The Curia

[SwissBarbar]

Avlvs couldn't believe his ears. He arose again, in order to speak.


"Patres conscripti, please hear my statement.

Seconding edict 6.5. would mean, that Legio II only had served one mans greed and not the Roman Republic.

Seconding edict 6.5. would mean, that Legio II had acted against the will of the senate, which simply is a lie"

Avlvs looked in the eyes of Appius Claudius Nero, with a mixture of disgust and pity. How could he dare tell such things about his brothers in arms? He continued, saying with a strong voice:

"Seconding edict 6.5. would do naught but insult the soldiers of Legio II, insult the sons of Rome who had shed their blood in order to protect their beloved Republic. It insults every Roman brother, every Roman son and every Roman father, who had lost arms and legs in the service of Roma's natural desire to defeat its enemies and who faced death even if it occured in the form of an Epeirote forest of sarissas.

I was there, fathers of Rome, and as my brothers, also I have carried away scars. But edict 6.5. hurts me deeper than any Epeirote sword ever could. I was there, fathers of Rome, and I saw my brothers bleed and die." And continuing with an even stronger voice: "I was there, fathers of Rome, when Romans prayed to the gods before battle and wished naught but to be brave and not to fail their countrymen. "Oh Mars, give me courage and let me not be weak, let me defeat my enemy and shall I fall, let me fall for my country in dignity, so my family, my friends and my country be proud of me." That is what they said, and nothing else! I was there, fathers of Rome, when Roman soldiers raised their war cries and I saw in their eyes not their wish to elevate one man's glory, but their love to their country and their boundless will to destroy everyone who threats the country they love!

If I could, I would veto your motion, Appius Claudius, but I can't, since it's not in my power as a Legatvs."

Many senatores who had serverd in the army earlier mumbled their agreement. Some shouted "Down with our enemies!", others "long live the Republic!". Avlvs stepped back to the place where he sat, and sighed. In a low voice, he said:

"Shame on you, Appius Claudius, shame on you!"

Then he sat down, ignoring the senators next to him, who tried to speak to him.

[Tiberius Claudius Marcellus]

"Very touching sentiments, Aulus Aemilius, very touching. However, when we let emotion cloud our judgement, then we do a disservice to the people we represent. One must stand back and look at the mosaic as a whole, lest we become too focused on the individual tiles. Edict 6.5 is not directed against the men of the Second Legio in any way. It is purely and wholly directed at Caius Aurelius Cotta. He is the only one named in it. It punishes the legio in no way. We must remain focused on what our intent is - and that is to check the meteoric rise to power of this lone man before he usurps control of the Res Publica.

"As many of you men here were just shouting 'Down with our enemies!', that is what this bold and comprehensive legislation seeks to do. By forcing the Praetor to bow to the will of the senate, we maintain our collective authority - thus ensuring that voices are always heard and freedom will reign supreme. Just as one trims dead or even healthy limbs from a young tree to direct its growth in order to ensure it becomes a tall and mighty oak, so too must we take measures to ensure that our republic remains strong and healthy."

Tiberius Claudius took a sip of water from a cup as he walked to stand near Lucius Cornelius Scipio.

"Fellow senatores, this man says he has seen no proof of the Praetor's self-indulgent actions. I then ask, what have you seen, Lucius Cornelius, if you have not seen what is in plain sight? Perhaps you are blinded by your devotion to the cult of Caius Aurelius Cotta if you cannot see what recently transpired in Illyria? Allow me to refresh your memory.

"We were having a debate about whether or not to take Ambrakia after Caius Aurelius led a barely sufficient number of men to kill Pyrrhus. While we were debating the merits of such a move, we received a message from the then-Quaestor that he requested permission to take the city. No sooner had the message arrived requesting permission than we received another rider who bore the report that the Praetor had led even fewer men against another unit of the enemy's and, though victorious, half his force had been killed!"

