Unexplored sea approaches to the Temple Lands?

DrakBibliophile wrote:See: http://infodump.thefifthimperium.com/en ... hold/338/1

Aha, thanks.

*checks out link*

Quite frankly, I'm inclined to take that map with a grain of salt. Given that Zion grew up around the Temple as support FOR the Temple, I find it hard to believe that it doesn't completely surround the Temple grounds. Zion should be straddling the river, much like Constantinople/Instanbul does.

Also, it's a hand drawn map. I can see the Zion city symbol being placed on the other side of the river from the Temple just for clarity's sake.

The river drainage from Pei to the Passage doesn't need to be THAT huge (seriously, on this scale, it looks bigger than the Mississippi and Zion looks to be a few hundred miles from the Temple) and may only appear that way again for clarity. Traffic to and from the Temple from and to Zion is far too casual and easy for the river to be of any significant impediment to traffic.

n7axw wrote:

Zakharra wrote:The best time for Charis to attack would be in the spring right after the break up. This would let them put a lot of soldiers and weapons and supplies on the ground right then, at a time when Zion's supply situation is very bad. The Temple's supplies of food and coal would be at its lowest point. and since it's still spring,m before anything can be grown to be brought to Zion, they'd not really be in a situation to withstand a siege for very long.

Also there's no professionally trained troops there, just glorified policemen and Inquisition brute squads (a lot of them would be members in good standing, I am sure). Add in a large population that isn't soldiers and is on the verge of starving, there would be a lot of panic when ICE troops landed and marched on Zion. There's likely be an exodus and when the ICA took the city (as far as I know, Zion itself doesn't have any fortifications ie walls or forts, since no one was supposed to ever DARE think about attacking the seat of holy Mother Church.) they'd be able to move those people out and put on a siege of the Temple itself for 4-6 months, plenty of time to build defenses and bring in a lot more supplies for the inevitable Church counter attack.

This would ease the pressure on the Republic since Chlytahn would have the armies the Church has recalled immediately to crush the Chartisians. It gives much needed time for the Republic, it is a huge blow to the Church's moral and secular authority, especially if they can't drive the Charis army away. And it could very well drive some of the nations supporting the Church to send Charis offers to negotiate if the Charsians aren't driven off. Under the table of course. At the least, even if the Charisians retreat, it would deal a serious blow to the Church's power. Especially if they retreated while in good order.

All the ICA needs to do is hold the city for the summer and fall, denying it to the Church, then when fall comes, possibly leave and let those still left in the Temple starve since there would have been no time or ability to bring in any supplies for the upcoming winter. Even if the ICA left for the winter, it would be very very hard for the Church to get any needful amount of food and coal in to the Temple during the winter. Then the next winter, the ICA might be able to repeat its actions. But I think the Temple would surrender before the fall came. Starvation.

Fanatics usually aren't inclined to surrender. Probably it would be like the Romans entering Masada and finding all those dead bodies.

Don

That's why you starve them out. Most of the bureaucracy of the CoG and the people in the Temple don't know how to manage being besieged. that's why attacking so soon after the spring break up is so important. It prevents the Temple from bringing in much needed supplies like food and coal (they have some sort of Ark central heating, but they need coal/wood to cook with). Spring time in the winter is the time supplies are at their lowest in Zion and the Temple. If it's interdicted and supplies can be stopped, it shouldn't take no more than 3-4 months before they will starve out. If not, just stay there long enough to prevent supplies from being brought in and either leave and come back again in the spring or build up enough of a presence that the ICA can winter in Zion and keep up the siege. Spring time would mean they can be resupplied and more troops brought in.

Charis doesn't need to take the Temple, all it really needs is to isolate it.

evilauthor wrote:

DrakBibliophile wrote:See: http://infodump.thefifthimperium.com/en ... hold/338/1

Aha, thanks.

*checks out link*

Quite frankly, I'm inclined to take that map with a grain of salt. Given that Zion grew up around the Temple as support FOR the Temple, I find it hard to believe that it doesn't completely surround the Temple grounds. Zion should be straddling the river, much like Constantinople/Instanbul does.

Also, it's a hand drawn map. I can see the Zion city symbol being placed on the other side of the river from the Temple just for clarity's sake.

The river drainage from Pei to the Passage doesn't need to be THAT huge (seriously, on this scale, it looks bigger than the Mississippi and Zion looks to be a few hundred miles from the Temple) and may only appear that way again for clarity. Traffic to and from the Temple from and to Zion is far too casual and easy for the river to be of any significant impediment to traffic.

You are making good points, evilauthor, but I think we have to assume that in the main, Philip is right. Given that the maps are provide us with an impression of the geography, his assumption that Zion is on the other side of the river from the river is only reasonable. So is his impression that the river provides the drain off from Lake Pei and undoubtedly takes quite a hit when the spring run-off starts. As for pilgrims, they could well be ferried across from Zion or even be transported across Lake Pei and landing on the temple side of the river.

None of this preludes the possibility of more informal settlements on the Temple side, in all probability residential neighborhoods for the wealthy and the businesses needed to service them. But according to what evidence we have, the city of Zion is on the other side of the river from the Temple.

Thanks to Drak for the link to the map.

