Strator Savvas,
So what your saying is, that it is ok to swear allegiance to the Emperor's empty seat, but we can not trust him to exercise his judgement in his duties as Megas?
Your idea of loyalty is most interesting.
Printable View
Strator Savvas,
So what your saying is, that it is ok to swear allegiance to the Emperor's empty seat, but we can not trust him to exercise his judgement in his duties as Megas?
Your idea of loyalty is most interesting.
Vissarionas is somewhat annoyed at being ignored, so he repeats himself, sounding a bit strident and pedantic.
I will say again, not only is Antioch more easily defended than every other province on this list, it is richer than any three of them put together. All of this talk of stretching to protect the city and expending resources on it are bald political gambits with no basis in reality.
Furthermore I see no signs that by surrendering the wealth of Antioch to the infidels we will encourage them to slaughter one another. More provinces seperate their two nations from each other than are even on this silly list which has been proposed.
As noted by the Grandmaster, we will require no Imperial funds to aid in the defense of the city beyond the wages for the men already in service. Antioch will immediately be profitable. The Order has not suggested anything but the most direct and effective use of the forces already in the region. To move men and material out of the Adana/Antioch theatre and in any other direction is somewhat more costly immediately and dramatically less profitable in the long run.
:egypt:
Comes Ksanthopoulos, I am happy to answer your question. I will not add "any land which does not belong to a foreign power" to my Edict, because it would allow to conquest of places such as Antioch. I firmly believe that using our limited resources in such places is not a good idea. We must secure the provinces around our core cities for the defense and prosperity of the Empire. The change that you request would allow us to conquer Ireland if someone was mad enough to attempt it. The whole purpose of the Edict is to focus our immediate efforts on those conquests which will give the greatest benefit to the Empire. Your very opposition to the Edict is the reason why it is needed in the first place. If we allow anyone to go about conquering whatever they please, then our resources will be stretched thin and the Empire will be left vulnerable.
The Basileus being physically absent does not mean his seat is empty, Comes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Privateerkev
And as for the duties of the Megas, well, isn't executing the Edicts voted by the Senate one of his duties?
Strator ek Lesvou, you are now the second man to say that Antioch can be conquered without the expenditure of a single coin from the treasury. The wise Markianos Ampelas has already suggested an Edict which you could propose that would formalize this statement. If you mean what you say, then propose the Edict. I will second it without hesitation.
Good Sir Diogenis add Antioch to your list and I will instantly propose just such an edict in my own words. Without Antioch on the list is there truly any need for an edict to point out that defending it costs us nothing?
:egypt:
But my friend, adding Antioch to the list would authorize the expenditure of Imperial funds for its conquest. Both you and your Lord have stated that such funds are not needed. Why then can you not simply propose the Edict suggested by our colleague? It would accomplish your goals and I give you my word that I will wholeheartedly support it.
Strator Khristophoros,
I thank you for finally laying out your logic regarding the proposed amendment to your edict. But I have to disagree with some points.
1.) Letting the Order head to Antioch will not lead the Empire down the road to ruin. What we ask is meager and most reasonable.
2.) Sending the Order anywhere else is inefficient for all involved. Other Houses can reach Rhodes and Smyrna faster and with larger forces than we can.
3.) Going to Antioch would not be "allow[ing] anyone to go about conquering whatever they please." It could only be done with the express permission of the Emperor himself. If the Emperor does not see the wisdom of such a move, then it simply will not happen this term.
Since we;
a.) already have the army,
b.) already have the ships,
c.) are only one year away, and
d.) are years away from any target on your list,
I again ask that the Emperor be given the option of letting the Order head to Antioch immediately. We ask for little. If we were next door to one of these "core" provinces, I would be more agreeable to what you propose. But were not. Just look at the map. It would take years for 2 ships to shuttle the Order over to Rhodes or Smyrna. We could have Antioch under siege in just a couple years. And we can hold it.
As for an edict that promises no money will be spent, again that will bind the hands of the Emperor. I think we can do it for free. But, what if we need a single mercenary regiment? No one else is expected to conduct war for no cost. I can only promise it will be "cheap", not free. It may require a peasent from Nicosia or a Turcopoles from Antioch. Again, it would be entirely up to the Emperor.
Ah, so now Imperial funds are needed. Why then did you claim they were not?
