Curia Session V / 195 BC

[Postumus Caesonius Tacitus]

Conscript Fathers,

I do think we need to clarify some points. How long can we expect our Greek allies to remain in the field? Are we going to need raise additional legions if we go to war with Sparta or do we have enough time for one of the consuls to finish their campaign before going east? Whatever we decide, I do not think it is prudent to leave our allies in limbo for too long. It is entirely possible that Sparta, hearing of our allies mobilization, may decide to try a preemptive strike rather than wait for us to be in position to crush them.

[Gaius Quinctilius Varus]

Conscript Fathers,

Honorable Caesonius Tacitus, your concerns are well met. Our allies are currently busying themselves with preparations for war this coming summer campaign season, it is winter after all. As such they are not presently marshalled, the Spartans have nothing to notice. Some as far afield as Rhodes and Pergamum required more than a couple months to assemble their forces. I accepted this knowing that both our Consuls are presently afield with campaigns of their own.

[Marcus Decius Bellicus]

Bellicus’ Proxy Rises

Conscript Fathers,

The report of “ I ordered the council of Greek allies to ready themselves for war this coming campaign season, a task they willingly undertook. Now they but wait the time and the arrival of a Roman army to lead them against the treacherous Laconians…” still bears further explanation. We were under the understanding this was to be a fact finding mission, yet we’re now told we’re expected in a war escalated by a member of this body using said conflict as an explanation for his Consul campaign. This is most troubling.

[Allectus Fabius Maximus]

Allectus stands to speak once given permission to do so by the Princeps Senatus

Good and Honorable Senator Quinctilius Varus,

I first wish to commend you on a job well done as diplomatic legate to our allies in Greece. You have indeed determined that our allies are disgruntled with the current state of affairs and with Sparta’s occupation of Argos. A sensible ultimatum was not only rejected by the Spartans but they had the audacity to attempt to bribe you. You are a good man for refusing to debase yourself to the level of Greeks.

I however do have concerns with the wording of your interactions with the Spartan dictator and to our allies in Greece. We still have tribal concerns in Gallia Cisalpina, Hispania and now a slave revolt in Etruria that has yet to be resolved. I fear that providing such assurances to our Greek allies can and will overextend our already stretched out forces far more than we are prepared to handle. War with Sparta doesn’t necessarily have to be a fait accompli but we are now in a position where we may be forced to act before we are fully prepared, in order to save face with our Greek Allies and other foreign adversaries that may challenge Roman influence and might in the Mediterranean.

Now, that is not to say I do not support a more aggressive approach to dealing with tyrants and their like minded ilk. We must however consider all other options before Roman lives and treasure are wasted disciplining errant Greeks.

He would sit down after speaking

[Gaius Quinctilius Varus]

Conscript Fathers,

There are those among our Grecian allies who would very much prefer Rome be excluded from the coming conflict. The Aetolians would seek to expand their own power in the fall of the Laconian tyrant. Some of our Grecian Allies are Roman clients in all but name, it is Rome's proper place to lead them. They are incensed by Nabis and will have their war with or without Roman leadership. My actions were entirely within my imperium and dictate. I used my position as Legatus to delay our allies until a time where Rome could lead them, if the next Consulship so chooses.

Though some here might shrivel from war, it is upon us to decide whether we lead our allies or leave them to fight alone, leaving room for the Seleucids to gain a foothold in Greece. The decision is up to this esteemed body.

[Gnaeus Domitius Corbulo Hispanicus]

Albinovanus Fango, proxy of Propraetor Domitius Corbulo, stood and turned to Quinctilius Varus.

"The issue I and so many fellow Senators have is the promises you made to our allies without first reporting back. Your report states you have promised Roman military support to our Greek allies. No such support was voted on by the Senate. Regardless of however foregone the conclusion might have been, you still went far beyond your authority and have put us on a path to war before we were ready. It would have been far more prudent to allow the Senate to vote for war and raise legions and then deliver our promise of support to our allies. Now we have tipped our hand to Nabis and it will be several months before we can respond, thus giving him much needed time to prepare for war and strike at our allies."

[Amulius Valerius Marius]

Bellicus’ Proxy Rises

Conscript Fathers,

The report of “ I ordered the council of Greek allies to ready themselves for war this coming campaign season, a task they willingly undertook. Now they but wait the time and the arrival of a Roman army to lead them against the treacherous Laconians…” still bears further explanation. We were under the understanding this was to be a fact finding mission, yet we’re now told we’re expected in a war escalated by a member of this body using said conflict as an explanation for his Consul campaign. This is most troubling.

