The Magnaura

[Ibn-Khaldun]

Efstathios listens what Makedonios have just said and the raises..

Good plan! That's all I can say. I doubt that Savvas would be able to make a better one.

He nods to Makedonios and smiles..

[Ituralde]

As the letter from Vissarioans ek Lesvou is read, Pavlos barks a short laugh!

"Hah! Bloody coward, not even showing his face in the Senate. But we're all heroes on paper, eh?"

He looks at Makedionios, his face set in its eternal downcast.

"Surely you condemn the words of your vassal or do you agree with them?"

[Warmaster Horus]

Has Makedonios not already spoken of this, Pavlos?

Vissa was rebuked. He is not even here. If he wants to send letters, he can until the Emperor says he can't. I say again, take it up with the Emperor if you want Vissa banned.

These attacks on the Grandmaster using his vassal as an excuse are becoming ridiculous. We are free men, are we not? If we say something out of line, then we are rebuked for it, and the matter should rest then.

[Kagemusha]

" Surely your plan sounds nice and all, Grandmaster, but it has a flaw that turns it into just dreams. It seems all your actions only increase the spending of the Empire, while you support getting rid of yet another way to gain income, in form of outlawing sacking. To me it seems that you have great dreams, but no means to make those dreams true. Senator Militous plans seem lot more based on reality then yours."

[Rowan]

Ah yes, maybe if Senator Militou would care to share his plan with the rest of us we might appraise its worth! What have we heard from him? Pretty nothings! Sure, he says he will negotiate and that florins will flow to his hands from sacked cities but what cities is he planning to sack? Is he going to attack the catholics? For all we know he is going to singlehandedly invade Italy!

And could he tell us what he will do with all those florins, beside enlarging his wine cellar!

[Ituralde]

"It was no bloody attack. Merely an inquiry about his oppinion. And don't think an insult isn't seen as one just because you put an 'I apologize' in front of it or do you agree with the sentiments of ek Lesvou and are willing to repeat those things to my face?"

[Privateerkev]

Vissa's words are his own. I, nor the Order, condone his words. He has been rebuked, twice. The Emperor has had the chance to review his words, and if you notice, Vissa has not been banned from these chambers. Therefore, any further attempt to link his words to me or the Order is blatant political grandstanding. I have taken the appropriate steps. If he does it again, I will take more steps. The Emperor has obviously not found the charges ban worthy. If you want me and/or the Emperor to do more about it, then say so. But using it for political gain is childish.

As for "outlawing sacking," I am, yet again, being mis characterized. I have not outlawed sacking nor will I attempt to at this session. I discourage sacking. And I am strong against mandating that we sack. I am confident that we will do just fine without any sacking, but if my edict is renewed, it will still be a viable option for those who insist on doing it.

Bart has a good point. Exactly what cities would be sacked this term if Savva's edict passes. For one, this would ensure that both Crusade targets of Cairo and Alexandria will be sacked. Which is horrible. We go to save the people of Cairo only to sack them? Doesn't make much sense. Caesarea is about to fall and that would have to be sacked if the edict passes. But if you remember, Ampelas already sacked it. How many times does the poor castle have to be sacked? Which brings up another good point about the question on what happens to settlements we lose to the enemy, and then retake. Like Caesarea. If we lose a settlement, retake it, and it is not 51% Orthodox, does Savvas really expect us to sack it?

Many of our own settlements are not 51% Orthodox because the Caesar insisted that only special places can have the Word spread. And by special, I mean owned by his House. So, if the Order loses Adana or Aleppo to the enemy, then takes it back, Savvas would actually have us sack these tiny castles? Please, this is utterly ridiculous. Damascus will probably be taken this term so Savvas will demand I sack that as well. Ok, so we have Caesarea, Damascus, Cairo, Alexandria, and any non-Orthodox settlement we lose but then take back. Also, what if someone goes and takes Zagreb again. Do we sack that too? So basically, we will be forced to sack settlements we go on Crusade for, settlements we used to own, and the poor town of Damascus. Wow... And what wonderful liberators we shall be...

[Privateerkev]

*edit*

OOC:

I'm sorry, my browser locked up and double posted.