It is interesting, good Comes of the Cypriots, how at first your proposal to attack Antioch required "no additional expenditure", but is now "cheap" but not free, and how, perhaps, when the Turks and Saracens are bearing down on newly Roman Antioch in great numbers, it may become "expensive." This is all we fear, and your increase in budget requested does nothing to encourage us.
They "might" be needed. War is unpredictable. You ask for guarentees, but war promises none. I wouldn't want any of you to be left vulnerable for want of a single regiment.
What about this;This leaves it up to the Emperor but does not forbid it. It also does not forbid him from spending a florin to help us if it is needed. If he can spend florins to help take Bari and Trebizond, then why not Antioch? It would still require the "core" provinces to be taken.Quote:
Antioch, Bari, and Trebizond may be included in this list at the discretion of the Megas Logothetes.
This compromise still "directs" the Emperor to take certain provinces, but it leaves the Order's province to be at his discretion. If the Emperor approves of it, I would vote on such a compromise. If he didn't, then I would vote against it because it would be binding his own hands against his wishes.
How does this sound Strator Khristophoros Diogenis?
Again the shocking reliance on the presumed cowardice of this body in the face of the Turks? One wonders if the opponents of the Order actually intend to see battle at all, or just huddle in our few remaining cities trying to make the rest of us see the glory and goodness of appeasing the infidel!
I would happily propose that edict and take for granted that your word was good Sir Diogenis, except for the simple fact that you have repeatedly argued in the face of facts for your own political benefit. Making a fool of me by ignoring my proposal after it was made would also be to your political benefit. Therefore it seems obvious that if I did propose such an edict you would simply refuse to edit your own and count it a 'victory' against the Order that I wasted an edict which might otherwise simply read (OOC: This is not an edict!) Edict blah.blah Antioch can be conquered.
...turning now to the other members at the Order table,
Gentlemen given the inadequacy of practical support for this edict I am of a mind now to simply leave it as is and let it come to a vote, if the Grandmaster feels such is appropriate of course.
Comes Ksanthopoulos, it sounds like you need to have someone propose that Edict for you. I will not include Antioch in my Edict because I believe it is in the Empire's best interests to retake the provinces immediately surrounding the core provinces before any other expenditures are authorized. I would sooner delete Bari and Trebizond from the Edict altogether than add Antioch. If you wish such an Edict, I suggest you propose it yourself.
Pavlos raises and speaks to the assembled nobles.
"Alright, let's make this simple. I propose the following.
Edict 1.3:
A Priest is to be sent in the region surrounding Caesarea to help our Orthodox brethern against their Muslim overlords.
Maybe that's something we all can agree on then, this endless discussion is tiring me. My seconding for Edict 1.2 stands, although I would have preferred Trebizond to stay on that list, I can see the merrits of it. Let's just put it to the vote and be done with it.
All this bloody talk of binding the Basileus hands is getting on my nerves. If we're not here to guide him through Edicts we might just leave right now and be bloody happy about it!"
If I may suggest another compromise, let Bari, Trebizond, and Antioch be included in the list after the cities of the primary list have all been captured.
Once again, Markianos Ampelas proves to be the wisest of all. I would agree to his proposed alteration. Would that satisfy the Order?
Comes Markianos Ampelas, since the Order can not reach any of the targets in a timely manner, I prefer if the Emperor be given leave to decide whether the Order can take Antioch.
Edict 1.4: If Edict 1.2 passes, Antioch can be conquered at the Megas discretion.
And I second Edict 1.3.
*edit*
Edict 1.4 has been amended and re-seconded.
I second Edict 1.3.
Cannot reach any targets in a timely manner? That is absurd. Rhodes is equidistant between Athens and Cyprus, it will take the Order no more time to reach it than the House of Asteri, less time, in fact, since the Order has ships immediately available and Asteri does not. It could easily be conquered with enough time to return to Cyprus for your preparations for Outremer. With so many vassals under your command it would even be a minor task to detach one or two with a small army to move on Smyrna as well, without greatly impacting your ability to field an army in Outremer.
I assure you, Comes Ksanthopoulos, Grandmaster of the most noble Order, that an argument based on what the Order can and cannot reach in what manner of time will hold little sway with those who chose to remain and defend the Empire rather than establish themselves on far and isolated Cyprus.Quote:
Originally Posted by Privateerkev
In any case, we seem to be past the point where we can agree on a compromise. Let the majority decide what is best for the Empire then. I apologize in advance, but I will campaign against your Edict, for reasons outlined already.
Strator Khristophoros,
You really haven't studied the maps have you?