There were grumblings amongst some of the senators about the throwing away of Roman lives

"While we were joyous over the death of our greatest enemy and this second victory, we also began to weigh the benefits over the costs of such actions even more than we had before. Before we could finish the debate on this newest subject we received word that the entire Legio II Latium was massing at the borders for a swift and final strike on Ambrakia to be completed before this very congressional session! If I must still point it out to you - the man requested permission; but did not even wait for our response! He simply did it as a formality to 'be polite' and let us know that he was going to do what he wanted to do. That is not respectful of the decision making authority of the Curia, and it is not respectful of the traditions of the Res Publica to carry on with wild abandon.

"I will be the first to acknowledge that certain decisions can only be made by the general in the field. We are hundreds of leagues away, here in Roma, and we cannot make those life-and-death decisions when they are needed to be made. However, the taking of a city and the subsequent pacifying of the countryside and the logistical nightmare of re-supply and constructing roads and installing a new government for the region are things that the Senate is not only capable of; but is our very duty! They are things that take time to discuss and lay our properly so that we don't have to re-conquer the territory when it rebels. Can this lone man and his lone legion do all of that? I should say not.

"It is for those reasons and the history of such rash and criminal behaviour that Appius Claudius proposed, and I have seconded Edict 6.5. Of course, Caius Aurelius is entitled to the presumption of innocence; but this here is his trial and the evidence is most damning."

[Cultured Drizzt fan]

to be fair to Caivs he did back down from assaulting the city when told of our displeasure. I am hesitent to crucify any mans career. I believe that Caivs has gotten the message, and that none of this will ever happen again, that is enough for me. At least for the moment.

if we forward this edict it will be giving the go ahead to strip any man of his rights, and regardless of Caivs's actions that is something I will not do.

[The Celtic Viking]

"Rights?! It is a privilege to command Roman soldiers, not anybody's 'right'. As it is, I second edict 6.5, not necessarily because I agree with it, but rather because I think it important that the matter is at least tried."

Pvblivs clears his throat.

Edict 6.7: A peace treaty should be offered to the Epeirotes, demanding 3000 mnai as well as map information under the threat of an attack. If it is declined, Legio II should sack Ambrakia and enslave the population, after which a new peace treaty should be proposed. This new one is to demand 7000 mnai as well as map information, with Ambrakia being given back to Epeiros.

(OOC: Since there is no way the AI will accept either, the CoF will decide whether or not to force diplomacy it, but the second [if it gets to it] must be force diplomacied.)

"This would not only give us fewer fronts to fight on, but also give us more mnai to use in our war against Carthage, which remains our main enemy. If we are going to have a spitting chance to win that war, we need every coin we can get; we all know how expensive navies can be, especially the real ones that we will need now."

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

OOC: When I say sack, I mean destroy if not all at least the most important and profitable buildings, such as the MICs etc. AFAIK the script won't give the AI settlements they get through diplomacy government buildings though, so if that's right then we should leave it intact.

[SwissBarbar]

"ARE YOU MAD?" , Lvcvllvs Valerivs lost his temper. "You speak of a privilege of leading Roman soldiers, and then sacrifice them taking a city, which you would give back to the enemy for lousy 7'000 mnai? "

Avlvs Aemilivs arose and said:

"Forgive my friend, senator. He - and I - just can't believe that you suggest to take the most important city the enemy has, the one where he can recruit his elite-forces and the one with his greatest harbor - which would give us more than 7'000 mnai for longer periods - and then give it back to the enemy.

As I proposed in Edict 6.4. , the capital city of Epeiros, Ambrakia, is to be taken by Legio II, in order to put the Epeirotes ambitions to destroy us to an end. With that I meant to take AND to keep it.

[Cultured Drizzt fan]

and it is a privilage that cotta has proven himself worthy of having. he may be reckless and at points has used his authority to his own ends, and for that he deserves some punishment. but he has my respect, if not my friendship. he has not done anything to truly deserve the dishonour of such a act. he deserves punishment yes, but I would not go so far as to strip him of any military rank.

[The Celtic Viking]

"I'm sure you did, Avlvs Aemilivs, but I disagree completely. What may be best for the long run - which in and of itself is still debatable - may be completely worthless if going for it means we will not make the short run. If the Carthaginians, with their huge treasury and supreme navy, defeats us in 5 years, what does it matter if Ambrakia would've brought us all the gold in the world after 10 years?

