Esteemed Speaker,
I would ask you to request he senate librarian to post the candidate manifestos in the senate library for easy perusal by our fellow sentors.
Printable View
Esteemed Speaker,
I would ask you to request he senate librarian to post the candidate manifestos in the senate library for easy perusal by our fellow sentors.
I'd like to ask all of the consular candidates the following question(s)
Your words, candidates, about conquest, the glory of battle and even the death of Pyhrrus are hopefull indeed...
but how do you propose to finance your war ?
What are you planning to construct in the currently owned settlements ?
:
How will you deal with other nations, the Macedonians for example, will you seek their aid or their land ?
:
And further more what do you plan to do when Pyhrrus is no longer here, surely that will be long before the end of your reign ?
What are your goals, for your consular period - what are you trying to achieve?
I and I'm sure the other senators would like to know the answers to these predicaments, for the sake of the republic of course.
:balloon2:
We have a large standing army which we can ill support for an extended period on our current budget, especially if we raise an additional third praetorian legion. Therefore we must, for their own protection and our financial security, conquer and occupy the rebellious latin and etruscan city states. It is their and our only hope of long term survival.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutch_guy
Our main focus should initially be on improving our road system. This is vital both for trade and military reasons. Afterwards the focus should be on trade related structures like traders and ports. In Rome itself I would start work on an academy, which is essential as we are in dire need of learned men of all trades to serve our nation.
Should victory be ours against Pyrrhus I would, after these first critical buildings, desire to raise temples to honour Mars and Jupiter, and additionally I would like to honour Mercury with a temple so he shall bless our trade efforts. With the skilled administrators we have I see no reason not to set the tax rate to high in all our settlements, this will incite our population to better and enrich themselves.
From the first moment we should train troops to complement our existing legions, to serve as garrisons and for the to be created third legion. I will raise roman troops in Rome and italian troops in Ancona and Capua continuously untill the number of troops has reached a satisfactory level.
I would immediately send out our esteemed diplomat Sextus Antio to sue for a ceasefire with the Greeks to give us more time to consolidate and to make us better able to crush them later. Whether this ploy succeeds or fails, I will send Sextus Antio out into the east, travelling round the mediterranian, offering an open hand of friendship and trade to all we find living there. I would especially try to form an alliance with the nations that border the Greeks and try to incite them to attack our enemies. As soon as a non-troops-producing city is available I would train a second diplomat and send him out to the west to do the same. A third diplomat would be stationed in Italy itself to carry out the wishes of the senate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutch_guy
If Pyrrhus agrees to our demand to surrender his colonies in southern italy, I am willing to consider peace if the senate agrees. I find this an unlikely scenario however, but I think honour demands an effort should be made, before we crush him utterly.
With that much territory conquered, an effort should be made to stabilize and to make our position unassailable. Therefore I will slowly raise our army strength to four praetorian legions, two stationed north and two stationed south, while spending most of our budget in improving our infrastructure and trade and auxilia buildings. Within five years our position should be made so strong our neighbours should fear our military and financial prowess.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutch_guy
The Republic of Carthage especially worries me, it has become strong and powerful and has a strong hold on most of Sicily, from which they might try to invade us in the future. I forsee a clash between our nations in the future and we should be prepared to meet that challenge.
I will not seek war, this is not the Roman way, but any nations that dares to threaten us will feel our rightious retaliation.
Firstly security, secondly stability, thirdly a high standard of living for our citizens.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutch_guy
I hope I have answered the questions of my esteemd collegae to his satisfaction and that of the senate. These are my personal views and as such secondary to the wishes of the senate, which I will carry out to the limit of my ability.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutch_guy
I must say I am not in favor attacking north. This body has swayed my view. Could the consuls who think expanding north is neccessary answer these:
Question1: What steps will you take to defeat Pyrrhus?
Question2: What is your plan if Pyrrhus defeats a Roman army in the field?
Question3: What will be your policy about these factions: Macedon, Carthage, Gaul, Greece
Question4: Why is it neccessary to expand north now?
I will withhold my opinions on the matter of specific motions until the house recieves answers to these questions and any others.
ab cedo ab area
I yield the floor
And what action, may I ask, would you take if we are assaulted simeltaneously by massive armies from both the Gauls and Carthaginians, in Roma and Rhegion respectively? This might be a scenario you will face, should you allow these powers to build up over time.
Also, do you intend to crush Pyrrhus and then leave Tarentum and Croton in the hands of the arrogant Greeks and their unorthodox customs?
Finally, before you fall asleep reading this, does higher living standards for our citizens simply mean higher standards for the Romans who have citizenship, or for all Italian citizens? Or, do you plan on denying Italian comrades citizenship upon liberation, and instead sell them as slaves to Romans to better their lives?
I will take a moment to address the specific issues raised by the Senators.
how do you propose to finance your war?
I believe wars finance themselves. Control of additional regions provides additional income. Currently, our income can support our army. As long as the Republic grows as the army does, we will not have financial problems. Of course, this can be augmented by increasing the output of our current provinces, by upgrading trading facilities, roads, and signing trade agreements. More on that to follow.
What are you planning to construct in the currently owned settlements?
There has been some demand for an Academy in Rome, and that I agree with, as long as the funds don't take away from military needs. Other than that, I will focus on economic construction, improving the trade infrastructure, both sea-borne and by roads, which also serve a dual military purpose. Military construction is generally unnecessary at this time, but the fleet must be improved, which may require some construction.
How will you deal with other nations, the Macedonians for example, will you seek their aid or their land?
It varies with nation. The Macedonians should not be considered enemies at this time, as they are the rivals of the Greeks, although I would not consider them close friends either. The Greeks themselves I would seek a ceasefire with, after Pyrrhus is dead and they have been completely ejected from Italy. I believe that in that case they will not be a threat. The barbarians are to generally be ignored. Carthage is our main rival, and although I do not forsee open warfare with them during the upcoming Consular term, I would take steps to limit their expansion and influence, by, for example, capturing Messana.
And further more what do you plan to do when Pyhrrus is no longer here, surely that will be long before the end of your reign?
After Pyrrhus, I plan to capture all of southern Italy, get a foothold on Sicily, and take Etruria and Umbria in the north. I plan to upgrade the fleet so that it may compete with the navy of Carthage. If we got into a war with Carthage, and could gain naval superiority in the western Mediterranean, we could invade and capture their islands which would be cut off, and then invade Iberia or Africa wherever we feel it would be most advantageous to us. We would be assured victory.
What are your goals, for your consular period - what are you trying to achieve?
Over the next 5 years, we must achieve dominance over the entire Italian peninsula, and prepare for a war with Carthage. Although such a war may not come soon, we must be ready.
***
I would like to point out to Senator Glaucus that I am not one of those who wishes to expand north before Pyrrhus is defeated. Only after southern Italy is secured do I wish to capture Etruria and Umbria, but not necessarily get into a war with the Gauls. I believe the Senator's questions were, therefore, not addressed at me, and will skip them.
And what action, may I ask, would you take if we are assaulted simeltaneously by massive armies from both the Gauls and Carthaginians, in Roma and Rhegion respectively?
If that were to happen, Rome would be the primary defensive objective. All the available legions would be combined, leaving the south momentarily undefended, while they defeated the Gallic incursion. They would then either move, or be shipped by sea, which is faster, south to intercept the Carthaginians. This scenario is precisely why we need a strong navy. If we can stop Carthage from landing and reinforcing large armies in Sicily, from Africa, then we have secured our southern border.
Also, do you intend to crush Pyrrhus and then leave Tarentum and Croton in the hands of the arrogant Greeks and their unorthodox customs?
Not at all, the Greeks must be expelled from Italy. I would do that as soon as the town of Corfinium was on our side.
Finally, before you fall asleep reading this, does higher living standards for our citizens simply mean higher standards for the Romans who have citizenship, or for all Italian citizens? Or, do you plan on denying Italian comrades citizenship upon liberation, and instead sell them as slaves to Romans to better their lives?
I shall not conceal the fact that I will favor Rome above all others. But all Italians loyal to Rome shall receive fair treatment.
[QUINTUS]I thank the noble Senators for their questions. They show a subtle and detailed grasp of the issues. I am grateful for the opportunity to explain my own analysis and intentions.
==========================================================
To answer, the Senator Dutch_guys' questions:
>>but how do you propose to finance your war ?
The theme of my Consulate would be expansion. So long as we remain on the Italian peninsula, seizing cities will increase our revenue without increasing our costs. Two armies can defend the whole of Italy as well as they can defend our three existing provinces. In short, I concurr with my honorable friend, Senator FLYdude, that wars of expansion can pay for themselves.
Beyond that, I would favour the construction of economic buildings - traders, roads, ports - in conquered towns. The natural reluctance of the conquered to fight for the conqueror requires that most of our military recruitment must come from our existing provinces.
Taxes I would set at high, unless that kills population growth. Early on, the good citizens of Roma may have to pay an even steeper price for war.
>>What are you planning to construct in the currently owned settlements ?
Traders in Capua and Ancona, then military buildings. Our three provinces must be all be capable of producing a variety of well armoured soldiers. One city on either side of the peninsula must be devoted to construction of a navy, although I would need to survey the coast to find the most suitable harbours.
In Roma, I would initially prioritise a stables to recruit equites and an academy to teach young additions to our great families. Thereafter, I would work towards a foundry so that our armies are the best equipped in the world.
>>How will you deal with other nations, the Macedonians for example, will you seek their aid or their land ?
I would seek trade with all we meet and avoid war with all but Pyrrhus and rebels.
>>And further more what do you plan to do when Pyhrrus is no longer here, surely that will be long before the end of your reign ?
I would expand our Republic throughout the Italian peninsula and into Sicily, stopping only when our borders touch those of Carthage and Gaul.
>>What are your goals, for your consular period - what are you trying to achieve?
(1) Expansion of territory
(2) Economic growth
(3) Expulsion of Greece from Italy and Sicily
(4) Cultivation of a healthy cadre of fellow generals, with good traits and useful ancillaries
=========================================================
To answer Senator Glaucus's questions:
>>Question1: What steps will you take to defeat Pyrrhus?
Pyrrhus will defeat himself. To march south to face him in open battle is folly. We will surely win, but the casualties will be high. Instead, let him undo himself. He will divide his armies. He will deplete them subduing and then garrisoning rebels that otherwise we would have to defeat. And yes, he will soon march on us within the year. But he will come piecemeal. We, by contrast, will bide our time until the time is right. Then, when he is over-extended, we will strike repeatedly with a full consular army. We will defeat his captains, trap his garrisons and slowly dismember his army. With great numerical superiority in each encounter, our losses will be minimal and victory assured.
>>Question2: What is your plan if Pyrrhus defeats a Roman army in the field?
Your premise is inconceivable.
>>Question3: What will be your policy about these factions: Macedon, Carthage, Gaul, Greece
For the next five years, physical constraints limit our realm of concern to Italy and Sicily. Outside that realm, I would seek trade and peace with all.
Greece has declared war on us and must be expelled from our realm. Her presence here is an affront.After that, we can regard her like Macedon - peace and trade can be sought.
