have stayed with the Empire, even without a pro-Empire king. Of course, one would need more info: Tullius was at a stalemate against Ulfric. What would have happened, had all of Skyrim followed Ulfric? Militarily, it might have become independent. However, it would have created a massive rift between the families of the Nords in the Imperial forces and the rest, and it would have lost the Empire's goods, while being alone and exposed agains the Dominion.

That's the big question with Ulfric: now what? What happens in independent Skyrim? It's no surprise that the game just ignores the whole matter and has no incoronation afterwards. I don't think Ulfric had plans. He strikes me mostly as an shrewd adventurer with a strong sense of opportunity that can be idealistic when it helps his case, but rolls as the events go and trusts himself to handle things appropriately as they emerge, even if just by guts or sheer luck.

[LibraryOgre]

I'd say that the Stormcloak's racism will likely hit them hard; while the Imperials can manage trade with the Empire, Orsinium, High Rock, and Hammerfell, the Stormcloaks are out to antagonize the Empire, and to their east, they only have Morrowind...

[Vinyadan]

I'd say that the Stormcloak's racism will likely hit them hard; while the Imperials can manage trade with the Empire, Orsinium, High Rock, and Hammerfell, the Stormcloaks are out to antagonize the Empire, and to their east, they only have Morrowind...

Lol, I can't wait for the Dunmer running away from the Argonians to overwhelm and conquer Skyrim. A good, old-style domino effect, but, as a "reader", it would almost make up for the Red Year.

And then there would be new legends, and Veloth would be the Anticipation of the Mer who led the Dunmer to Skyrim...

[Fyraltari]

The Nords gave Solstheim to the Dunmer. Skyrim has better relations with Morrowind in the fourth era than it has had in... ever, really. Also the Stormcloak holds are the Old Holds who were always the most traditionalists and most isolationists as well as the ones with the worst weather according to the PGE 1st edition. It's likely they were never that rich to begin with. Meanwhile Solitude is one of the most important trading ports of Tamriel.

[Grim Portent]

The Nords gave Solstheim to the Dunmer. Skyrim has better relations with Morrowind in the fourth era than it has had in... ever, really. Also the Stormcloak holds are the Old Holds who were always the most traditionalists and most isolationists as well as the ones with the worst weather according to the PGE 1st edition. It's likely they were never that rich to begin with. Meanwhile Solitude is one of the most important trading ports of Tamriel.

Weren't the Nords, Dunmer and Argonians allies in the 2nd era? I'd say that's at least on part with their 4th era relations.

That said, I do think the idea that the Dunmer would be hostile to the eastern holds is kind of silly. The Dunmer are doing fine in Riften and Winterhold, it's just the Gray Quarter in Windhelm where we see any interracial disputes, and that situation doesn't seem to bother the dunmer anywhere else.

[Fyraltari]

Weren't the Nords, Dunmer and Argonians allies in the 2nd era? I'd say that's at least on part with their 4th era relations.

Oh, right I forgot.

[Resileaf]

Number 4 also seems generally convincing. It explains why the Stormcloak territories seem so poor (no goods from the Empire) and why half the Jarls have stayed with the Empire, even without a pro-Empire king. Of course, one would need more info: Tullius was at a stalemate against Ulfric. What would have happened, had all of Skyrim followed Ulfric? Militarily, it might have become independent. However, it would have created a massive rift between the families of the Nords in the Imperial forces and the rest, and it would have lost the Empire's goods, while being alone and exposed agains the Dominion.

I wouldn't quite say that Tullius was at a stalemate with Ulfric. The game starts with Ulfric having just been captured. The Stormcloaks admit that the moment Tullius arrived in Skyrim, they completely lost their momentum. And that was before Tullius even got an army, he was just working with the Imperial garrisons and loyal jarls.

[Starlit Dragon]

Lol, I can't wait for the Dunmer running away from the Argonians to overwhelm and conquer Skyrim. A good, old-style domino effect, but, as a "reader", it would almost make up for the Red Year.

And then there would be new legends, and Veloth would be the Anticipation of the Mer who led the Dunmer to Skyrim...

Or perhaps the Falmer rising from beneath? I hate the way the game treats them, but it would still be very funny.

[LibraryOgre]

Or perhaps the Falmer rising from beneath? I hate the way the game treats them, but it would still be very funny.

Gelebor asking the Last Dragonborn to kidnap baby Falmer so he can try to raise them...

[Starlit Dragon]

Gelebor asking the Last Dragonborn to kidnap baby Falmer so he can try to raise them...

Does he actually do that?

[Grim Portent]

Does he actually do that?

No, he just muses about the idea that they seem to be becoming smarter, and hopes that in time he might be able to educate them and teach them of the Falmer of old. Maybe give them something to live for outside of their pain and vengeance.

[LibraryOgre]

Does he actually do that?

Nah, he doesn't. Just a riff on "treating the Falmer differently"

[Starlit Dragon]

No, he just muses about the idea that they seem to be becoming smarter, and hopes that in time he might be able to educate them and teach them of the Falmer of old. Maybe give them something to live for outside of their pain and vengeance.

I've seen that bit. Personally, I think he's going at it the wrong way due to his own predudices, but also because the game doesn't write them very well.