Sybille says Ulfric offered the challenge and Torygg accepted it.

That's not how Sybille Stentor tells it. She does say that if they knew Ulfric was going to challenge Torygg, they never would have let him in. That all goes to prove Ulfric's point, that Torygg's kingship was in name only and propped up by the imperials' corrupt politicking.

They wouldn't have interfered, because Torygg accepted the challenge. However if he had won, he would be free of any crimes because it was Ulfric who initiated the challenge, whereas Torygg was merely defending his title, honor, and life. And possibly because unlike Ulfric, he wasn't conspiring to commit treason. Not simply because he's an Imperial supporter.

The Jarls still would have had enough power to call for one and make it happen. Even if Tullius opposed it, it doesn't matter because at the time he wasn't in Skyrim.

The Markarth Incident happened when the Empire was still dealing with larger problems and was more of Ulfric's fault than the Empire's. The duel with Torygg and execution of Roggvir were straightforward examples of murder/regicide and treason. And what happened wasn't a "fair" challenge: aside from the fact that Torygg was obviously outmatched, he would lose his title and honor if he didn't accept. Even the pre-Red Year Dunmer considered that kind of thing to be de facto murder.

I can't blame them for wanting to prevent it. It doesn't come off as a very good or ethical system. And given it was Nords that would have stopped him, I'm not seeing the issue. If they feel the Empire's system is better, than more power to them.

Fixed. The moot would've convened to determine the title part, and his life was never in jeopardy until he accepted the duel.

So have him tossed in jail for conspiracy to commit treason or attempted regicide or whatever you want. If you're gonna follow imperial law, follow imperial law.

This is what confuses me about the people arguing against the duel system:

On the one hand you say "just because it's tradition doesn't mean it's legal", so were saying the duel should be inconsequential where law and decency apply.

But on the other hand, you say Torygg had to accept the duel or else he would be "dishonored" and by tradition, a moot would have to be called ending in him likely being removed from power.


HUH? So we're talking about a duel that is so important it can make or break a high king, but, we should totally disregard the duel if someone loses (I.E. dies)? We have to let the duel happen, but we can't let it finish?

I don't get that backwards logic.

You can believe that if you like. It's a fairy story. The imperials wouldn't have interfered if it had gone their way. It didn't, so they bring in the muscle and wave their laws in the air as cover.

That's not the point. The aftermath of the duel showed that the system has been corrupted by imperial interference and coin. Ulfric knew this, but he had to demonstrate it for everyone else in a way that no one could ignore.

We both know that he would have lost his title if he had declined. Torygg knew it too.

We also both know that regardless of the Empire's reaction, Ulfric would have made Skyrim independent and sought to push the Legion out. And I suspect that many of the Jarls would refuse this and it would degenerate into civil war regardless. I seriously doubt that if he won the moot, which would have likely been a 5-4 vote (as Dengeir was Jarl at the time) then said he's kicking the Empire out, that the remaining Jarls would actually take it in stride, considering they later ally with the Empire and decide to buckle down instead of siding with him. And the Empire, and its supporters in Skyrim would have fought to stop it. His Thalmor puppeteers certainly wouldn't have let it end peacefully.

I don't fully understand how it works out myself, since there's limited information in-game. I've mostly been speculating, but whatever the case, we know that the Imperials, and the Nords of Solitude, wanted to arrest Ulfric for the murder of Torygg. I'm assuming that that by Imperial law, Ulfric committed murder. Unfortunately we don't really have the details on what the Empire's official position is, or how the Nordic customs and laws factor in. What it comes down to, it seems, is that the two sides (both on the forums and in the game) take alternate interpretations on the Empire's intentions and reasoning. Stormcloak supporters seem convinced that whatever unsaid Imperial law Ulfric broke, it either doesn't matter because they're fighting the Empire or that the Empire made it up because they hate Ulfric and won't settle for anything less than a puppet king. On the other hand, I'm playing the assumption that the Imperials and Imperial-aligned Nords actually have a valid reason to see Ulfric as having broken some pre-existing law.

Ultimately we will never agree on their intentions because there's not enough evidence to confirm one or the other.

And you can believe that if you like. I will believe that like the Nords in Solitude saw, Ulfric broke a pre-existing Imperial law in killing Torygg, not that they simply make it up to give an excuse to arrest him. With the lack of evidence pointing either way, it's clear we'll never agree on the Empire's intentions in TES V.

Yet many of the Nords themselves don't care, they seem to prefer the Imperial ways over the old Nordic system (even if they respect it). After all, is a little foreign influence really so heinous compared to the idea that you can challenge someone weaker to a duel to the death and they'll be greatly shamed and likely lose their title if they decline?

Not if the person making the claim to the throne is in an imperial prison, because you followed imperial law.


Most of the jarls seem unwilling to upset the status quo(I recall several that state they'd like independence, but don't want to face the empire to do it). I doubt they'd raise a fuss if Ulfric had become high king and seceded.

We'll never know given our understanding of Imperial Law as it pertains to this is sketchy at best.

If they could, they would have done it by now. If Jarl Balgruuf had the power to keep the Legion out of Whiterun, I think the combined Jarls would have enough power to convene a moot, and ensure it was uninterrupted by the Empire even with Ulfric wanted for murder. And of course there would still be the issue of the Thalmor working to inflame things.

