Salve,
There is a new site for Nova Romans. The focus is for New Citizens,
But those that wish to help them are encouraged to Join.
the link is as follows.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/newroman/
Please feel free to join. It is for all who wish to interact in a
Roman Virtues enviroment. This site is not very tolerant of Flames
and Abuse.
But We are open to all faiths, Christian, Greek, Jewish and of cource
My own Religio. The Main issue is if You wish to Support and to Serve
Nova Roma.
Vale,
Lucius Martianus Paullus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "A. Apollonius Cordus"
<a_apollonius_cordus@y...> wrote:

> I get the feeling you would quite like to rid gid of
> the rules all together, but if so then I urge you to
> reconsider that view, because it is fundamentally
> inimical to the whole Nova Roma project. The religio
> publica needs a res publica, and a res publica must
> have rules and justice. Cicero made justice the
> defining characteristic of the res publica. If Nova
> Roma should fail to offer justice to its members, it
> would not be a res publica; and if its members should
> undermine the system of justice by ignoring it and
> trying to circumvent it, they would be undermining the
> res publica and the religio publica.
>
> No religio publica without res publica; no res publica
> without justice; no justice without a system of
> justice; no system of justice without respect for the
> system of justice; no respect for the system of
> justice without accepting its authority to settle
> disputes between citizens. I beg you to stop
> encouraging citizens to reject the authority of the
> judicial system if you wish to preserve the religio.
>

You write as if the Res Publica and the Religio Publica were two
seperate things.

Res Publica dosen't mean Republic or Government, it means the things
that are public. The Government, the Public Religion, and the Public
Customs in the Mos Maiorum are all parts of the Res Publica, the
Public Sphere, and they are a seamless whole with no clear dividing
line between them.

There is a wide varity of governmental types that were part of the Res
Publica over the years, Kingdom, Republic, Principate, and Dominate.
It can include the government of a small village founded by king
Romulus, a minor city state under Etruscan domination, the most
powerful city in Italy, and a City that rules a great Empire.

One thing that the term Res Publica never covered was a Modern Nation
State with a lose connection to the Religio and a disdain for the Mos
Maiorum, but that is pretty much what Misunderstandings and Modern
Attitudes have created a simulation of in Nova Roma.

L. Sicinius Drusus

Salve,
I follow the Religio. Yes, in a way I am bigioted. My way is the
right way. but that goes for every thing I do..... I am to be married
this Feb. to a Roman Catholic...... Religio is a accepting thing, We
beleive that You can follow what You want. there is room for all at
the table.
Those that did the 7 day adventist thing are not true followers of
the Religio. THEY ARE SCUM. Take it From ME a Child of MARS.
To those who complain that the Religio comes first here in Nova Roma,
I agree, But remember that if you harm a good Nova Roman that follows
another religion You harm us all.
Lucius Martainus Paullus

G. Equitius Cato L. Sicinio Druso S.D.

salve, Sicinius Drusus.

> Res Publica dosen't mean Republic or Government, it means the things
> that are public. The Government, the Public Religion, and the Public
> Customs in the Mos Maiorum are all parts of the Res Publica, the
> Public Sphere, and they are a seamless whole with no clear dividing
> line between them.
>
> There is a wide varity of governmental types that were part of the
>Res Publica over the years, Kingdom, Republic, Principate, and
>Dominate. It can include the government of a small village founded
>by king Romulus, a minor city state under Etruscan domination, the
>most powerful city in Italy, and a City that rules a great Empire.
> One thing that the term Res Publica never covered was a Modern
>Nation State with a lose connection to the Religio and a disdain for
>the Mos Maiorum, but that is pretty much what Misunderstandings and
>Modern Attitudes have created a simulation of in Nova Roma.

CATO: Sicinius Drusus, by your very own definition you show how
important it is that we obey the laws set down in Nova Roma,
because "the Government, the Public Religion, and the Public
Customs...are a seamless whole". If you belittle or suppress one,
you are affecting them all. To ignore the government simply because
you do not like it is your right; that does not make you free,
however, to break its laws or act in any way contrary to them --- you
are still bound by them as a citizen of Nova Roma. If the government
collapses, then you no longer have a Religio Publica. You could
still practice privately to your heart's content, but there would be
no State for the Religio to be the State Religio of. There would be
no Mos Maiorum because there would be no framework within which to
practice it publicly.