My edict is simply made to remove one front, to ease the burden on the others. The taking of Ambrakia is only to punish and consequently force them to sign one, if they at first refuse to comply. I assure you that it would take a very long time for Ambrakia to trickle in as much wealth by simply taking and occupying it, as it would if we sacked it and then sold the worthless remains back to the Epeirotes for 7000 mnai, which is not a small amount to begin with, I may remind you. With this would come the bonus of one less front, so perhaps it's you who's mad for opposing it, and not I?"

Pvblivs turns to Sextvs, and nods.

"I fully agree with that, which is why I will vote nay on Edict 6.5. I want it tried so that the senate can clearly show where it stands on this matter, but that doesn't mean I want it to pass."

[SwissBarbar]

"I see your point, but I don't agree. Our legions are stronger than the Carthaginian army. They only rule at sea, but we already build ships that can match them. We are quite wealthy, so we don't need extremely much money right now. If we want to win this war, we need to still have money in 2 or 3 years. And the harbour of Ambrakia will guarantee this. If we pillaged and kept Ambrakia, we'd have both. Money now from the pillaging and money then from the rich harbour My edict covers your wish too."

[The Celtic Viking]

"Don't be absurd now. We will hardly go bankrupt within 2-3 years just by not taking and keeping Ambrakia, that much is certain. The most important thing for us to do right now is to close that front and focus on the Carthaginians. Being paid at minimum 3000 mnai for it is not a bad by itself, and if we add to that the promise of gaining a huge sum if anything but the minimum gain would happen and it's an extremely lucrative deal.

Your proposal does not close the front, nor would it bring in as much money in the short term - especially if the Epeirotes refuse the initial offer in my proposal. It would take a long time for it to earn us that much by keeping Ambrakia, because you need to remember to count the cost of holding and defending it, which is not only costly in and of itself but it's a real hassle. It is, after all, the most important Epeirote settlement as you say, and if you think the populace - as well as the Epeirotes themselves - would just accept us there, you're fooling yourself. Much better it is, then, to simply not bother with all that and claim a hefty sum for losing a front and avoiding the cost and trouble of governing yet another foreign province. At this time we can do without that."

[SwissBarbar]

"Bankrupt? That's not what I said and meant, and you know it. My proposal would close the front, for Epeiros would be robbed of its most capable recruiting-center. After having taken Ambrakia, we should force them to peace, I agree. But the city should not be given back.

My point simply is, my edict covers your wish of having the front closed and gaining money immediately, and it covers my wish to cut Epeiros access to their elite recruiting center and taking their richest harbour."

[The Celtic Viking]

"If that's not what you meant, then I don't see what point you were trying to make when you talked about the need to 'still have money 2-3 years from now'.

Even so, your edict does not 'cover my wish', as you like to claim. It only covers taking Ambrakia, and that's it. It doesn't close the front at all, because if you think that would be enough to defeat the Epeirotes, even its will to fight, you're being naive. The war would be far from over; indeed, the Epeirotes would be fighting tooth and nail to take back Ambrakia, and if they would sign a peace treaty afterwards, it would be one we couldn't trust, because they would always be looking at the city with ever hungry eyes. My way we do close the front, end that threat, gain loads of mnai and still taking away what you call 'its most capable recruitment-center' - if the initial peace offering isn't accepted. If it is, then we'll still gain a good amount of mnai, while sparing good, Roman lives, closing a front while also getting a much more reliable peace than we ever could if we would hold Ambrakia."

[SwissBarbar]

"A peace the enemy would use to recover and train elite forces in the city we did not take and to attack again when our armies are bound at the front against carthage."

[/Bean\]

Horatius Galcratus stands.

Surely, Consul, whether we offer a ceasefire or not, a legion is going to have to stay in Illyria to protect it. I doubt the Epirites will be happy to completely give up any claim to it, especially if we withdraw right on their doorstep.

