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.