Carthage and Gaul will attack us eventually. We must seek to prepare for the inevitable and deterr it to allow yet more time for preparation. But when they strike, we should mercilessly conquer all provinces sharing a land border with us - driving the Carthaginians across the sea and the Gauls across the Alps.
>>Question4: Why is it neccessary to expand north now?
It is unnecessary. But it is desirable to expand at every opportunity. We must feign weakness to fool Pyrrhus into dividing his forces. That implies a light southern garrison. While Pyrrhus takes over the rebel towns to our south, we will be able to seize at least one rebel town north of us. Our lines of communication are short and we will be able to quickly return south when he enters our lands.
=========================================================
To answer Senator Tiberius's questions:
>>And what action, may I ask, would you take if we are assaulted simeltaneously by massive armies from both the Gauls and Carthaginians, in Roma and Rhegion respectively? This might be a scenario you will face, should you allow these powers to build up over time.
By this time, we should have two full Consular armies - one in the north, one in the south (Sicily). Each alone should be able to defeat any army our enemies throw at us. We only risk defeat is we are engaged by multiple enemy armies. That is only likely if we march blind into enemy lines. I will ensure each army follows paths scouted by a spy to avoid such peril.
>>Also, do you intend to crush Pyrrhus and then leave Tarentum and Croton in the hands of the arrogant Greeks and their unorthodox customs?
Greece's presence in Italy and Sicily is intolerable. I utterly disagree with my honourable friend, Senator DDW. Peace with Greece, however, temporary, will not avail us. We are stronger than Pyrrhus and will only three provinces to call our own, we must expand now if we are to keep pace with our larger rivals.
>>Finally, before you fall asleep reading this, does higher living standards for our citizens simply mean higher standards for the Romans who have citizenship, or for all Italian citizens? Or, do you plan on denying Italian comrades citizenship upon liberation, and instead sell them as slaves to Romans to better their lives?
The towns and cities we will liberate are small and will take time to mature and develop the necessary infrastructure. Depleting their populations by enslavement will slow that progress to a crawl. Roma will grow with or without additional slaves. I will occupy, not enslave, all Italian provinces.
It seems much has occured in my absense. I will atempt to avoid rhetoric as these proceedings are becoming rather lengthy as it is.
Publius Laevinius
Fellow senators we face a trying time ahead of us. Pyrrhus marches north as we speak and we stand with our backs to the wall. Our army marches forth on gold alone and as we stand with our territorial holdings our treasury is not sufficient to support such a war effort as will be needed.
We must seek the alliances of the various other latin states that surround us and face the same threat. This will without doubt require some persuasion as these small states are proud and disdain our rule. To some only steel can persuade . . .
One of our standing legions must march north under competent leadership to bring in the rebellious states of Arminium and Aretium immediatly. This will not only protect Rome herself but also fill her coffers with abundant funds. In the same way Paestrum must also be brought within our ranks by another legion. These states will of course be granted full citizenship and their auxiliary assimilation into the empire will begin immediatly.
The conscription of a third legion must begin immediatly. There are several standing garrisons in our cities that can be called forth and it will only take a season or two to assemble these troops with new recruits to fashion a third legion. This will be compelted easily before Pyrrhus has the time to march north from his currently reported position.
Pyrrhus will without doubt march on Corfinium without delay and this cannot be avoided. But it can be planned for. By the time Pyrrhus captures Corfinium our 1st legion in Peastrum and our 3rd legion outside of Ancona will be in position to flank his army. Once he is within this trap he will be crushed like the bug he is and upon his death will follow the liberation of all of southern italy from the Greeks and the inclusion of all independant cities.
I have great faith in our diplomat that he will serve us well in his travels to Macedon, Illyria, and Carthage to offer trade and perhaps alliance as well depending on circumstances.
With southern Italy liberated and unified and its auxiliary assimilation well under way it will be time to look further. Rome herself needs improvements and with this considerable amount of tax income pouring into our treasury from the newly aquired possessions she will have all that she could want. An academy would only be the start.
The engines of war however do not stop. With such veteran legions on our borders being supported by our treasury it would be foolish to allow them to sit unused to waste. Sicily is only a small hop away and the Gauls as well will be removed from Italy once and for all to never again threaten Rome.
I will stretch our borders from the Alps in the North to Sicily in the South so that no enemy army can ever again set foot on Roman land and Rome will be more powerful than she has ever been before or ever dreamed she could be.
I still do not agree about trading with Gauls. True, it earns denarii for the republic, but are we so corrupt to forget the atrocities the Gauls inflicted upon us for a paltry sum money?
Your strategy is a foolish one, would you have us fight both the Gauls and Carthaginians at once?
Senators, before I delve into deeper matters, I would like announce that, as per the previous request, the currently available Manifestos of the candidates for the Consulship have been posted in the vestibule of the Senate Library. There they shall remain until after the election has been decided. In addition, all motions enacted into law will be posted there as well, until such time as they become obsolete or are otherwise made ineffective.
As for the issues at hand, my questions for the candidates have already been asked or answered. However, some statements have been made by my fellow Senators today that I feel I must respond to.
First, Senator SwordsMaster urges us to delay a confrontation with the hated Pyrrhus. I understand the strategy behind his desire to take the enemy piece by piece and I applaud his desire to keep Roman men from slaughter. However, I cannot understand how this desire has any manifestation except to place faith in the enemy himself! Such a plan requires that we stand by and wait, trusting in the Greek to dismantle his own power and give us the advantage. Fellow Senators, we cannot ensure that such an action will occur. By delaying, we give Pyrrhus the chance to choose the time and place of the coming conflict. Yes, he may disperse his forces, be so too may he concentrate and either fall back behind the walls of Tarentum or advance on the southern Italian states in force! Either way, we will be giving the initiative to the foe and trusting in his own ignorance to see us to victory. I say we cannot take this risk. A direct and immediate confrontation of Pyrrhus may be costly in Roman blood, but it is the only way we can ensure that the battle will be fought on Roman terms. Think also of our prospective allies in the independant Italian states, north and south. What will they think of the power of Rome if we delay, if we stall, in the presence of the enemy? I urge whichever candidate that wins this election to confront the Greeks immediately and to end this threat without hesitation!
Secondly, in one of his questions, Senator Tiberius made a comment suggesting that he was planning on giving Roman citizenship to all Italian states. I find it difficult for me to even repeat such a comment. Does Senator Tiberius really propose to give away the rights of true born Romans to every man we march by? Have they sacrificed as much as we have, to earn such an honor? Did the Italians found this city? Did the Italians throw off the yoke of the Etruscan kings? I tell you now, the ghost of Lucius Junius Brutus will curse all who suggest such a thing! Our Italian allies are worthy men, for certain, and for their service we should rightly reward them. We will provide them with security. We will develop their cities and make them prosperous. Their sons will grow healthy and strong with our gratitude. However, some things are not ours to give away. Roman citizenship should remain only with the sons of Romulus! Anything else betrays all that we have fought for.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ignoramus
I am not sure who you were addressing but if you were addressing me then i can only say that i said nothing of the sort.
[QUINTUS]:Apologies, noble Senators - I believe Senator Ignoramus was addressing me.Quote:
Originally Posted by shifty157
On further reflection, I have decided to defer to expertise and judgement of our chief diplomat, Sextus Antio, who has advised against trading with the Gauls.
I must say, that some of the manifestos of the candidates, as well as the answers to questions from my colleagues are somewhat alarming me. You talk about long-term goals for our Republic, but that's just what they are: long-term. Right now we have a large army with a power-hungry general that is the immediate threat.
Econ21/Quintus, your initial strategy is commendable and practical. However, your blatant arrogance when it comes to the outcome of the confrontation with Pyrrhus frightens me greatly. What if he doesn't divide? Surely you must have a backup plan in case something goes wrong. If you do not address this than be assured that you will not garner my vote for Consul.
Flydude/Tiberius Coruncanius, you have a very solid strategy for dealing with Pyrrhus. However, I believe that you also have some of the flaw that you attributed to our enemy- arrogance. The Carthaginians pose no threat to us at the current state. Their armies are weak- composed mainly of mercenaries. Surely we should concentrate on the territories closer to home, like Northern Italy?
DDW/Lucius Amelius, your domestic strategy is well-thought out, and has little flaws. However, you fail to say how you will deal with the clear and present threat- Pyrrhus of Eprius has a large army bent on destroying us, in case you forgot! Please put into detail how you plan to defeat him.
Shifty/Publius Laevinius, your strategy is extremely interesting: send half of our current forces away from the threat! You speak of time to raise a third legion. I know phalangites are slow, but I did not realize they were that slow! Suppose Pyrrhus were to move faster then anticipated- then you have one, maybe one and a half legions to deal with him. Please keep that into consideration.
I apologize if the esteemed candidates deem my words harsh, but these are hard times and I want the correct man leading us.
[QUINTUS]:
Senator GeneralHankerchief, this is a time for plain speaking and you are to be commended for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by GeneralHankerchief
What would you have me say? My spies inform me that Pyrrhus currently has an army equivalent to a Praetorian army. By the end of Spring, I will have concentrated our scattered forces into a single Consular army, twice as large as his. Have we Romans become so timid that we fear giving battle with such odds? Even if Pyrrhus does not divide, he will not be able to defeat our main army.
He has few assets. His elephants can be countered by our many velites. He has a superiority in cavalry and missiles, although by Summer, my recruitment of funditores and allied cavalry will have greatly reduced that advantage. These few advantages will not be sufficient to outweigh our superior quantity and quality of heavy infantry. It is inconceivable that we will lose such a contest.
Now, I concede, it is possible that, by bad luck or misjudgement, he may defeat a detachment of our troops located far from the Consular army. But so long as our Consular army remains undefeated, we will - sooner or later - be able to bring him to battle and defeat him.
You must understand - this is not arrogance. I would not dream of sending any one of our present commands alone against Pyrrhus. But when we outnumber him two to one on the field, victory is inevitable.
Now, you may say - what if he gathers more men to his army? And so also musters a full consular force? To this, I make two observations. Firstly, such an event is much more likely if we blithely march south in strength, rather than draw him north by feigning weakness. Secondly, in such an event, I would stand on the defensive on high ground, allowing his men to tire themselves out approaching us. The edge would still be with us.
And yet, I hear you still persist - what if we should lose? Then, I say this: we already have enough men to form a Praetorian army in addition to our Consular one. With additional recruitment and the survivors from our imagined defeat, we will once more outnumber a victorious Pyrrhus (a man who has earned something of a reputation for costly victories). And again, in such an event, I would not immediately seek to confront him. I would give him the opportunity to divide his forces, become diverted by petty sieges and only give battle in the most favourable of circumstances.
I generally agree with Senator econ21 on the strategy to be employed against Pyrrhus. We both think that the two Legions should be combined, and that they should engage Pyrrhus in battle. I will point out where we differ, and explain why I believe my strategy to be superior.
The difference is where Pyrrhus is to be engaged. I believe the two Legions should march south, past Corfinium, link up somewhere south of it, and engage Pyrrhus in battle on the open fields of Samnium. Senator econ21 seems to believe that the engagement should take place further north.