There are exactly 2 ships off of Cyprus. How is a force supposed to take both Rhodes and Smyrna if 2 ships can only carry 1 general and 3 regiments? And a round trip to get reinforcements would take years.
Requiring the core provinces to be taken first means we will have to wait as they are taken. What if the Emperor sees fit to allow us to move on Antioch before those core cities are taken? Comes Markianos's amendment would prevent that from happening.
I rather have the Senate vote on both Edict 1.2 and 1.4. If both pass, then the Emperor can decide for himself "if" and "when" to take Antioch.
OOC: In a couple hours I'm going to go home and play this out on the computer. I want to see just how many years an invasion of Rhodes and Smyrna would take from Cyprus. :beam:
Senator Ampelas, your suggestion of waiting until all the other provinces of edict 1.2 are conquered before moving on Bari is ineffective and pointless.
I have stated that the castle can be taken and secured with little more then a hundred men. I stand by that statement. If we wait, we will only allow the Normans to secure their position in southern Italy and they will be free to move against our holdings in Epirus. It would be much wiser logistically to ensure imperial control over Apulia rather then let it slip to a belligerent faction. The Norman aggression that began in Italy will not likely stop there. We should be ready to meet them when they come.
Given the extremely small allocation of resources this task requires, the only reason anyone would back from it is cowardice. And I dare hope, that in this place, no one counts as a coward.
I second edict 1.4.
As obviously, Comes Ampelas, we will campaign against the hamstringing edict 1.2. Nor is it necessary to tell us that the sun is shining, the grass is green, or the sea salty.
Viassarionas mutters loudly,
By God I yearn for the day when I have an opponent with a straight swords and no time for curved words.
:egypt:
Iakovos can take it no longer and stands up sharply.
Enough! My fellow Strator Khristophoros, you argue against the siezing of Antioch on a monetary basis, yet do you have a cost-by-cost analysis of the amount spent if say the Order where to take Rhodes versus Antioch? If it is indeed less expensive, cheaper, and actually brings in coin for the Empire, as you are so adamant about doing, then the most profitable action should be taken, regardless.
Second, How is Rhodes a "front" of the Empire? May I ask how the Turks on Anatolia plan on exploiting it to further threaten the Empire? The Egyptians? The Venetians, particularly with Crete so more easily available and more profitable?
May I also ask why we are discussing funding of it to begin with? Will you not send money and aid to those provinces which we are recapturing? All of these conquests will require effort, time, and money, and yet your willing to deny a venture which most likely will not impact the Imperial purse to begin with!
I say Antioch would provide a greater strategic, logistic, and monetary benefit then the vast majority of the cities listed in Edict 1.2. Antioch, as has been mentioned, is highly defensible with minimal manpower, is a rich and prosperous city, and can reap a benefit faster then say Rhodes or even Smyrna can within the same time frame, nevermind the logistical mess mentioned by Comes Makedonios of transporting the troops back and forth from Cyprus.
I second Edict 1.4 as well
I second Edicts 2, 3 and 4 and propose:
Edict 1.5: The training of a boat or hiring of a mercenary craft is required outside of Athens in order to transport men to Rhodes, as per Edict 1.2. The fleet we already own further North may also be used if it has no other orders.
I second Edict 1.5.
In anycase, I will say it again. If the Order were to seize Antioch immediately it would be the other Houses who would benefit most. Certainly a large percentage of the income from that region would go to fund the conquest of other nearby provinces.
Ioannis Kantakouzinos returns to the diet, walks to the speakers place and addresses the audience, after briefly checking from his scribe what has been said.
"I would still advice the honourable parties to wait for the Basileus. As far as i know, there are no Nobles who have private armies and the Basileus and Caesar are the only ones who have Imperial army in their possession. Those who have the man power should be first to decide how it will be used"
Kantakouzinos sits down among the Komnendoukai
I second edict: 1.5
I will amend Edict 1.4 to read: If Edict 1.2 passes, Antioch will be added to the list.
My sergeants have a point with regards to the money that Antioch will bring in. I admit I don't normally think in such a way, but obviously some do.
The Emperor can still decide on the order that the settlements are conquered. If we're going to insist on imposing a list on the Emperor, we might as well include cities that will generate income.
Sergeants, I am afraid I will need your seconds again.
Though I am not a seegeant I will second Edict 1.4 again. More land for the Empire is never a bad thing and people who think it is are similar to those responsible for our Empire falling to this bedraggled state.
And I will second 1.4 again as well.