[Kagemusha]

" Makedonias. Your problem is that you want to over regulate everything through legistlation. To me that is a sign that you dont trust the judgement of the individual army commanders of the Empire. Laws that over limit the possible actions of field commanders are simply not needed. We should limit laws as guidelines or otherwise our glorious empire will turn into massive uneffective pile of bureocracy. Rules are not the only way to lead people. Trust is important part for people to feel appreciated and laws that imply that people cant be trusted and should be guided in detail all the time are unnecessary."

[woad&fangs]

As I read it Makedonious edict gives more freedom to the generals than Savvas' edict.

[Andres]

If I may ask, Savvas, what is your own experience of managing men? I believe a Comes has no vassals? What can we say about that? How can you manage the Empire if you have no experience at all with vassals?

Savvas turns to Manouelitis.

No experience with vassals? Dear Manouelitis, I don't have vassals, no, but I work behind the scenes. You see, young senator, the most important parts of diplomacy happen in private, where you can't see it.

Tagamta being a small House, I manage to be on good grounds with all other Houses, the Royal family, and, this will perhaps surprise you, I can even come to an agreement with the Order on some points.

Besides, is experience with vassals required to run an Empire?

Some of the Senators in this Magnaura will have to admit that I know very well how to negotiate.

Aleksios leans forward.

Leaving aside the insults and inane accusations that seem to make up a majority of this Session, I have a question for the two candidates:

Considering the current strategic situation of the Empire, what would be the military and diplomatic goals of your term?

With all due respect, dear Basileus, my words aren't intended to insult or accuse the Grandmaster. I am only showing that he lacks the necessary qualities of being Megas.

But I do have a plan, dear Basileus.

As for diplomacy, I will always drive a hard bargain. I will try to get the last florin out of anyone who is interested in trade rights and map information. I would also ask our Orthodox allies for small gifts in return for preferably nothing and if they insist, map information.

Allthough I would never ally with a muslim faction, if the opportunity is there and if the money is needed for the overall good of the Empire, I would see no harm in letting them pay for a temporary cease-fire, trade rights or map information, only to attack them again right away. If they are foolish enough to spend florins on us, than why should we refuse it? They are infidels, no more no less, and in love and war, everyting is allowed.

Alliances with Catholics can be made, but only if they are prepared to pay a decent amount of florins...

We have enough diplomats as it is now, so no need for training additional agents.

Zagreb needs to be retaken and I don't see no harm in sacking that settlement.

Cairo, Alexandria, Damascus, Caesarea, and any other settlement we conquer during my term as Megas should be sacked. As explained before, but our Grandmaster seems to refuse to understand it, sacking all settlements we conquer is the best thing we can do, even from a moral point of view. Do harm now to avoid disasters later. It's dirty, but it's necessary. It seems dispicable, but it isn't. It's a necessity.

After Cairo and Alexandria have been sacked, the war with the Fatamids will pretty much be over. I will communicate with our noble crusaders after they have taken said settlements and I will encourage them to also conquer the Castle of Gaza and convert it into a city.

The Order of the Knight's Templar are a pestilence for us in the region. It is a weak faction without allies. I would humbly request the Basileus to send a declaration of war against the Templar Knights and ask the Order of St John to take Tortosa and sack it.

I would also gather what units we can miss and send them by ship to Acre, to sack the settlement.

The money we gain can be used to build more military infrastructure in Dardanellia, Belgrade, Aleppo and Tbilisi.

But I will also invest in economical buildings in the coastal settlements, both in the West, the Centre and the East. This will ensure a steady income. You cannot talk about military if you don't talk about money as well. Soldiers need to be paid. Where possible and beneficial on the mid-long term, I will replace expensive mercenaries by cheaper regular units of similar quality.

The Western frontier will also be strengthened. Some Senators in the west are spending alot of time in their own settlements, blocking garrison units that can be used elsewhere. Senators who agree to cooperate and to let me use or (disband in case they are unnecessary) their units in case of an emergency, will be rewarded, others will receive nothing.

Constantinople has a large army within its' walls. I will train two or three additional regiments. I already mentioned Dardanellia. This castle is near Constantinople and I will train additional units of better quality to a) aid Constantinople if the city would be besieged; b) defend the region and intercept Jihads c) defend the region against the French Crusaders. We all know Jerusalem will fall soon against the German Crusaders. Those French won't go back to France empty handed...

