Law IX.

In the afternoon, let the judge grant the right to
bring the action, and render his decision in the
presence of the plaintiff and the defendant.

-------------------------------------------------------

Lucius Quintius Constantius

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/

G. Iulius Scaurus Q. Lanio Paulino salutem dicit.

Salve, Q. Lani.

> So at the end of his lecture Michael stood up and merely pointed out
> how nice everything sounded but as above, he mentioned Aristotle had
> died 300 years before the library was built! Schermer got some growls
> and jeers for his comments.

Well deserved growls and jeers, if that was what he said. Aristole
died in 322 BCE. Ptolemy II Philadelphos (282-246 BCE) built the
Museion and library. At most it's less than a hundred years.

To be absolutely clear, I happen to agree with a colleague of Mary's
who once opined over dinner at the APA that her refutation of
Afrocentism was a testament to her scholarship and the fact that she
was too much a refined lady to say "bullshit" which is all the
refutation Bernal's pseudo-scholarship required.

Vale.

G. Iulius Scaurus

Lucius Quintius Constantius writes:

> The Lex Cassia de
> Creatione Sodalitatum allows for a Sodalis to be
> recognized by either the Senate OR by any one of the
> Comitia. I don't know if any of the current
> Sodalitates has been granted recognition by a Comitia
> instead of by the Senate, but if it has it seems to me
> that only the body that allowed for recognition would
> have the authority to dissolve that recognition.

It's an interesting point you make. The Senate enjoys
ultimate authority as the board of directors of Nova
Roma Inc., but within Nova Roma the micronation we do
respect the authority of the Comitiae to grant or rescind
recognition. That said, I don't know of any sodalities
recognized by Comitial vote.

> However, I am not convinced that absent a clause in
> charter allowing for special elections that any one
> outside of the Sodalis (including the body that
> granted it official Nova Roman recognition) would
> necessarily have the authority to call for new
> elections.

One of the problems we have with our Sodalities in NR
is that they're not the private organizations that
sodalities in Roma Antiqua were. The government of Roma
Antiqua never granted any official recognition to any of
those clubs. They came into and out of existence entirely
on their own.

But that's not how we do it here in NR. It seems to me
that if official recognition can be given, it can also
be taken away, with a statement given of what must be
done for that recognition to be reinstated.

> I see a difference between dissolution and withdrawal
> of official recognition.

It is a difference, I grant you. The sodality could just
continue as it wanted to, ignoring the requirements for
reinstatement. Given our Constitutional "personal sovereignty"
clause there is no way that any law would ever be enacted
which made membership in such an unrecognized sodality
a crime. So it'd just go on for as long as it lasted.

[...]

> > But sure, as a general means of addressing the problem that
> > can occur in various sodalities, your idea is worthwhile. Get
> > back with me and Gnaeus Salix Astur in January, after one or
> > both of us have been elected Consul, and we'll work with you
> > to develop such legislation.
>
> Are you presuming election Marinus? :)

I'm certainly presuming that either Astur or I will be elected.
If only one of us is, the other will work with him to accomplish
the kind of work we're discussing here.

> I agree with your idea of a Contio previous to
> voting on a lex. Since the results of the current
> census are in, it is my understanding that any
> legislation from the Tribunes that does deal solely
> with the internal affairs of the Comitia Plebis
> Tributa now must be brought before the Comitia Populi
> Tributa.

I think you forgot to type a "not" up there. Any Tribunician
legislation which does *not* deal solely with the internal
affairs of the plebs must be brought before the Comitia Populi
Tributa, yes.

> You will have ample opportunity to comment
> on it at the same time as all other citizens do.

I will, yes. Of course, if I am Consul then I can call the
Comitia Populi Tributa as easily as a Tribune can.

> I only make the last comment because of the value
> that I place on the independence of the Tribunes.

I have great respect for the independence of the Tribunes,
though I confess I don't see how it has much bearing on
this matter. What is it that you're seeing about the
issue of sodalities which would make them a particularly
Tribunician issue?

> I see that you are a patrician and the two other
> candidates for the consulship are plebeians.

Yes, that's true. I stand on the steps of the Senate House
because I'm not allowed to go down into the Well of the
Concilium Plebis. (At least I would if we had such things,
or if we were in Roma Antiqua.)

> The Tribunes (whoever they are next year) may take your
> advice on the legislation or not, as they see fit.

Consuls can put legislation up for a vote too, y'know?

> If this legislation were being decided in the Comitia
> Plebis Tributa, you as a patrician would not be able
> to vote on it either way.

That's absolutely correct. If it were, then I wouldn't.
But given that the law prevents such a thing from happening
it's something of a moot point.

> This is not to disparage your views in any way. I
> hope it will be taken in the spirit in which it was
> intended.

Well, I'm a strong supporter of the rights of the Plebian
Order. But as I stated above, I'm not clear on why you
think this is a matter of uniquely Tribunician interest.

--
Gnaeus Equitius Marinus
Candidate for Consul
http://www.villaivlilla.com/equitius-for-consul/index.html

g_iulius_scaurus wrote:

> G. Iulius Scaurus Q. Lanio Paulino salutem dicit.
>
> Salve, Q. Lani.
>
> > So at the end of his lecture Michael stood up and merely pointed out
> > how nice everything sounded but as above, he mentioned Aristotle had
> > died 300 years before the library was built! Schermer got some growls
> > and jeers for his comments.
>
> Well deserved growls and jeers, if that was what he said. Aristole
> died in 322 BCE. Ptolemy II Philadelphos (282-246 BCE) built the
> Museion and library. At most it's less than a hundred years.
>
> To be absolutely clear, I happen to agree with a colleague of Mary's
> who once opined over dinner at the APA that her refutation of
> Afrocentism was a testament to her scholarship and the fact that she
> was too much a refined lady to say "bullshit" which is all the
> refutation Bernal's pseudo-scholarship required.
>
> Vale.
>
> G. Iulius Scaurus

Afrocentism is a blatant attempt to do what it accuses Whites of doing,
"stealing" the culture of another race by claiming it as it's own. It's
driven by modern politics, not by any scholarly interest in history, and
the drivel it churns out is pure Racist propaganda and nothing else. I
will NOT be seeing a film that endorses this garbage by miscasting an
important figure in history.

L. Sicinius Drusus

Salve, Quinte Lani and all others interested in Roman film....

Sorry to say, I have not seen the film you mention, although I can
corroborate what you say about it. Apparently the leader of fascist Italy wanted to put
together a propanganda film in 1937 to show the world how powerful his
country was by comparing it with the ancient Roman world. From reading about it in
a couple of film review books it has some scenes that might offend animal
rights activists, among others.

Let me know what you think about it after a viewing.

Vale,

Gaius Lanius Falco


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Citizens of Nova Roma;

I bring to you the next in my series of reports as to my activities in
looking into the elements of publishing the "Eagle". The other night at
a meeting in New Haven (which had nothing to do with NR) I met and
talked with a gentleman who has offered his skills and hardware on the
internet to another organization to which I belong. I asked him about
what would he recommend for publishing a newsletter on the internet.
Because we were short on time, he sent his response later by E-Mail. As
usual, his explanation was heavily couched in "computereze" but I have
another friend who has been kind enough to "translate" the explanation
into the King's English, and it seems that we now have a dependable
"back-up system" for getting the "Eagle" out in the coming year.

The current "Eagle" Editor, has been active in urging he NR Macellum
businesses to advertise in the "Eagle" and I shall carry on his
activities in that area.

I have only received three questions regarding the "Eagle" and my
Candidacy for the position of Curator Differum. From that sparse
response to my invitation to submit your concerns, I must assume that
the current "Eagle" staff and my comments to you about my activities as
a Candidate have answered your questions and concerns.

I do not wish to create any political "wars" here over this element of
our coming elections, but I do wish all to know that I am open to your
questions and concerns regarding "Eagle" and where it is going in the
coming year. I canot guarantee that will be able to answer all of your
questions off of the top of my head,but I do guarantee everyone a
response, and my best efforts to arrive at a ful and reasonable response
to any straightforward question regarding "Eagle."

My thanks again for your very kind review of these words and I submit to
you my desire and my ability to serve you, the people of Nova Roma, in
this Magistry, if you will have me.

Very Respectfully;

Marcus Minucius Audens

Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!


http://community.webtv.net/jmath669642reng/NovaRomaMilitary

Salve Romans

In one section of the NR constitution it lists the order of authority that must be followed

"Legal precedence. This Constitution shall be the highest legal authority within Nova Roma, apart from edicts issued by a legally appointed dictator. It shall thereafter be followed in legal authority by edicta issued by consuls acting under the Senatus consultum ultima, laws properly voted and passed by one of the comitia, decreta passed by the collegium pontificum, decreta passed by the collegium augurium, Senatus consulta, and magisterial edicta (in order of descending authority as described in section IV of this Constitution), in that order. Should a lower authority conflict with a higher authority, the higher authority shall take precedence. Should a law passed by one comitia contradict one passed by another or the same comitia without explicitly superceding that law, the most recent law shall take precedence."

But in another section it reads that the "The collegium pontificum shall have the power To issue decreta (decrees) on matters relevant to the Religio Romana and its own internal procedures (such decreta may not be overruled by laws passed in the comitia or Senatus consultum). "

It would appear that the constitution sets the standard of laws properly voted and passed by one of the comitia, as superior but if that lex is about a decreta , it is ipso facto not proper and therefore null and void.

At least that's my reading of the two sections. Any comments?

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
Candidate for Tribune of the Plebs
Fortuna Favet Fortibus




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Stephen Gallagher wrote:

> Salve Romans
>
> In one section of the NR constitution it lists the order of authority
> that must be followed
>
> "Legal precedence. This Constitution shall be the highest legal
> authority within Nova Roma, apart from edicts issued by a legally
> appointed dictator. It shall thereafter be followed in legal authority
> by edicta issued by consuls acting under the Senatus consultum ultima,
> laws properly voted and passed by one of the comitia, decreta passed
> by the collegium pontificum, decreta passed by the collegium augurium,
> Senatus consulta, and magisterial edicta (in order of descending
> authority as described in section IV of this Constitution), in that
> order. Should a lower authority conflict with a higher authority, the
> higher authority shall take precedence. Should a law passed by one
> comitia contradict one passed by another or the same comitia without
> explicitly superceding that law, the most recent law shall take
> precedence."
>
> But in another section it reads that the "The collegium pontificum
> shall have the power To issue decreta (decrees) on matters relevant
> to the Religio Romana and its own internal procedures (such decreta
> may not be overruled by laws passed in the comitia or Senatus
> consultum). "
>
> It would appear that the constitution sets the standard of laws
> properly voted and passed by one of the comitia, as superior but if
> that lex is about a decreta , it is ipso facto not proper and
> therefore null and void.
>
> At least that's my reading of the two sections. Any comments?
>
> Vale
>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> Candidate for Tribune of the Plebs
> Fortuna Favet Fortibus

The section dealing with the powers of the collegium pontificum is the
later section, and therefore is a modification of the earlier section
dealing with precedence.

In Matters relevant to the Religio Romana the Institutions of the
Religio have the superior power over the Comitia, in all other matters a
Decretum would simply be advice from the Religio and inferior in
authority to the Comitia. Personally I have no interest in involving the
Religio in matters that are not relevant to it and would oppose any such
decretum except under extraordinary circumstances.

L. Sicinius Drusus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@m...>
wrote:

> Salve Romans
>
> In one section of the NR constitution it lists the order of

authority that must be followed

>
> "Legal precedence. This Constitution shall be the highest legal

authority within Nova Roma, apart from edicts issued by a legally
appointed dictator. It shall thereafter be followed in legal authority
by edicta issued by consuls acting under the Senatus consultum ultima,
laws properly voted and passed by one of the comitia, decreta passed
by the collegium pontificum, decreta passed by the collegium augurium,
Senatus consulta, and magisterial edicta (in order of descending
authority as described in section IV of this Constitution), in that
order. Should a lower authority conflict with a higher authority, the
higher authority shall take precedence. Should a law passed by one
comitia contradict one passed by another or the same comitia without
explicitly superceding that law, the most recent law shall take
precedence."

>
> But in another section it reads that the "The collegium pontificum

shall have the power To issue decreta (decrees) on matters relevant
to the Religio Romana and its own internal procedures (such decreta
may not be overruled by laws passed in the comitia or Senatus
consultum). "

>
> It would appear that the constitution sets the standard of laws

properly voted and passed by one of the comitia, as superior but if
that lex is about a decreta , it is ipso facto not proper and
therefore null and void.

>
> At least that's my reading of the two sections. Any comments?
>
> Vale
>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> Candidate for Tribune of the Plebs
> Fortuna Favet Fortibus

Salve,

My take on the reading on this murky mix of "church and state" is
rather simple. A Lex may not overrule a previously issued decree of
the Collegium in regards to the function of the Religio. For example,
a Comitia can not pass a Lex stripping a Pontiff of his office and
replacing him with someone else, nor could a Comitia issue a Lex that
over rules the Collegium's Decree on Blasphemy as Blasphemy is
strictly a religious crime. At the same time the Collegium is not
suppose to be able to go along after a Comitia vote and issue a decree
nullifying that vote. After all we are suppposed to be a Republic,
not a Theocracy.

Vale,

Q. Cassius Calvus

quintuscassiuscalvus wrote:

> After all we are suppposed to be a Republic,
> not a Theocracy.
>
> Vale,
>
> Q. Cassius Calvus

The Roman Republic was a Theocracy. The Gods postion as the rulers of
Roma was recognized by their right to veto any action by way of the
Auspices.

L. Sicinius Drusus

Gaius Modius Athanasius L. Sicinio Druso SPD

I have to agree with you completely on this. The magistrates of Roma Antiqua were invested with a priestly quality, and with priestly obligations (ie., officiate sacrifices). Our "secularization" of Nova Roma magistrates is a tragic necessity because we have magistrates who do not believe in the Gods of Rome. But this does not take away from the reality that Nova Roma is an organization that is mandated to bring back the Republic, and the Republic of Rome and the Religio Romana were linked like skin to bone.

I have no problem with non-Religio magistrates, senators, etc... As long as they follow our Constitution: "All magistrates and Senators, as officers of the State, shall be required to publically show respect for the Religio Romana and the Gods and Goddesses that made Rome great."

Vale:

G. Modius Athanasius



In a message dated 12/6/2003 8:47:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, drusus@... writes:

> The Roman Republic was a Theocracy. The Gods postion as the rulers of
> Roma was recognized by their right to veto any action by
> way of the
> Auspices.
>
> L. Sicinius Drusus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@b...>
wrote:

> DEAD WRONG.
>
> The Comitae have no authority to pass a law regulating the Religio. The
> Constitution states:
> "The institutions of the Religio Romana shall have authority over
> religious matters on the level of the state and nation only,

maintaining

> the religious rites of the State"

> The Auspices are a Religious matter, and under the authority of the
> institutions of the Religio Romana, not of ANY Comita or Magistrate.
> Seeking to undermine the institutions of the Religio Romana Authority
> over religious matters falls under the Blasphemy Decretum.
>
> I Would also remind you that the Religio IS the primary reason that

Nova

> Roma was founded. That Nova Roma exists as "the temporal homeland and
> worldly focus for the Religio Romana" as per the preamble of the
> Constitution. The Religio isn't a play toy for people who don't even
> beleave in the Gods to tinker with in a Comitia vote that is open to
> everyone not just practitioners of the Religio.

Salve,

Then NR might as well do away with the Senate and the Comitia and head
straight to Theocratic rule as by your reasoning everything in Nova
Roma has a connection to the Religio, thus the Collegium should rule
by decree. However that is not the reasoning behind this clause and
you know it. The clause is written so someone can't come along and
put a Lex through a Comitia (the proper spelling is Comitia, not
Comitae) to remove a Pontiff, priest, augur, ect because some Consul
or Tribune doesn't like that particular Pontiff, priest, augur, ect.

You're correct, the Religio isn't a play toy for non-believers, but
the State is not a play toy of the priests either.


