Res Publica: A Quest of Ancient Rome
- Thread starter Telamon
- Start date
- Original Historic
- Location
- Europe
If it's only in rare instances then there is no reason to worry. Besides, how is being willing to rule against your own soldiers in favour of Samnites when your men are guilty going to make things worse?
What cost for the Roman elite? For them Samnium is the sideshow to the actual important events going on in Greece and Asia Minor. Unless we manage to make the whole region explode in rebellion or our legion is defeated in battle they'll likely don't care. Not when the battle for the future of the republic is being fought in the east. The outcome deciding whose heads will roll.
And what are our soldiers going to complain about? That they aren't allowed to loot the people we are supposed to protect? (Admittedly, that's a lesson the Gauls apparently didn't understand.
)It doesn't matter if we pretend to be a conqueror in the city, they will still have to fight for them. They just won't be allowed to rape women and loot houses.
Could there be a riot in the city? Yes, after all there is a food shortage. What do you think, that if we are attacked in the streets the attackers will all get fair trials and that our men won't round up the rioters if we choose to follow Roman law to the letter?
Or we'll just be the straw that breaks the camel's back. Whipping people in the streets won't just make anti-Roman sentiment vanish. We might be lucky and they get cowed, or they start revolting, especially if we get the wrong people.
Last edited:
- Location
- nz
[X] Plan Slow & Steady
- Location
- USA
If it's only in rare instances then there is no reason to worry. Besides, how is being willing to rule against your own soldiers in favour of Samnites when your men are guilty going to make things worse?
What cost for the Roman elite? For them Samnium is the sideshow to the actual important events going on in Greece and Asia Minor. Unless we manage to make the whole region explode in rebellion or our legion is defeated in battle they'll likely don't care. Not when the battle for the future of the republic is being fought in the east. The outcome deciding whose heads will roll.
And what are our soldiers going to complain about? That they aren't allowed to loot the people we are supposed to protect? (Admittedly, that's a lesson the Gauls apparently didn't understand.
It doesn't matter if we pretend to be a conqueror in the city, they will still have to fight for them. They just won't be allowed to rape women and loot houses.
Could there be a riot in the city? Yes, after all there is a food shortage. What do you think, that if we are attacked in the streets the attackers will all get fair trials and that our men won't round up the rioters if we choose to follow Roman law to the letter?
Or we'll just be the straw that breaks the camel's back. Whipping people in the streets won't just make anti-Roman sentiment vanish. We might be lucky and they get cowed, or they start revolting, especially if we get the wrong people.
I'm in full agreement that, in terms of full justice and propriety and whatnot, a fair hand is "just" and "right." But this is Rome, not the modern day. I would certainly strongly consider granting the region full rights, emancipation, etc. if this was in a modern context. Yet Rome's aims are different. The objectiveness justness will not make the sting any less if Roman soldiers are punished along with Samnites, even if it's just the pretense of considering adjudication of Romans. Take for instance the arbitration between the legionnaires and the equites. Although the compromise was fair and managed to be, in a pragmatic sense, mutually satisfactory, and it was fair, that did not mean that both sides were perfectly satisfied. As it is, the compromise was accepted, not embraced or celebrated.
It is the nature of people to act as such when identifying as their own group versus another. The difficulties and sense of distance between the two sides will be compounded for Romans versus Samnites. Even if these are compliant (friendly?) Samnites, even the most optimistic of us acknowledge there is risk of violence amidst the regional atmosphere of armed conflict. Imagine the perspective of a Roman soldier. Just because the outcries of those soldiers would not be fair and reasonable as we understand it from our perspective, would not make it any less natural in their own eyes to support each other.
With respect to the elites in Rome, I was referring to costs Atellus could incur in his standing with them. I think there is no love lost between the leaders of Rome and the Samnites, and this is Atellus's first campaign. His actions will reflect on his reputation, and I don't think leniency with the Samnites would be a favorable one for him. Furthermore, as I'm arguing from the premise that a harsher hand will be more effective, this will also reflect on his prestige.