But I see one significant problem with the region north of Corfinium: mountains. Starting in Tarentum and moving northwest toward Corfinium, you come upon a fork. If you take a left, you arrive in Capua, and if you take a right, you arrive in Ancona. And between these two roads is an impassible mountain range. To get from Ancona to Capua, one would have to travel via Latium, passing close to Rome. Now, if you are to have a single army, how will you defend both approaches?
I think that a plan to defend north of Corfinium assumes that Pyrrhus will be willing to engage your army. And indeed he may. But if he was smart, he could instead take the other approach, and capture the city you were not defending. I think that's a risk better not taken, and I believe Pyrrhus should be met somewhere on the open ground south of Corfinium.
I apologize to Senator Quintus (econ21), for misreading his proposal, I thought he stated that we ought to attack Gaul and Carthage, whereas Senator Quintus stated: "But when they strike, we should mercilessly conquer all provinces sharing a land border with us - driving the Carthaginians across the sea and the Gauls across the Alps."
I, Senator Antio, do apologize to Senator Quintus.
A full third legion can be assembled in the proper position in two seasons. Most likely this will coincide with the fall Corfinium. I have given this much careful consideration and know that the timing will work perfectly.Quote:
Originally Posted by GeneralHankerchief
We need to advance north immediatly to bring more money into our treasury. Arminium will fall the first turn followed closely by Aretium in the next season. The gauls do not begin with nor have the potential to raise a significant army in the area to threaten our hold.
[QUINTUS]: Senators! If I may take a moment to speak to issues beyond those of this election campaign. The deadline for proposing motions is tonight and I humbly wish to submit one for your consideration.
It concerns the development of our generals. All members of the Lower House aspire to lead our armies into battle. I propose that the First Consul, whoever he may be, take certain specific steps to prepare them for this.
First, you will notice that governors of Capua often attract fiery priests of Mars into their retinue. I propose that, where possible, generals in the Lower House be rotated through governorships of Capua so that they each attract such an invaluable ancillary for leading our men into attack.
Second, you will doubtless have studied the rules of Roman leadership laid down by the venerable Senator Marcus Camillus - they are available in the Senate library. There is a clear progression of office from Tribune through Legate to Praetor. These offices confer valuable traits in command and, when the general leaves office, also add to their influence as governors. However, you will note that the preconditions for attaining such office are lengthy periods in the field and ending a season in a settlement does not count for such duty. Therefore, I propose that where possible, generals of the Lower House do not end seasons in settlements but instead be left in command of armies or in forts. (If elected First Consul, I would build a fort between Roma and Capua to act as a central barracks for homeland defence and collecting replacements to be marched to the front.)
Clearly, these proposals are not absolute and hence I add the condition "where reasonable". Our priority is defeating Pyrrhus and all other considerations are secondary to that. Moreover, we will need a governor of Roma, at least. However, we will also have generals appear who wish to remain in the Upper House, some of which may never wish to take up arms. These individuals would be better suited for civic rather than military duty.
So, I propose:
MOTION 9: This House proposes that, where reasonable, generals from the Lower House be tasked with military duties. Specially that, where reasonable, they:
a) be rotated through the post of governor of Capua
b) end their turns outside of settlements
In short, honorable Senators, I wish you to instruct the First Consul to nurture and develop his generals of the Lower House so that each may some day become a fine commander who can lead our armies into the field as First Consul. Do I have a seconder for this motion?
I second this sensible motion by Senator Quintus.
Senator Quintus is certainly wise and his motion will do much to further proper education of our children in military matters after they leave the Academy following their 4 years as a Student. However, I must point out that such an advanced military education takes a great deal of time to obtain and that the present generation of honorable Generals has not completed even the first year of such a qualification. Why, you yourself, Senator Quintus, the foremost general of the Republic, would not achieve the rank of Praetor until the venerable age of 67.
It is in Rome's best interests to ensure that every last available dinarii is collected in taxes and trade from all sectors, especially at a time with such a looming conflict. I believe that at the current Generals of the Republic should be exempted from any such requirements of military duty.
When our legions need leadership, it should be given by you noble Senators. However, our cities are desperately in need of efficient governorship. The honorable Publius Laevinius, in particular, is acknowledged far and wide as having a remarkable managerial mind. Both you, Senator Quintus, and the equally generous Lucius Aemilius, also have significant managerial experience. The Republic needs you, but we need you to manage the provinces, to raise legions and to ensure great income to the treasury.
It is for this reason that I urge my fellow Senators to vote for my father, Senator Tiberius Coruncanius. You all know him as a lively man, but few would dispute that others are better skilled in the ways of management. My father would serve us best, not only for the wise policies proclaimed in his manifesto, but also because he is simply the man who we can most afford to spare. In addition, Tiberius Coruncanius has in his service an experienced Drillmaster to lend experience to the Legions. With this aid, my father will be able to march farther and faster than any other. Such leadership will be greatly needed when our armies are still small and scattered. We are at the crux of a time of great military conflict, we should elect he whose abilities most properly compliment our needs!
[QUINTUS]: Senator Amulius Coruncanius, your filial loyalty does you credit.
And it is true, our current family members stand somewhat disadvantaged by lacking qualifications as students and tribunes.
However, we must make do with what we have and regardless, experience can be a fine tutor.
Moreover, I would have you look at the character of a man, rather than his paper qualifications. The candidates for First Consul are by inclination fighters - eager to see battle.
Would you have them fester away, counting dinarii in our towns while callow youths - and here, I mean no disrespect to your young self - lead our armies?!
Senators of the House, I wholeheartedly support Tiberius Coruncanius and his family in these matters. Whilst some have spoken of striking North I direct you to our greater threat to the South, Pyrrhus.
It would be nice, if we had the luxury of time and distance to consider our options fully towards the Northern provinces but at this time it is Trade that we must consider to the Northern provinces rather than conquest. Income, Senators, income of Denarii, will enable us to strike at our enemies whilst keeping our homes safe. Whilst the North is weak, it is too tempting to strike at them but this can only mean detriment to our security as Pyrrhus moves against us.
I fear not Carthage, but in looking to the South we must consider Carthage as an opponent to us in the near future.....perhaps within a Consuls reign.
Nay, we must maximise our income by Trade with the North and overseas whilst we raise a Third Legion which can be used to strike North whilst our other two deal with Pyrrhus. The twin cities of Arminium and Aretium will fall swiftly but for these two seasons they are a warning buffer to us of any evil intent from the Gauls.
I also support Quintus's motion - Motion 9 - in its entirety, such action will be a good proving ground for our Generals of the Lower House. Generals of Note we will require in the seasons of the future I am sure. However, such actions are the future and we must act immediately to secure such a future!
So, to confirm my vote on the motions tabled thus far. I throw my support to Motions 1, 2, 5, 8 & 9 as I do not agree with the proposals covered under Motions 3, 4, 6 & 7.
Good afternoon Conscript Fathers :ave:
I commend the honourable Senator Quintus's proposals for the training and education of our young men, though I do worry that we may be burying our future Consul under a mountain of motions. I hope he will be able to keep track of them all when he is out in the field chasing down Pyrrhus!
I also have a question for our 4 consular candidates.
If and when we have defeated Pyrrhus and driven the Greeks from southern Italy, what peace terms will you attempt to extract from them? Roman honour demands that they must recompense us for their foolhardy aggression. Will you seek land? Tribute? What if a satisfactory peace cannot be obtained? Would you take the war to Greek soil?
Thankyou for hearing my questions honourable Senators.
We must seek and fight Pyrrhus in the open field. Whilst it is certain that his army will be weakened trying to take cities such as Corfinium, he WILL take them. Our latin countrymen, whilst not members of our Republic, are still of our blood. Worse than this, I would not commit a Legion to try and take such a city from Pyrrhus with his combination of Phalanx’s and Elephants such a venture will cost us dearly.
Whilst casualties are unavoidable, we must strike in such a way as to lessen them. We must hit Pyrrhus early and with as much force as we can bear upon him, and it must be done in open fields where we can out pace his slow moving troops and divide to defeat him.
Whilst we start to raise a third Legion from our heartlands we must re-enforce the two we have now and march them with all haste against Pyrrhus, once he is destroyed…and I have no doubt that our two full Legions will do this….we can march our newly raised, third, Legion North to reclaim those rebel cities in the North. From there the Legio III can guard against the Gauls and rearm just as our Legio’s I & II do so from the Southern regions whilst marching upon the Southern cities that claim independence from the Senate.
What occurs after this, I believe should be discussed at a later session. We have now to elect a Consul to carry out these orders and give clear and concise instruction to him….confused political “banter” can only lead to needless deaths. We should discuss what “peace” we demand from our beaten foes….once we have beaten them. My good Senator, we must walk before we run but rest assured that a punitive “peace” will be something I shall vote for, if indeed a “peace” is what we want.
What is clear to me at this time is that we must not allow Pyrrhus to occupy a city and we must not sit back and await his arrival in Capua! We must strike firm and swift and worry about the detail of what tribute we extract from the defeated after the act. Let them mull over their defeat whilst we re-arm for a few months.
Noble senators and friends, although I am not a running member for consul myself, I would like to put forward my views on how the Greeks should be treated. After the destruction of the Pyrrhic army, our noble colleague Sextus Antio should be sent to the Greek settments of Croton and Tarentum, to demand peace. The conditions will be ceasefire, trade rights, ten years of tribute, and the surrender of their Italian provinces to Rome. If they refuse, which will most likely happen, we should immediately send our Legions to take either Tarentum or Croton, repeat our demand, and then annex the remaining city should they refuse.
[QUINTUS]:Senators, I concurr with the course of action proposed by noble Tiberius.
It may be possible, although misguided, to make peace with Greece before we come to blows. But thereafter, I fear their blood will be up and reasonable negotiation impossible.
Nonetheless, Tiberius's proposal strikes a fine balance between the the need for honour and the requirements of the Republic.
[SENATE SPEAKER]: Voting on all Senate motions is now possible.
Results will be announced after 6pm Friday, UK time.
No further motions may be tabled until the mid-term session of Senate.
May I humbly suggest that Senators use the following two days to come to a decision as to who to elect First Consul?
Senators who have made up their minds are encouraged to speak out in favour of their preferred candidate, following the example of Senators Amulius Corncanius and Braden.
Such speeches may sway the minds of the undecided and inspire them to support your chosen leader. Indeed one might imagine that your leader may reward you for your support, if his is successful. Of course the possibility that you will make enemies cannot be ruled out either.
Very well.
"Fellow Romans, honourable men! I call upon you today to vote for my esteemed colleague Quintus! His strategy for dealing with Pyrrhus seems wise, and if the worst comes to the worst and Pyrrhus chooses to attack our Italian friends, Senator Quintus' command experience will make him regret the decision! Quintus is the most capable candidate for consulship. His experience throughout the years is invaluable to the people of Rome, and his effecient management of senatorial affairs proves that Rome's assets will be safe in this man's hands! His policies are peaceful, and not warmongering, just like any true Roman's should be! The plans he has proposed are solid and will without doubt lead Rome to greatness worthy of our Trojan descent!"
I do not agree with the latest diplomatic proposal by Senator Tiberius. I see no purpose in making offers that we expect the Greeks to refuse. It would be a waste of time, and a dishonorable diplomatic trick. Once we have captured Tarentum and Croton, and achieved our objectives, we can make more reasonable demands. I would consult with our diplomat Antio as to what the greatest demands we expect the Greeks to accept are.