Vale,

Q. Cassius Calvus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@b...>
wrote:

>
>
> quintuscassiuscalvus wrote:
>
> > After all we are suppposed to be a Republic,
> > not a Theocracy.
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Q. Cassius Calvus
>
> The Roman Republic was a Theocracy. The Gods postion as the rulers of
> Roma was recognized by their right to veto any action by way of the
> Auspices.
>
> L. Sicinius Drusus

Salve,

If the Roman Republic is a Theocracy as the Gods can veto any action
by way of Auspices, then are you saying that the Tribunes MUST take
auspices? Otherwise that leaves the Tribunes free to rule without
the Veto of the Gods wouldn't you say?

Vale,

Q. Cassius Calvus

Ex Domo Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus Augur Quiritibus SPD

In matters of State Religion the Constitution itself gives authority
to the Colleges to set policy as Pontifex Drusus has explained.

In fact, since the law in question attempts to set religious policy it is
itself Unconstitutional for the Constitution CLEARLY states that religious
institutions set religious policy through the College Pntificium et College
Augurum.

Also, "the presiding magistrate shall *request* " doesn't mean it will be
done.
The Comitia Plebis Tributa will not receive anything other
that an appropriate Obnuntatio for adverse omens or prodegies.

Valete

________________________________________________________________________

Message: 25
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 15:20:41 -0500
From: "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@...>
Subject: Re: Re: New Decretum regarding Augury

quintuscassiuscalvus wrote:

> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@b...>
> wrote:
>
> > The Comitae of Nova Roma have NO authority over the Religio Romana,...

> Salve,
>
> Wrong! The order of precedence is clearly established by the Nova
> Roman Constitution 1.B. The order is as follows:
>
> 1a. Edicts of the Dictator
> 1b. Consular Edicts under the Senatus Consultum Ultima
> 1c. Constitution
> 2. Laws from the Comitia
> 3. Decrees from the Collegium Pontificum
> 4. Decrees from the Collegium Augurium
> 5. Senatus Consulta
> 6. Magisterial Edicta (in order of Magisterial Precedence)
>
> Vale,
>
> Q. Cassius Calvus

DEAD WRONG.

The Comitae have no authority to pass a law regulating the Religio. The
Constitution states:
"The institutions of the Religio Romana shall have authority over
religious matters on the level of the state and nation only, maintaining
the religious rites of the State"

The Auspices are a Religious matter, and under the authority of the
institutions of the Religio Romana, not of ANY Comita or Magistrate.
Seeking to undermine the institutions of the Religio Romana Authority
over religious matters falls under the Blasphemy Decretum.

I Would also remind you that the Religio IS the primary reason that Nova
Roma was founded. That Nova Roma exists as "the temporal homeland and
worldly focus for the Religio Romana" as per the preamble of the
Constitution. The Religio isn't a play toy for people who don't even
beleave in the Gods to tinker with in a Comitia vote that is open to
everyone not just practitioners of the Religio.

L. Sicinius Drusus

quintuscassiuscalvus wrote:

> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@b...>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > quintuscassiuscalvus wrote:
> >
> > > After all we are suppposed to be a Republic,
> > > not a Theocracy.
> > >
> > > Vale,
> > >
> > > Q. Cassius Calvus
> >
> > The Roman Republic was a Theocracy. The Gods postion as the rulers of
> > Roma was recognized by their right to veto any action by way of the
> > Auspices.
> >
> > L. Sicinius Drusus
>
>
> Salve,
>
> If the Roman Republic is a Theocracy as the Gods can veto any action
> by way of Auspices, then are you saying that the Tribunes MUST take
> auspices? Otherwise that leaves the Tribunes free to rule without
> the Veto of the Gods wouldn't you say?
>
> Vale,
>
> Q. Cassius Calvus

No it does NOT. The Tribunes do not posess imperium and therefore do not
pocess the Ius Auspicandi needed to conduct the Auspices. It Does NOT
free them to conduct a meeting of the Plebs if a sign from the Gods
comes unlooked for such as Thunder. They may not seek the Auspices but
they still have an obligation to heed a "veto" from the Gods that comes
unbidden.

L. Sicinius Drusus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@b...>
wrote:

>
>
> quintuscassiuscalvus wrote:
>
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@b...>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > quintuscassiuscalvus wrote:
> > >
> > > > After all we are suppposed to be a Republic,
> > > > not a Theocracy.
> > > >
> > > > Vale,
> > > >
> > > > Q. Cassius Calvus
> > >
> > > The Roman Republic was a Theocracy. The Gods postion as the

rulers of

> > > Roma was recognized by their right to veto any action by way of the
> > > Auspices.
> > >
> > > L. Sicinius Drusus
> >
> >
> > Salve,
> >
> > If the Roman Republic is a Theocracy as the Gods can veto any action
> > by way of Auspices, then are you saying that the Tribunes MUST take
> > auspices? Otherwise that leaves the Tribunes free to rule without
> > the Veto of the Gods wouldn't you say?
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Q. Cassius Calvus
>
> No it does NOT. The Tribunes do not posess imperium and therefore do

not

> pocess the Ius Auspicandi needed to conduct the Auspices. It Does NOT
> free them to conduct a meeting of the Plebs if a sign from the Gods
> comes unlooked for such as Thunder. They may not seek the Auspices but
> they still have an obligation to heed a "veto" from the Gods that comes
> unbidden.
>
> L. Sicinius Drusus

Salve,

How do you propose that is suppose to work given the diverse geography
of NR's citizens the Tribunes don't meet in one place? One Tribune
might be having thundershowers, but for the other four it's a bright
sunny day. How do you resolve that?

Vale,

Q. Cassius Calvus

quintuscassiuscalvus wrote:

> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@b...>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > quintuscassiuscalvus wrote:
> >
> > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@b...>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > quintuscassiuscalvus wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > After all we are suppposed to be a Republic,
> > > > > not a Theocracy.
> > > > >
> > > > > Vale,
> > > > >
> > > > > Q. Cassius Calvus
> > > >
> > > > The Roman Republic was a Theocracy. The Gods postion as the
> rulers of
> > > > Roma was recognized by their right to veto any action by way of the
> > > > Auspices.
> > > >
> > > > L. Sicinius Drusus
> > >
> > >
> > > Salve,
> > >
> > > If the Roman Republic is a Theocracy as the Gods can veto any action
> > > by way of Auspices, then are you saying that the Tribunes MUST take
> > > auspices? Otherwise that leaves the Tribunes free to rule without
> > > the Veto of the Gods wouldn't you say?
> > >
> > > Vale,
> > >
> > > Q. Cassius Calvus
> >
> > No it does NOT. The Tribunes do not posess imperium and therefore do
> not
> > pocess the Ius Auspicandi needed to conduct the Auspices. It Does NOT
> > free them to conduct a meeting of the Plebs if a sign from the Gods
> > comes unlooked for such as Thunder. They may not seek the Auspices but
> > they still have an obligation to heed a "veto" from the Gods that comes
> > unbidden.
> >
> > L. Sicinius Drusus
>
> Salve,
>
> How do you propose that is suppose to work given the diverse geography
> of NR's citizens the Tribunes don't meet in one place? One Tribune
> might be having thundershowers, but for the other four it's a bright
> sunny day. How do you resolve that?
>
> Vale,
>
> Q. Cassius Calvus

The Tribune who called the meeting and is presiding over it is the one
that will recieve the Omens.

L. Sicinius Drusus

Salve Tiberius,

Thank you! I was at my office when I wrote the email and didn't have
the file with the article available.

Vale,
Livia Cornelia Hibernia
Scriba Curatoris Differum
Candidate for Quaestor for MMDCCLVII A.V.C.


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@m...>
wrote:

> Salve Justin et al
>
> The Illustrious Livia Cornelia Hibernia did indeed write a review

for the April Eagle on

>
> Gladiatrix: The True Story of History's Unknown Woman Warrior.
>
> She may not have it handy but I do!
>
> Enjoy
>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> Curator Differum 2756
>
> RECENSIONES
> (Book Views)
> By Livia Cornelia Hibernia
> Scriba Curatoris Differum
>
> [...snipped...]

Salvete Omnes,

I just have a question for the Religio Romano regarding the auspices
or omens for NR. I was reading the discussions with interest on the
list today and a question came to mind. Do we have an augur in NR
that is actually reading or intrepreting omens at this point? Does
the person in this position need to be a priest or the pontifex
maximus or is it a special office? Thanks!

Regards,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus

Salvete Decimus et Omnes,

Yes, I saw it. As I recall, it was on "The Discovery Channel" on
cable in the U.S.A. In fact, the program is taken almost directly
from the book or vica versa, I'm not certain which came first.

Valete,
Livia Cornelia Hibernia
Scriba Curatoris Differum
Candidate for Quaestor for MMDCCLVII A.V.C.


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Decimus Iunius Silanus
<danedwardsuk@y...> wrote:

> Salvete Livia Cornelia, Justinian et Omnes
>
> I saw a documentary quite a while ago about a
> gladiatrix who was discovered under the city of
> London. Alas I can't remember specific details.
>
> Has anyone else seen this?
>
> Valete
>
> Decimus Iunius Silanus
>
> > There were also women who fought in the arenae as
> > gladiatrices.
> > There is a fairly recent book on the subject:
> >
> > "Gladiatrix: The True Story of History's Unknown
> > Woman Warrior"
> > by Amy Zoll, Berkley Publishing Group, Sept.
> > 2002
> > ISBN 0425186105
> >
> > I wrote a review of it for The Eagle that appeared
> > last spring (I
> > believe it was the April 2003 issue, but I don't
> > have my copy handy
> > right now).
> >
> > Vale,
> > Livia Cornelia Hibernia
> > Scriba Curatoris Differum
> > Candidate for Quaestor for MMDCCLVII A.V.C.
> >
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Trajan Justinian"
> >
> > <harrituspotterus1@y...> wrote:
> > > Problems posting, this may show up 2x.
> > >
> > > Salvete all,
> > > I was surfing the web for interesting information
> > on ancient Rome
> > and
> > > came across Perpetua.
> > >
> > > Roman Carthage and the North African martyrs.
> > Perpetua was
> > > sacrificed for the son of the Emperor Septimus
> > Severus.
> > >
> > > Chapter One--"Rome"--details what is known about
> > the upbringing of
> > > well-to-do Roman girls in general and examines the
> > religious
> > rituals
> > > most commonly practiced by Roman women.
> > >
> > > I never thought of women in the arena, only men
> > but I learned
> > > Perpetua and her companions were sentenced to
> > execution by wild
> > > beasts which turns out to be a particularly
> > inefficient method of
> > > killing prisoners.
> > >
> > > In the "Arena," we learn about Roman fascination
> > with violent death
> > > and about the difficulty in persuading wild beasts
> > to attack
> > people.
> > > Apparently it was common for authorities to have
> > to try several
> > > different animals and for the actual execution to
> > take place
> > > afterward, at the hands of armed men outside the
> > arena.
> > >
> > > There is more interesting information here but i
> > thought everyone
> > > (especially the Ladies of NR) might be interested
> > in this if they
> > > have not already read it.
> > >
> > >
> >
> See:http://www.h-net.msu.edu/~women/threads/rev-perpetua.html
> > > for more if you are so inclined.
> > >
> > > Valete,
> > > Justinian
> >
> >
> > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
>
>

______________________________________________________________________
__

> BT Yahoo! Broadband - Save £80 when you order online today. Hurry!

Offer ends 21st December 2003. The way the internet was meant to be.
http://uk.rd.yahoo.com/evt=21064/*http://btyahoo.yahoo.co.uk

Salvete

--- quintuscassiuscalvus <richmal@...>
escreveu:

> Salve,
>
> How do you propose that is suppose to work given the
> diverse geography
> of NR's citizens the Tribunes don't meet in one
> place? One Tribune
> might be having thundershowers, but for the other
> four it's a bright
> sunny day. How do you resolve that?

M.Arminius: Well, the Comitia Plebis is called by one
Tribune, not by all at the same time; if the gods
doesnt agree with him, they can show their "veto"
(prodigia or portenta, i believe) to the presiding
magistrate, that is, the Tribunus who issued the
edicta that called the Comitia.

> Vale,
> Q. Cassius Calvus

Vale
M.Arminius


______________________________________________________________________

Yahoo! Mail: 6MB, anti-spam e antivírus gratuito! Crie sua conta agora:
http://mail.yahoo.com.br

Salvete

--- quintuscassiuscalvus <richmal@...>
escreveu:[..] The clause is written so someone can't

> come along and
> put a Lex through a Comitia (the proper spelling is
> Comitia, not
> Comitae) to remove a Pontiff, priest, augur, ect
> because some Consul
> or Tribune doesn't like that particular Pontiff,
> priest, augur, ect.

[..]

M.Arminius: I believe that only a Dictator or an
Interrex could remove a priest, without fearing a
veto; an even so, if the Senate agrees when that
magistrate steps down.

> Vale,
> Q. Cassius Calvus

Vale
M.Arminius

______________________________________________________________________

Yahoo! Mail: 6MB, anti-spam e antivírus gratuito! Crie sua conta agora:
http://mail.yahoo.com.br

Salvete

--- "Quintus Lanius Paulinus (Michael Kelly)"
<mjk@...> escreveu: > Salvete Omnes,
[..] Do we have an augur in NR

> that is actually reading or intrepreting omens at
> this point? Does
> the person in this position need to be a priest or
> the pontifex
> maximus or is it a special office? Thanks!

M.Arminius: Yes, we have a Collegium Augurum, with
only one active member, L.Equitius Cincinnatus Augur.

> Regards,
> Quintus Lanius Paulinus

Vale
Marcus Arminius

______________________________________________________________________

Yahoo! Mail: 6MB, anti-spam e antivírus gratuito! Crie sua conta agora:
http://mail.yahoo.com.br

Salvete

--- QFabiusMaxmi@... escreveu:

> Salvete.

[..]

> Hannibal Barca was a Samnite, not a Libi -
> Phonecian. In otherwords white, not
> black. Denzal is great actor, but wasted in this
> role.

M.Arminius: What, a samnite, from Samnium, Italy?
I think that Q.Fabius meant the semites, perhaps.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Samnite

By the way, i have an old booklet, "Penguin Atlas of
Ancient History", by Colin McEvedy, that says that the
original population of north africa was called
"hamite", a white people. Is it up to date with the
modern theories?

> Q. Fabius Maximus

Vale
M.Arminius


______________________________________________________________________

Yahoo! Mail: 6MB, anti-spam e antivírus gratuito! Crie sua conta agora:
http://mail.yahoo.com.br

Salve Marce,

Thanks!

Quintus Lanius Paulinus


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, M Arminius Maior <marminius@y...>
wrote:

> Salvete
>
> --- "Quintus Lanius Paulinus (Michael Kelly)"
> <mjk@d...> escreveu: > Salvete Omnes,
> [..] Do we have an augur in NR
> > that is actually reading or intrepreting omens at
> > this point? Does
> > the person in this position need to be a priest or
> > the pontifex
> > maximus or is it a special office? Thanks!
>
> M.Arminius: Yes, we have a Collegium Augurum, with
> only one active member, L.Equitius Cincinnatus Augur.
>
> > Regards,
> > Quintus Lanius Paulinus
>
> Vale
> Marcus Arminius
>
>

______________________________________________________________________

>
> Yahoo! Mail: 6MB, anti-spam e antivírus gratuito! Crie sua conta

agora:

> http://mail.yahoo.com.br

G. Iulius Scaurus S. P. D.

Salvete, Quirites.

Perhaps a bit of historical background can help reach an amicable
understanding of the basis for the recent decretum as it touches on
auspices in the Comitia Plebis Tributa.