As for the legion's conduct, I would expect that Roman discipline would still restrain most excesses. I could use also some direct clarification on the distinction between the options, as the actual option A Harsh Hand itself only explicitly refers to heavy-handed treatment of Samnite dissidents, whereas there have been arguments made that the legionnaires will be free (encouraged, even?) to loot and ransack at the extremes with no constraint at all. If it's possible, could you clarify the dividing line, @Telamon?
- Location
- Classified
[X] Plan Slow & Steady
- Location
- Texas
That option is deciding your specific, personal actions and presented persona towards the Samnites. The soldiers will largely act the same across all options — discipline is discipline, and any harshness against the Samnites by the soldiers themselves will have to be part of the main vote for dealing with Bovianum.
That isn't to say the soldiers won't carry out personal orders which could be construed as harsh (beating a dissident in the streets), but that's because you ordered it. You won't just loose them on the city you're meant to protect, even in your harshest persona.
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
Yes, and that has always been normal in the context of harsh, equality-focused justice and law enforcement.
Stern justice that is unbendingly fair to everyone involved and which does not play favorites is not something that people usually celebrate, unless they are brutally oppressed and the justice is landing on their oppressor, personally. It is, however, respected. It provides a bedrock foundation on which people can develop respect for the state, and acknowledge its authority without undue fear for themselves.
Furthermore, the concept of harsh punishment for disobedience of orders is a well understood and respected one among the legions. We will command the soldiers to respect the persons of the Samnites and to behave according to certain regulations. If they obey, there will be no problems and no judgments of consequence against the legionnaires. If they disobey, then they will be punished- which they would and should be punished for anyway, because it is disobedience.
Moreover, ultimately we are going to have to acknowledge that Samnites have rights which are binding on Roman soldiers, sooner or later, or we have basically no choice but to raze all of Samnium to the ground. Since we have chosen the way of conquering Samnium rather than destroying it, we have to at least seriously consider that maybe we can't just curry favor with our soldiers by giving them license to abuse the Samnites with impunity.
Failure will damage Atellius's reputation badly. Atellius courts failure if he does not convince the Samnites that he respects the law, or if he does convince the Samnites that he is here to ravage them personally rather than to help them.
We came to Bovianum in the first place because we're trying to make progress on conquering and integrating the Samnites. If we treat Bovianum as a conquered town whose inhabitants are second or third-class citizens after they specifically requested our help to save their lives, no Samnite who hears of this is ever going to trust or obey a Roman except at swordpoint. Conversely, if we treat Bovianum as a place where Roman subjects who have rights of their own sought protection from the legions, and respect the rule of law, word will spread that it is safe to support Rome and that the Romans can protect people from bandits who fight under the banner of Samnite independence.
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
@Darkcrest , I note that your plan differs from "Even Trench, Ordered Line" only in terms of the fact that it focuses on training the Roman infantry, instead of on enforcing discipline among the Gallic cavalry. Given that "Plan Trained Soldiers" is probably not going to catch on this far into the vote, might you want to consider switching to vote for "Even Trench, Ordered Line," the most similar plan (in that it shares food like yours?)
For the "Slow & Steady" voters out there, let me make a few points about why I'm favoring "Even Trench, Ordered Line."
...
I have two major reasons for favoring "Sharing" of the Bovianum food supply with the locals over "Forge a Route" to connect us with distant Beneventum.
For one, committing our half of the legion to the local supply of food will mean we have considerably more manpower and flexibility for local operations. Protecting a supply line that... well, I'm a bit confused trying to find the location of Bovianum in real life, but suffice to say that the distance is something on the order of fifty miles from here to Beneventum. Maybe more, depending on whose maps I go with for various things. It is very unlikely that we can maintain such a long supply line while still being able to strike full-force against local threats. Compare and contrast to the difficulty of opening up a purely local route over a much shorter (ten mile) distance to Aquilonia, which is big enough to take enough troops to eat one of our three actions for the upcoming phase of operations.