I do not believe anyone wishes to fight Pyrrhus within the walls of Corfinium. Indeed we well know what devastation a phalanx can wreak in such close confines. But i do believe it is tactically better to let him come to us. With the advantages of the defensive as well as fresh and unweakened troops on our side Pyrrhus has no hope. Why rush hastily to meet Pyrrhus when we can more effectively wait for him to come to us. This will give us time to assemble another legion as well as bring our neighboring states under our rule. Their tax gold will be swelling our treasuries before Pyrrhus even sets foot in Roman land and with such excesses of gold we will be able to finance more construction and more armies sooner.
While trade and proper management are necessary, they would provide only a very small fraction of the gold that the conquest of our neighbors would bring immediatly. I am not saying that i would not seek trade. Quite the contrary i will order our diplomat far and wide to open new lanes of trade. I am saying however that sitting and waiting for trade to fill our treasuries would require a great deal of waiting and we have no such time to spare. Our time is short and we need new sources of income immediatly or we risk losing what gold we have.
I agree with senator flydude in chastising sentor Tiberius on his childish behavior concerning the Greeks. War is not something to be taken lightly. Peace even less so. To toy with peace in such a way by hanging it in front of the eyes of the Greeks is childishly cruel and completely unnecessary and far from as you say displaying our honor it tarnishes it by poking a wounded animal with a stick. Peace will not be toyed with in such a way as to make a mockery of our diplomacy, our government, and our country. Most importantly however our single diplomat has much more important matters to attend to than playing such a foolish game. Rather than making empty proposals to the Greeks he should be sent to distant lands to build good relations and to encourage trade.
So, Senator Laevinius, you propose that we station our army into cities so that we may defend from behind walls? I have many objections to this:
= We currently have three cities, any of which can be attacked by Pyrrhus.
-Should you choose to divide your troops, you will maybe face defeat.
-Should you concentrate all the troops in one city, Pyrrhus, being a military genius, will simply bypass it and siege another city. If you relieve the siege, you will get exactly what you have tried to avoid: battle in an open field.
-Pyrrhus will have strengthened his army by the time he sieges us, he is no fool.
=In street fighting, phalanxes are superior.
-When a group of phalangites march through our gates, they will kill and not be killed due to their spear wall.
-When they march through our streets, they will again be safe. The archers of Pyrrhus will be right behind the phalangites, raining death upon Romans.
-Elephants are pretty much juggernauts when attacking cities, and it will be difficult for our men to even launch two volleys of pila before routing in the face of the mighty Indian elephants.
-Our system of maniples was developed by our forefathers to be flexible and versatile. These are obviously advantages in open fields to us Romans, and we should make full use of them.
=Romans must not be seen as cowards hiding behind walls!
Forgive me, senator Laevinius, for being such an obviously 'foolish' and 'childish' person, not understanding your statement. But how exactly can we defeat the rebels while keeping our men 'fresh and unweakened'? Also, would you not give the Greeks a chance for peace? Us Romans have been threatened by their presence and obvious desires to conquer. Do you propose that we simply offer them a peace after their ridiculous behaviour and pretend nothing happened? This is weakness and is despicable. We are the sons of Mars, and should behave as such! I do not want war any more than you do, but anyone with a clear head should be able to see that the Greeks are not our friends and do not want to be either! War is the only solution. If you want an economy as you say, then the liberation of the Southern states from the hold of the Greeks and then the proceeding unification of the Southern Italian free states under Roman rule is the only way forward.
EDIT: I am sorry, senators, it seems I have made the same statement twice.
You have mistaken what i said. Now please carefully read what i say before jumping to conclusions and putting words in my mouth.
I will not sit with our armies inside the safety of cities. Indeed with the mods we are using there are very few city walls for protection at all. Regardless this would be folly and i never said this is what i intended to do.
I said that it would be best to wait for Pyrrhus to come to us to give us more time to prepare. At which point he should very much be engaged on an open field preferably with our armies on the defensive where we can take full advantage of the mobility of our troops and the immobility of the phalanx.
Battle would be waged on a field somewhere between Corfinium and our cities.
Let me again impart on the importance of this extra time to our war effort. The extra time would allow us to bring our surrounding neighbors into our empire and in so doing these extra possessions would swell our treasury immensely and immediatly and provide for the financial means by which to assemble a third legion. This can all be done in the time it takes Pyrrhus to march on Corfinium and would give us a much greater advantage against him when the final battle came.
The overwhelming financial benefits aside, new possessions in the north would serve to keep the gauls far from an imminent threat to our city Rome. If the gauls should take these lands before us then they are only a season's march from Rome's gates. They would be upon us before we could react. Possessing a provicne between us and the gauls forces them if they wish to declare war upon us to take that province first thereby giving us many turns warning to call up an army for Rome's defense. Not only this but conquering these two provinces would also mean that we would already have an army on our northern border with which to deter the gauls whether by presence or by force.
Another benefit of taking them immediatly would be that we can begin to assimilate them as auxiliaries that much sooner allowing us when the time comes to begin recruiting troops from these cities that many turns sooner. While this benefit may seem trivial now, in a year or two we will congratulate ourselves on having the forsight to begin assimilation with such expedience.
These territories are crucial both financially and strategically and the sooner they are obtained the sooner they will benefit us.
Also notice senator tiberius that i did not say that i wished for peace with the greeks as you so quickly assumed. I simply stated that your method was foolish and unnecessary. Now as i HAVE said before it is very important that we unite all of southern italy under our banner. This includes the liberation of the italian states under the control of the greeks as well as the unification of the independant states.
In trying to find contradictions within my words you have invented your own words which you claim are mine and you contradict yourself.
So, please tell me how I am contradicting myself. I claimed that you wanted peace. Surely, if you will make no attempt to force a favourable peace upon the Greeks, you are strengthening their nation and allowing them time without our interference?
You wanted to defend. If you want to defend in the field, there is no point in waiting. A battle with us attacking Pyrrhus would be vastly favourable. If he gets aggressive, we play defense and take out his army bit by bit. If he defends, we make use of his immobility and rain pila onto his elephants. The rest, the destruction of his phalangites, will come easily enough afterwards.
You mentioned defensive strategies because that way our troops would be 'fresh and unweakened'. If you propose to take the Northern states first, they will not be 'fresh and unweakened'.
Our present two legions are incomplete. The 'completion' of them, if you like, will take half a year, as that is how long it takes to recruit the triarii needed to complete them. Pyrrhus will be able to march on Corfinium within the season if he chooses to. So, by the time we have our first two legions, and far from having our third one, Pyrrhus will have attacked Corfinium, contrary to what you have stated.
Conquering the Northern states with our legions and then evacuating them because of a need to fight Pyrrhus in the south seems to be quite ridiculous. It would make the Gauls definitely declare war, creating a need for a Northern army to defend ourselves. This would drain precious finances, and the underdeveloped cities would not pay off.
Even the time to march our armies to the North and back again is enough for Pyrrhus to besiege, attack and conquer Corfinium.
Unnecessary? Why? We Romans should always give the enemy a way out. It is the correct thing to do. If they refuse to swallow their pride and surrender, we will destroy their influence on Italia. It is fair and just. I will not allow our enemies to portray us as savages killing Greeks in Italia and refusing peace. If the Greeks have learned their lesson, they should evacuate from Italia peacefully, or they shall suffer the consequences.
I do not intend on leaving the northern provinces undefended as you suggest. Within time there will be more than enough troops to defend the north and to bolster the armies against Pyrrhus. You make it seem as if we are in infinitly more peril than we truly are. Indeed as i siad before the gauls do not begin with an army in the area, nor do they have the potential to assemble one in such a short amount of time.
Also I have no intention of recruiting triarii as you suggest. There is not the time nor the funds to recruit them. They will have to wait a bit while more necessary troops are recruited.
Though the northern army will have seen battle. The southern armies would have not aside from the taking of Paestrum which is hardly cause for concern compared with what Pyrrhus will no doubt face in Corfinium.
As i said before. Taunting the greeks with empty proposals for peace is both dishonorable and a waste of time. We have only a single diplomat and it would do the empire infinitely more good for him to travelling about the world creating good relations and encouraging trade than to have him taunt the greeks. I am sure that senator flydude agrees with me on this issue.
[QUINTUS]:Noble Senators, now that the scribes have begun collecting votes on our motions, I feel it is important that my fellow candidates for First Consul and I show leadership by casting our own votes. This will allow undecided Senators to better understand our positions. The alternative - to mask our intentions and make our peers choose among us in a fog of ignorance - would appear dishonourable.
But before I cast my vote, I would like to indicate my choices and also seek two small clarifications.
I support MOTIONS 2, 5, 9 and 10:. I believe they are uncontroversial.
As the theme of my Consulship would be expansion, I must support MOTION 8: and reject the mutually exclusive MOTIONS 6 & 7:. But with the provisio that there is no rush to move north. Pyrrhus is the main threat.
On MOTION 1:, I can vote for the letter of this motion but fear I may transgress it spirit. Suppose the First Consul marched first to take Arretium but then returned within the year to deal with Pyrrhus, would that be violating the spirit of the motion? I would be grateful if the noble Senator Tiberius would enlighten me on that point.
The same doubts apply to MOTION 3:. I would be inclined to move our armies north at first, but then return them all in haste to battle Pyrrhus. Once again, this seems consistent with the wording of the motion but perhaps not its spirit. Perhaps Senator GeneralHankerchief can enlighten me on this point?
On MOTION 4:, in this case, the timing now is clear and so in this case, I must decline. One year is too soon. An academy is expensive and we have other priorities. Two years would have been more reasonable. The honourable Senator Amulius Coruncanius will have to wait a little longer for his schooling. I note, with no condescension, that dear Amulius is in any regard rather too young to benefit from an Academy at this moment. So long as it is built within three years, he will not be forced to remain idle or ignorant when he comes of age. He may run free for a few more years, debating in the Senate and training in the martial arts, as a true Roman should, before he is forced to labour under the scribes in the manner of unfortunate Athenian youths.
After further debate, I have full confidence in the candidates who intend to battle Pyrrhus with two legions and I realize that three full legions fighting is unnessecary.
The original intent of Motion 3 was to raise a third legion quickly, and send all three legions at Pyrrhus at once. Now I realize that it is a waste of men and that third legion would be better used taking the cities directly to our north, then to be used as reinforcement in case the war against Pyrrhus is extended.
I trust that whichever general is leading the two consular armies will be victorious in this conflict. I therefore urge you to vote no on Motion 3. Yes, I realize that I was the one who originally proposed this motion.
I do hope that Motions 1 and 2 are approved by the good Senators, however. As to Motion 1, I assume that it means marching off to confront Pyrrhus before any other missions that do not directly relate to the King. If it does not, then I must ask the good Speaker to withdraw my "yes" vote for Motion 1 and put it under "no."
I have also placed my own votes. Those who wish to see where i stand as to the various motions may easily do so in the other thread.
You may be wondering as to my opinions most specifically in why i voted against certain motions so i shall give you as much information as i can.
