Remove ads

Res Publica: A Quest of Ancient Rome

Reader mode
Undead Martyr said:
I think people are underestimating just how useful naval warfare will be. Greece is basically coastline and mountains- they have more coast than all of Africa! And then there's asia minor too.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

To be honest, if I thought there was a plan that could have won while also taking the Seafaring action, I would be pushing for it, but I don't think there is. The personal action slots are very competitive this turn. I have real world experience with various maritime activities, which are pretty heavily steeped in tradition, so I'm interested for non-gameplay reasons, even if my knowledge of ancient seafaring isn't exactly amazing.

With very little effort, we could be better than pretty much everyone else, and controlling the sea is pretty huge when essentially every population center of note is within a short distance of the coast. In addition, trade is heavily reliant on the Mediterranean, which means we could lock that down. So, there are benefits, but they're not immediate. Which is unfortunate, because I don't think we're getting the option to pick the brains of the captains again for a while.
 
Last edited:
Valkur said:
Hate to ask but are we going for a full restoration of Rome as republic with a civil service system?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
With the current chaos happening, I think we're wisely trying to expand our influence without stepping on any of the big player's toes. It'll be a long time yet. To clarify Caesar was fifty-five five at the time of his death, Attelus is only nineteen we lack the influential background, skills and the prestige of our historical counterparts so it'll be a long road ahead of us before we can dream of reforming Rome in whatever manner we wish. We're doing well so far, but baby steps for now.

Although with the way Telamons dice have been rolling I'm half expecting Sulla to die against Mithridates subordinate in Greece, leaving Lucullus in charge and Marius to simply crumple over from heart failure within the year.
 
Last edited:
Yeah death to the republic. In all honesty I do not see the player base wanting to restore the republic since if we do everything we want to do will just get destroyed by rich people, you know like in real life.
 
So, is our ultimate goal to become the Roman Empire? With us as Emperor? If so, we've got a lot to do.
 
Noroboro said:
So, is our ultimate goal to become the Roman Empire? With us as Emperor? If so, we've got a lot to do.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I honestly have no clue what my ultimate goal for my votes is, though it's probably not going to be "become Emperor" either. I prefer more subtle historical greatness than being a ruler, like through the act of creation or through being instrumental in many of history's events.

My main problem with the idea of restoring the Republic is that many of Rome's historical issues are institutional and cultural. You would need to break the republic in order to fix it in the first place if you wanted to invest in ACTUALLY making the problems plaguing the republic go away. Any such reforms short of that are, at best, band-aid solutions and, at worst, going to quickly be worn away at for someone else's gain. It just doesn't feel like a worthwhile accomplishment upholding the status quo as is, nor does going down history's path with MC replacing Caesar sound good either. I am confused as to what I want at the moment, and my final goal will probably become more finalized as the MC grows older with more experiences.

That's kinda why I mentioned how I would support the Mithridates thing if it were a genuine option that wouldn't likely kill us. I don't particularly desire for this quest to end under Pontic rule - this is a Rome quest after all - but it was more an expression of how I wish to do something so starkly contrasting with history that it is a feat unto itself that it happened.
 
Last edited:
Maybe we can just create a neutral party that is all about building Road Networks, Tax collection, Teaching, and appointong people based on merit. Oh amd welfare. Can't forget that.

Aka a civil service.

Then make ourselves its founding father and director. By doing that we can create a system that works without needing political/milotary oversight.

We got blessed by Minerva so we should work to create a society and aystem that would be inkeeping with that for additional authencity.
 
Valkur said:
Maybe we can just create a neutral party that is all about building Road Networks, Tax collection, Teaching, and appointong people based on merit. Oh amd welfare. Can't forget that.

Aka a civil service.

Then make ourselves its founding father and director. By doing that we can create a system that works without needing political/milotary oversight.

We got blessed by Minerva so we should work to create a society and aystem that would be inkeeping with that for additional authencity.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

"We'll simply create a system where there are no politics involved in governance" :thonk:
 
I'm of the opinion that the Republic is already doomed. We can think up reforms all day, but Romans have already marched on Rome. Killing your opponents and seizing power via legions is no longer unprecedented.

In order to implement any solution that might revive the republic and solve the problems that killed it, we ourselves would have to become another warlord, defeat our rivals, and seize power. That's it. The spiral has already been set in motion.

The only question is which warlord comes out on top.
 
Bullmoose said:
I'm of the opinion that the Republic is already doomed. We can think up reforms all day, but Romans have already marched on Rome. Killing your opponents and seizing power via legions is no longer unprecedented.