In 494 BCE the plebeian assembly (called at the time the Concilium
Plebis, because it voted by curia rather than tribes; after the
introduction of tribal voting it came also to be called the Comitia
Plebis Tributa) was formed, electing tribunes and aediles. At the
time no plebeian could hold a magistracy with imperium and the ius
auspicandi belonged only to curule magistrates. It is traditionally
held that part of the negotiation which permitted the formation of the
Concilium Plebis included the right to convene without auspices, lest
it be subjected to patrician presiding magistrates (who alone held the
ius audspicandi). Without auspices any sign of divine displeasure
with the plebeian assembly could be shown only through obnuntiatio --
the declaration that auspicia oblativa, unsought portents (frequently
thunder of lightning), had been observed by an augur or the presiding
tribunus plebis. In the case of an augur's obnuntiatio, since augures
were still only patricians, the presiding tribunus plebis had the
right to accept or reject the obnuntiatio as he saw fit (although he
might be prosecuted at the tend of his term for rejecting an
obnuntiatio if something went serious wry in the Concilium). It was a
point of pride in the Concilium Plebis, and later Comitia Plebis
Tributa, that even when plebeian curule magistrates were elected, the
right of presiding in the plebeian assembly was reserved to the
tribuni plebis, who had no imperium and, thus, no ius auspicandi. The
absence of auspices in the plebeian assembly was a symbol of the
independent dignitas of the plebs and a guarantee that no curule
magistrate would try to usurp the right to preside over them from the
tribuni. Some of the early Roman historians whose work we know only
in fragment go further still and indicate that the a condition imposed
by the pax Deorum when the Concilium Plebis was formed was that its
presiding magistrates would never usurp the right of patrician curule
magistrates to exercise the ius auspicandi as in the Comitia
Centuriata (the Comitia Populi Tributa did not yet exist). In short,
for a number of reasons, auspices were never taken for the Concilium
Plebis or Comitia Plebis Tributa in Roma antiqua. This is the mos
maiorum.

The blunt fact of the matter is that the Vedian legislation on the
formation of the Comitia Plebis Tributa in NR got it wrong (looking at
the texts of the three Comitia laws, I frankly wonder if it weren't an
artifact of the somewhat cookie-cutter approach to legal language
which facilitated this error, as well as the author's unfamiliarity
with the historical facts). I frank wonder if NR collectively owes
Iuppiter Optimus Maximus, from whom all auspicia come, a piaculum for
having gotten it wrong for so long (this is a matter I intend to raise
with the Collegium Pontificum), even if it were done with the best of
intentions and in ignorance.

All the Collegia Pontificum et Augurum have done in the recent
decretum with respect to the Comitia Plebis Tributa is clarify when a
_state religious_ practice may not be done, and in doing so have
brought us closer to the example of the historical mos maiorum. The
Collegia have acted to ensure that proper religious observance in
accordance with the mos maiorum is carried out and that the
independence and dignitas of the Comitia Plebis Tributa be respected
in a way in which our Roman forebearers thought necessary and proper.
I am frankly astounded that a measure which was aimed at
strengthening the historical religious basis of the independence and
dignitas of the Comitia Plebis Tributa has been taken as a usurpation
of a right of the plebs. Nothing was further from the intent of the
Collegia; I know because I proposed the section in question and made
the principal argument for it. I was looking forward to the day when
the plebeian population was sufficiently a majority of our citizenry
that the provision for devolving to the Comitia Populi Tributa is no
longer necessary and wanted to make certain that no religious
impediment to the complete independence of the tribuni plebis as
presiding magistrates of the Comitia Plebis remained in law.

Valete.

G. Iulius Scaurus
Flamen Quirinalis et Pontifex

Salve

I have been trying - really hard - to stay out of this, but I'm tired of the same arguments bouncing back & forth.

This is a tug-of-war on whose authority trumps whose, I'm not blind to that fact, but urge you to settle it at some other time on some other subject. On this subject - Auguries - the simple fact is that Auguries are done by the College of Augurs, which is under the authority of the Collegia. The Religio wins on this one - or were you planning on having the Auguries done by some amateur?
If you want them done right, you need the co-operation of the College of Augurs and the Collegia. Since the Constitution can be interpreted either way (and has been over & over), a Constitutional debate clearly isn't going to solve this. Besides, even if you "win", Calvus, what are you going to do? Compell an Augury?
Yield to the Collegia on this - otherwise a 'win' is still going to be a big loss.

Vale
~ Servius Equitius


-----Original Message-----
From: quintuscassiuscalvus <richmal@...>
Sent: Dec 6, 2003 8:32 PM
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: New Decretum regarding Augury

<html><body>


<tt>
--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@m...><BR>
wrote:<BR>

> Salve Romans<BR>
> <BR>
> In one section of the NR constitution it lists the order of<BR>

authority that must be followed <BR>

> <BR>
> "Legal precedence. This Constitution shall be the highest legal<BR>

authority within Nova Roma, apart from edicts issued by a legally<BR>
appointed dictator. It shall thereafter be followed in legal authority<BR>
by edicta issued by consuls acting under the Senatus consultum ultima,<BR>
laws properly voted and passed by one of the comitia, decreta passed<BR>
by the collegium pontificum, decreta passed by the collegium augurium,<BR>
Senatus consulta, and magisterial edicta (in order of descending<BR>
authority as described in section IV of this Constitution), in that<BR>
order. Should a lower authority conflict with a higher authority, the<BR>
higher authority shall take precedence. Should a law passed by one<BR>
comitia contradict one passed by another or the same comitia without<BR>
explicitly superceding that law, the most recent law shall take<BR>
precedence."<BR>

> <BR>
> But in another section it reads that the "The collegium pontificum<BR>

shall have the power  To issue decreta (decrees) on matters relevant<BR>
to the Religio Romana and its own internal procedures (such decreta<BR>
may not be overruled by laws passed in the comitia or Senatus<BR>
consultum). "<BR>

> <BR>
> It would appear that the constitution sets the standard of laws<BR>

properly voted and passed by one of the comitia, as superior but if<BR>
that lex is about a decreta ,  it is ipso facto not proper and<BR>
therefore  null and void.<BR>

> <BR>
> At least that's my reading of the two sections.  Any comments?<BR>
> <BR>
> Vale<BR>
> <BR>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus<BR>
> Candidate for Tribune of the Plebs<BR>
> Fortuna Favet Fortibus<BR>

<BR>
Salve,<BR>
<BR>
My take on the reading on this murky mix of "church and state" is<BR>
rather simple.  A Lex may not overrule a previously issued decree of<BR>
the Collegium in regards to the function of the Religio.  For example,<BR>
a Comitia can not pass a Lex stripping a Pontiff of his office and<BR>
replacing him with someone else, nor could a Comitia issue a Lex that<BR>
over rules the Collegium's Decree on Blasphemy as Blasphemy is<BR>
strictly a religious crime.  At the same time the Collegium is not<BR>
suppose to be able to go along after a Comitia vote and issue a decree<BR>
nullifying that vote.  After all we are suppposed to be a Republic,<BR>
not a Theocracy.    <BR>
<BR>
Vale,<BR>
<BR>
Q. Cassius Calvus<BR>
<BR>
</tt>

<br>

<!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->

<table border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2>
<tr bgcolor=#FFFFCC>
<td align=center><font size="-1" color=#003399><b>Yahoo! Groups Sponsor</b></font></td>
</tr>
<tr bgcolor=#FFFFFF>
<td align=center width=470><table border=0 cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0><tr><td align=center><font face=arial size=-2>ADVERTISEMENT</font><br><script language=JavaScript>var lrec_target="_top"; var lrec_URL = new Array(); lrec_URL[1] = "http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=12cv5jd19/M=266846.4063241.5347241.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705313712:HM/EXP=1070847150/A=1844976/R=0/id=flashurl/*http://www.merchantservicesinfo.com/trackerC.asp?ad=121&id=CD72&did=0"; var link="javascript:LRECopenWindow(1)"; var lrec_flashfile = 'http://us.yimg.com/a/la/landmark/300x250_clicktag.swf?clickTAG='+link+''; var lrec_altURL = "http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=12cv5jd19/M=266846.4063241.5347241.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705313712:HM/EXP=1070847150/A=1844976/R=1/id=altimgurl/*http://www.merchantservicesinfo.com/trackerC.asp?ad=121&id=CD72&did=0"; var lrec_altimg = "http://us.yimg.com/a/la/landmark/300x250_static.gif"; var lrec_width = 300; var lrec_height = 250; </script><script language=JavaScript src=http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/1-/jscodes/031016/ct_lrec_031016.js></script><noscript><a href="http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=12cv5jd19/M=266846.4063241.5347241.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705313712:HM/EXP=1070847150/A=1844976/R=2/id=noscript/*http://www.merchantservicesinfo.com/trackerC.asp?ad=121&id=CD72&did=0" target=_top><img src="http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/la/landmark/300x250_static.gif" width=300 height=250 border=0></a></noscript></td></tr></table></td>
</tr>
<tr><td><img alt="" width=1 height=1 src="http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=266846.4063241.5347241.1261774/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1844976/rand=950093042"></td></tr>
</table>

<!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->


<br>
<tt>
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:<BR>
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<BR>
<BR>
</tt>
<br>

<br>
<tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <a href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">Yahoo! Terms of Service</a>.</tt>
</br>

</body></html>

Salve

No offense, L.S. Drusus, but this isn't a good argument. From a purely Logical standpoint, it could be argued as you have said or exactly the opposite: That because the ranking of authority comes first in the Constitution it literally has "Precedence" (comes before) the section you are citing. They are both parts of the same document passed and enacted at the same time: Neither section has "Precedence" over the other. Sorry.

Vale
~ Servius

-----Original Message-----
From: "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@...>
Sent: Dec 6, 2003 8:21 PM
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] New Decretum regarding Augury

<html><body>


<tt>
<BR>
<BR>
Stephen Gallagher wrote:<BR>
<BR>

> Salve Romans<BR>
><BR>
> In one section of the NR constitution it lists the order of authority <BR>
> that must be followed<BR>
><BR>
> "Legal precedence. This Constitution shall be the highest legal <BR>
> authority within Nova Roma, apart from edicts issued by a legally <BR>
> appointed dictator. It shall thereafter be followed in legal authority <BR>
> by edicta issued by consuls acting under the Senatus consultum ultima, <BR>
> laws properly voted and passed by one of the comitia, decreta passed <BR>
> by the collegium pontificum, decreta passed by the collegium augurium, <BR>
> Senatus consulta, and magisterial edicta (in order of descending <BR>
> authority as described in section IV of this Constitution), in that <BR>
> order. Should a lower authority conflict with a higher authority, the <BR>
> higher authority shall take precedence. Should a law passed by one <BR>
> comitia contradict one passed by another or the same comitia without <BR>
> explicitly superceding that law, the most recent law shall take <BR>
> precedence."<BR>
><BR>
> But in another section it reads that the "The collegium pontificum <BR>
> shall have the power  To issue decreta (decrees) on matters relevant <BR>
> to the Religio Romana and its own internal procedures (such decreta <BR>
> may not be overruled by laws passed in the comitia or Senatus <BR>
> consultum). "<BR>
><BR>
> It would appear that the constitution sets the standard of laws <BR>
> properly voted and passed by one of the comitia, as superior but if <BR>
> that lex is about a decreta ,  it is ipso facto not proper and <BR>
> therefore  null and void.<BR>
><BR>
> At least that's my reading of the two sections.  Any comments?<BR>
><BR>
> Vale<BR>
><BR>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus<BR>
> Candidate for Tribune of the Plebs<BR>
> Fortuna Favet Fortibus <BR>

<BR>
The section dealing with the powers of the collegium pontificum is the <BR>
later section, and therefore is a modification of the earlier section <BR>
dealing with precedence.<BR>
<BR>
In Matters relevant to the Religio Romana the Institutions of the <BR>
Religio have the superior power over the Comitia, in all other matters a <BR>
Decretum would simply be advice from the Religio and inferior in <BR>
authority to the Comitia. Personally I have no interest in involving the <BR>
Religio in matters that are not relevant to it and would oppose any such <BR>
decretum except under extraordinary circumstances.<BR>
<BR>
L. Sicinius Drusus<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</tt>

<br>

<!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->

<table border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2>
<tr bgcolor=#FFFFCC>
<td align=center><font size="-1" color=#003399><b>Yahoo! Groups Sponsor</b></font></td>
</tr>
<tr bgcolor=#FFFFFF>
<td align=center width=470><table border=0 cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0> <tr> <td align=center><font face=arial size=-2>ADVERTISEMENT</font><br><a href="http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=12c4bilvr/M=267637.4116732.5333197.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705313712:HM/EXP=1070846530/A=1853618/R=0/*http://www.netflix.com/Default?mqso=60178338&partid=4116732" alt=""><img src="http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/ne/netflix/yhoo1103_a_300250A.gif" alt="click here" width="300" height="250" border="0"></a></td></tr></table> </td>
</tr>
<tr><td><img alt="" width=1 height=1 src="http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=267637.4116732.5333197.1261774/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1853618/rand=801240146"></td></tr>
</table>

<!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->


<br>
<tt>
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:<BR>
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<BR>
<BR>
</tt>
<br>

<br>
<tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <a href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">Yahoo! Terms of Service</a>.</tt>
</br>

</body></html>

Salve

If the Clause in question can be so readily misinterpreted, then perhaps it needs revising?

Vale
~ Servius

-----Original Message-----
From: quintuscassiuscalvus <richmal@...>
Sent: Dec 6, 2003 9:38 PM
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: New Decretum regarding Augury

<html><body>


<tt>
--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@b...><BR>
wrote:<BR>
<BR>

> DEAD WRONG.<BR>
> <BR>
> The Comitae have no authority to pass a law regulating the Religio. The <BR>
> Constitution states:<BR>
> "The institutions of the Religio Romana shall have authority over <BR>
> religious matters on the level of the state and nation only,<BR>

maintaining <BR>

> the religious rites of the State"<BR>

<BR>

> The Auspices are a Religious matter, and under the authority of the <BR>
> institutions of the Religio Romana, not of ANY Comita or Magistrate. <BR>
> Seeking to undermine the institutions of the Religio Romana Authority <BR>
> over religious matters falls under the Blasphemy Decretum.<BR>
> <BR>
> I Would also remind you that the Religio IS the primary reason that<BR>

Nova <BR>

> Roma was founded. That Nova Roma exists as "the temporal homeland and <BR>
> worldly focus for the Religio Romana" as per the preamble of the <BR>
> Constitution. The Religio isn't a play toy for people who don't even <BR>
> beleave in the Gods to tinker with in a Comitia vote that is open to <BR>
> everyone not just practitioners of the Religio.<BR>

<BR>
Salve,<BR>
<BR>
Then NR might as well do away with the Senate and the Comitia and head<BR>
straight to Theocratic rule as by your reasoning everything in Nova<BR>
Roma has a connection to the Religio, thus the Collegium should rule<BR>
by decree.   However that is not the reasoning behind this clause and<BR>
you know it.  The clause is written so someone can't come along and<BR>
put a Lex through a Comitia (the proper spelling is Comitia, not<BR>
Comitae) to remove a Pontiff, priest, augur, ect because some Consul<BR>
or Tribune doesn't like that particular Pontiff, priest, augur, ect.  <BR>
<BR>
You're correct, the Religio isn't a play toy for non-believers, but<BR>
the State is not a play toy of the priests either. <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Vale,<BR>
<BR>
Q. Cassius Calvus<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
  <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</tt>

<br>

<!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->

<table border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2>
<tr bgcolor=#FFFFCC>
<td align=center><font size="-1" color=#003399><b>Yahoo! Groups Sponsor</b></font></td>
</tr>
<tr bgcolor=#FFFFFF>
<td align=center width=470><table border=0 cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0> <tr> <td align=center><font face=arial size=-2>ADVERTISEMENT</font><br><a href="http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=12c98qkcb/M=267637.4116730.5333196.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705313712:HM/EXP=1070851160/A=1853619/R=0/*http://www.netflix.com/Default?mqso=60178356&partid=4116730" alt=""><img src="http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/ne/netflix/yhoo1103_b_300250A.gif" alt="click here" width="300" height="250" border="0"></a></td></tr></table> </td>
</tr>
<tr><td><img alt="" width=1 height=1 src="http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=267637.4116730.5333196.1261774/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1853619/rand=204753002"></td></tr>
</table>

<!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->


<br>
<tt>
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:<BR>
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<BR>
<BR>
</tt>
<br>

<br>
<tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <a href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">Yahoo! Terms of Service</a>.</tt>
</br>

</body></html>

G. Iulius Scaurus S. P. D.

Salvete, Quirites.