If we pull our forces out from Illyria completely, and send them all against the Carthaginians, and the Epirites mount a counter attack, what kind of message would we send to those we conquer? We protect them only as long as our interests in the region exist? That would surely send a negative message to future provinces, would it not?

Surely we must keep a force in the region, and in the best possible defensive position. If we take Ambrakia, we stop a risk of a three pronged counter attack by the Epirites. By taking Ambrakia, we can secure the mountain passes with one legion, thus keeping the whole of Illyria safe from one position.

[The Celtic Viking]

"Avlvs Aemilivs, that is only possible in the first case scenario, and it's not even necessary to happen then. I think they are ready to cut their losses now after losing their great king, and if not, they definitely would if they lost Ambrakia. Besides, you forget that they also hold Pella, where they can get elite soldiers as well. What's more desirable: an unreliable peace with elites raised on the borders, or a reliable peace with elites raised on the borders? Or better yet, a reliable peace with no elites raised on the border - which we could get through my proposal, but not through yours."

Pvblivs turns to Horatius Galcratus.

"I would much prefer not to have to defend at all. I would much prefer to keep Illyria safe by getting paid for no work than to lose Roman lives to get one more province that will be hard to control, one which the Epeirotes would never accept as lost. Illyria is far less important to them, and I do believe they are rational enough not to think they have any hope for victory now. If not already, then at least after a sacking of Ambrakia. If we then give them back their capital in return for mnai and peace, they will accept their loss and not only will we border only the small, pitiful remains of what is now Ambrakia, but we will also have a much more reliable peace than if we actually try to hold it. Or what? Do you actually believe they'll just let us keep their capital, just like that?

No, we need to close that front and fast, and holding Ambrakia is counter-productive to that."

[Tiberius Claudius Marcellus]

Intrigued by this latest turn of events, Tiberius couldn't help but smile inwardly at the enigma that was Publius Atilius Regulus. The man denounced Cnaeus Cornelius Blasio and supported legislation (yet simultanesouly vowed to vote against it) to do the same to Caius Aurelius Cotta - a man twice the villain than the old Dictator ever was. This man knew the rules of the game quite well. For all he tried, he couldn't determine if Publius Atilius was indeed to be trusted or was posturing to put himself in a position of power one day.

"Gentlemen, you are arguing about how wet the rain is. Your proposals are hardly dissimilar, whereas one removes an enemy stronghold and would steadily trickle money into our coffers and the other fills our coffers now at the expense of having to re-conquer and rebuild the city at a later time. In the end, we will both have the city and their money. I strongly urge, for the sake of consensus, that you work together to combine your proposals, and hopefully ammend them to clearly state that Caius Aurelius Cotta not be allowed to command the Legio II Latium on its mission. As it stands now, I cannot second Edict 6.7."

[SwissBarbar]

"I am willing to combine my edict with the one Publius Atilius proposed, including peace with Epeiros, under the condition that the city of Ambarakia be kept under Roman rule and not given back to Epeiros."

[navarro951]

"I do see peace in the east might be a solution for now. But I would only second an edict which said we propose peace AFTER Ambrakia is taken. We have come to far to not cripple them with such a move; so I say we make it. Once things are solidified in Illyria, including Amrakia, then we can discuss peace."

[navarro951]

Gamemasters CA 6.2: That Legions, after a period of 9 years, unless they are desperately needed on the front, are to return to an Italia city for a time of leave. A "rotation of command" will be used once they depart for campaign again.

OOC: Again, if any of you do not like me proposing "Gamemaster" CA's like this then let me know it will be removed. I just think there is so much to propose and so little time or people to propose it.

[SwissBarbar]

Sounds good, but I have technical questions: Who decides if the legion is needed or not? How is it decided which commander takes over the legion? Has the current commander the chance to prolong his duty?

[The Celtic Viking]

"If you think you can have peace with Epeiros while still holding Ambrakia, you are either fooling yourselves or trying to fool the rest of us. Lets say the fortunes were reversed, and - the gods forbid - they took Roma. Would you accept a peace in which it remained in their hands? If not, why would they do so with their capital, Ambrakia?"