As for the Levant, once Caesarea falls, the Seljuks will be broken. House Komnenodoukai and Asteri will have my support in their efforts.

I won't split the fleet. Having a large fleet has the advantage that it will defeat any enemy fleet it encounters. We don't want to lose expensive ships, let alone valuable armies travelling on said ships.

I know that what I propose will cost money, hence the need for the sacking of settlements.

Because some Senators will refuse to sack settlements (no doubt with the noblest intentions, but they are wrong),I feel they should be obliged by an Edict, namely the Edict I proposed.

[woad&fangs]

Savvas, may I bring to your attention that Zagreb is now owned by the Venetians? Do you intend to wage war against the Venetians also?

Also, I intend to capture either Gaza or Thebes during the next Megas term and I will refuse to sack either of those settlements. What do you intend to do when that happens?

[Rowan]

Well, if his grasp of the matters remains this low he probably won't even notice. Because Jerusalem has already been taken by the catholics and we already have a french army in our territory wondering which settlement they would like to sack now.

[Ituralde]

Pavlos bows towards Makedonios.

"I thank you for answering my question."

[Cecil XIX]

The Senator ek Militou's vision can be summarized in three parts.

It will make us all liars, by having us attack our peaceful neighbors and sign peace treaties which will we immediately break.

It will make us all murders, by forcing us to sack every settlement we come across, including settlements full of Orthodox Christians and Roman citizens.

Finaly, it will make us all tyrants by subverting our objective system of laws with a more subjective system of 'consensus', which can only result in Oligarchy.

[Andres]

Savvas, may I bring to your attention that Zagreb is now owned by the Venetians? Do you intend to wage war against the Venetians also?

Also, I intend to capture either Gaza or Thebes during the next Megas term and I will refuse to sack either of those settlements. What do you intend to do when that happens?

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

OOC: on the map it still shows as 'rebel' I don't play ahead nor do I toggle of fog of war...

[Privateerkev]

Makedonios looks at Kantakouzinos.

Ah, if you can't win with real debates then just mis-characterize your opponent. That seems to be the strategy of the Caesar's men.

Once I get a handle on the situation, I will allow commanders control over regional resources including agents, ships, and reinforcements.

And yes, in terms of sacking, it is actually Savvas who is introducing much more strict legislation than I. Ironic...

Looks at Savvas.

You propose us building our Empire upon a pile of skulls. You really would have us sack settlements we used to own, like Caesarea, wouldn't you. Truly remarkable...

Addresses the Senate.

I will make this very clear and very plain. Any man who attempts to order me to sack a settlement better do so in person and he better come with a sword in his hand.

[woad&fangs]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

ooc: I got my information about Zagreb from the "Senate Library" thread.

[Privateerkev]

*edit*

OOC: I'm sorry this happened again. For some reason, the board keeps locking up and I have to refresh. When this happens, a double post is the result.

[Askthepizzaguy]

A letter arrives, stained in blood

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

To the Emperor of the decadent Roman Empire, and his underlings in the Imperial Senate;

The one known as Efstratios Monomachos, a Senator of the Roman empire and commander of mercenaries who committed crimes against the Durazzoan people, has been captured and executed by the Free Durazzo Movement.

Let it be known that should the one known as Michail Arianitis remain near the Durazzo region, he will be captured as well.

The time for the end of the Roman Empire is at hand. Your warlike ways have begun a holy conflict which will plunge the world into chaos, resulting in Armageddon. If the occupying forces of Durazzo do not remove themselves, more Roman Senators will be destroyed.

Do not underestimate us, we have allies in Athens and in other regions. Retreat back to Rome where you came from, or the wrath of the almighty God will come down upon you.

-General Ruggero, Free Durazzo Movement

[OverKnight]

Aleksios speaks:

Senators, the Crusade is on the cusp of liberating Egypt. I salute the bravery of the men involved in such a noble and holy endeavor. We must ensure that Orthodox Christianity is restored in that land.