I believe that motion 1 restricts the consul too much. While it has good intentions (indeed Pyrrhus must be combatted successfully) i believe it is for the consul to decide how he will recruit and position the armies. The senate may provide goals and objectives, but it is the consuls job to do what he deems necessary to accomplish these objectives.
If i do not approve of motion 1 then i can not approve of motion 3.
I believe that motion 4 is a very good motion however i do not believe that the treasury can support such a large expenditure within the coming year. The construction of an academy is without doubt something that must occur within the reign of this consul but i do not believe it is feasible so soon.
As to motions 6 and 7 i believe i have already made myself clear as to what i believe should be done militarily for the survival of our country.
I will take a moment to comment on the motions and state my intentions regarding them.
I support Motion 1 as stated, as I believe that there should be no delay in dealing with Pyrrhus, and also Motion 2.
However, Motion 3 I will vote against. Whether the III Legion should be sent south or north or used to defend Latium and Rome depends on the strategic situation. Does the Consular Army need help in the south? Are the Gauls an apparent threat? What is the state of the Gallic army? Is there a threat of naval invasion in Latium? All these questions must be answered before III Legion can be comitted to battle in the south. As they cannot be answered yet, it is not time to make the decision. A "No" vote would allow the Consul to make that decision when appropriate.
Motions 6, 7, 8 are similar to Motion 3 in that they attempt to make a decision too early. All of the above questions still apply, as well as the fate of Pyrrhus, the availability of troops, and the ability of Etruria and Umbria to defend themselves from the Gauls.
Although I support an Academy in Rome, I dislike the fixed timeframe of Motion 4. The construction of an Academy depends on the available funds and the necessity of other construction in Rome. I would leave this decision to the Consul, but if it appears that it is possible to build an Academy without detracting from the military effort, but the Consul has not attempted to do so by the mid-term, I would support a mid-term Motion that would call upon the Consul to being the construction with no delay.
Motion 5 also has a fixed timeframe, but it is simple to accomplish its objectives, and has the support of our chief diplomat, so I will support it.
Motion 9 is a generally good idea, and provides some leeway, which is important as we will at first have more generals than armies. However, as upper house senators become available to take governorships, and as we activate more armies, this Motion should be put into effect, and I support it.
Motion 10 is perfectly reasonable.
I shall soon vote as above, for the reasons stated.
I give my support to Senator Quintius for consul ship. While all the candidates can bring victory, i feel that Quintius can finish the war the quickest there forth keeping the cost down to the minimum.
Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears! Senator Quintus has the experience and generalship to defeat Pyrrhus, and to drive him and his despicable Greeks across the sea, back where they belong! The Greeks will run like frightened boars at the sight of Quintus and his legions. Rome shall let the world know who is ruler of Italy!
I am curious as to why you say this. As far as i am aware sneator quintus has never bestowed upon us any concrete plans for what steps he would take upon potential aquisition of his post. I am merely curious as to what you are basing your assertion on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ignoramus
To this end however i implore senator quintus to give us a detailed view into his strategies as i cannot say that i at least am fully aware of them.
I believe Senator Quintus said:
"Then, when he is over-extended, we will strike repeatedly with a full consular army. We will defeat his captains, trap his garrisons and slowly dismember his army."
Is that not clear enough? Once he has killed Pyrrhus, it is only logical that he would capture the Greek cities in Italy. Thus, he would teach them not to defy the might of Rome.
[Quintus]:I am indebted to Senator Antio Sextus for his confidence in me.
It is true, Senator Publius Laevinius, that my manifesto is short on detail but I hope my answers to the questions on the floor of this House have filled in some of the finer points.Quote:
Originally Posted by shifty157
Nonetheless, at the good Senator's request, I will sketch out my thinking so far.
As I have already communicated in private to those concerned, if elected I would install the Senator Publius Laevinius as governor of Roma; give Senator Tiberius Coruncanius command of a second, Praetorian, army; and make Senator Lucius Amelius military tribune in our first, Consular, army. These assignments are not based on backroom deals, but on an objective assessment of the current qualifications of these three fine Senators. Over time, as explained in Motion 9, I would seek to groom each of them for possible succession as First Consul.
What of Pyrrhus? My inclination is to take a Consular army north to quickly seize Arretium, leaving the Praetorian army near Roma to reinforce Capua and Ancona if threatened. A swift strike north move would net us an additional settlement straight away and encourage the Greeks to recklessly venture into our lands, thinking them lightly held. But immediately after the fall of Arretium, the Consular army would head south and, together with the Praetorian army, we would defeat the impudent Greeks. I will not go into details, as my strategy will be opportunistic. We will watch Pyrrhus and take advantage of any mistakes he makes, ideally giving battle in the most favorable of circumstances against isolated detachments and his callow captains before bringing down the warrior King himself.
Thereafter, I will march south with the Consular army in a series of conquests that will stop only when our troops reach the borders of Carthaginian territory. Likewise, the Praetorian army will march north and finish the work of conquering the rebel states to our north until they border Gaul. Over time, it will be built into a second Consular army capable of repelling any Gaullish invasion. Whether it should then be divided into two - one to cover the border, the other to defend Latium against invasion from the seas - I have yet to decide.
That is my roughly the strategy I envisage us following over the next five years. How long it will take to execute, I do not know. I confess it is largely theoretical, not based up exercises and drills with our troop as I fear such over-reherseasal would dampen their spontaneity and initiative when war starts for real. Consequently I would welcome any comments as to its practicality.
Senator Publius Laevinius, it seems that our bickering has come to no end, as neither of us are able to see the logic in the other's argument. Let us put aside our differences and co-exist in peace for the sake of Rome.
Senator Quintus: I see that you are the tactical expert that I thought you were, and I applaud you for your superb plan. However, I see no need to conquer Arretium only. With the small armies that the rebels command, our present Legions can divide and conquer, taking Ariminium as well, while also allowing Senator Tiberius Coruncanius to gain some military experience. Should we lose men, they can be replaced by soldiers from the third Legion, or, better still, we can have fresh recruits from Rome.
However, I must state my fear of Pyrrhus' army growing, and I urge a pre-emptive strike on his forces to lessen the casualties on our side.
[QUINTUS]: Once again, I thank the honorable Senator Tiberius for his kind words and agree that combating Pyrrhus is our first priority, which will require great care and some finesse to pull off efficiently.
I have a small nautical query I wonder if anyone, perhaps the Senate Fixer, can enlighten us on?
Over time, Rome must develop a navy both to defend against marauding Greeks and to gain access to Africa. Which settlements are most suitable for developing military harbours? I suspect that - just as only some settlements are capable of having walled defences - so only a few will have harbours deep enough to build the most advanced warships.
It would seem convenient to develop two such military harbours - one on the west coast, the other on the east. Which two settlements should be assigned this duty? I am considering Capua and perhaps Arminium or Tarentum as our two military harbours, but I have not had them surveyed to see if they are physically capable of ultimately fulfilling this role.
Gentlemen of the Senate, during the evening I have taken the time to examine the maps we have in our libraries, and I fear that much of the arguments presented against marching to strike at Pyrrhus immediately have their foundations set firmly in nothing more than quick-sand.
Pyrrhus is within a seasons march of Corfinium or even Paestum, people have spoken of allowing his army to march upon these cities and exhaust his troops on their walls……I say….WHAT WALLS!
Neither city has any defensive structure to protect it, Pyrrhus’s phalanx’s will utterly destroy the valiant defenders with little or no loss and by the time we DO act Pyrrhus, not being a fool , would have erected his own defences around the city!
We must march the two Senate legions South will all haste and confront him before he has the chance to take one of these settlements, or at the very least, before he has another season in which to prepare the defence of a city.
To our North lie the cities of Arretium and Ariminum, it is to OUR advantage that the citizens have yet to erect fortifications, we should raise a third legion from our garrisons and add whatever additional troops we can raise in a season and strike for these Northern settlements. If we have an agent who can infiltrate them, more the better, thus we learn what troops await us. Whatever the matter, we should hold both settlements within three seasons.
So, cease this foolish talk of “waiting for Pyrrhus”, it is even more clear to me now that it is imperative we march with as much force as we can muster and destroy his army in the open field and before he has chance to take a city and consolidate.
I put it to the Senators that it is only Tiberius Coruncanius, that has the purpose of thought to make these bold moves, that has the ability to perform these desperate acts successfully. It is true that this is a more desperate situation than many in the Senate have been fit to see….secure behind the strong and tall walls of Rome, within these cloistered walls of the Senate buildings you have forgotten that the Plebeian on the frontier does not have the luxury of such protection, we are their only hope for protection, Tiberius Coruncanius, is their hope of salvation and for the expansion and security of our Republic in the next 10 years.
Need we discuss this much further? The actions we MUST take are abundantly clear to me, as is which member of the Lower House is capable of performing those actions.
As to the issue of negotiation with the Greeks.
Such talk is folly, why even waste the time of our diplomats by approaching the Greeks with an offer that we already know they will refuse?? Such time is better spent sending diplomatic overtures to other neighbours that we are not in direct conflict with, the Carthaginians perhaps? I know this may not be a popular suggestion but even the stinking Gauls would be a better target for our diplomatic Corp!
I feel that IF we make such an offer to the Greeks we will destroy what little opportunity we have of later building a peace once they have been expelled from our lands, as we will greatly offend their nature. I say we cast them from our shores and allow them to consider the matter as closed for a good time, then we shall approach them, not as aggressors, but as civilised neighbours who have but claimed back what was theirs to start with. The Greeks can remain in their own lands, whilst we will have only taken what is ours by birth. The Greeks will understand our use of force at this time, and welcome us in a few years to come as honoured equals.
Such are my arguments, at this I close my speech and leave it open to the Senate to discuss and ask questions as they see fit.
[QUINTUS]: Senator Braden, your impatience to get at our enemy and your desire to see our borders expand is admirable. But while wrestling in your youth, did not your learn to use your enemy's strength against him?
Yes, Pyrrhus will quickly overrun Corfinium and Paestum. But in so doing he will take losses - the term Pyrrhic victory has not been coined for nothing. More importantly, he will surely divide his army in order to take both prizes. And when he marches on us, as again I agree he will quickly do, he will further deplete his armies due to the requirement to garrison his new conquests. Why, he may even tarry awhile in one of them himself, leaving inexperienced captains to lead the invasion of our lands. His probes will reach Capua, but its walls will hold them for a season. Ancona is further away from him and so we will have sufficient notice if he marches on it. The full Consular army and the Praetorian army I propose to bring against him are protection enough for Latium - you need not be unduly alarmed.
Your valour and concern is admirable, but I urge you - we must not strike hastily. To march south now will compell Pyrrhus to keep his army concentrated and perhaps even reinforce it so that it rivals a Consular army in size. Attacking his army while it is concentrated will cost us dear, though I am sure we will nonetheless prevail. My Fabian strategy of delay and counter-strike will cost us less in Roman blood.
And one final point, good Senator: regrettably some settlements can never be made properly defensible by walls. It is not a function of the size or resources of the settlement, but simple geography. If you consult the Senate library, information has been submitted by our scribes that implies that no settlement currently without defensible walls will ever be capable of building them. Hence, your haste to move before defences are constructed is without foundation.