The legate was empowered to hold council with our allies and delivering a report back to Rome. There was in fact zero discussion, if I recall, that the legate was to be strictly tasked with a fact finding mission. But if the good consul wanted a written statement from each of our allies to be returned to Rome for elaboration, I could have sent my Scribae in his place.

The good legate has been affronted by the treacherous Nabis, whose insult not only fails to belittle the virtus of the legate, but is made out of weakness in light of the strong support offered to our allies. Had the legate called council and simply offered pleasantries in lieu of support, Nabis would surely interpret this as weakness and be emboldened to take action. This political bantering of wording and grandstanding is what is most troubling, when our common enemies are poised to work together.

I contend that not only did legate Quinctilius Varus work within the authority granted by the Senate, but he exceeded expectations and should be commended for his actions in securing Roman interests abroad, much like the Carthaginian delegation.

[TerranSteel]

Senator Furius Pavo motioned to speak and then rose.

I wish to clarify a point the proxy for Valerius Marius just made. While both the diplomatic missions to the Greeks and to Carthage held similar goals, their outcomes and realms of restraint were entirely different.

Fabius Maximus and Caesonius Tacitus were witness and present to all the actions and statements we undertook. From the very beginning, our plan was to assess the situation in Carthage and do everything in our power to remedy a situation we found inadequate short of commanding the powers of the Roman Senate. Everything we did in Carthage was by our own, personal efforts and we never threatened war or the use of Legions. In fact, as the two may attest, I was quite clear in wanting to avoid any incident that may bring conflict without Senate knowledge or consent.

By Quinctilius Varus’ own admission, he committed Rome to war alongside our allies without consent or agreement from this body. Would we be feeling the same if the delegation to Carthage returned with promises of war for the coming summer?

My point being that our actions and outcomes are not the same and do not share equal weight in my eyes and should not in the eyes of the Senate.

[Marcus Decius Bellicus]

The Proxy for Consul Bellicus rises

"The words of Senator Furius Pavo show the great skill that led the Carthaginian delegation through their own mission so skillfully. For accusations of pedantry to be cast against my person, it is amazing to see that it is the same pedantry that is being used to say the arguments being presented are wrong. It is amazing to see how two separate missions, with effectively the same objective, have returned with two vastly different outcomes and the one that has obligated us to a war, something that is not allowed in Roman law, is the one that is being treated as something worthy of almost a triumph and a Consulship? Is this what the Republic has come to in this day? We would not be sending Legions to defend our allies, we would be sending legions to assuage the perceived slight on the honor of an overly zealous diplomat acting on behalf of a Consul who refused to go on his own.

"There is no doubt that we have been obligated to be involved in this conflict lest our allies suffer, but we should not treat this as something worthy of celebration or acclamation or triumph, we should look at it as the warning against the insidious powers of pride and the hunger for power, when the ambitions of the individual were placed above the needs of the whole."

[Amulius Valerius Marius]

The Proconsul's ravishing proxy stood once more

One must imagine the terror in the eyes of the Carthaginian council when Senator Furius Pavo delivers the ultimatum, demanding the handing over of our most prized enemy Hannibal, with no threat behind such demands. No doubt the good senator explained carefully that he was only there on a fact finding mission and should Carthage refuse, he would do nothing except write home for instructions instead of acting in the best interests of Rome and making an appropriate decision at the time.

Or perhaps he did not have to make threats, because they understood the consequences of defying the representative of this Senate body. Please forgive me Senator Furius Pavo, I mean no disrespect in using your example.

Are we to infer from his complete opposition that Consul Bellicus, if he had gone in place of the legate, would have refused to support our allies and show Roman leadership in a tenuous region? The same Consul that insisted his co-Consul be immediately sent to the region thrice in an earlier debate? I do not believe for a second that Consul Bellicus would shy away from representing the interests of Rome and striking unity among our allies. He would understand that the Senate had tasked him with council, and to not support our allies would be analogous to abandonment - something that would be quite un-Roman-like and shunned.

The legate was acting under the authority of the Consul who sent him, on behalf of this august body. Any affront to a formal Roman representative is an attack on Rome. To treat this as anything but is simply not treating it with the gravity that such an action deserves. One can only hope that all our representatives act with such virtue.