With that in mind, I would like to propose the following Edict:

Edict 4.5: Patriarch Nicholas III will be transferred to the newly recreated Patriarchate of Alexandria. A Synod of the Church, chaired by the Basileus, will be called to select his replacement as Patriarch of Constantinople.

Patriarch Nicholas has been very closely involved with the implementation and progress of the Crusade, making him an ideal choice to be the Shepperd of our new flock. It was he who saw the suffering of Christians in Egypt and decided, without any assistance from the Senate, to do something about it. In addition, he already has a close working relationship with some of the Crusaders, most notably Vissarionas ek Lesvou, his man in Egypt even before the Crusade.

With such qualifications it would be an offense not to send the Patriarch to Egypt. I'm sure under his wise guidance that the Church will flourish there.

[Kagemusha]

" I second edict 4.5. It is the least we can do for the noble Patriarch."

[Warmaster Horus]

I second edict 4.5 as well.

[_Tristan_]

Still looking drawn, his skin with a feverish sheen, Methodios stands.

My Lord,

If you please, seeing how I should be the one to claim Alexandria, if God wills it... I think I should be asked if I wish to enjoy the Patriarch's company...

There was once a Patriarch in Antioch : why isn't there one now ?

I do not like to have decisions forced upon me. Cairo would be a better seat for the Patriarch, as his views are closer to those of the Order who are about to claim it.

With a slight bow to the Basileos, Methodios sits down.

[Ignoramus]

Ioannis Komnenos rises to speak.

Strator Tagaris, Alexandria has always been a patriarchate. Cairo is a city founded by the infidel, populated by the infidel, and in essence is infidel.

Sitting back down, Ioannis begins to write.

[_Tristan_]

Methodios adresses the Caesar.

Much as Antioch was also a Patriarchate, why isn't it one now, then ?

[Ignoramus]

Looking up from his papers, Ioannis responds.

Antioch is closer to Constantinople than Alexandria. While I also would like to see a Antioch receive her Patriarch, Alexandria has a greater need. Remember, we have not held the city for almost 500 years.

[GeneralHankerchief]

Patriarchal Representative:

Very cute, Basileus. I didn't think you would have had the balls to propose it at this Session.

For your information, Senators, the Basileus does have an ulterior motive for proposing this:

Ioannis, Anna and Senators (OOC: And TC as I want to run this by him):

While no hard evidence has emerged to implicate Patriarch Nicholas III with involvement in triggering a crisis in Egypt or with the Organization, the man is obviously rife with sin. He has exceeded, by a far measure, his God given authority, suborning the foreign policy and military resources of the Empire. I tire of his lackey's slander and insinuations in the Senate. There is only room enough in the Empire for one Vice-Regent of the Lord, and that would be the Basileus.

He must be dealt with before he can threaten Imperial succession. It is the Patriarch of Constantinople, after all, who serves at the Coronation of a new Basileus. While his direct control of the title of Basileus is less than those schismatic Popes and their sham Emperors in the west, he could cause problems.

Therefore I am thinking of proposing the following Charter Amendment, technically it will not change the Charter, but I believe it will need a super majority to be legal:

Charter Amendment 4.x: Patriarch Nicholas III will be transferred to the newly recreated Patriarchate of Alexandria. A Synod of the Church, chaired by the Basileus, will be called to select his replacement as Patriarch of Constantinople.

I will introduce this by speaking of a need for a gifted and strong man to restore the Word of God in liberated Egypt. Since the Patriarch has shown such concern for the Christians there, he is the natural choice for such a holy task, to continue the work of the Crusade he called.

Thoughts? (OOC: TC, would this be acceptable?)

Basileus Aleksios

Unfortunately, this is nothing more than a blatant power grab to keep His Eminence out of the Emperor's way. You'll notice that His Eminence and myself have not exactly been the most praising of the Basileus and his son? Exactly. This is just a plan to remove a critic with one fell swoop as well as extend more control over Orthodoxy, a recipe that has never worked.

[Warmaster Horus]

Exactly who received this information? And how did the Patriarch get it?

[GeneralHankerchief]

Patriarchal Representative:

The Basileus, I suppose, sent this out to the group of Senators whom he considered loyal right around the start of the session. At least one of them recognized the work for what it was and forwarded it to His Eminence.