High King Harald doesn’t make sense.
I think I’m going to stop doing this series on a regular basis, and instead start a recurring blog for UESP news. The blurbs on the wiki’s news section don’t cover much, some site-related events deserve greater acknowledgement, and I find myself with more than a paragraph of off-topic things to say when I make these.
Also, finding real discrepancies in the lore is not easy. There are plenty of differing viewpoints, but overt mistakes in the lore which contradict some other established piece of the world are few and far between. They go to great efforts to keep their facts straight; that’s a huge reason why I love this series so much! Anyways, on to the nit-picking. From the lore page:
Some sources apparently conflate Harald’s “reign” with his entire life. Frontier, Conquest accredits the years 1E 113 to 221 to him (108 years). Both the Daggerfall Chronicles and the 1st Edition Pocket Guide state that he died at the age of 108, placing his birth at 1E 113. The 3rd Edition Pocket Guide states that by 1E 113, “the entirety of modern Skyrim was under the reign of King Harald”, suggesting his birth and reign coincided. However, a memorial plaque in Windhelm confirms that his reign began in 1E 143, when he was about 30 years old.
It’s possible that Harald was proclaimed king upon birth, with a regent running Skyrim until he reached the age of majority … which is apparently thirty years old in Skyrim. But this is ancient Skyrim we’re talking about, where kings apparently still ruled through right of arms. Why have a baby High King?
Then again, maybe these two issues could cancel one another out? Maybe the High King dies with his heir Harald in utero, a regent assumes the throne in Harald’s name, and he/she was such a badass that even Harald didn’t have the balls to take the throne until three decades had gone by? I don’t know, but I think there might be a story to be told here.