Here's a link to "Images of Roman Landscape Architecture":

http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~helphand/romepgsone/romepg1.html

This site consists of images which were intended to accompany the
lectures of Dr. Kennenth Helphand (Univ. of Oregon) on the history of
Roman landscape architecture. Use the "next page" function at the
bottom of each page to view the several pages of excellent photographs
and illustrations.

Valete, Quirites.

G. Iulius Scaurus

Salve G. Iuli Scaure,

Thank you for your replies and postings today. As always they are
greatly appreciated.

The Roman landscape architecture is fascinating. When I look at the
photos, drawings and paintings I feel comfortable or right at home
as if I had been there before even though I'm not a follower of the
reincarnation idea. There were certainly Frank Loyd Wrights 2000
years ago from the look of things.

Regards,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "g_iulius_scaurus" <gfr@w...> wrote:
> G. Iulius Scaurus S. P. D.
>
> Salvete, Quirites.
>
> Here's a link to "Images of Roman Landscape Architecture":
>
> http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~helphand/romepgsone/romepg1.html
>
> This site consists of images which were intended to accompany the
> lectures of Dr. Kennenth Helphand (Univ. of Oregon) on the history
of
> Roman landscape architecture. Use the "next page" function at the
> bottom of each page to view the several pages of excellent
photographs
> and illustrations.
>
> Valete, Quirites.
>
> G. Iulius Scaurus

Salve Calve,

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "quintuscassiuscalvus"
<richmal@a...> wrote:

> My take on the reading on this murky mix of "church and state" is
> rather simple. A Lex may not overrule a previously issued decree of
> the Collegium in regards to the function of the Religio. For
>example, a Comitia can not pass a Lex stripping a Pontiff of his
>office and replacing him with someone else, nor could a Comitia
>issue a Lex that over rules the Collegium's Decree on Blasphemy as
>Blasphemy is strictly a religious crime. At the same time the
>Collegium is not suppose to be able to go along after a Comitia vote
>and issue a decree nullifying that vote.

Why not? If the college has the power... "to issue decreta (decrees)
on matters relevant to the Religio Romana and its own internal
procedures (such decreta may not be overruled by laws passed in the
comitia or Senatus consultum)."...then it would seem that the college
could issue such a decree at any time it wished. No time frame is
specified. If necessary it could issue a decree after the senate or
comitia, to contradict *them* if need be, though I hope that would
never be necessary.

>After all we are suppposed to be a Republic, not a Theocracy.

True, but the institutions of the Republic must not be used to work
against the Religio Romana. In a case where the political
institutions contradict the religious ones, then the political
institutions MUST lose. We are at the core a republic that exists to
give life to the Religio Romana. It is the reason for our founding
and the main reason for our continued existence. Everything thing we
do must suppport that mission, or at the very least not hinder it.

Vale,

Decius Iunius Palladius

Salvete,

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "deciusiunius" <bcatfd@t...> wrote:
>
> Salve Calve,
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "quintuscassiuscalvus"
> <richmal@a...> wrote:
>
> > My take on the reading on this murky mix of "church and state" is
> > rather simple. A Lex may not overrule a previously issued decree
of
> > the Collegium in regards to the function of the Religio. For
> >example, a Comitia can not pass a Lex stripping a Pontiff of his
> >office and replacing him with someone else, nor could a Comitia
> >issue a Lex that over rules the Collegium's Decree on Blasphemy as
> >Blasphemy is strictly a religious crime. At the same time the
> >Collegium is not suppose to be able to go along after a Comitia
vote
> >and issue a decree nullifying that vote.
>
> Why not? If the college has the power... "to issue decreta
(decrees)
> on matters relevant to the Religio Romana and its own internal
> procedures (such decreta may not be overruled by laws passed in the
> comitia or Senatus consultum)."...then it would seem that the
college
> could issue such a decree at any time it wished. No time frame is
> specified. If necessary it could issue a decree after the senate or
> comitia, to contradict *them* if need be, though I hope that would
> never be necessary.
>
> >After all we are suppposed to be a Republic, not a Theocracy.
>
> True, but the institutions of the Republic must not be used to work
> against the Religio Romana. In a case where the political
> institutions contradict the religious ones, then the political
> institutions MUST lose. We are at the core a republic that exists
>to give life to the Religio Romana. It is the reason for our
>founding and the main reason for our continued existence. Everything
>thing we do must suppport that mission, or at the very least not
>hinder it

In light of further discussion, I alter the first sentence of the
paragraph above to read "Nova Roma is a republic with theocratic
elements, as such the the institutions of the Republic must not be
used to work against the Religio Romana."

Valete,

Palladius

In a message dated 12/6/03 8:12:00 PM Pacific Standard Time,
marminius@... writes:

> M.Arminius: What, a samnite, from Samnium, Italy?
> I think that Q.Fabius meant the semites, perhaps.
>
>

No, he is not an Oscan. His family like most ruling families in the Sophet
came from Tyre the mother city in Lebanon. Indeed he would be a Semite rather
that of Samnite. There were Samnites in Hannibal's army after Cannae.
This is what happens when you do not proofread your posts before mailing.
Q. Fabius Maximus.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salvete all,

The International Coordinator of the Pagan Federation sent me this nice letter in support of my
campaign for Consul, but she doesn't have time to subscribe to this list (she already gets about 200
PF emails per day).
Valete Diana

----- Original Message -----
From: <morgana@...>
To: "Diana Moravia Aventina" <Diana@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2003 10:33 AM
Subject: Reference Letter

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

Hallo,

I have know Diana Aventina for a number of years, about 6 to be exact. We
met as members of the Pagan Federation - a well-known international
organisation with representation throughout the English-speaking world.
Both she and I have been actively involved in the PF for years - Diana as
National Coordinator for Belgium and later as editor of our inhouse
magazine "Pagan World" and web mistress for a multilingual website, and I
as NC for the Netherlands and later International Coordinator.

I have know her as an extremely loyal co-worker and friend.

We have endured attacks on our pagan beliefs and we have stood together
when paganism has been brought into disrepute. She has never been afraid to
stand up for her rights and has always tried to be upright and fair. She
has not stooped to devious means to prove her point and it is her honesty
and optimism which has always been the thing which I admire most in her.

Kind regards

Morgana,
PF International Coordinator

http://www.paganfederation.org

Greetings, everyone on this list.

I have subscribed and taken the time to go through all the upheaval
that is going on around the appointment as Consul of Diana Moravia
Aventina.

I was surprised to read the words of Flavia Tulla as she laid down in
her message 'de delectu consulum'. I will refrain from commenting on
her words though, since she jumped on this list, made her 'speech' and
left again.

As for myself, I know Diana since about 3 years, through the Pagan
Federation International (PFI). As I am not aware in how far you know
this organisation, I may state that this is -not- a collection of
loose-heads and pagans gone astray. It is a well-organised group of
people who are all doing their best to make paganism accepted and
respected. Diana Aventina has, since I know her, been in the staff of
the PFI, managing members for Belgium, doing a lot of work for the
quarterly newsletters and assisting in the goings-on at several PFI
conferences. Not something one would leave to an irresponsible or
unloyal person. As former acting national coordinator for Germany and
currently IT manager for the PFI, I have had close contact with Diana
on a few occasions.
A cheerful person with her heart in the right place, she is ever ready
to help people and lift one's spirit with a joke or a supporting word.
Her pagan beliefs are very important to her, and she is always ready
and willing to stand up and defend them.

If you have any questions about me or her, please let me know. Either
through the list (I'll stay on here for a while) or to me personally.
You can reach me at paul@....

Awen blessings,
Paul
--
A committee is a cul-de-sac down which ideas are lured and then
quietly strangled.
-Barnett Cocks
http://www.nlpagan.net - Linux Mandrake - Thunderbird 0.4a RC1

Salve

> In one section of the NR constitution it lists the order of

authority that must be followed

>
> "Legal precedence. This Constitution shall be the highest legal

authority within Nova Roma, apart from edicts issued by a legally
appointed dictator.

I have a Constitutional question, in what circumstances is a
dictator appointed and are there any limits on his power?

vale

Titus Octavius Salvius

Thank you honorable Consul, I look forward to working
with you and others on establishing Nova Roma's first
(and hopefully not last) Oppidias and Municipias.

M. Scipio Africanus
Tribunus Militum

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/

Denzel to play Hannibal???? I would take a wild guess that they are not using him based onl ooks, but on acting skills. and he is GOOD, IMO. I am looking forward to seeing it even morenow.
Paula Drennan
In Memory of, Tenzing the Kitty, May 4 - August 1, 2003
He lost his short battle for life, and is now in peace.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Quintus Lanius Paulinus (Michael Kelly)" <mjk@...>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2003 8:18 AM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Denzal Washington To Play Hannibal


> Salvete omnes,
>
> I was checking the net for upcoming epics of Rome and it looks like
> Denzal Washington is slated to play Hannibal. That has got a lot of
> debate going about what this chap looked like but nevertheless, I'll
> be looking forward to seeing this film made with all the new
> technical effects.
>
> Regards,
>
> Quintus Lanius Paulinus
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Greetings to you all,

> With this e-mail I would like to support Diana Moravia Aventina with her

candidacy for Consul of

> Nova Roma.
> This lady is a wonderfull person and a great pagan! If it was not for

Diana, the PF Belgium would

> not be so well organised as it is now.It wouldn't have so many members and

activities without Diana.

> She puts in a great deal of work and time and whenever you need

her...she's always there to help you

> out and support you.I am convinced that the members of N.R., who were in

Tongeren for a visit and a

> Roman meal, still remember the efforts Diana made to give them all a

pleasant day !

> The last year was for Diana a year with a lot of bad luck and the loss of

her father.But even in

> these difficult moments, she was always there and she always kept on

smiling.She keeps the Religion

> alive and honours the Gods as they should be honoured.
> She's a great priestess of Venus.She does not only have a temple of Venus

on the internet,she also

> made one in her home.As a member of the PF Belgium,as a pagan and as a

friend,I can only say :"Diana

> would be a great Consul !"
>
>
> To the members of Nova Roma I have met in Tongeren,I would like to say

:"Hope to meet you again."

>
> Circe.
>
>

Salve Quintus Moravius!

Thanks for the support! I have to say working with you these last few years has made my life a lot
more pleasant!

Salvete to Paul & Circe,

Thanks for the support and I'm glad that you've subscribed to this list! I'm happy to see that
people who have met me and worked with me promoting Paganism in Europe have such a very nice opinion
of me!

Paul said:
<A cheerful person with her heart in the right place, she is ever ready
<to help people and lift one's spirit with a joke or a supporting word.
<Her pagan beliefs are very important to her, and she is always ready
<and willing to stand up and defend them.

In other words, I'm a practical joker in the PFI too in between making the newsletters, the website,
the activities, etc etc :-)

Circe said: > She's a great priestess of Venus.She does not only have a temple of Venus

> on the internet, she also made one in her home.

Thank you for remembering that! I don't think that I've ever mentioned that on this mainlist! I have
a room on the third floor which is my Temple to Venus. I'm quite picky as to whom I let see it
(Pagans only basically) because I don't want people picking up her statues and handling the
offereings thinking that they are knick-knacks.

> > To the members of Nova Roma I have met in Tongeren,I would like to say
> :"Hope to meet you again."

For the citizens that don't know, Circe (as well as Peter & Macha) guided us through Tongeren to all
of the Roman Sites. Circe also led the group of 12 to the restaurant because as usual, I was about
to lead us down the wrong street (getting people lost is sort of a recurring problem for me).

Valete!
Diana

Salvete omnes

A citizen made a question about "Scipio l'Africano", an italian film of 1937 (Not 1939) which was filmed by Carmine Gallone and is somehow described as a "Mussolini's propaganda film made to justify the Italian campaign in Africa". However, it is told that it had huge sets of the Forum Romanum (In Cinecittà), an epic battle with elephants or very interesting natural size ships in Ostia. It is said too that is a film not screened in Italy or any other place because of its link to Mussolini's policies.

There is another film named "Scipione Detto Anche l'Africano" filmed in 1971 by Luigi Magni, featured Marcello Mastroiani and (Beautiful :-)) Silvia Mangano. But I have no more references.

I have not seen both films but I had a chance to see the first one on the Filmoteca de Madrid some years ago. I wasted that chance trying to pass a University exam, so I can't tell more about. :-)

If any citizen is interested in peplum or Antiquity in movies, I suggest a book (Which is the one I used to quote this message) written by Jon Solomon, a Classics teacher of the Arizona University. Maybe available in Yale University (Copyright) 2001. It is a very good one to know more about movies&clasical world. :-)

vale bene in pace deorum,

L·DIDIVS·GEMINVS·SCEPTIVS
TRIBVNVS·PLEBIS

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salvete omnes

> > For Tribunus Plebis in general:
> >
> > - What kind of relationship should the plebeian > magistrates have > between each others?

The Tribunes should be able to work together well. This is not the same thing as saying that they should or will always agree with each other. Indeed, the Constitution presupposes that the Tribunes are likely to disagree which is why I believe that it requires a majority of the Tribunes to sustain an intercessio.


SCEPTIVS: Good point, Quintius. I think you have made a good interpretation of our Constitutio. :-)

The Tribunes are elected by the Plebs as a whole and report to the Plebs (and in the case of the Senate proceeding, to the People as a whole). The Tribunes must do what is in the best interests of Nova Roma and the Plebs in safeguarding the Constitution. That is their role.


SCEPTIVS: That is the core point. :-)

But a Tribune should not allow a disagreement on one matter to sour their working relationship with their colleagues.


SCEPTIVS: I agree with you there. However, egos can smash that good will and therefore it is important to have patiente in many issues.

What would be your goals on > that field?

I will accept and consider the views of my colleagues on all matters. I will always express my conscience and do what is reasonable to persuade colleagues who may disagree with me. In the final analysis, I will accept that sometimes we need to
agree to disagree.


SCEPTIVS: Good! this is a very sensible way of acting. :_)

What are > the main problems you identify for next year? Why?

> >

It is early to anticipate what next year will bring. However, I think Nova Roma has a good mission that could be better articulated in more local and regional real-life gatherings. I think more work needs to be done as far as advertising, both online and in printed media. Getting copies of the Eagle to area libraries, for instance.


SCEPTIVS: I agree there. In fact, it seems to be the same policy Salix Astur wants to bring to Nova Roma if elected. On the other hand, as Tribunus, what would be your own view? I men, in a more specific frame.

I think Nova Roma's biggest problem is the acrimony that often exists within our political debates. There is far too often a focus on the personalities involved rather than on substance. I place a high value on civility in debate.


SCEPTIVS: Well, Quintius Constantius, I can't be more agree with you. Your answers have been really sensible ones and quite focalised. I hope you'll be elected too, I must say that after this speech you have probed to be a valuable candidate and worthy of confidence.

Citizens, I endorse Quintius Constantius as Tribunus Plebis together with Arminius Faustus and Apulus Caesar. You three would be a good team as far as I see you have good ideas that summed up will bring us a better Res Publica. I hope then you'll to be elected. :-)


vale bene in pace deorum,

L·DIDIVS·GEMINVS·SCEPTIVS

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salve L. Didi,

Thanks for the information; I'll check the film out. To those that
would refuse to see this movie because of its propoganda:

In my opinion, I do not think that a film should be avoided just
because of its affiliation with a particular infamous government. As
long as it is looked at in its context of the times and its technical
or artistic merit, I can see no harm. I doubt that this movie will
make me feel like justifying the 1930's invasions of Lybia and
Ethiopia anymore than the movie, the Birth Of A Nation made me want
to be a KKK member or Freedom Of The Will got me marching to the NSP
offices. Besides, the subject covered is ancient Rome and was not so
contemporary as the other two films that are considered masterpieces
for their times in spite of where they are coming from.