In order to implement any solution that might revive the republic and solve the problems that killed it, we ourselves would have to become another warlord, defeat our rivals, and seize power. That's it. The spiral has already been set in motion.

The only question is which warlord comes out on top.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah my opinion is that any chance of saving the Republic died with the gracchi brothers. The question before us is less "Do we want to build the Roman Empire" and more "What do we think we can actually achieve without getting ourselves killed."

Because here's the thing, a lot of powerful, brilliant people died in the final days of the Republic. We're not gonna be Octavian and get incredibly freaking lucky. Whatever we make is going to be on a knife's edge.

Then again, do we follow just one person or if Quintus has a heir do we follow them once he dies?

Though I suppose that's an incredibly long ways off regardless.
 
Well, I'm no expert on Roman history, at most I can name several famous emperors and Caesar himself. What were the problems that plagued the late Republic?
 
Noroboro said:
Well, I'm no expert on Roman history, at most I can name several famous emperors and Caesar himself. What were the problems that plagued the late Republic?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Political infighting prevented judicial reform. Traditional power blocks prevent political reform. Rich aristocratic blocks got richer and the poor got poorer. Inability to govern the large amount of land they got.

You know what just go watch all the Histori Civilis videos
 
Last edited:
Noroboro said:
Well, I'm no expert on Roman history, at most I can name several famous emperors and Caesar himself. What were the problems that plagued the late Republic?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Check out the Roman Histories posts in the Informational threadmarks section. They cover some of the more important people/events in the Late Republic, and why Rome is so...uniquely troubled at the moment.

HeWhoAdds said:
"We'll simply create a system where there are no politics involved in governance" :thonk:
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

This is not incredibly far from what Augustus did. He created a civil service run by ex-slaves and freedmen. Though they obviously got political at times, their primary interest was the continued existence and well-being of the state, because it was the only thing keeping them relevant. A Roman aristocrat is still a powerful and rich man if the state collapses — meanwhile, a freedman bureaucrat only has influence and power so long as the bureaucracy continues to exist.

The establishment of this self-perpetuating bureaucracy was probably Augustus' most important feat, as it's the reason the Roman Empire could survive while the various would-be emperors stabbed each other. Doesn't matter if there's been four emperors in as many months, because as long as the tax-man comes, there's still a state.
 
Last edited:
Telamon said:
The establishment of this self-perpetuating bureaucracy was probably Augustus most important feat, as it's the reason the Roman Empire could survive while the various would-be emperors stabbed each other. Doesn't matter if there's been four emperors in as many months, because as long as the tax-man comes, there's still a state.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It's be nice to try and build on that so whatever comes after the Late Republic doesn't have to deal with quite so many civil wars, although I'm not sure how we'd swing that.
 
I think it might be best to build our base of power, in all forms (political, economic, military, and social). Engaging in military campaigns should be used to not just showcase our military prowess, but build social and political connections that could later be leveraged to enrich ourselves.

Economically, acquiring more land should be pursued along with diversifying our business portfolio. We're a skilled negotiator. Building villas may further help insulate us.

I am wary of getting too political given the climate, but maybe putting our strong knowledge of law to use can garner us favor and renown. Perhaps we can try our hand in writing a treatise or two. With the help of our spy network, we can proactively stay ahead of any pitfalls, provided it's well funded.

Helping governing a territory could also help keep us safe from the craziness that's Rome while also building prestige.

Edit: typos everywhere
 
Last edited:
HeWhoAdds said:
It's be nice to try and build on that so whatever comes after the Late Republic doesn't have to deal with quite so many civil wars, although I'm not sure how we'd swing that.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Honestly I think the best think to prevent that if we go the Imperial route is a clear line of succession and well defined powers. Tiberius's problems in part came from the fact that he was an man who didn't have Augustus's massive popularity and inherited a position with ill defined powers.
 
it's hard to envision a path to restore the Republic.

Telamon said:
This is not incredibly far from what Augustus did. He created a civil service run by ex-salves and freedmen. Though they obviously got political at times, their primary interest was the continued existence and well-being of the state, because it was the only thing keeping them relevant. A Roman aristocrat is still a powerful and rich man if the state collapses — meanwhile, a freedman bureaucrat only has influence and power so long as the bureaucracy continues to exist.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Well, let's be careful.

The slave and freedmen bureaucrat were political; they were a group that was indebted to the institution of empire and owed everything to bonds of patronage and gratitude. They allowed a walling of the poor citizen from any form of governance, and it is no mistake that a target of both Sulla and later the Emperors was the Tribune of the Plebs. They were not powerful, but that was also a political choice by emperors, and the imperial bureaucracy was never comparable to something like the Han at their apogee in power.

