DrunkenMage
Intoxicated Arch-Mage
1. The author is a forsworn sympathizer which is obvious from his only other book.
Which means he has the motive to look for answers, but he also has bias to make the Forsworn seem better.
2. The author was not present at the time the events took place, how do we know this its not mentioned anywhere? From his words its obvious he would not fight with/for Ulfric so if he where there then according to his own words he would have been murdered along with everyone else - unless what he says is a lie.
He never claims to be there. Many books about events aren't from first hand experience.
3. The author is an Imperial and has an imperial agenda to make Ulfric look bad. In the book he says:
Again, race doesn't mean anything. Some of the most damaging books about the Empire have come from Imperials.
So he is disappointed in Ulfric's actions "jeopardizing the treaty" yet the Empire could have avoided a war all together if they signed the first one. The "treaty that so many sacrificed for during the Great War" was all in vain, they sacrificed for the empire to sign away what they started fighting for in the first place.
No, the Empire wouldn't have accepted the terms at the mere threat of war. After a long and destructive war, many accepted peace at any price. The Empire was never going to win the first war, but it couldn't also agree to terms that shake the foundations of the Empire without a bloody nose.
Also by all indications, the Aldmeri Dominion would have overrun Hammerfell without the Legions having been there. It would have been a quick victory for them, as Hammerfell wasn't united and they weren't fighting Cyrodiil.
The only reason they actually decided to try destroy the Empire is they found out it was weaker than they expected. Now if the Emperor accepted the ultimatum, and civil war broke out everywhere. Do you believe the Thalmor would leave them be? Especially when their spies report that Imperial strength was overestimated.
4. Apart from the book, there is no other in game evidence to support any of the claims made in the book. You think maybe one or two people who lived in Markarth at the time would have remembered such a massacre?
Massacre or liberation? You're looking at it from the Scholar's eyes, many people actually would have thought the Nords were heroes. Executions are mentioned to happen regarding the Forsworn uprising, even a line about "The Nords didn't who who was or wasn't involved"
The author claim that the Forsworn were mostly peaceful during their rule, yet when you first enter Markarth a Forsworn is murdering an innocent women. Every single Forsworn you meet in the wild will attack and try to kill you on sight, and for what reason? The Forsworn are savages and worship hagraven's and make human sacrifices, this is how they live outside Markarth why would they be any different inside?
Firstly the Forsworn killing the woman is under orders from the Silver-Bloods, that "innocent woman" is actually an Imperial Agent working for the Empire.
The Forsworn you meet in the wilds are that way now, it has been twenty six years. It seems unlikely they would have been like that in the city, if I recall they formed an alliance with the Hagravens after they became the Forsworn.
So basically how I interpret that - they killed a whole bunch of Nord's but don't don't pay any attention to that, they are only rebels that fight our glorious empire, Ulfric massacred these peaceful people!
Basically it pulls it more into focus, where the author is picking at one event. By all accounts Ulfric and the Jarl (both would have done executions together) were within the law, the Forsworn did rebel against the kingdom and treason does = death. Anyone killed for not aiding the Nords, is actually justified in Tamriel law.
- Every women and child killed is a huge overstatement.
Claims children old enough to wield a sword that didn't pick one up. Chances are many people did actually aid the Nord militia, the battle would have lasted awhile.
- This book is an imperial attempt to damage the Ulfric's name and cause, and to paint the empire in a better light.
Seems more like a Pro Reachmen attempt to damage the image of Nords themselves. Given by his second book, the Empire isn't in better light either. By the same token I could claim that as Stormcloak propaganda.
If it was Imperial propaganda itself, trying to damage the Stormcloak cause. It would mention the Stormcloaks, or even hint about the rebellion.
The two books actually make more sense as trying to make the Forsworn have an interesting background, as to what made them the way they are now. People just believe it Civil War related, but really they aren't.