Senator Quintus, by defensive measures I mean any fortifications….they do not need to be around a city, is it not our own practice to make a fortified enclosure for our armies should they venture into potentially hostile territory?
I have to concede though that I have lent much to conjecture on what Pyrrhus plans. In extreme, it is possible that he will not even march his army further North, but it is clear none in the Senate trust to this possibility.
Likewise, I do not believe that Pyrrhus, being a commander of note, will weaken his army to take two lightly defended cities at the same time. He is a canny commander and it would be foolish of him to weaken his army so close to the boarders of such a mighty foe as the Republic….that would not be the act I would commit, I do not feel Pyrrhus will make such a mistake. Would you err so?
Time.
It is true I ask for haste, but I have no delusion as to the speed we can effectively react. As has been stated before, I believe by your good self, our current Legions are “under strength” and require re-enforcment.
Whilst I do not accept that Pyrrhus will suffer more than a handful of casualties taking the cities to the South, I accept your call for less “haste” in our deployment. However, I urge us to march our two legions South immediately after they are at full compliment. Pyrrhus will either take Corfinium or Paestum but by the time we meet him he will be refused the other by our legions.
With two legions Pyrrhus can be encircled and his retreat cut off, re-enforcements refused passage to him and he will be utterly destroyed.
Pyrrhus will act first in this play of Greek Tragedy but we must move against him before the end of the next season, lest he capture both cities AND have a re-enforced army. Any moves to gain territory in the North can wait until we have a third legion available for this task, such a move also provides homeland security against any bold naval landings as well as potential re-enforcements for our legions attacking Pyrrhus.
Where ever Pyrrhus strikes we must march to meet him before he has time to strike a second time.
A hunter does not wait for the Lion to kill more of his cattle Quintus, he takes up the bow and dagger and marches forth to protect his homestead. Do we forget these are rightful citizens of the Republic? It is true they have lost their way but, like lost cattle, they will return to their stockade once the fears of night approach them.
Senator Quintus, you appear to be willing to allow Pyrrhus the freedom to take those settlements occupied by our kin to the South and await his armies arrival at the very gates of our own Republic…
…I had expected better from one such as you, it is certainly a stance I cannot support.
Senator Quintus, your proposal to build a deep port on both coasts of Italia is a sensible one, however I disagree with the choice of Capua. That city has long been the place were we train our troops - why break with that city's proud military tradition. Given the desire of many of our Senators to conquer Italia in as short a time as possible, I'm sure that a suitable port on the west coast can be found soon enough.
My fellow senators,
I have been unable to attend this college yeasterday due to my military duties. In the meantime I have been critized for lack of detail of my military strategy. Therefore I would ask you to hear me as I will explain them in detail.
What worries me, my lords, is that many of you do not seem to understand how vulnerable our nation is to attack. The city of Ancona, for example, lacks city walls, as do the cities of our rebellious italian cousins. Wild talk of rushing our armies through the peninsula is therefore folly. The moment our troops are out of reach of our frontiers, our enemies would rush into our country and lay waste to our cities. Instead a careful strategy is needed, ensuring we always drive our enemies before us, and that no enemy armies can slip by us and threathen our cities. Even so, there is a real danger of a naval invasion of our homeland while our armies are down south, pressing the enemy toward the sea. Also consider that our walled cities are not safe. The elephants that Pyrrhus has brought can break down our gates without requiring a siege. I beg you to reflect on this, and so consider my strategy more fully.
Due to the grave danger we are in right now, I see no other alternative, than to move all our available military assets down south immediately, leaving a tiny garrison in all our cities. I would merge all our troops in two legions, led by myself Lucius Amelius and senator Publius Laevinius (shifty157) and attack Corfinium immediately. We should be able to take this town with insignificant losses. Pyrrhus would not dare attack us right away, as we would have a great numerical advantage and he is no fool.
I would send the senator Amulius Coruncanius (FLYdude) to govern Capua and the senator Quintus (econ21) to govern Rome itself, as I outlined in my previous speeches. I would send out spy down southeast and our diplomat Sextus Antio (Ignoramus) down southwest to provide intelligence on Greek army movements. The moment our diplomat Sextus Antio (Ignoramus) is no longer required down south he would strike out eastward.
The next season my moves would depend greatly on Pyrrhus his movements. If he should ship part of his army back to Greece, I would leave the equivalent of a Praetorian legion just south of Corfinium under the leadership of senator Publius Laevinius (shifty157), to protect the city from a possible suprise Greek attack. Meanwhile the rest of the troops would capture the town of Paestum under my leadership. If Pyrrhus would ship out many of his troops, I would even advise senator Publius Laevinius (shifty157) to advance immediately south and capture the town of Tarentum. If Pyrrhus would make the mistake of dividing his forces I would suggest senator Publius Laevinius (shifty157) to attack immediately. Meanwhile my legion would advance along the west capturing Rhegium.
If Pyrrhus does not divide his forces and/or ship them out I would attack immediately with our entire army and crush him. This is a bold move, and contradictory of my earlier plan to make an offer of ceasfire first (if he would give up his colonies), but the debate in this noble house has convinced me it is the best course of action.
Whichever of these scenarios happens, I would have the two legions capture the entire south peninsula, advancing independantly if possible. Whether my advance would stop at Rhegium depends on the strategic situation by then.
Meanwhile, a third legion would be raised and after it was up to strength I would send it out under senator Quintus (econ21) to capture Arretium and Arminium. While this happens I would ask senator Amulius Coruncanius (FLYdude) to govern Rome or perhaps to accompany senator Quintus, depending on the wishes of these senators and this house.
The rebellious italian cities will be occupied and the greek colonies will be enslaved as recompense for our losses.
Pyrrhus is a fool if he thinks he can keep his foothold in Italy and will be cast out. The Greek people themselves, strangely referred to as barbarians so often in this house, are a civilized people who I would like to see as friends or even allies in the future. Therefore I am quite willing to involve in diplomatic and trade relations with them, providing of course that their presence has been removed from Italian soil.
On the matter of a navy, I agree we need a strong navy, but if we cannot hold our own on land, a navy is a redundant luxury. Therefore I would concentrate on strengthening our land armies before I would start laying down hulls for a war fleet. I surmise that we would be in a position to start work on a navy toward the end of this consulship.
I thank you for your patience, my lords, and I hope that I have answered your questions in sufficient detail.
I shall have to enlighten you, master Aemilius. A quote from my scribe:
Let us stop talking aobut barbarians now. What do you propose we do if attacked by the Gauls? Or, if Pyrrhus uses his tactical genius, and chooses to march on Rome itself while our armies are concentrated in the south? The swift Greek ships will enable him to launch a lightning campaign in the north of our holdings.Quote:
The Romans called the barbarians BARBARI, nominative plural of the masculine noun and adjective BARBARUS which derives from the ancient Greek word barbaros' originally denoting one who did not speak Greek or pronounced it wrongly, as if he was stammering [bar-bar].
Later on, however, this Greek word "Barbaros" had the meaning of :
-people not fully civilized and then usually believed to be inferior to another people, land or culture.
-foreigner
-cruel, ill-mannered person.
As for the meaning of the Latin term BARBARUS, we need to say that, when this word came into Latin , it had lost the original meaning of stammering person', but retained that of "foreigner", as "not-Greek" or "not-Roman" and therefore 'lacking refinement, learning, artistic or literary culture' 'cruel', 'coarse', 'brutal', 'ill-mannered', 'primitive', 'rough', 'untamed'.
I find myself torn between the candidates senator Quintus and senator Amelius...
Both I deem worthy of command of my country.
However I do have certain issues with both candidates, whoever can make my doubts of certain issues go away will earn my vote. Now I hope that even though senator Quintus already has 4 votes, he'll still answer to the best of his abilities.
To you, senator Quintus I'd say this, in reply to the latest of your ideas and comments :
It would seem convenient to develop two such military harbours - one on the west coast, the other on the east. Which two settlements should be assigned this duty? I am considering Capua and perhaps Arminium or Tarentum as our two military harbours, but I have not had them surveyed to see if they are physically capable of ultimately fulfilling this role.
I agree that in the long term ships must be built, but I do urge you to delay such issues to when you've defeated Pyhrrus. As building fleets is an arduous task, we must have the time to set it as our top priority. I propose we first have complete control of Italia before we start the building of a fleet.
If that is how you think of this also, then we are in agreement, if not, well then sadly we disagree on this issue. I would like to hear your thoughts on the issues I just raised.
Yes, Pyrrhus will quickly overrun Corfinium and Paestum. But in so doing he will take losses - the term Pyrrhic victory has not been coined for nothing. More importantly, he will surely divide his army in order to take both prizes. And when he marches on us, as again I agree he will quickly do, he will further deplete his armies due to the requirement to garrison his new conquests. Why, he may even tarry awhile in one of them himself, leaving inexperienced captains to lead the invasion of our lands. His probes will reach Capua, but its walls will hold them for a season. Ancona is further away from him and so we will have sufficient notice if he marches on it. The full Consular army and the Praetorian army I propose to bring against him are protection enough for Latium - you need not be unduly alarmed.
While your strategy is a good and sensible one I urge you not to let Pyhrrus or any of his captains get close enough to Capua or Ancona to be able to siege it. I find it horrible enough to know that Pyhrrus might sack Paesium and Corfinium and even worse to know he might be able to destroy Capua or Ancona. I however do know that dividing his army gives us the best chance of destroying him, but what If he doesn't ? What if you let him wander around southern Italia and let re enforcements arrive ? What if Pyhrrus get's the opportunity to siege Corfinium and Paesium at the same time while knowing his army is big enough to withstand a full praetorian army.
My point is that I do sympathize with your divide and conquer tactics, and with your Fabian one of letting him exhaust himself on Corfinium and Paesium. But will it not take a force - which we may not have - to take these cities from the phalangite composed army of Pyhrrus, which is difficult to beat -even for us ROmans - in the city streets.
Will it maybe, just maybe , not be better if we attack him in the field, where we can surround his army and destroy it piece meal ?
To march south now will compel Pyrrhus to keep his army concentrated and perhaps even reinforce it so that it rivals a Consular army in size. Attacking his army while it is concentrated will cost us dear, though I am sure we will nonetheless prevail. My Fabian strategy of delay and counter-strike will cost us less in Roman blood.
I understand - as said before - your point of view on the matter, but I disagree with your latter argument. If it is your desire to, when the time is right, besiege and assault the taken cities of Corfinium and Paesium.
I deem that to be a to costly task, we should try and keep theses cities as some sort of a buffer, if that is possible.
And one final point, good Senator: regrettably some settlements can never be made properly defensible by walls. It is not a function of the size or resources of the settlement, but simple geography. If you consult the Senate library, information has been submitted by our scribes that implies that no settlement currently without defensible walls will ever be capable of building them. Hence, your haste to move before defences are constructed is without foundation.
It seems you have taken the time to sufficiently analyse our current settlements, that is a very good and sensible thing to do. And for that I praise you.
It is however a sad thing to hear that no walls will ever be able to be constructed, how will you defend - garrison - these cities. How will you make them safe ? And keep them that way.