My first reason is considerably undermined by my EPIC MAP READING FAIL. On further reflection, the route to Beneventum is 'only' about 3.5 times longer than the route to Aquilonia. Therefore, it is unlikely to require dramatically more effort to secure supply caravans for 2500 legionnaires from Beneventum than it is to secure relief caravans for the people of Bovianum from Aquilonia. It's not like we can use the Appian Way or anything, but it's not going to be as big a proposition as I'd feared.
In all fairness, if the difficulty of maintaining a supply line to Beneventum was the main factor in your mind, and not a relatively minor issue, then you should probably switch to "Slow & Steady" here and now. My first reason for wanting to vote "Sharing" isn't very compelling.
By contrast, my second reason still stands...
NAMELY, the obvious propaganda benefits will help ensure that the townsmen remain loyal and supportive of the legion's efforts, and to make sure the soldiers are strongly motivated to secure food supplies for the city of Bovianum.
...
I also have two major reasons for favoring "Whip Them Into Order" over "Whip Them Into Shape."
Firstly, making the Gauls effective and disciplined as a fighting force will be extremely helpful. The Samnites, accustomed to hilly terrain and local conditions, are likely to fight against us as light infantry, irregulars, and skirmishers. Our legionnaires are a heavy infantry force, and even with good training, we're unlikely to be able to keep up with the bandits and rebels. The difference between a disciplined cavalry that can pursue the bandits, and an undisciplined force that is unreliable and easily drawn into traps could prove very significant.
Secondly, the point that has been discussed before: it could be disastrous to our efforts to maintain order among the Samnite townsfolk if the Gauls are not forced into discipline. Worse yet, if we do not enforce discipline quickly, and if we are forced to rule against the Gauls in clashes with the Samnite townsfolk enough times (and we might be), the combination of lack of loot and perceived hostility from the commanding officer will likely collapse the Gauls' morale. The Gauls may begin deserting or rebelling against us.
For the "Slow & Steady" voters out there, let me make a few points about why I'm favoring "Even Trench, Ordered Line."
...
I have two major reasons for favoring "Sharing" of the Bovianum food supply with the locals over "Forge a Route" to connect us with distant Beneventum.
My first reason is considerably undermined by my EPIC MAP READING FAIL. On further reflection, the route to Beneventum is 'only' about 3.5 times longer than the route to Aquilonia. Therefore, it is unlikely to require dramatically more effort to secure supply caravans for 2500 legionnaires from Beneventum than it is to secure relief caravans for the people of Bovianum from Aquilonia. It's not like we can use the Appian Way or anything, but it's not going to be as big a proposition as I'd feared.
In all fairness, if the difficulty of maintaining a supply line to Beneventum was the main factor in your mind, and not a relatively minor issue, then you should probably switch to "Slow & Steady" here and now. My first reason for wanting to vote "Sharing" isn't very compelling.
By contrast, my second reason still stands...
NAMELY, the obvious propaganda benefits will help ensure that the townsmen remain loyal and supportive of the legion's efforts, and to make sure the soldiers are strongly motivated to secure food supplies for the city of Bovianum.
...
I also have two major reasons for favoring "Whip Them Into Order" over "Whip Them Into Shape."
Firstly, making the Gauls effective and disciplined as a fighting force will be extremely helpful. The Samnites, accustomed to hilly terrain and local conditions, are likely to fight against us as light infantry, irregulars, and skirmishers. Our legionnaires are a heavy infantry force, and even with good training, we're unlikely to be able to keep up with the bandits and rebels. The difference between a disciplined cavalry that can pursue the bandits, and an undisciplined force that is unreliable and easily drawn into traps could prove very significant.
Secondly, the point that has been discussed before: it could be disastrous to our efforts to maintain order among the Samnite townsfolk if the Gauls are not forced into discipline. Worse yet, if we do not enforce discipline quickly, and if we are forced to rule against the Gauls in clashes with the Samnite townsfolk enough times (and we might be), the combination of lack of loot and perceived hostility from the commanding officer will likely collapse the Gauls' morale. The Gauls may begin deserting or rebelling against us.
Last edited:
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
[blinks]
AAAHH MY BRAIN.