Regards,

Quintus




--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, L·DIDIVS·GEMINVS·SCEPTIVS
<sceptia@y...> wrote:

> Salvete omnes
>
> A citizen made a question about "Scipio l'Africano", an italian

film of 1937 (Not 1939) which was filmed by Carmine Gallone and is
somehow described as a "Mussolini's propaganda film made to justify
the Italian campaign in Africa". However, it is told that it had huge
sets of the Forum Romanum (In Cinecittà), an epic battle with
elephants or very interesting natural size ships in Ostia. It is said
too that is a film not screened in Italy or any other place because
of its link to Mussolini's policies.

>
> There is another film named "Scipione Detto Anche l'Africano"

filmed in 1971 by Luigi Magni, featured Marcello Mastroiani and
(Beautiful :-)) Silvia Mangano. But I have no more references.

>
> I have not seen both films but I had a chance to see the first one

on the Filmoteca de Madrid some years ago. I wasted that chance
trying to pass a University exam, so I can't tell more about. :-)

>
> If any citizen is interested in peplum or Antiquity in movies, I

suggest a book (Which is the one I used to quote this message)
written by Jon Solomon, a Classics teacher of the Arizona University.
Maybe available in Yale University (Copyright) 2001. It is a very
good one to know more about movies&clasical world. :-)

>
> vale bene in pace deorum,
>
> L·DIDIVS·GEMINVS·SCEPTIVS
> TRIBVNVS·PLEBIS
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Titus Octavius Salvinus asked:

> I have a Constitutional question, in what circumstances is a
> dictator appointed and are there any limits on his power?

Quoting from the Constitution:

> In times of emergency, the Senate may appoint a dictator to serve a
> term not to exceed six months. At the time of such appointment, the
> Senate may prescribe a given task or boundaries within which the
> dictator is obliged to remain. The edicts of the dictator are absolute
> within his sphere of influence, and subject to neither intercessio or
> provocato. The dictator shall hold Imperium and have the honor of being
> preceeded by twenty-four lictors. At the end of his term the actions of
> the dictator shall be subject to final confirmation by the Senate.

In its 5 year history, Nova Roma has had one dictator, Flavius Vedius
Germanicus, who is no longer with us.

--
Gnaeus Equitius Marinus
Candidate for Consul
http://www.villaivlilla.com/equitius-for-consul/index.html

> Marcus Octavius Germanicus wrote:
>
> The voting program has been modified to comply with new leges.
> If you'd like to see or test it, go to:
>
> http://www.novaroma.org/bin/voting/c_cent/cista?votercode=1AAA11

I certainly hope that Thing wins for Praetor! I was disapppinted to see that Cousin It didn't
candidate for any of the offices. IT would have given me a run for my money in the Consular
elections,
that is for sure!

Vale,
Diana

Ex Officio Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus Augur Quiritibus SPD


It is my pleasure to announce the appointment of Gaius Iulius Scaurus to Pullarius and head of 'De Sodalitate Pullariorum'.

QVOD BONVM FAVSTVM FELIX FORTVNATVMQVE SIT POPVLO ROMANO QUIRITIBVS

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Decretum Collegii Pontificum et Augurum De Iure Auspicandi et Tripudio

I. De Iure Auspicandi

A. Curule magistrates who are practitioners of the Religio Romana
shall have the ius auspicandi.

1. A curule magistrate who is a practitioner of the Religio Romana,
but not an augur, pontifex, flamen, sacerdos, or pullarius, shall
submit a written report of any auspication he has taken and his
interpretation thereof to the Collegium Augurum for verification that
vitium has not occurred in the auspication.

2. In the event of vitium, the Collegium Augurum, providing such
advice as shall be necessary to correct the defect, shall require the
curule magistrate to repeat the auspication correctly.

B. Curule magistrates who are not practitioners of the Religio Romana
shall not have the ius auspicandi.

1. A curule magistrate who is not a practitioner of the Religio
Romana shall consult an augur or pullarius who shall take the
auspication and provide an interpretation thereof to the curule
magistrate.

2. In the event that the curule magistrate shall dispute
interpretation of the auspication, the curule magistrate may appeal to
the Collegium Augurum for ultimate interpretation of the auspication.

II. De Modo Tripudii

A. Whenever possible, tripudium shall be the preferred means of
auspication for meetings of the comitia or the senate.

1. The principal bird for use in tripudium shall be the chicken.

2. The Collegium Augurum may determine that other birds of good omen
may be used for tripudium.

B. The Collegium Augurum establishes the rules by which a correct
tripudium is performed.

III. De Sodalitate Pullariorum

A. The person charged with responsibility for maintaining and feeding
the sacred birds for tripudium shall be a pullarius.

B. It shall be the responsibility of the Collegium Augurum to appoint
and train pullarii.

C. Pullarii appointed by the Collegium Augurum shall constitute the
Sodalitas Pulliariorum and its members shall have the rank and century
points of a sacerdos.

IV. De Impietate et Auspicando

A. It shall constitute an offence of impietas prudens dolo malo for a
curule magistrate to knowingly convene a meeting of the Comitia
Centuriata, Comitia Populi Tributa, or the Senate without performance
of a valid auspication.

B. A person who has been convicted of this offence of impietas
prudens dolo malo shall suffer the penalty of exactio for life.

C. Trial for the offence of impetas dolo malo shall be conducted in
accordance with the Lex Salicia Iudiciaria, or those Leges which
replace Lex Salicia Iudiciaria. No prosecution shall be accepted for
offences under this decretum which occurred prior to this decretum's
promulgation.

V. De Auspicando et Comitiis Plebis Tributis

A. In accordance with the mos maiorum auspices shall not be taken to
convene the Comitia Plebis Tributa.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> There is one thing I would like to make clear about this, the Decretum
> should in no way be considered a rebuke of Tribune Moravia or the Plebs
> who voted for her Lex. I Commend you for your attempt to bring the Rites
> of the Religio more into the Public. Nova Roma would be a better place
> if more of us did what Tribune Moravia attempted to do, take notice of
> the Immortals.

Thank you Drusus. That was my intention. But now that there is an offical Decretum saying that the
auspices are not necessary in the Comitia Plebis Tributa, I bow to their superior wisdom in these
matters!

Vale,
Diana Moravia

Salve Silanus,

<So I'd be grateful if our candidates for consul (and
<anyone else) could answer me a few questions.

<1. Do you agree with me in my analysis of the current situation? Is this to be viewed as a problem
or a
<necessary evil of politics?

Arguing always becomes a bit tiring but it is the discussions that push us forward. For example, the
Senior consul proposed an electoral lex this year which was discussed and argued about. And what was
the result? An electoral lex whih is as historically accurate as possible that everyone likes. So
sometimes the end does justify the means. On the other side of the coin, sometimes a Lex is viewed
by who wrote and not on what the context is. This is where the factional side of politics becomes
ugly.

<2. If elected, what, if anything, would you do to prevent further exacerbation of the current
divisions
<within Nova Roma?

The odd thing is that nearly everyone wants Nova Roma to be as close to Ancient Rome as possible, so
the divisions appear to me to be more personality conflicts that political conflicts. Just this
week, we saw a discussion going on about things from end 2000-early 2001. The discussion is taking
place because of personality clashes rather than a current political disagreement.

To me the best way of settling differences is by more physical meetings. These meetings help people
from both sides of the political fence find common ground 1000 times faster than this medium of
email ever could. When people become friends in person, they will listen to eachother and understand
eachother more when they read their posts to this Forum.This should really be our focus for next
year: having more gatherings. This is where my years of experience organizing Pagan meetings in
Belgium will really come in handy. Meetings and get togethers do not have to be gigantic expensive
things. With just a little guidance, anyone can do it in their areas. And if they get even one new
member out of it, it is a success, besides the 'bonding' that will happen between people who are
already citizens.

Another way to help stop the divisions in NR is to propose Leges, listen to what the people want and
alter them accordingly. This way everyone will see that the magistrates with the authority to write
laws are willing to bend in order to find common ground between all political opinions.
When I wrote my 2 leges this year, I did so specifially because Plebeian citizens wanted it. Not
all of the Plebeians were perfectly happy but the majority were. I will continue to do the same next
year and will work with whomever else should be my co-Consul in order to give the citizens the
leadership that they need. A leadership that is here amongst the people listening and working *for*
them.

Vale,
Diana Moravia Aventina
Candidate for consul 2757
Tribunus Plebis 2756

Salvete omnes,

I have been listening to the discussion for a few days now and I hit
the books to find out what the discussions of the Auspices and Augers
is all about. The whole discussion has been on a high legal jargon -
like level and I am concerned that some of our newer citizens may not
have a clue of what is being talked about and more often than not,
they will be to shy to ask.

At this point I think have figured out that we are talking about
omens and the religious people who conduct and interpret them. In
ancient times, only the patrician class could have people who did the
ceremonies and read the omens from the gods. Now the tribunes and
their commities who did have the power to veto the patrcians and
senate in order to protect the plebs had no imperium but had the
power to "not" accept or accept a good or bad omen from the gods via
the auspice. In other words if a bad omen came the day a law or
decision was to be enacted, the omen itself could not thwart the
decision of the tribunes, positvely or negatively. Now is
this "discussion', particularily between Drusus and Calvus about the
power of the state through the tribune versus the Religio Romano and
what the gods have to say about the laws through their omens.

Also, is that 2 page document by Marinus giving G. Iulius Scaurus a
new position essentially saying that G. Iulius Scaurus is the Keeper
of the Chickens whose type of eating habits gave various omens to the
Romans.

If I have misinturpreted, I apologize but it would be nice if one of
our experts could do a quick summary in layman's terms. To me the
only foolish questions are the ones that are not asked.


Regards and thanks,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus

"Quintus Lanius Paulinus (Michael Kelly)" wrote:

[a lot, of which I'll only address]

> Also, is that 2 page document by Marinus

No, it was by Cincinnatus, the other Equitius frequently seen around
here. He is the Chief Augur.

> giving G. Iulius Scaurus a
> new position essentially saying that G. Iulius Scaurus is the Keeper
> of the Chickens whose type of eating habits gave various omens to the
> Romans.

Yep! That's what it said. Scaurus is now recognized as an interpreter
of signs from the gods sent via the eating habits of chickens.

--
Gnaeus Equitius Marinus
Candidate for Consul
http://www.villaivlilla.com/equitius-for-consul/index.html

Salve Lucius Equitius,

This is great news. Congratulations to Gaius Iulius Scaurus! and the subject matter is extremely
interesting.

1. The principal bird for use in tripudium shall be the chicken.

> A. The person charged with responsibility for maintaining and feeding
> the sacred birds for tripudium shall be a pullarius.
>
> B. It shall be the responsibility of the Collegium Augurum to appoint
> and train pullarii.

I am extremely insterested in how one can train these birds. A good friend has just bought 4 chicks
in order to give fresh eggs to the family. I often take care of them and they are really sweet.
There living conditions are very nice (lots of space to run around, etc.) and they are well fed and
happy as a chicken can be! I have a rather silly question though: Is it inappropriate for a sacred
chicken used in tripudium to also be the ones who are 'family pets' used to give eggs to the family?

Vale,
Diana Moravia Aventina

Salve omnes,

I also recommend the book mentioned by L. Didius Geminus Sceptius regarding
ancient films. The title is The Ancient World in the Cinema by Jon Solomon,
and is well worth reading if you have any interest in these films. He covers
not only Rome, but also Greek history and mythology, the Old Testament, the New
Testament, Babylon, Egypt, Persia, and the ancient Orient, ancient tragedy and
comedy, and finally, the muscleman epics, otherwise known as peplum.

Vale,

G. Lanius Falco


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salve Marinus,

> Yep! That's what it said. Scaurus is now recognized as an interpreter
> of signs from the gods sent via the eating habits of chickens.

Nope! That's not what it said. Scaurus has not been appointed as an Augur, but as our first
Pullarius and head of 'De Sodalitate Pullariorum':

Pullarius- the person charged with responsibility for maintaining and feeding
the sacred birds for tripudium.

Scaurus is now also in charge of the 'De Sodalitate Pullariorum' which will consist of Pullarii
(those who train the chickens) who are appointed and trained by the Collegium Augurum.

Vale,
Diana Moravia

Salvete quirites,

With respect to Diana Moravia Aventina's recent comments to the effect
that G. Iulius Scaurus will not be performing auguries under his
appointment to Pullarius today, I'm trying to understand the meaning
of this passage in the Decretum Collegii Pontificum et Augurum De Iure
Auspicandi et Tripudio:

> 1. A curule magistrate who is not a practitioner of the Religio
> Romana shall consult an augur or pullarius who shall take the
> auspication and provide an interpretation thereof to the curule
> magistrate.

If the pullarius is able to take the auspication and provide an
interpretation thereof, how can it be said that Scaurus will not be
interpreting the auspices?

Valete,

-- Marinus

G. Iulius Scaurus Gn. Equitio Marino et Q. Lanio Paulino salutem dicit.

Salvete, Gn Equiti et Q. Lani.

Let me try and clarify some aspects of the Decretum Collegii
Pontificum et Augurum De Iure Auspicandi et Tripudio as it regards
taking auspices for meetingsof the senate and comitia.

First, the decretum authorises the Collegium Augurum to appoint and
train pullarii. A pullarius is an assistant to a magistrate with ius
auspicandi who cares for and feeds the sacred chickens. When tripidium
is required, the pullarius pours the grain into their cage and reports
whether and how they ate and whether they exhibited any behaviour
which might be portentous. The magistrate usually scans the skies for
auspicia oblativa while this procedure goes on. Tripudia for such
meetings were traditionally done just after dawn, although could be
done at any time at need.

Second, the decretum specifies what whenever possible, tripudium shall
be the preferred means of auspication for meetings of the comitia or
the senate. This means that consulting the preferred means for
consulting Iuppiter Optimus Maximus for auspices for such meetings
will be observation of whether and how the sacred chickens eat when
grain is administered to them by a pullarius. The most auspicious
tripudium is one in which the the chickens eat so eagerly that grains
drop from their mouths as they eat; if the chickens refuse to eat, it
portends disaster. The chief value of the tripidium as a method of
auspication is that it is historically the way auspices were taken for
meetings of the senate and comitia and it is relatively easily
interpreted. Other means of auspication may be used, but they require
the establishment of templum by an augur.

Third, the decretum recognises that curule magistrates who are
practitioners of the Religio have the ius auspicandi. In practical
terms what this means is that a magistrate who wishes to take the
auspices for a meeting of the senate or comitia will contact a
pullarius who will feed the sacred chickens and report back to the
magistrate the relevant results of the tripudium.

Fourth, the decretum authorises a curule magistrate who is an augur,
pontifex, flamen, sacerdos, or pullarius to interpret the tripudium
without further recourse.

Fifth, the decretum requires that a curule magistrate who is a
practitioner but not an augur, pontifex, flamen, sacerdos, or
pullarius must submit a written report of the auspication and
interpretation to the Collegium Augurum to check that no vitium
(religious error) has taken place. If a vitium has taken place, the
curule magistrate must repeat the auspication.

Sixth, the decretum requires that a curule magistate who is not a
practitioner does not have the ius auspicandi. In this case the
magistrate must consult an augur or pullarius and the results of the
augury or tripidium must be verfified and interpreted by an augur, who
informs the magistrate of the auspices (rather like the system we
previously had, except tripudium is now a significant option). It is
the augur whose responsibility it is for the final interpretation of
the auspices.