I hope I made my issues with your proposals clear enough, senator Quintus.
Now to you senator Amelius I say the following, concerning your latest comments;
Due to the grave danger we are in right now, I see no other alternative, than to move all our available military assets down south immediately, leaving a tiny garrison in all our cities. I would merge all our troops in two legions, led by myself Lucius Amelius and senator Publius Laevinius (shifty157) and attack Corfinium immediately. We should be able to take this town with insignificant losses. Pyrrhus would not dare attack us right away, as we would have a great numerical advantage and he is no fool.
I would send the senator Amulius Coruncanius (FLYdude) to govern Capua and the senator Quintus (econ21) to govern Rome itself, as I outlined in my previous speeches. I would send out spy down southeast and our diplomat Sextus Antio (Ignoramus) down southwest to provide intelligence on Greek army movements. The moment our diplomat Sextus Antio (Ignoramus) is no longer required down south he would strike out eastward.
I agree with moving all our troops to the southern part of our noble country, but why attack Corfinium immediately, why not Pyhrrus ?
What if you do manage to take the city but then get besieged and maybe even starved out by Pyhrrus - who is ,as we all know, not a fool and a very capable commander.
I can understand the latter part of your argument, and I can agree with your choices of governors.
The next season my moves would depend greatly on Pyrrhus his movements. If he should ship part of his army back to Greece, I would leave the equivalent of a Praetorian legion just south of Corfinium under the leadership of senator Publius Laevinius (shifty157), to protect the city from a possible surprise Greek attack. Meanwhile the rest of the troops would capture the town of Paestum under my leadership. If Pyrrhus would ship out many of his troops, I would even advise senator Publius Laevinius (shifty157) to advance immediately south and capture the town of Tarentum. If Pyrrhus would make the mistake of dividing his forces I would suggest senator Publius Laevinius (shifty157) to attack immediately. Meanwhile my legion would advance along the west capturing Rhegium.
If Pyrrhus does not divide his forces and/or ship them out I would attack immediately with our entire army and crush him. This is a bold move, and contradictory of my earlier plan to make an offer of ceasfire first (if he would give up his colonies), but the debate in this noble house has convinced me it is the best course of action.
So you propose to first attack and take Corfinium, and then pose to attack Pyhrrus while he may even be at full strength ? I do not understand this.
Whichever of these scenarios happens, I would have the two legions capture the entire south peninsula, advancing independently if possible. Whether my advance would stop at Rhegium depends on the strategic situation by then.
Meanwhile, a third legion would be raised and after it was up to strength I would send it out under senator Quintus (econ21) to capture Arretium and Arminium. While this happens I would ask senator Amulius Coruncanius (FLYdude) to govern Rome or perhaps to accompany senator Quintus, depending on the wishes of these senators and this house.
The rebellious italian cities will be occupied and the greek colonies will be enslaved as recompense for our losses.
How do you propose to finance the raising of a new third legion, which I do agree with ? What are you planning to do with the epirotes and greeks once Pyhrrus is impaled on a speer ?
And what are you planning on constructing in the newly conquered settlements ( I'd like to know the same thing of senator Quintus
Pyrrhus is a fool if he thinks he can keep his foothold in Italy and will be cast out. The Greek people themselves, strangely referred to as barbarians so often in this house, are a civilized people who I would like to see as friends or even allies in the future. Therefore I am quite willing to involve in diplomatic and trade relations with them, providing of course that their presence has been removed from Italian soil.
Ah it seems that I was to quick to react, thus rendering one of my earlier mentioned questions useless.
On the matter of a navy, I agree we need a strong navy, but if we cannot hold our own on land, a navy is a redundant luxury. Therefore I would concentrate on strengthening our land armies before I would start laying down hulls for a war fleet. I surmise that we would be in a position to start work on a navy toward the end of this consulship.
I agree completely
Well that about sums up my questions to you senator Amelius.
:balloon2:
Senator Lucius Amelius, I have to find myself generally in agreement with your proposed plan of action, but doesn’t it mirror very closely that of Tiberius Coruncanius? What do you offer us that Tiberius, whom I sponsor, does not?
Senators of the House, this talk of worry about Pyrrhus outflanking our advancing Legions I think is a dead-end. The topography of the land to the South means that if we advance and liberate Corfinium this season, our Legions will be in a position to cut off any advance further North than this by Pyrrhus on land. The mountains to the South East of Paestum will prevent Pyrrhus moving along our West coast immediately, leaving him only two routes into the Republic – the central route, North of Paestum and South of Corfinium or along the East coast, passing North of Corfinium. If I was a general in Pyrrhus’s place and intended to move into our Republic, it is the East coast route I would pass through. That said, Legions stationed in or near Corfinium can easily intercept Pyrrhus should he choose to approach the Republic by either route. It is at this point that he should be engaged I feel.
If Pyrrhus advances North as our Legions move upon Corfinium, then the Legate in command will know his intent and correct his tactical position accordingly. I do not ask for further detail from the Consulate candidates as NO plan will find completion once Legions march.
All the candidates have put forward their general intent and we, the Senate, are voting on the proposals. It is, also, up to the Senate to consider who amongst those candidates in the Lower House will best perform those tasks we set them.
I see the only worry for us once our Legions move South to harass and engage Pyrrhus is a sea-borne landing from an unknown quarter. However, if we stop to consider and plan for EVERY eventuality no legions will march forth anywhere and we will find Pyrrhus’s elephants breaking down the gates of Rome in three seasons time. To our North, I cannot see the Gauls striking against us for at least a season, time enough for us to muster a Legion for our own protection from garrison troops and recruitment locally, a Legion I would suggest is then used to strike North and expand our borders.
All I ask now, is that Pyrrhus be engaged, in open field with our two current Legions and before he passes Corfinium and directly threatens the Republic herself.
With this statement, I take my leave for the day. It has been a long a trying period in session today and I feel we have accomplished much and garnered a better understanding of the situation at hand. I may return later this eve to find out the results of all our votes.
[QUINTUS]:Senator Dutch_guy, I admire the conscientiousness with which you are approaching your task as an elector of the next First Counsel and will answer your points directly.
I apologise if I gave the impression that my priority was to build a navy. I was merely seeking information for the Senate library as to the possible settlements that were capable of such a task - as much for the benefit of other potential First Consuls as for my own plans. It has been reported that the enemy is increasingly willing to consider seaborne landings, so I submit that sufficient naval strength on both sides of the Italian peninsular may be extremely useful in securing our heartlands.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutch_guy
Presently, my spies report that Pyhrrus's army is merely the size of that of a Praetorian army. I will not let it double in size. If he does not move north, after taking Arretium, I will move my Consular army to engage him. I suspect he will find the appeal of Paesium and Cofrinium irresistible, however. In passing I must remark that I find your sympathy for the inhabitants of those two towns reflects highly on your noble nature. But I must remind you that they have refused our offers of protection and are technically at war with us. Sooner or later, they must submit by force and I would rather Pyrrhus expend his men's lives to disarm then than our own warriors suffer needless losses to that end.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutch_guy
A phalanx in a narrow street is a formiddable opponent, it is true. And I would not strike a large Greek army in a city, preferring instead to starve them out. But I have no fear of a city guarded by a small Greek army. Typically, captains leave but one or two units in the heart of the city and fritter others away attempting to hold an open perimeter. A full consular army has four velites or Italian skirmishers. Have you seen what javelins can do to the rear of a phalanx? Even in a city, we will have the mobility and firepower to tear him apart, like wolves bringing down an elk. Moreover, I remind you - despite widespread misunderstandings - the Greek hoplite does not fight in phalanx like a pikeman. He is but a spearman and is inferior to our princeps in close quarters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutch_guy
As I have said, I will let Pyrrhus have the right of first refusal on these rebellious malcontents. But the richest pickings for immediate expansion lie south and sooner or later, these settlements must submit to our authority, willingly or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutch_guy
Without walls, I do not believe a small garrison can secure a settlement against a significant threat. Therefore, we must screen such settlements with armies of at least Praetorian size. I will establish a network of forts between our settlements, close enough that our defensive armies can reach the settlements on hearing of the approach of trouble. A network of spies will scout for any potential incursions, giving our field armies time to approach. In due course, a system of roads in our interior will facilitate this defensive networkQuote:
Originally Posted by Dutch_guy
Pyrrhus is indeed a capable commander and thus will not attack a vastly superior force. Instead I suspect he will attempt to strike out to the west and I will hunt his army down, leaving a minimal garrison to occupy Corfinium. I would strike at Pyrrhus immediately, but his army is still far to the south, and the closest our combined forces can march in one season is Corfinium. Should he suicidically assault or siege Corfinium I will sortie from the city and destroy his army.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutch_guy
You misunderstand me. The Greek confederation is widespread and there are many demands on its troops. It is quite possible that Pyrrhus may decide to transfer a great part of his troops to Greece itself. If he does so, and a praetorian legion still outnumbers his remaining troops comfortably, I will split the army up and strike at Paestum and Pyrrhus simultaneously. If this does not happen, I will attack Pyrrhus with my entire army, leaving a single unit of spearmen as a garrison. In any case, I will not wait, but move on immediately. Pyrrhus' army must be destroyed before it can reinforce itself from the mainland of Greece and pose a deadly threat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutch_guy
I have described my domestic plans in detail two days before, but I am quite willing to expand on this subject, as my views have altered slightly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutch_guy
During the first few years of my consulship, I will concentrate on increasing our financial stability, especially building traders, roads, and safe harbours. The first priority remains building troops, but we have sufficient budget to do both at the same time if we keep building trade buildings. The roads are of course vital from a military perspective as well. The academy, which this senate seems to want to build as much as I do, will have to wait untill the second year of my consulship, as its building is prohibitively expensive (6000 denarii) and we must recruit some military troops immediately. Should victory be ours, and finances permitting, I would like to honour the gods with temples for granting us victory.
[SENATE SPEAKER]: Honorable Senators, pray excuse a brief interjection!
The chief scribe has asked me to remind you that the deadline for voting in the elections for First Consul is in 24 hours time. Last time he checked, some candidates had not even voted for themselves. Honorable Senators, do not be shy!
My dear senator Braden, I have outlined my strategy and it is up to you to decide who to elect as First Consul. Personally, I greatly respect my noble collegae Tiberius Coruncanius, and think he would make an excellent first consul. That said, I believe I would make an even better one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Braden
The Gauls will first take the two rebel cities to our north, giving us ample warning of their advance. In any case, the third legion I will recruit should be quite sufficient to counter them. My whole strategy is focused on taking Pyrrhus out immediately, and making sure no army can slip past us into our heartland. That said, a naval invasion will remain a threat. The third legion will not stray far from Rome just to counter such an eventuality. After the first two years, I recruit a fourth legion which will act as a 'Guards' division and be stationed in a fort just outside Rome. This will allow the third legion to roam further afield, should this be necessary.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiberius
Senator Aemilius, I very much doubt that Pyrrhus will withdraw his men from Italia. Given his current position, as King of Epirus and Macedonia, he will most likely try to carve out an Empire in Italia. He would not be so foolish to attack the Successors of Alexander, as their armies are too large. No, my friend, we are his targets, and will be until either he has destroyed, or is destroyed.