On the other hand, if Ulfric had never challenged Torygg, and never rebelled, and maybe actually approached the Empire on how the Thalmor contacted him and have been trying to manipulate him, things would have also been better. In fact, he probably would have even had a better chance of Skyrim seceding peacefully, or in the very least seceding more uninimously, if he hadn't challenged Torygg.

Seems like a copout to me, but ok.

Given that the legion trying to forcefully take whiterun would've likely led Balgruuf to side with Ulfric, it's not that surprising at all.

Nothing to suggest Ulfric ever knew he talked to an agent after the interrogation save for snippets that he reacts with hostility should they declare themselves.

Given his history with imperialized nords before, I don't think Ulfric wanted to go to jail again for however long the empire decided for voicing his opinion that Skyrim should secede. He already gave his opinion to Torygg when he first became high king. Torygg was never going to do it.

Ulfric is supposed to trust the empire after what happened in Markarth?

Likewise by your reasoning, Torygg could have declined the duel, stepped down and endorsed Ulfric as king at the moot, which would probably also have averted civil war. Lots of wouldas couldas. Bottom line is, if you believe Ulfric's cause is just, his means are not over the line, and vice versa with the empire.

Well here's my vision on how it is, the Empire was fighting a war against the Aldmeri Dominion in which they lost, they had to sign the White Gold Concordant which passes laws not even the Imperials want and Skyrim finally decides they don't wanna be apart of the Empire anymore because they don't want to accept the consequences from losing a war they participated in.
Even then if Skyrim was independent, the Thalmor would easily take over them as well and not even have protection from the Empire,
which again ends them in having the same laws again.
how does Ulfric plan to take on Hammerfell, Cyrodiil, Valenwood, and Elsweyr? they may have defeated the Imperials but those are only the Dogs of the Thalmor.
I joined the Legion because pointing out the differences between everyone in Tamriel is not going to help get rid of these dang Thalmor >:|
start a rebellion against them, not your brothers who wish for the same as you.

Who says he plans to invade Hammerfell? He's asking them for support, along with High Rock. And he doesn't mention any plans to invade Cyrodiil, either. As for Valenwood and Elsweyr, they are in the Dominion so you're going to have to deal with them no matter which side you choose in Skyrim's civil war.

Guys you have to understand...Skyrim was controlled by the EMPIRE, its laws go BEFORE nordic laws.

Hell even Ulfric admits that he was wrong, when you meet him in soveguard he says all he wanted to do was free skyrim, instead all the civil war did was kill good men on both sides.

Never mind

He was in contact with the Thalmor prior to the incident. By my understanding of the Markarth Incident, he should have realized that the Empire had been played just like he was.

One of my first players was an Imperial, who I still maintain. I've done a character with the Stormcloaks but this time I've got a Breton. I'm trying to play a game and stay out of the war just to see if its possible. As the Imperials I felt like a [censored] cutting down Ulfric, as the Stormcloaks I felt like an ape disemboweling General Tullius.

I wasn't arguing "background" so much as arguing for not trying to force one's own notions of "right" on others.... I did the MQ on one toon, and parts of both "sides" on two other toons (one for each side). And that's the point at which I decided not to do any of the above again.... I also did the TG and DB on one toon each, so I would have some idea of what goes on in those questlines, though I won't ever do them again either.... I have read all the books in game - but that's suspect as background. I've also dug into some of the lore.... not enough to ever qualify as "knowledgeable" about it though - and I doubt I'll ever go any deeper than I have at this point.

The Legion is the only way to a long term stability. Considering the Stormcloaks can be considered the time when an Empire splits, if such splits happen, you can see that it will eventually end badly for an Empire and with no Empire, Skyrim will be surrounded by Thalmor troops. They'll hold out for some time against the Thalmor but one province can only provide so much against the Thalmor.

I have to wonder, did Ulfric expect Torygg to accept his challenge? It seems like he hoped he would decline and that they could avoid bloodshed when trying to free Skyrim. Maybe he only used the voice because he felt surprised?

Killing Torygg was one of the biggest mistakes Ulfric made during this war. He upset alot of Nords that would have joined him otherwise. Not only that, but regicide doesn't put you in a good light.

No reason to assume that he knew the Thalmor were trying to influence him. In fact we don't even know for sure that they actually were, only that his handlers are trying to claim credit for it all now.

I don't think he expected Torygg to decline the duel. Either way, he would get what he wanted, which was to force a moot or else expose the imperial corruption of Nord leadership.


If Hammerfell had stayed in the empire, they would be either largely or completely occupied by the Thalmor by now.

All the souls in the mist are in despair. Legate Rikke is despairing over the war, too.

Hell, if Hammerfell can make a stand against the Thalmor without help from the Empire, it's hardly far fetched that Skyrim could either. Especially when you add in the fact that if your Dragonborn backs the Stormcloaks, they're not going to lose.

I'm not saying Titus Mede II is a good leader. Yeah, Hammerfell left the Empire. However, the reason for that is that they had to. In the case of Hammerfell, they literally had to leave or they'd be overrun. However, even if they didn't leave, it would be another Iraq. You know, with the guerrillas and the fact that every living person on Nirn hates the Thalmor.