Among the reasons for which L. Equitius Cincinnatus Augur, our only
currently active member of the Collegium Augurum has appointed me a
pullarius are the fact that I am familiar with all the extant sources
on tripudium and can carry the procedure out without vitium and I am
able to keep chickens on my property. I have purchased two leghorn
hens -- Cornelia and Antonia (I chose the names by lot, one patrician,
one plebian) -- who currently reside on the nearby farm of a friend
while construction of a hen house in my back yard is being completed.
I can visit them for tripudia in under twenty minutes' drive, if
needed now, and within a week or so they will be resident in their own
hen house on my property.

I hope this explains more clearly what the decretum has established
and how it will be implemented.

Valete.

G. Iulius Scaurus

Salve G. Iuli Scaure,

Thank you for taking the time to explain the aspects of the Decretum
Collegi Pontificum et Augurum De Iure Auspicandi et Tripudio and
taking auspices for the meetings of the senate and comitia.
Everything is much clearer to me now and I'll put your explanation in
my files.

Regards,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "g_iulius_scaurus" <gfr@w...> wrote:
> G. Iulius Scaurus Gn. Equitio Marino et Q. Lanio Paulino salutem
dicit.
>
> Salvete, Gn Equiti et Q. Lani.
>
> Let me try and clarify some aspects of the Decretum Collegii
> Pontificum et Augurum De Iure Auspicandi et Tripudio as it regards
> taking auspices for meetingsof the senate and comitia.
>
> First, the decretum authorises the Collegium Augurum to appoint and
> train pullarii. A pullarius is an assistant to a magistrate with
ius
> auspicandi who cares for and feeds the sacred chickens. When
tripidium
> is required, the pullarius pours the grain into their cage and
reports
> whether and how they ate and whether they exhibited any behaviour
> which might be portentous. The magistrate usually scans the skies
for
> auspicia oblativa while this procedure goes on. Tripudia for such
> meetings were traditionally done just after dawn, although could be
> done at any time at need.
>
> Second, the decretum specifies what whenever possible, tripudium
shall
> be the preferred means of auspication for meetings of the comitia or
> the senate. This means that consulting the preferred means for
> consulting Iuppiter Optimus Maximus for auspices for such meetings
> will be observation of whether and how the sacred chickens eat when
> grain is administered to them by a pullarius. The most auspicious
> tripudium is one in which the the chickens eat so eagerly that
grains
> drop from their mouths as they eat; if the chickens refuse to eat,
it
> portends disaster. The chief value of the tripidium as a method of
> auspication is that it is historically the way auspices were taken
for
> meetings of the senate and comitia and it is relatively easily
> interpreted. Other means of auspication may be used, but they
require
> the establishment of templum by an augur.
>
> Third, the decretum recognises that curule magistrates who are
> practitioners of the Religio have the ius auspicandi. In practical
> terms what this means is that a magistrate who wishes to take the
> auspices for a meeting of the senate or comitia will contact a
> pullarius who will feed the sacred chickens and report back to the
> magistrate the relevant results of the tripudium.
>
> Fourth, the decretum authorises a curule magistrate who is an augur,
> pontifex, flamen, sacerdos, or pullarius to interpret the tripudium
> without further recourse.
>
> Fifth, the decretum requires that a curule magistrate who is a
> practitioner but not an augur, pontifex, flamen, sacerdos, or
> pullarius must submit a written report of the auspication and
> interpretation to the Collegium Augurum to check that no vitium
> (religious error) has taken place. If a vitium has taken place, the
> curule magistrate must repeat the auspication.
>
> Sixth, the decretum requires that a curule magistate who is not a
> practitioner does not have the ius auspicandi. In this case the
> magistrate must consult an augur or pullarius and the results of the
> augury or tripidium must be verfified and interpreted by an augur,
who
> informs the magistrate of the auspices (rather like the system we
> previously had, except tripudium is now a significant option). It
is
> the augur whose responsibility it is for the final interpretation of
> the auspices.
>
> Among the reasons for which L. Equitius Cincinnatus Augur, our only
> currently active member of the Collegium Augurum has appointed me a
> pullarius are the fact that I am familiar with all the extant
sources
> on tripudium and can carry the procedure out without vitium and I am
> able to keep chickens on my property. I have purchased two leghorn
> hens -- Cornelia and Antonia (I chose the names by lot, one
patrician,
> one plebian) -- who currently reside on the nearby farm of a friend
> while construction of a hen house in my back yard is being
completed.
> I can visit them for tripudia in under twenty minutes' drive, if
> needed now, and within a week or so they will be resident in their
own
> hen house on my property.
>
> I hope this explains more clearly what the decretum has established
> and how it will be implemented.
>
> Valete.
>
> G. Iulius Scaurus

Salve Gai,

Thanks! I'll be tracking that book down.

Regards

Quintus Lanius Paulinus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, lanius117@a... wrote:
> Salve omnes,
>
> I also recommend the book mentioned by L. Didius Geminus Sceptius
regarding
> ancient films. The title is The Ancient World in the Cinema by Jon
Solomon,
> and is well worth reading if you have any interest in these films.
He covers
> not only Rome, but also Greek history and mythology, the Old
Testament, the New
> Testament, Babylon, Egypt, Persia, and the ancient Orient, ancient
tragedy and
> comedy, and finally, the muscleman epics, otherwise known as peplum.
>
> Vale,
>
> G. Lanius Falco
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salve Honorable M. Scipio Africanus!

Yes, let's get to work together! ;-)

>Thank you honorable Consul, I look forward to working
>with you and others on establishing Nova Roma's first
>(and hopefully not last) Oppidias and Municipias.
>
>M. Scipio Africanus
>Tribunus Militum

--

Vale

Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Senior Consul et Senator
Propraetor Thules
Sodalitas Egressus Beneficarius et Praefectus Provincia Thules
Civis Romanus sum
************************************************
Cohors Consulis CFQ
http://www.insulaumbra.com/cohors_consulis_cfq/
************************************************
Aut inveniam viam aut faciam
"I'll either find a way or make one"
************************************************
Dignitas, Iustitia, Fidelitas et Pietas
Dignity, Justice, Loyalty and Dutifulness

Salvete

Art should be judged on its merits, not its sponsor. Leni Riefenstahl's "Olympiad" is magnificent, and pioneered many of the film techniques we take for granted today.
I could understand avoiding a book because of its author, but this is the equivalent of avoiding a book because of its publisher - just not a reasonable criteria.

Valete
~ Servius Equitius

-----Original Message-----
From: "Quintus Lanius Paulinus (Michael Kelly)" <mjk@...>
Sent: Dec 7, 2003 11:23 AM
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: A book about peplums

<html><body>


<tt>
Salve L. Didi,<BR>
<BR>
Thanks for the information; I'll check the film out. To those that <BR>
would refuse to see this movie because of its propoganda:<BR>
<BR>
In my opinion, I do not think that a film should be avoided just <BR>
because of its affiliation with a particular infamous government. As <BR>
long as it is looked at in its context of the times and its technical <BR>
or artistic merit, I can see no harm. I doubt that this movie will <BR>
make me feel like justifying the 1930's invasions of Lybia and <BR>
Ethiopia anymore than the movie, the Birth Of A Nation made me want <BR>
to be a KKK member or Freedom Of The Will got me marching to the NSP <BR>
offices. Besides, the subject covered is ancient Rome and was not so <BR>
contemporary as the other two films that are considered masterpieces <BR>
for their times in spite of where they are coming from.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Regards,<BR>
<BR>
Quintus<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, L·DIDIVS·GEMINVS·SCEPTIVS <BR>
<sceptia@y...> wrote:<BR>

> Salvete omnes<BR>
> <BR>
> A citizen made a question  about "Scipio l'Africano", an italian <BR>

film of 1937 (Not 1939) which was filmed by Carmine Gallone and is <BR>
somehow described as a "Mussolini's propaganda film made to justify <BR>
the Italian campaign in Africa". However, it is told that it had huge <BR>
sets of the Forum Romanum (In Cinecittà), an epic battle with <BR>
elephants or very interesting natural size ships in Ostia. It is said <BR>
too that is a film not screened in Italy or any other place because <BR>
of its link to Mussolini's policies.<BR>

> <BR>
> There is another film named "Scipione Detto Anche l'Africano" <BR>

filmed in 1971 by Luigi Magni, featured Marcello Mastroiani and <BR>
(Beautiful :-)) Silvia Mangano. But I have no more references.<BR>

> <BR>
> I have not seen both films but I had a chance to see the first one <BR>

on the Filmoteca de Madrid some years ago. I wasted that chance <BR>
trying to pass a University exam, so I can't tell more about. :-)<BR>

> <BR>
> If any citizen is interested in peplum or Antiquity in movies, I <BR>

suggest a book (Which is the one I used to quote this message) <BR>
written by Jon Solomon, a Classics teacher of the Arizona University. <BR>
Maybe available in Yale University (Copyright) 2001. It is a very <BR>
good one to know more about movies&clasical world. :-)<BR>

> <BR>
> vale bene in pace deorum,<BR>
> <BR>
> L·DIDIVS·GEMINVS·SCEPTIVS<BR>
> TRIBVNVS·PLEBIS<BR>
> <BR>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]<BR>

<BR>
</tt>

<br>

<!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->

<table border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2>
<tr bgcolor=#FFFFCC>
<td align=center><font size="-1" color=#003399><b>Yahoo! Groups Sponsor</b></font></td>
</tr>
<tr bgcolor=#FFFFFF>
<td align=center width=470><table border=0 cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0> <tr> <td align=center><font face=arial size=-2>ADVERTISEMENT</font><br><a href="http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=12c6thnjm/M=267637.4116732.5333197.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705313712:HM/EXP=1070911420/A=1853618/R=0/*http://www.netflix.com/Default?mqso=60178338&partid=4116732" alt=""><img src="http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/ne/netflix/yhoo1103_a_300250A.gif" alt="click here" width="300" height="250" border="0"></a></td></tr></table> </td>
</tr>
<tr><td><img alt="" width=1 height=1 src="http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=267637.4116732.5333197.1261774/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1853618/rand=646154681"></td></tr>
</table>

<!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->


<br>
<tt>
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:<BR>
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<BR>
<BR>
</tt>
<br>

<br>
<tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <a href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">Yahoo! Terms of Service</a>.</tt>
</br>

</body></html>

To the Nova Roma members,

Despite living in the other side of the Atlantic, I have known Diana for many years now and I was surprised to hear someone might have anything bad to say about her.

She is one of the most bright, intelligent and active persons I've ever met in decades and I really can only find good things to say about her. Sense of humor and intellence are attributes that cannot easily be found, among Pagans or not.

So please allow me to tell you all that Diana Moravia Aventina is someone who only deserves my respect and admiration, especially for the tremendous amount of work she has done for the Pagan Federation during many years and also for Nova Roma as Tribune this year, for her love and respect for the Gods, and her serious commitment in promoting Paganism.

I do hope all the good words people have to say about her and, more than that, the impression of her great work and personality in all those who have ever met her, will always be considered much more important than any mistaken remark made by strangers.

Sincerely,
Nero
romangods@...

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

-----Original Message-----
From: "Patrick D. Owen" <Patrick.Owen@...>
Sent: Dec 5, 2003 9:06 AM
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: The Dawn of a New Age in Rome?-Let's just do it.

<html><body>

Salve F. Galerius Aurelianus

On the one hand, the good people on the Inc.'s Board have to worry about such things; it IS a 'business' after all, albeit about as non-profit as you can get! ;-)

On the other hand, you're right: Various members get together all the time, whenever they can, and I've never heard of a single one of them wringing their hands over their Homeowner's Insurance! Basic Liability coverage is a fact of life these days, you send your token amount off to Allstate or whoever & get on with having a good time together!
If the Treasury doesn't have it, you pass the hat, or you hold it privately and declare it "unofficial" which is the way it has been to date. It makes sense to guard against the realities of modern life, but only to the point of making up a list of how best to deal with it. Then you deal with it. All the obsessing DOES get a bit tiresome, and accomplishes nothing in and of itself. A simple, rational list of practical considerations is all that we need, then we can shop for insurance, write a check & get on with it!

So let's get on with it and start creating local communities! :-D

Vale
~ Servius Equitius


<tt>
F. Galerius Aurelianus Secundus S.P.D.<BR>
<BR>
Everytime somebody proposes something that will give a little flesh <BR>
and blood to our bare bones micronational Republic, someone will <BR>
step in and mention insurance or law suits or liability.  Come on, <BR>
citizens, let's start having the meetings and get togethers and <BR>
worry about the legal ramifications later.  I respect that the <BR>
Illustrious Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix doesn't want to see all the <BR>
work that he and other have put into NR to go down the drain because <BR>
somebody hit a spectator in the head with a pila.  However, the <BR>
early meetings are most likely just going to be "get-to-know-<BR>
everybody" parties and will not need to be regulated.  Let's just do <BR>
it.  Vale.<BR>
--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Woolwine" <alexious@e...> <BR>
wrote:<BR>

> Avete Omnes,<BR>
> <BR>
> I hope to have the following information clarifed:<BR>
> <BR>
> Are these meetings going to be "sponsored by Nova Roma?"<BR>
> <BR>
> (Please just give a yes or no answer.)<BR>
> <BR>
> If the answer is Yes, is the Propraetor going to purchase <BR>

insurance <BR>

> to cover any potential liabilities?<BR>
> <BR>
> If there is not going to be any purchase of insurance then I <BR>
> certainly hope that these meetings will not be sponsored by Nova <BR>
> Roma; and instead be private meetings/get together.  <BR>
> <BR>
> Vale,<BR>
> <BR>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Shane Evans <BR>

<marcusafricanus@y...> <BR>

> wrote:<BR>
> > <BR>
> > --- Gnaeus Equitius Marinus <gawne@c...> wrote:<BR>
> > As you know from our conversations in the Militarium<BR>
> > > I share your feelings in this Marce.  I hope to be<BR>
> > > able to encourage a significant increase in the<BR>
> > > number of local get-togethers of Nova Romans next<BR>
> > year.<BR>
> > <BR>
> > <BR>
> > I have spoken to several within my provincia about<BR>
> > this very same idea tonight, and with the permission<BR>
> > of our Honorable Propraetor, and the blessings of the<BR>
> > Senate, we plan to establish two such municipalities,<BR>
> > and test out this new format that the Republic has<BR>
> > ushered into law.  We hope to serve as a test model<BR>
> > for its workability, and over the next year, help to<BR>
> > fine tune it if it becomes obvious that is needed.<BR>
> > <BR>
> > M. Scipio Africanus<BR>
> > Tribunus Augusticlavii<BR>
> > <BR>
> > __________________________________<BR>
> > Do you Yahoo!?<BR>
> > Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now<BR>
> > <a href="http://companion.yahoo.com/">http://companion.yahoo.com/</a><BR>

<BR>
</tt>

<br>

<!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->

<table border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2>
<tr bgcolor=#FFFFCC>
<td align=center><font size="-1" color=#003399><b>Yahoo! Groups Sponsor</b></font></td>
</tr>
<tr bgcolor=#FFFFFF>
<td align=center width=470><table border=0 cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0> <tr> <td align=center><font face=arial size=-2>ADVERTISEMENT</font><br><a href="http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=12cnikh1i/M=267637.4116732.5333197.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705313712:HM/EXP=1070730679/A=1853619/R=0/*http://www.netflix.com/Default?mqso=60178356&partid=4116732" alt=""><img src="http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/ne/netflix/yhoo1103_b_300250A.gif" alt="click here" width="300" height="250" border="0"></a></td></tr></table> </td>
</tr>
<tr><td><img alt="" width=1 height=1 src="http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=267637.4116732.5333197.1261774/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1853619/rand=975047250"></td></tr>
</table>

<!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->


<br>
<tt>
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:<BR>
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<BR>
<BR>
</tt>
<br>

<br>
<tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <a href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">Yahoo! Terms of Service</a>.</tt>
</br>

</body></html>

Salve Marinus

You are correct - it was others who took this (possible) inferrence and began speaking of apologies; my apology for seeming to put words in your mouth! (Next time I'll go back to the original source instead basing my Reply on someone else's misquote!)
As for what Flavia Tullia said, I have re-read that as well and must disagree with you. Via some very clever wording, she says more than is at first apparent; so clever there are actually hidden degrees of slander I had missed in the first reading, but that is moot at this point so I won't diagram it out (much as I want to - it's REALLY quite clever! Admirably done, had it been directed at someone other than Diana!)
Anyway, I wish you the best in trying to persuade Flavia Tullia to return to us.
Actually, I intend to try myself, so I hope she will accept messages from me!
Have a good Pearl Harbor Day! If you decide to get bombed, don't drive!