Also, how do you propose we finish recruitment of the third legion within two years, seeing as it will take half a year to even complete our first two legions? Not to mention incredible strain a fourth legion will put on our economy.
Senator Lucius Amelius,
I must say your plan is quite reasonable, and indeed, very similar to mine. But I must ask, what purpose would Corfinium serve other than to delay our army, if the objective is to destroy Pyrrhus? Why not bypass it at this time, and conquer it later, when Pyrrhus is eliminated?
I fully agree with my collegae Tiberius, and thus Pyrrhus and his colonies are my primary target.
The combination of our existing troops almost equals a consular army, and it will be complemented into a correct consular army as we go along. I definitely do not expect to finetune my army while Pyrrhus loots our provinces, but I expect I am misunderstanding my collegae's question. The third legion will be reqruited from Rome and in 8 seasons, it mus be able to put a legion together, while Capua and Ancona support the 1e and 2e legion and provide garrison troops. The fourth legion would be raised when we control both the rebellious cities to the north, the south and the greek colonies. With the taxes we get then, along with the financial structures that will have been build by then, we can easily afford a fourth legion.
And to answer the question of my colegae FLYdude, why not take Corfinium as it is the logical place to gather our armies for the strike at the Greeks ? It blocks our armies easy travel, and I do not believe in leaving an enemy behind me sitting on my supply lines is sound strategy. With the 4:1 numerical advantage we have it should be possible to take Corfinium losing very few men.
You underestimate the Gauls, they would not stop at taking Arretium and Arminium, but would at once besiege Rome.
Senator Antio, with all due respect, I think you overestimate their potential. There is no doubt that they will eventually attack Rome (which is why I suggest that we expand there once Pyrrhus is dealt with), but do you really think they possess the strength to take three cities that quickly?
The Gauls will need time to regroup after they take each city, assuming they defeat the garrisons. And it will take time to even organize such an assault. Don't they have blood feuds to settle in their homelands before they ride for war?
The Gauls have lately been unified; I fear for the safety of our homeland. Do you not remember what happened in 395 B.C?
Senator, that was over 100 years ago. I repeat what i have said before. The gauls do not currently have an army with which to attack us. Nor do they have the capability to quickly assemble one. For now we are safe from them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ignoramus
With the number of territories currently possessed by the Gallic confederacy, I doubt that they are incapable of assembling an army at short notice.
Senators, the Gallic question is one that requires addressing that is sure. It would be foolish of us to not consider them a threat; however, at least two of the Consulate candidates have put forward their plans for dealing with this potential threat – the raising of a third legion.
The Gauls live in the fertile plains to our North and whilst they are a warrior culture I believe that this, coupled with the fact that their Nation is still divided, according to the maps I have at hand, means that it is unlikely that they will make the massive military push against us that some Senators believe.
The most I think they will do is to expand South into Ariminum but surely their priority would be to attempt to re-connect their territories by striking West and taking Massilia and Comata. I suspect they do not see us as a threat as yet, they will do when we absorb Ariminum and Arretium into the Republic but at that time we will have our Third Legion and be more than capable of defeating a Gallic army fully twice the size of our Legion.
Senator Tiberius, whilst it will be possible for the Gauls to raise a significant army, they have but three settlements of minor size within a seasons march of Ariminum. Their other settlements are beyond the Alps and cannot directly support those settlements closer to our homes. Even if they manage to raise an army of note and IF they have need to march that army South then I am not unduly concerned, I am very confident that any of the Senators of the lower house will be fully capable of defeating such an army with only one full Legion.
I suggest that the best way to assuage your worries is to vote YES to the raising of a Third Legion and to vote for the best Consul who can lead our, then three, Legions to the security and glory of Rome and the Republic. May I suggest voting for Tiberius Coruncanius, who has the correct mix of Youth, ambition and tactical knowledge to best fulfil such a task.
I am confident though, that whomever the Senate votes to be our Consul, will not “forget” the Gallic question and with support from the Senate will raise a third legion to answer that question.
Gentlemen of the Senate, I formally put a request to the Library for a full list of our current military units. Whilst we are discussing the potential raising of a Third Legion it would be useful to know what forces we have currently in our cities for home defence, and the potential of some of those units going towards the formation of the third legion and it would also be very useful to know what forces we have in our current standing two legions that, I, and many others are proposing to march against Pyrrhus.
SENATE SPEAKER: Senator Braden's request is a reasonable one. The scribes have added the requested information. Note that we may currently train all kinds of Roman and Italian units, with the exception of equites - who would first require a stables to be built in Roma.
Excellent Speaker, I have had a few moments to peruse the information provided and the situation is indeed more stable than many first assumed and aligns nicely with the proposals I am supporting.
I would suggest that should the Senate vote to send both Republican Legions South, that a unit of Velites from Ancona be dispatched to join the Legion currently under Senator Quintus’s leadership. Such a transfer will not vastly hinder their march South as they are close to Ancona and I feel the Velites will add greatly to their fighting ability without unduly effecting the citizens comfort in the city. Apart from that I feel that the two Legions we have now are more than suitable to combat Pyrrhus which ever Consul is in command.
As to the raising of a third Legion, within our cities we have the firm beginnings of such a Legion and I feel that within 2 seasons we will be able to field a formidable formation by instructing the governors carefully we should manage to field a Legion consisting of:
1 x Princeps, 2 x Hastati, 2 x Velites, 1 x Italian Spearmen & 1 x Italian Swordsmen which will be suitably lead by whichever Tribune we choose from the Lower House at the time. Even now we would be able to field a significant Legionary formation as long as we ensure those troops used return, post haste, to their garrison duties after any defensive conflict.
I have conceived what the governors need to do exactly to reach the above formation, but I will table that as a formal proposal after the Consul elections and the current Motions are approved, as such a proposal depends largely on the fiscal status of the Republic at the time.
Now, with this new information, I am even more convinced of the plans of Tiberius Coruncanius, being a success.
[SENATE SPEAKER]:I must interrupt these proceedings to announce that, with the closing of the polls, Princeps Senatus Quintus has been elected First Consul! Details of the votes for Senate motions are now also confirmed. I briefly hand you over to our newly elected First Consul, Quintus.
[QUINTUS]:Noble Senators, I am humbled to be called upon by you in this time of crisis to serve once again in the role of First Consul. As I promised in my manifesto, this will be my final time in this high office; thereafter I will make way for younger leaders.
I must, in particular, congratulate Senator Tiberius Corunanius for his strong showing in the vote. It is with some humility that I note he attracted the support of more active Senators than I. I hope he will not resent the fact that I only obtained victory only through the greater influence of myself and my valued supporter, Senator Sextus Antio. I also wish to thank my other active supporters, Senators DoH, Tiberius and Dutch_guy. I pray that I do not disappoint the confidence that they have shown in me.
Now is not the time for long speeches, Senators. King Pyrrhus awaits. We have talked enough. Now, we must go to our posts and prepare for war!
Senator Sextus Antio - there is a boat waiting to take you to Caralis to talk commerce with the Carthaginians.
Senator Publius Laevinus - you must run this great city in my absence.
Senator Tiberius Coruncanius - you must take command of the Praetorian army I am ordering formed outside Capua.
Senator Lucius Amelius - you will ride by side as my military Tribune, as we prepare a Consular army to expell the Greeks from Italy!
I would like to be the first to congratulate our new Consul Quintus. His effecient style of management will surely strengthen our state, and defeat Pyrrhus with minimal losses. I have full confidence that he will be able to fulfill every promise he had made in his manifesto, and we Romans can look forward to a period of prosperity under Quintus.
I would also like to congratulate Senator Coruncanius, who shares the same praenomen as myself. I am sure that he will command the third Legion to the best of his ability, and will not disappoint. I look forward to following his career, and may it be a successful one!
Congratulations, Senator Quintus. I have little doubt that you will lead our great republic to victory over the Greeks and anyone else foolish enough to attack us.
I'd like to thank all senators who voted for me, and in particular Senator Braden, who campaigned for me without being asked to do so.
Glory to Rome! Despite having placed my vote for my father, Tiberius, I have full faith in the abilities and decisions of Consul Quintus. The Greeks will quake in fear at the sight of our mighty legions! Freedom for Italy from the eastern Tyrant! We have elected our consul and we have enacted our legislation. I see great prosperity and success for the Republic over the next 5 years. Our work is just beginning though...
Fellow Senators, perhaps it is now time to begin considering in detail how we shall secure and develop the Republic once the Greek menace has been dealt with. While we have years yet before such a happy day is before us, it is never too soon to begin considering such a complex issue. Legislation and politicing for future consulships can wait, but there is much that can be accomplished while Consul Quintus leads our legions into battle.
Shall we secure our alliances with our Italian allies? Shall we spend our efforts developing our resources? If so, how show the limited treasury be allocated for so many needs? What sort of policy shall we adopt in relation to the vile Gauls? And towards the mighty Carthaginians? What shall we due if the foolish Greeks refuse peace after they have been expelled from Italy?
Such things will take time to debate and I think it wise to begin on them now.
Alas, it seems as if I missed the important Consul vote! I apologize to the four candidates for my laxness- the only thing I can say in my defense is that the bed in my villa is extremely comfortable and time can easily pass while sleeping.
My congratulations to our new Consul Quintus on his victory. I am sure that he will remove the plague of Pyrrhus befouling our homeland. To Senator Antio, I wish calm seas and eager Carthaginians for your journey. To Senator Laevinius, the best of luck on running this grand city. To Senator Coruncanius, may you bring new lands under Roman rule, and to our esteemed Consul and Senator Amelius, may Mars be with you!
Honored members of the senate,
I would like to congratulate senator Quintus on his election and I am honored to ride by his side in these crucial battles. His lead I will follow and let Jupiter strike me down should I fail his trust !
Also, my congratulations to senator Coruncanius, who has managed to gather such strong support for his faction. An impressive display, and people call me a Politician *laughs*. I trust he will crush the Etruscans for us.
I wish senator Sextus Antio a safe journey. May Neptune and Mercury guard you on your travels.
I am also glad to hear that senator Publius Laevinus will look after our beloved city, and our most sacred trust. I will ride easy, knowing that he has his watchful eye on our homes.
No more words now, it is time to let our swords speak for us. TO WAR !
May I also add my congratulations to Senator Quintus upon his election to the Consulship. It is a rare honour that has been accorded to you sir, to sit in the consular ivory chair for a second time, and is no-doubt a sign of the troubled times we live in. May Fortuna smile upon your period in office.
To my father Lucius, I send my wishes, I will make offerings to Jupiter and Mars on your behalf as you ride into battle to take on Pyrrhus.
I would also like to congratulate senator Quintus on his election !
These times are a difficult one for our country it is up to you to make sure we get through them in one piece.
Also good luck - which I'm sure you won't need - to Sextus, the Carthaginians may seem barbaric at times, but do try and persuade them to offer their services to us - we'll even pay them if need be.
I also wish my dear colleges Coruncanius, Amelius and Laevius succes in their tasks and hope they continue their tireless efforts for our republic with as much enthusiasm as they showed during the period of election.
:balloon2:
Thank you Senator, Phoenecian isn't half easy to learn!Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutch_guy