[Tiberius Claudius Marcellus]

"Dux Cnaes Cornelius, that proposal is wise beyond measure. It will further expand the corps of experienced officers for the Legios and decentralize the power base of the Senate."

[Tiberius Claudius Marcellus]

double post

[/Bean\]

^^

[navarro951]

Sounds good, but I have technical questions: Who decides if the legion is needed or not? How is it decided which commander takes over the legion? Has the current commander the chance to prolong his duty?

OOC: It works out simply that the senate will decide who is most senior. If their are complications we just have a 24 hour poll.

[SwissBarbar]

I second your edict though I will think that we'll have a poll every single time, because commanders here are most likely juged by "do I like him?" and not by "is he capable?"

[navarro951]

I second your edict though I will think that we'll have a poll every single time, because commanders here are most likely juged by "do I like him?" and not by "is he capable?"

OOC: That's an impossibility. For the most part, whoever is senior is senior. That is how the rule will work. We only vote if say two or more people were at a certain rank at the same time and have both not yet lead a legion.

[desert]

After Aulus Aemilius's impassioned speech, several senators gazed at Appius Claudius to gauge his reaction. Appius simply hid his face with his robe, as he usually did when attracting unwanted attention. He beckoned his assistant Quintus Sertorius over. For a fleeting second, Quintus thought he noticed a slight moistness in his liege's eyes, but as soon as Appius turned to him fully it was gone. He put it down to the shadow cast over Appius's face by his cloak accentuating the white of his eyes.

After some moments, he rose.

Senators, may I have your attention please!"

"The esteemed and honorable Senator Appius Claudius Nero wishes to make a comment on current events. *Ahem*

I would like to denounce Caius Aurelius' supporters as being mere yes-men at best, and part of a conspiracy at worst. Caius Aurelius is too powerful for his own good. And from my time serving with him here Appius hissed and glared angrily at Quintus I learned that he is...unashamedly ambitious. He has absolute authority over an entire legion, and is a praetor as well. While the legions fight against Carthage, he could easily march his men into Roma and have us all executed.

Then he will raise more men and eliminate the remaining commanders piecemeal. Who is to say he has not infiltrated the other legions with spies, promising greater power to the common man? Mutinies will arise and he will win without a single threat to his own person. And then, he plans to dole out our ancient estates to his loyal soldiers! For now, it is simply too dangerous to grant him a command. Put him in one of the provinces, Illyria or transalpine Gallia, and let him prove his loyalty there, if he so wishes.

Also, I second Edict 6.7.

[Cultured Drizzt fan]

Sextus laughs at Appius Claudius Nero comment, thinking esteemed and honoured indeed!

we all agree that Caius Aurelius is ambitious, and for some of his actions as provincial governer he deserves reprimand. that much is true.
but you are not talking about reprimand you are talking of barring a man from all military postings, something only done to a truly dishonoured general. which Caius Aurelius is not. while I may agree that Caivs would be better off sitting somewhere twittling his thumbs, I cant agree with such harsh measures.

[The Celtic Viking]

"Out of interest, Sextvs Cornelivs, what 'reprimand' would you suggest instead?"

[Cultured Drizzt fan]

My idea is this,

Edict 6.8: after the Taking of Ambrakia, Caivs Aurelius Cotta will relinquish control of legio II, Avlvs Aemilivs Mamercvs will take over command. Caivs will be given Provincial governence of Ambrakia and Illyria Hellenike to compensate. However Caivs will be restricted to the city of Ambrakia for half a year, and at any time if it comes to light he is misusing his power he can be expulsed by a simple 3/4 majority senate vote. any attempt to replicate his "patrols" will be met with the loss of his Governance and his house arrest in rome for 1 year.

the way I see it this seems fair enough, Legio II is commanded by a veteren officer that has been with it for a while, Caivs is punished for his actions. And if peace is made with the Epiriotes then he will be in a dead end. Caivs gets a chance to prove his loyalty, without reducing his career to a smoldering heap of slage.

(ooc: think of it as probation)