Vale
~ Servius Equitius

-----Original Message-----
From: Gnaeus Equitius Marinus <gawne@...>
Sent: Dec 5, 2003 9:18 AM
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: de delectu consulum

<html><body>


<tt>
Salvete Quirites, et salve Deci Iuni,<BR>
<BR>
Decius Iunius wrote:<BR>
[as part of a reply]<BR>

>>Marinus DID say Flavia Tullia should apologize [...]<BR>
> <BR>
> Did Marinus say that? <BR>

<BR>
Marinus has as yet said no such thing.  Though I suppose<BR>
it's possible it might have been infered.<BR>
<BR>
But assuming I can get Flavia Tullia to even exchange<BR>
e-mail with me about this, let's look at what she wrote<BR>
about Diana so we can decide on exactly what it is you<BR>
and others want an apology for, OK?<BR>
<BR>
I also note from looking at the headers that the message<BR>
was approved by you, Decius Iunius.  Given the offense<BR>
you're taking at Flavia Tullia's words, I'm surprised that<BR>
as Praetor you didn't require her to rephrase the message.<BR>
<BR>

> X-eGroups-Approved-By: deciusiunius <bcatfd@t...> via<BR>
> email; 3 Dec 2003 16:18:23<BR>

<BR>
The entire message may be seen at<BR>
<a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/message/17654">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/message/17654</a><BR>
<BR>
Leaving out the parts where she endorsed Astur, and said<BR>
that she supported me but didn't feel she could endorse<BR>
me since I'd mentioned the possibility of using her as<BR>
an advisor, we get to what she wrote about Diana:<BR>
<BR>

>  Unfortunately, one of the other candidates possesses some of these<BR>
> qualities, but not others, and is not qualified at this time to hold this<BR>
> office. Making too light of this office and spurning the advice of not one,<BR>
> but two, persons more learned in such matters bodes ill for the readiness of<BR>
> this candidate.<BR>

<BR>
Thus far all I see are statements of opinion.  Anything<BR>
above that anyone thinks requires an apoplgy?<BR>
<BR>

> Certain recent matters of decorum are also at issue, for it<BR>
> is by no means appropriate to appear at a reenactment event hosted by one of<BR>
> the most authentic of the reenactment legions in the U.S. attired as a most<BR>
> inauthentic danseuse du ventre,<BR>

<BR>
Unfortunately my expert on middle-eastern dance is<BR>
currently not available, having moved to England with<BR>
her husband for a few years as required by the US Navy.<BR>
But I think the term "danseuse du ventre" is a specific<BR>
term for a beledi dancer (aka belly-dancer) from Morocco.<BR>
I'm not an expert on the various types of beledi costume,<BR>
but I see no reason to doubt Flavia's identification of<BR>
Diana's coin belt and other items of costume that she<BR>
wore at Roman Days as belonging to the "danseuse du ventre"<BR>
fashion of Moroccan dance.  I think that Flavia's use of<BR>
the term "inauthentic" above refers to the inauthenticity<BR>
of the costume for a Roman period display, not the modern<BR>
Moroccan art form.  So I interpret the statement as one<BR>
that Diana's choice of garb was not accurate within the<BR>
context of a reenactment event, which Roman Days is, and<BR>
in which Nova Roma participates as the guest of Legio XX.<BR>
Given that I've never had any compalint from Matt Amt, the<BR>
commander of Legio XX, I must assume that Flavia's objection<BR>
is a personal statement and not the official position of<BR>
the Legion.<BR>
<BR>
Gaius Iulius Scaurus has already spoken about the issue of<BR>
reenactors being respectful of one another's "kit" at events,<BR>
even when there are inaccuracies.  If Flavia is willing to<BR>
discuss the matter with him, I hope he'll be able to explain<BR>
his reasoning, and why he feels her criticism of Diana's garb<BR>
was inappropriate.  I've run into enough "authenticity nazis"<BR>
in the reenactment community to know it's dreary having to<BR>
deal with them, though I don't see Flavia's comments above<BR>
as falling into the extreme "authenticity nazi" category.<BR>
<BR>

> much less to boast about the effect of such<BR>
> garb, nor is it appropriate to solicit a new citizen of the opposite sex to<BR>
> discuss his 'love tool.'<BR>

<BR>
If anyone thinks this bit requires an apology, please<BR>
explain your reasoning and if Flavia reestablishes contact<BR>
with me I will forward the request to her.  I simply see<BR>
it as Flavia's statement of disagreement with Diana's<BR>
choices of behavior.<BR>
<BR>

> This is hardly the path to pudicitia. Neither,<BR>
> for that matter, is rejecting the gentle counsel of the learned Julilla as<BR>
> to proper attire for a candidate, choosing instead the garb of the<BR>
> meretrices.<BR>

<BR>
I note that Flavia does not say that Diana *is* a meretrix<BR>
in this statement, but that she chose the garb of the meretrices.<BR>
Given that Diana chose to appear in a toga, that's a simple<BR>
acknowledgement of truth, if perhaps a bit more blunt than<BR>
it needed to be.  Shall we require an apology from Flavia for<BR>
speaking the truth?  Or is an apology called for on some other<BR>
basis for this statement of hers?<BR>
<BR>

> This candidate's piety of the Kalends is commendable, as are<BR>
> her virtual attire assumed for her vow and her uncharacteristically good<BR>
> (almost perfect) Latin, but, though I have nothing personal against her, I<BR>
> fear that these do not reflect a permanent change of heart or mind.<BR>

<BR>
Shall Flavia apologise for this?  She says that Diana's<BR>
vow of Pietas on the Kalends is commendable, and then goes on<BR>
to say that she fears it doesn't reflect a permanent change of<BR>
heart and mind.  If she had said that she thought Diana was<BR>
deliberately falsifying her vow, then yes, that would be an<BR>
offensive statement requiring apology.  But no, Flavia commends<BR>
Diana's piety and then says that she fears the change in conduct<BR>
doesn't represent a permanent change.  Where is the offense in<BR>
this?<BR>
<BR>
I understand from Iulius Scaurus' private communique to me<BR>
earlier today that some see Flavia's statement here as an<BR>
implication that Diana's vow was given falsely, and had Flavia<BR>
said that then I would agree she had gone over the line and<BR>
ought to apologise.  But given her phrasing I'm more inclined<BR>
to say that those who are infering the insult to Diana owe<BR>
Flavia an apology for twisting her words into something which<BR>
she did not, herself, say.<BR>
<BR>

> Perhaps this candidate is ready for a lesser magistracy,<BR>
> but I doubt ready for the consulship.<BR>

<BR>
Again, a statement of opinion, for which I see no need<BR>
for Flavia to apologise.<BR>
<BR>
My personal take on all of this is that a number of<BR>
people have chosen to take great offense based on scant<BR>
evidence.  They are now demanding that the woman return<BR>
here to abase herself for having dared to state her opinions<BR>
where those opinions don't happen to agree with the opinions<BR>
of the offended parties.<BR>
<BR>
I think I've made my own feelings about Diana's qualifications<BR>
for the Consulship sufficiently clear elsewhere.  I will<BR>
reiterate here that I have no problem with the idea of<BR>
serving with her as Consul, should that occur.  I think she<BR>
has every right to feel that Flavia Tullia doesn't have a<BR>
very high opinion of her, but I'm not clear on the matter of<BR>
what it was that Flavia wrote about Diana that requires an<BR>
apology.<BR>
<BR>
I realize that as a candidate it's quixotic of me to take<BR>
a stand for someone who's probably already resigned her<BR>
citizenship, and whose vote in the last Century would count<BR>
very little in getting me elected.  But as her provincial<BR>
governor, and the person who recruited her into Nova Roma,<BR>
I feel an obligation in this.<BR>
<BR>
-- <BR>
Gnaeus Equitius Marinus<BR>
Candidate for Consul<BR>
<a href="http://www.villaivlilla.com/equitius-for-consul/index.html">http://www.villaivlilla.com/equitius-for-consul/index.html</a><BR>
<BR>
</tt>

<br>

<!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->

<table border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2>
<tr bgcolor=#FFFFCC>
<td align=center><font size="-1" color=#003399><b>Yahoo! Groups Sponsor</b></font></td>
</tr>
<tr bgcolor=#FFFFFF>
<td align=center width=470><table border=0 cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0> <tr> <td align=center><font face=arial size=-2>ADVERTISEMENT</font><br><a href="http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=12cg7i55l/M=267637.4116730.5333196.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705313712:HM/EXP=1070731272/A=1853619/R=0/*http://www.netflix.com/Default?mqso=60178356&partid=4116730" alt=""><img src="http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/ne/netflix/yhoo1103_b_300250A.gif" alt="click here" width="300" height="250" border="0"></a></td></tr></table> </td>
</tr>
<tr><td><img alt="" width=1 height=1 src="http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=267637.4116730.5333196.1261774/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1853619/rand=908955224"></td></tr>
</table>

<!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->


<br>
<tt>
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:<BR>
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<BR>
<BR>
</tt>
<br>

<br>
<tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <a href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">Yahoo! Terms of Service</a>.</tt>
</br>

</body></html>

G. Iulius Scaurus S. P. D.

Salvete, Quirites.

Here's a link to "Roman Maps and the Concept of Indian Gems":

http://www.thebeadsite.com/UNI-MAPS.html

This site provivdes an interesting discusion of Ptolemy's map of India
and the Tabula Peutineriana and their implications for Roman knowledge
of India and the Indian gem trade.

Valete, Quirites.

G. Iulius Scaurus

Ave Omnes!

I haven't written to the lists in a while, but I have
been following events and voting and although it has
been a couple of months, I thought it would probably
be a good idea to inform NR that I changed my name
through the censors' office.

Old: Decimus Antoninius Aquitanius Organbidexka

New: Decimus Antoninius Aquilius

It's good to see NR clicking along in its way and when
I think of how it has changed since I became a citizen
in 2001 I realized that much has changed indeed, and I
feel for the better (in the long run especially)!

Hope you're all doing well (and if not, that you get
better!)

Anyway, up with Nova Roma!

Valete!

=====
Decimus Antoninius Aquilius

______________________________________________________________________
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca

T Labienus Fortunatus Consul Quiritibus SPD

In accord with the recent decretum, I took the auspices myself shortly
efore making this announcement, and I saw nothing which appeared to
indicate that I should delay the election. I have sent a report of what
I heard and saw during the augury to L Equitius, so that he might
determine whether or not I have made an important mistake, and to
declare obnuntiatio if I have.

In the meantime, having sacrificed incense and wine to Iuppiter Optimus
Maximus, I hereby convene the Comitia Centuriata. I pray that Iuppiter
looks kindly upon our endeavor, and that Minerva guides our votes.

In Roma Antiqua, it was customary for the presiding magistrate to
present a speech before convening the comitia for an election, endorsing
those candidates that he preferred. I shall follow the mos maiorum and
continue that tradition now.

For censor, I support my collega, Caeso Fabius Quintilianus. Throughout
this past year, he has been a joy to work with; ever happy to help when
we agreed, willing to compromise when we didn't see eye to eye, and
always cordial. He is entirely qualified to be a censor, and he will be
a boon to any colleague. Beyond that, though it may not appear this way
to his opponents, he has a high regard for the religio and the mos
maiorum. His first question on an issue in contention is almost always,
"How was this done in antiquity?" Please let him continue to serve the
Res Publica by giving him your votes.

For consul, I support Cn Salix wholeheartedly. He is eminently
qualified to be a consul, and he has worked hard for Nova Roma. The
most experienced of the candidates, he is both dedicated to the
restoration of the mos maiorum and quite knowledgable about Roma Antiqua.

As for the second consul, I will be quite pleased regardless of the
outcome. Both of the remaining candidates are pleasant and hardworking
people who care deeply about Nova Roma's success. I probably won't know
which one of them I will pick until I'm actually casting my vote.

That said, I would like to mention my amusement at L Sicinius' assertion
that treating women as equal to men is a reasonable extrapolation from
ancient Roman practice. In antiquity, women were treated by the law in
much the same way that children were treated, and that attitude was a
reflection of the general attitude of Roman society. Indeed, his
endorsement of a woman for consul is as large a departure from adhering
to the mos maiorum as Nova Roma has seen to date. It is hardly the same
as his position that one should only use original parts when
reconstructing a vintage automobile. Once again, I point out that both
the self-styled Boni and the so-called 'liberals' are willing to
compromise to modernity. It is only the areas in which they are most
willing to do this that distinguishes them.

Moving on to the race for praetor, I cannot recommend Cn Octavius
Noricus more highly. He has done an incredible job as my quaestor this
year. At every turn, I have been impressed by his good attitude,
attention to detail, and work ethic. He has been no end of help to me
throughout the year. Additionally, he has never failed to be polite,
affable, and insightful. In short, he has all of the qualities I could
hope for in a praetor, and I urge you to cast your votes for him.

I also support M Arminius Maior. He is an active and motivated citizen
with a solid understanding of both Roman and Nova Roman law. His
activities as a senator, propraetor, and tribunus plebis have proven
this, and I recommend that you give him your votes as well.

I am also presenting four constitutional amendments to the comitia
during this vote. I have included my reasons for promulgating each with
its text below.

Having given my endorsements, it's time to move on to selecting the
centuria praerogativa by lots. While Lex Fabia de Ratione Comitiorum
Centuriatorum places the responsibility for determining the centuria
praerogativa in the hands of the rogatores, I have followed the mos
maiorum by casting the lots myself. I ask the rogatores to accept the
centuria that I've selected as the centuria praerogativa. I hereby
swear that I have obeyed the prescriptions stated in Lex Fabia (only
centuriae of the 1st Class with more than 1 member) when casting the
lots, and that I've made the selection at random.

If the rogatores consent, the centuria praerogativa shall be Centuria IV.

The schedule for the contio and vote is as follows:
8 Dec (dies comitialis) - contio begins at 0730 in Rome
9 Dec (dies comitiales)
10 Dec (dies comitiales)
11 Dec (nefastus publicus)
12 Dec (endotercisus) - voting begins at 1801 in Rome
13 Dec (nefastus publicus)
14 Dec (dies fastus)
15 Dec (nefastus publicus)
16 Dec (dies comitiales)
17 Dec (nefastus publicus)
18 Dec (dies comitiales)
19 Dec (nefastus publicus)
20 Dec (dies comitiales)
21 Dec (nefastus publicus)
22 Dec (dies comitialis) - voting ends at 1801 in Rome

The agenda is as follows:

*** I. The election of a censor to serve the next two years. The
candidates are:
Caeso Fabius Quintilianus (civis since 26 Aug 2000)
Quintus Fabius Maximus (civis since 01 Aug 1998)

*** I. The election of the consules for next year. The candidates are:
Diana Moravia Aventina (civis since 25 Sep 1999)
Gnaeus Equitius Marinus (civis since 23 May 2001)
Gnaeus Salix Astur (civis since 13 Apr 2001)

*** II. The election of the praetores for next year. The candidates are:
Decimus Iunius Silanus (civis since 04 Jul 2001)
Gnaeus Octavius Noricus (civis since 25 Nov 2000)
Marcus Arminius Maior (civis since 24 Jul 2000)

*** III. Lex Labiena de Iure Civium

The so-called sovereignty clause has been the source of a reasonable
amount of trouble in Nova Roma. The word 'sovereign' implies a degree
of legal importance not intended by the Constitution's author.
Therefore, it is desirable to change the wording of this article,
explicitly defining it as a right to privacy and security in one's home
and property, as well as a ban on the proscriptions that occurred in the
late Republic.