And many posts were still the preserve of the aristocracy; the senate was tamed and transformed into a captive nobility seeking patronage from the emperor. But while all of this is well and good for the Roman state, it's not clear where republic fit into this.

The Late Republic was a disaster, it wreaked hell upon the entire Mediterranean for the ambitions of a few rapacious men, and yet it was still more representative of poor citizens than the principate, and more responsive to their demands. Now, of course, as you might notice, I'm using the term poor citizens, and not "commoner" or "the people", because none of this had any provision for slaves or women, and the division of Citizen and Non-Citizen, held until the Principate's transformation into something decidedly more blunt in the 3rd century. But it was still more representative than the Empire.

I don't know if the Republic can be saved. I don't know if we even want to bother, to be honest, nor does Atellus really have the conceptual tools to grapple with the problem from his own perspective because to him the Republic is troubled, not dead. Destroying the hold of generals over their armies, for example, was both ruinously expensive and required resources only an emperor could really produce independently and hold consequently, not the elected and constantly shifting members of a jockeying and self-destructive aristocracy.
 
Last edited:
after the brothers Gracchi the Republic was on life support with each successive march of a legion on Rome was another heart attack to the republic ending with Caesar death from members of the senate being the death knell
 
HeWhoAdds said:
It's be nice to try and build on that so whatever comes after the Late Republic doesn't have to deal with quite so many civil wars, although I'm not sure how we'd swing that.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The problem is that rich Romans can run around the empire funding armies and raising soldiers. You need to make soldier pay and soldier armament and soldier training dependent on the state. If the soldiers get paid by the state, then they have reason to protect the state, and not whatever aristocrat happens to be sitting on the iron throne.

I mean in the consulship.

Take pay and raises out of the hands of charismatic men and their vast fortunes and estates, and you take away the loyalty of all those armies Sulla and Marius are running around with.
 
Professor Vesca said:
The problem is that rich Romans can run around the empire funding armies and raising soldiers. You need to make soldier pay and soldier armament and soldier training dependent on the state. If the soldiers get paid by the state, then they have reason to protect the state, and not whatever aristocrat happens to be sitting on the iron throne.

I mean in the consulship.

Take pay and raises out of the hands of charismatic men and their vast fortunes and estates, and you take away the loyalty of all those armies Sulla and Marius are running around with.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

And put it into the hands of who? This made sense as a solution in the empire because Augustus was undisputed. There was no one for him to levy armies against, and so he could afford to institutionally tie armies to the institution of the empire. But how do you establish such overwhelming power without going down Augustus' path, which requires bulldozing the institutions you're meant to be saving?
 
Cetashwayo said:
And put it into the hands of who? This made sense as a solution in the empire because Augustus was undisputed. There was no one for him to levy armies against, and so he could afford to institutionally tie armies to the institution of the empire. But how do you establish such overwhelming power without going down Augustus' path, which requires bulldozing the institutions you're meant to be saving?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Well thats the million dollar question aint it? If we had an easy solution, the Republic might not have died the way it did.
 
triumph8w said:
...

I never even knew that was a thing. It explains so much!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yes, probably the biggest benefit of the Empire was lifting the administration and government of the provinces out of the hands of ambitious nobles who just saw them as bags of money, and into the hands of capable slaves and ex-slaves who saw them as their only way of, well, mattering.

Though the Empire kept the same atrocious tax collection system as the Republic — the publicani. I've mentioned them before, but the publicani were basically private tax collectors. The Senate/Emperor would say "I need ____ amount from Judea/Asia/Greece", and the publicani would all vie to be picked, each promising a different amount. Those who promised to collect the most were usually picked, and would go wring coin from the province in question. Any money they gathered above the sun promised to the Senate was their payment, which incentivized them to bleed the provinces dry.

This is why the Bible and other ancient works treat tax collectors like the devil: because they basically were. The Senate's publicani might come by and squeeze you for their tax and his pay, then the local governor might send more publicani to get some money to build his new villa, then even more publicani might show up to squeeze you for even more because the Senate's raising a legion to fight a rebellion in a different province.

And again, the publicani were authorized to do anything and everything it took to get their coin. Sell your house, sell your clothes, and, if you still can't pay, sell you.

Not to mention that the publicani were raised from the equites, the same class as judges and prosecutors. So, like the consul Rufus, who once tried to stop the publicani from bleeding Asia dry, you might find yourself prosecuted on nonsense charges and exiled from Rome if you try to fix things or stop them.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top