Don

n7axw wrote:You are making good points, evilauthor, but I think we have to assume that in the main, Philip is right. Given that the maps are provide us with an impression of the geography, his assumption that Zion is on the other side of the river from the river is only reasonable. So is his impression that the river provides the drain off from Lake Pei and undoubtedly takes quite a hit when the spring run-off starts. As for pilgrims, they could well be ferried across from Zion or even be transported across Lake Pei and landing on the temple side of the river.

None of this preludes the possibility of more informal settlements on the Temple side, in all probability residential neighborhoods for the wealthy and the businesses needed to service them. But according to what evidence we have, the city of Zion is on the other side of the river from the Temple.

Thanks to Drak for the link to the map.

Don

On the flip side, if the Temple isn't in Zion, it can't be all that far from it either. Otherwise the city CAN'T service the Temple's needs effectively. Remember that this is a muscle powered society where you can't commute to work a hundred miles in a day every day.

Nynian's bordello (or whatever it was called) was specifically said to be in a well off neighborhood and five miles from the Temple itself yet is still considered to be in Zion. The map's river is WIDER than 5 miles, and the Temple icon is located more than 5 miles from the nearest river edge.

Ergo, Zion must straddle the river at the very least. It would hardly be the first city that did. Or the map is just plain wrong.

evilauthor wrote:
Nynian's bordello (or whatever it was called) was specifically said to be in a well off neighborhood and five miles from the Temple itself yet is still considered to be in Zion. The map's river is WIDER than 5 miles, and the Temple icon is located more than 5 miles from the nearest river edge.

Ergo, Zion must straddle the river at the very least. It would hardly be the first city that did. Or the map is just plain wrong.

I came to the conclusion a while back that the maps [on the city scale and exact location] are rather schematic - I think we were looking at Thesmar at the time, and if everything were to scale it would have to be about 60miles across!

I must say that when reading the books, you do get the strong feeling that the Temple is at the least v close to Zion, if not right in it. For example, I can't see the poor of Zion hiking miles & miles from Zion in deep winter to get to the Temple warm air outlets.

We know that Zion's homeless huddle around the heat-exchangers of the Temple during the winter. The descriptions give the impression that the Temple is in or immediately adjoining the city. But I don't recall anything definitive.

I don't see that we are really contradicting each other. There is no problem visualizing Zion itself on the other side of the river from the temple with the total metro area of Zion on both sides of the river. I would suspect that both city and temple are fairly close to the banks of the river. Heck, if the poor huddle around the heat vents which we do have text ev for, there is no issue with them walking across the river on the ice to get there. I'm not convinced that the river is really 5 miles wide, at least not most of the time.

Zion is the biggest city on Safehold. I would visualize it as being roughly a million plus, although I might be wrong on that.

The point that Philip was making, and I think he is right, is that a very substantial portion of the greater Zion area is on the far side of the river from the temple and wouldn't be part of the problem of isolating the temple. That would mean that far fewer people would have to be evacuated, easing the task of sealing the temple off from the population of the area.

As for supplying the city, use the same procedures that are already in place, perhaps improving on them a bit by transporting foodstuffs in from the sea in addition to what is already being done.

So, how big of a force would be needed? I am going to go out on a limb here and say it probably wouldn't need to be very big at all... perhaps a force of 15,000 of Gahrvai's Corisandians who after the attempted murder of Irys and Daivyn by the "rakurai" would be very strongly motivated to say nothing of the fact that they now know who murdered their prince.

So why so few? Well, as far as we know, there are no walls around Zion since prior to this it had been unthinkable that anyone would attack the place to start with. Add in to this, Clyntahn banned the guard from the area so that his inquisitors would be the only people representing a force, not to take into account whatever they do for city police. In short, not really a force to be reckoned with.

If the mission is limited to isolating the temple rather than attempting to control Zion, then the 15,000 are probably enough. Show up with the landing as early in the spring as practical before there has been any substantial resupply of food. Then isolate the temple, and wait them out. How long would they last? A month to six weeks? Two months? Who knows? Maybe Duchairn would appear at the front door waving a white flag holding Clyntahn's head tucked under the other arm. If anything could inspire the conspirators to action, one would think that this would do it!

Don

n7axw wrote:I don't see that we are really contradicting each other. There is no problem visualizing Zion itself on the other side of the river from the temple with the total metro area of Zion on both sides of the river. I would suspect that both city and temple are fairly close to the banks of the river. Heck, if the poor huddle around the heat vents which we do have text ev for, there is no issue with them walking across the river on the ice to get there. SNIP

Don

maybe on a nice sunny winter day, but in a howling blizzard?

heheh I feel snippet fever is setting in on the forum

isaac_newton wrote:

n7axw wrote:I don't see that we are really contradicting each other. There is no problem visualizing Zion itself on the other side of the river from the temple with the total metro area of Zion on both sides of the river. I would suspect that both city and temple are fairly close to the banks of the river. Heck, if the poor huddle around the heat vents which we do have text ev for, there is no issue with them walking across the river on the ice to get there. SNIP

Don

maybe on a nice sunny winter day, but in a howling blizzard?

heheh I feel snippet fever is setting in on the forum

They probably plan ahead a little better than that...

A big Amen on the snippet fever... I suspect we'll see one next week.

Don

There is one problem with the idea "blocade the Temple and wait until starvation or Robhair made the Clyntahn more tractable (or less alive)" What if the Temple has a pretty "conventional" underground passages, that would allow them to sneak away?