BEGIN LEX

Lex Labiena de Iure Civium

Article II.B.6 of the Constitution of Nova Roma is hereby amended to read:

The right to privacy; security in one's home, person, and property; and
authority over one's home, person, and property. Homes may not be
searched, persons may not be detained, and property may not be seized,
except by judicial ruling or by a special provision of law;

END LEX

*** IV. Lex Labiena de Gentibus

The Constitution mandates a form of gens which is decidedly contrary to
the mos maiorum; placing a paterfamilias in charge of all of the
familiae within a given gens, making all of the familiae of a given gens
belong to the same order, etc. Therefore, it is desirable to change the
articles of the Constitution that force the Res Publica to perpetuate
these unhistorical practices. This lex is intended as a gentle first
step in that direction. It does not force anyone to change the way they
are doing things now, but it recognizes and opens the door to historical
practices.

BEGIN LEX

Lex Labiena de Gentibus

I. Article II.C.1 of the Constitution of Nova Roma is hereby amended
to read:

Ordo Patricius (patrician order)
a. The Ordo Patricius shall consist of a minium of 30 families.
b. Should there be less than 30 patrician families the Senate shall
have the power to nominate a plebeian
family to the Comitia Curiata for elevation to patrician status.
c. The Senate shall have the power to nominate additional families to
the Comitia Curiata for elevation to patrician status if this elevation
does not cause the Ordo Patricius to exceed 5% of the population of Nova
Roma.
d. A patrician family may allow its members to form new patrician
families.

II. At the time of adoption of this amendment the family of the
paterfamilis of a gens recognized as patrician shall be recognized as a
Patrician Family.

III. Article II.D of the Constitution of Nova Roma is hereby amended
to read:

Gentes and Families. Families being the backbone of Roman society, the
prerogatives and responsibilities of the family are of primary
importance to Nova Roma. Except where specifically dealt with in this
constitution and the law, each family shall have the right to determine
its own course of action, and parents shall have the undisputed right
and responsibility to see to the education and raising of their children.
1. Each gens shall be registered with the censors, who will maintain
records of gens membership and other relevant information.
2. No two gentes may have the same nomen. The censors shall be
responsible for ensuring this rule is observed.
3. Each gens shall consist of a minimum of one family.
4. No two families within a gens may have the same cognomen (surname)
unless they are differentiated by
an agnomen. The censors shall be responsible for ensuring this rule is
observed.
5. Each family shall, through whatever means it may determine
appropriate, have a paterfamilias (fem. materfamilias) who shall act as
the leader of the family and speak for it when necessary. The holder of
this position must be registered as such with the censors. The
paterfamilias may, at his or her discretion, expel members of their
family, accept new members into it by adoption, or allow members who are
not impuberes to form new families belonging to the same order as the
paterfamilis.
a. The paterfamilias may, at his discretion, exercise the rights
ennumerated in paragraph II.B. of this Constitution on behalf of
impuberes in their gens, with the exception of the right to vote
(paragraph II.B.3.) and the right to join the Ordo Equester (paragraph
II.B.8.).
b. No impuberes may become paterfamilias of a gens.

IV. Article III.A of the Constitution of Nova Roma is hereby amended
to include the following three new subsections:

3. To approve or reject the elevation of a plebeian family to the
Ordo Patricius;
4. To approve or reject an adoption that elevates a plebeian to the
Ordo Patricius or lowers a patrician
to the Ordo Plebeius;
5. To approve or reject an application from a patrician who wishes
to renounce his status and become a member of the plebeian order.

V. All current citizens shall be grandfathered into the familia of
their preference. These citizens shall retain the right to change
familia for one year after the adoption of this amendment. This right
shall not be used to force a paterfamilias to accept a citizen that he
does not want into his familia.

END LEX

*** V. Lex Fabia Labiena de Iure Augurum

Currently, the Constitution forces us to retain augures in the Collegium
Augurum for their natural lives, without exception. Therefore, the
collegium is currently composed of one active augur and four former
cives who are no longer acing in any way as augures for Nova Roma. It
is therefore desirable to make it possible for these inactive people to
be removed from the collegium.

BEGIN LEX

Lex Fabia Labiena de Iure Augurum

Article VI.B.2 of the Constitution of Nova Roma is hereby amended to read:

The collegium augurum (college of augurs) shall be the second-highest
ranked of the priestly collegia. The eldest member of the collegium
shall be the magister collegii. The collegium augurm shall consist of
nine augurs, five from the plebeian order and four from the patrician
order. They shall be appointed by the collegium pontificum, and shall
hold their offices for life, excepting in cases of resignation of
office, resignation of citizenship, or loss of assiduus citizenship by
process of law. Resignation of office or citizenship by an augur must
be made in writing to the pontifex maximus and the magister collegii;
the pontifex maximus and magister collegii shall be informed in writing
of any process of law by which such an augur has lost citizenship.
Augurs who have resigned their office, resigned their citizenship, or
have lost their citizenship by process of law shall remain sacer in
their persons but may exercise no augural powers or functions, nor shall
they be accounted members of the collegium augurum.

END LEX

*** VI. Lex Labiena de Obnuntiatione

This constitutional amendment seeks to correct a Latin error in our
leges. Nuntiatio was a pronouncement of either neutral or favorable
auspices. The proper term for a pronouncement of an inauspicious augury
is obnuntiatio. Therefore, it is desirable to emend our Constitution
and other leges to correct this error.

BEGIN LEX

Lex Labiena de Obnuntiatione

I. Article VI.B.2.b.ii of the Constitution of Nova Roma is hereby
amended to read:

To declare obnuntiatio (a declaration that unfavorable and unsolicited
omens have been observed that justify a delay of a meeting of one of the
comitia or the Senate).

II. Any mention of nuntiatio throughout Nova Roma's official
documents, including leges, decreta, senatus consulta, edicta, etc.,
that have been enacted to date shall be assumed to refer to obnuntiatio.
These official documents shall be emended to change nuntiatio to
obnuntiatio by the curator araneum and his or her staff at the earliest
reasonable opportunity.

END LEX

Valete

T Labienus Fortunatus Consul Quiritibus SPD

In accord with the recent decretum, I took the auspices myself shortly
before making this announcement, and I saw nothing which appeared to
indicate that I should delay the election. I have sent a report of what
I heard and saw during the augury to L Equitius, so that he might
determine whether or not I have made an important mistake, and to
declare obnuntiatio if I have.

In the meantime, having sacrificed incense and wine to Iuppiter Optimus
Maximus, I hereby convene the Comitia Populi Tributa. I pray that
Iuppiter looks kindly upon our endeavor, and that Minerva guides our votes.

In Roma Antiqua, it was customary for the presiding magistrate to
present a speech before convening the comitia for an election, endorsing
those candidates that he preferred. I shall follow the mos maiorum and
continue that tradition now.

There are only seven candidates for the eight quaestor positions,
meaning that all of the candidates will almost certainly be elected.
Still, two of the candidates stand out for me. The first, of course, is
my gentilis, Servius Labienus Cicero. He has been a civis Novoromanus
for nearly a year and a half, has degrees in political science and
history, and is pursuing a degree in public management. He's
practically tailor-made for a quaestorship, and my dealings with him
have left me with no doubt that he will perform his duties well.

The other is Caius Curius Saturninus. His activities in the Academia
Thules, as well as his service on my collega's behalf in Thule
Provincia, have proven that he is an excellent man. I have no doubt
that he will be a valuable aid to whatever magistratus is lucky enough
to have him as a quaestor.

Again, the race for aedilis curulis is not going to be an exciting one.
However, I feel compelled to briefly mention my admiration and warm
feelings for C Iulius Scaurus. His erudition is matched by his pietas,
comitas, and humanitas. I expect that he will add industria to the long
list of virtues he displays in the coming year. Nova Roma could use a
few more like him.

Moving on, I could sing Marcus Octavius' praises for quite some time;
there are only two or three people who can claim to have donated as much
time and effort into Nova Roma as he has. As he is unopposed, however,
I will simply mention that I am extremely pleased to see him running for
curator araneum again.

Finally, I'd like to endorse Marcus Minucius Audens for curator
differum. He and I joined Nova Roma at roughly the same time. Since
then, through our various agreements and disagreements, I have grown to
respect him quite highly for his unflinching honesty, strong moral
compass, and dedication to duty. We have had good fortune with Tiberius
Galerius as our curator differum. Allow that good fortune to continue
by electing Marcus Minucius.

I am also presenting a lex to the comitia during this vote. I have
included my reason for promulgating it with its text below.

I have cast the lots, and the presidium shall be Claudia.

The schedule for the contio and vote is as follows:
8 Dec (dies comitialis) - contio begins at 0730 in Rome
9 Dec (dies comitiales)
10 Dec (dies comitiales)
11 Dec (nefastus publicus)
12 Dec (endotercisus) - voting begins at 1801 in Rome
13 Dec (nefastus publicus)
14 Dec (dies fastus)
15 Dec (nefastus publicus)
16 Dec (dies comitiales)
17 Dec (nefastus publicus)
18 Dec (dies comitiales)
19 Dec (nefastus publicus)
20 Dec (dies comitiales)
21 Dec (nefastus publicus)
22 Dec (dies comitialis) - voting ends at 1801 in Rome

The agenda is as follows:

*** I. The election of eight quaestores. The candidates are:
Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia (civis since 29 Oct 2002)
Caius Curius Saturninus (civis since 22 Mar 2001)
Gaia Fabia Livia (civis since 18 Dec 2001)
Gaius Vipsanius Agrippa (civis since 30 Nov 2000)
Livia Cornelia Hibernia (civis since 30 Jan 2003)
Marcus Bianchius Antonius (civis since 19 May 1999)
Servius Labienus Cicero (civis since 19 Aug 2002)

*** II. The election of two aediles curules. The candidates are:
Gaius Iulius Scaurus (civis since 22 Mar 2003)
Marcus Iulius Perusianus (civis since 11 Jan 2002)

*** III. The election of four rogatores. The candidates are:
Aulus Apollonius Cordus (civis since 24 Nov 2002)
Flavius Galerius Aurelianus Secundus (civis since 20 Oct 2001)
Gaius Minucius Hadrianus (civis since 06 Nov 2000)

*** IV. The election of one curator araneum. The candidate is:
Marcus Octavius Germanicus (civis since 01 Mar 1998)

*** V. The election of one curator differum. The candidates are:
Gaius Minius Messala Bellator (civis since 24 Dec 2002)
Marcus Minucius Audens (civis since 01 Jul 1998)

*** VI. Lex Labiena de Nominibus Mutandis

Section IV.4 of Lex Cornelia et Maria de Mutandis Nominibus involves the
Res Publica in needlessly examining the private medical records of a
small subset of our population. It is therefore discriminatory and
grossly unwise, given the privacy laws of a number of the macronations
in which our cives reside. A government--especially the government of a
small non-profit organization--should not have the authority to look
inside its citizens' pants unless it is absolutely necessary to do so.
Therefore, it is desirable to remove section IV.4 of Lex Cornelia et
Maria de Mutandis Nominibus.

BEGIN LEX

Lex Labiena de Nominibus Mutandis

I. Section IV.4 of Lex Cornelia et Maria de Mutandis Nominibus is
hereby amended to read:

The gender of the name is to be consistent; each part is to agree with
all others in gender.

II. All subsections under section IV.4 of Lex Cornelia et Maria de
Mutandis Nominibus are hereby repealed.

END LEX

Valete

Diana Moravia Aventina Tribunus Plebis Quiritibus SPD

Salvete Plebeian citizens!

The Comitia Plebis Tributa is hereby convened to elect next year's Plebeian magistates!

The schedule for the contio and vote is as follows:

8 Dec (dies comitialis) - contio begins at 0730 in Rome
9 Dec (dies comitiales)
10 Dec (dies comitiales)
11 Dec (nefastus publicus)
12 Dec (endotercisus) - voting begins at 1801 in Rome
13 Dec (nefastus publicus)
14 Dec (dies fastus)
15 Dec (nefastus publicus)
16 Dec (dies comitiales)
17 Dec (nefastus publicus)
18 Dec (dies comitiales)
19 Dec (nefastus publicus)
20 Dec (dies comitiales)
21 Dec (nefastus publicus)
22 Dec (dies comitialis) - voting ends at 1801 in Rome

The following citizens shall be elected by the Comitia Plebis Tributa:

Tribunus Plebis; 5 open positions with 7 Candidates:

Lucius Quintius Constantius
Gaius Modius Athanasius
Julilla Sempronia Magna
Franciscus Apulus Caesar
Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
L. Sicinius Drusus
Lucius Arminius Faustus

2 positions Open, 3 candidates:

Marcus Calidius Gracchus
Secundus Avisius Apollinarius
Emilia Curia

May the Gods guide yopu in your choice!
Valete,
Diana Moravia Aventina
Tribunus Plebis 2756

Fortunatus wrote:

>
> That said, I would like to mention my amusement at L Sicinius' assertion
> that treating women as equal to men is a reasonable extrapolation from
> ancient Roman practice. In antiquity, women were treated by the law in
> much the same way that children were treated, and that attitude was a
> reflection of the general attitude of Roman society. Indeed, his
> endorsement of a woman for consul is as large a departure from adhering
> to the mos maiorum as Nova Roma has seen to date. It is hardly the same
> as his position that one should only use original parts when
> reconstructing a vintage automobile. Once again, I point out that both
> the self-styled Boni and the so-called 'liberals' are willing to
> compromise to modernity. It is only the areas in which they are most
> willing to do this that distinguishes them.

The Boni position has never been total opposition to modernity, just
that we should try traditional ways if there is a chance they will work,
and if they don't then move on to modern ideas. I see ZERO chance that
the traditional position of women would work out.

L. Sicinius Drusus

In a message dated 12/7/03 9:31:15 PM Pacific Standard Time,
labienus@... writes:

> Lex Labiena de Iure Civium
>
> IV. Lex Labiena de Gentibus
>
> Lex Labiena de Gentibus
>

Consul, why are you doing an end run around the Senate? We Senators know
nothing about ANY of these proposed leges. You are ignoring the most important
part of our checks and balances. I see great harm in several of these leges,
that at this time should not enacted until all ramifications are studied. By
ignoring the Senate's advice, nay not even requesting, you are over reaching
your position by trying to make the Senate irrelevant.

I trust the people see through the charade you are trying to pull here, and
vote all your leges down. Let the Senate can thoroughly study them, before any
voting is done. Or are you saying you do not need the Senate's advice?

Q. Fabius Maximus.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

M. CALIDIVS GRACCHVS SENATORI Q. FABIO MAXIMO S.P.D.

AVE,

We are all sincerely grateful to you MAXIMVS for letting the Roman
people know of this news. I know I speak for all CIVES from HIBERNIA
and throughoutout the RES PVBLICA when I say that our thoughts and
prayers are with SVLLA at this worrying time.

Perhaps, honourable SENATOR you would be good , if it not too much of
an imposition and you can spare the time, to let us know of his
progress?

May great IVPPITER watch over him and guide him safely through this.


VALE

M. CALIDIVS GRACCHVS
PROPRAETOR PROVINIAE HIBERNIAE

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, QFabiusMaxmi@a... wrote:
> Nova Romans!
> I come to you with a request!
>
> Our own L. Cornelius Sulla, Paterfamilias of the Corneli, and great
statesman
>
> has fallen gravely ill. It has been decided by his physicians that
surgery
> will
> be needed to correct the problem.
> All surgery is life threatening, and we could lose him.
> Those who do not know of L. Cornelius Sulla, he is one of the most
tireless
> workers
> in the Rome. He was one of its first members and completed the
Cursus
> Honorum in
> four years! He has done much for Nova Roma.
> I request all the people here in Roma to pray for the health of
Cornelius
> Sulla. If not to
> Aesculapius, then to the deity of your choice. We are a community,
let this
> community pray for one of its own.
> I express my thanks in advance.
>
> Valete
> Q, Fabius Maximus
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]