Somehow, some way, I badly misremembered that map of Italy/Samnium you posted ten pages back
I still think "Whip Them Into Order" is better than "Whip Them Into Shape" because of its potential to avoid disasters and give us an effective cavalry force. But to be fair, it being only about three times as far to Beneventum as to Aquilonia does significantly change the equation. Excuse me while I go up and edit my argument post.
AAAHH MY BRAIN.
Somehow, some way, I badly misremembered that map of Italy/Samnium you posted ten pages back
I still think "Whip Them Into Order" is better than "Whip Them Into Shape" because of its potential to avoid disasters and give us an effective cavalry force. But to be fair, it being only about three times as far to Beneventum as to Aquilonia does significantly change the equation. Excuse me while I go up and edit my argument post.
These things happen. I spent a frankly embarrassing amount of time looking for a river I was convinced existed near Beneventum that would allow us to barge supplies most of the way to Bovanium with much less hassle and vastly greater speed.
There are in fact two rivers near Beneventum, neither of which flows in anything resembling a useful direction for our purposes. The sqiggle I thought was a river was actually a road.
There are in fact two rivers near Beneventum, neither of which flows in anything resembling a useful direction for our purposes. The sqiggle I thought was a river was actually a road.
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
A road is still better than no road?
KnightofTempest
The Man who would be King
- Location
- Chicago
Historically the Samnites fight in the same way the Legions do. Rome nicked the Manipular Legion from them during the 2nd Samnite War. As such your first reason for going for the Gauls is invalid.
As to your second reason, it is possible that we will find loot on campaign. If we can keep them in line with promises of loot later and pay now, like every other member of the Legion, we should be good.
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
The best-trained and organized Samnite forces may fight like a manipular legion. We're not fighting those guys. That's the kind of resistance we can expect when Sertorius goes for the jugular at Nola. Maybe what Sertorius will face if the Hirpini attack him. Meanwhile, we're going to be fighting glorified bandits and irregulars in loosely organized bands, chasing them up and down hills.
Remember the 'forces' we fought at Aeclanum? Think along those lines. Think of Spurio's bandits as a typical opposing force; a unit so small that it can easily live off the land, but which by the same token is small and irregularly equipped. it would be out of its mind to stand and fight against a cohort, and requiring a serious boost to moral from the Samnite
The closest we're likely to come to a pitched battle is against Gemino's main band of rebels, which might form up like heavy infantry and fight like a manipular legion. And since we know Quintus Atellius confidently expects a single cohort to be enough for that job, that puts a pretty sharp upper limit on the size of force we're likely to encounter in a pitched battle.
But if we seriously try to rout out the bandits, we'll be dealing with a lot of random bushwhacking, ambushes by archers and lightly armed men who try to get away from us by scrambling up a hillside faster than our heavily armored men can follow. Plus many of our men are inexperienced, and thus more likely to be drawn into traps or untenable situations in this way.
Cavalry can't fight on all the terrain around here, but their ability to move faster than a man can run may make the difference between us whittling down the bandits over a series of ten skirmishes, versus the ability to do it in two or three.
The loot is likely to be relatively poor (no sacking towns), and the conditions relatively unpleasant for the Gauls (harsh punishment for 'enjoying themselves' or seeking to augment their limited loot).
Those are the kinds of conditions under which mercenaries do, commonly, desert.
- Location
- USA
[X] Plan Slow & Steady
I am very much opposed to the idea of Sharing. While some might want to frame it as a "we're all in this together" kind of situation, it's probably going to come off as a "the Romans are taking what little food we already had" kind of situation. People aren't rational when they are hungry, and they already don't like us. Hardship can bring people closer together, but it also makes normally good people desperate enough to stab each other in the back so they can survive.
I am very much opposed to the idea of Sharing. While some might want to frame it as a "we're all in this together" kind of situation, it's probably going to come off as a "the Romans are taking what little food we already had" kind of situation. People aren't rational when they are hungry, and they already don't like us. Hardship can bring people closer together, but it also makes normally good people desperate enough to stab each other in the back so they can survive.
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
If so, why did @Telamon give us both "Appropriation" and "Sharing" as distinct options if they mean effectively the same thing?