Also, I must take issue with your definition of Nova Roma as a "legal
fiction".

A corporation such as Nova Roma is a group of individuals organized
in a specific legal form, just like a society is nothing more then a
sum of individuals organized in a specific form, or a marriage is a
group of individuals (a man and a woman) organized in a specific
form. A marriage may have a legal framework behind it: this does not
make it fictional. The same applies to the concept "society". The
same goes for a corporation where real individuals organize together
under a "fictional" name. The idea that they are government-
created "fictional" entities (as opposed to the application of
individual rights to an agreement between a group of individuals who
decide to do business as a single entity)is severely flawed, and is
no longer generally accepted; as typically used the claim that a
corporation is a "legal fiction" is itself a fiction. As the term is
conventionally used, it is construed to mean that the owners and
managers of a corporation become rightless serfs once they have
assumed corporate status. This idea is contrary to U.S. law, and has
been rejected by U.S. courts on both the state and federal level for
many years.



vale,

Cato

Salvete,

Today is 19th July, nefasti, the day of the Sack of Rome by the gauls.

Valete,
L. Arminius Faustus TRP



---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail agora ainda melhor: 100MB, anti-spam e antivírus grátis!

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

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "gaiusequitiuscato" <mlcinnyc@y...>
wrote:

> G. Equitius Cato L. Sicinio Druso S.D.
>
> salve, Sicinius Drusus.
>
> > Res Publica dosen't mean Republic or Government, it means the things
> > that are public. The Government, the Public Religion, and the Public
> > Customs in the Mos Maiorum are all parts of the Res Publica, the
> > Public Sphere, and they are a seamless whole with no clear dividing
> > line between them.
> >
> > There is a wide varity of governmental types that were part of the
> >Res Publica over the years, Kingdom, Republic, Principate, and
> >Dominate. It can include the government of a small village founded
> >by king Romulus, a minor city state under Etruscan domination, the
> >most powerful city in Italy, and a City that rules a great Empire.
> > One thing that the term Res Publica never covered was a Modern
> >Nation State with a lose connection to the Religio and a disdain for
> >the Mos Maiorum, but that is pretty much what Misunderstandings and
> >Modern Attitudes have created a simulation of in Nova Roma.
>
> CATO: Sicinius Drusus, by your very own definition you show how
> important it is that we obey the laws set down in Nova Roma,
> because "the Government, the Public Religion, and the Public
> Customs...are a seamless whole". If you belittle or suppress one,
> you are affecting them all. To ignore the government simply because
> you do not like it is your right; that does not make you free,
> however, to break its laws or act in any way contrary to them --- you
> are still bound by them as a citizen of Nova Roma. If the government
> collapses, then you no longer have a Religio Publica. You could
> still practice privately to your heart's content, but there would be
> no State for the Religio to be the State Religio of. There would be
> no Mos Maiorum because there would be no framework within which to
> practice it publicly.
>
> Also, I must take issue with your definition of Nova Roma as a "legal
> fiction".
>
> A corporation such as Nova Roma is a group of individuals organized
> in a specific legal form, just like a society is nothing more then a
> sum of individuals organized in a specific form, or a marriage is a
> group of individuals (a man and a woman) organized in a specific
> form. A marriage may have a legal framework behind it: this does not
> make it fictional. The same applies to the concept "society". The
> same goes for a corporation where real individuals organize together
> under a "fictional" name. The idea that they are government-
> created "fictional" entities (as opposed to the application of
> individual rights to an agreement between a group of individuals who
> decide to do business as a single entity)is severely flawed, and is
> no longer generally accepted; as typically used the claim that a
> corporation is a "legal fiction" is itself a fiction. As the term is
> conventionally used, it is construed to mean that the owners and
> managers of a corporation become rightless serfs once they have
> assumed corporate status. This idea is contrary to U.S. law, and has
> been rejected by U.S. courts on both the state and federal level for
> many years.
>

I'm not using the term "legal Fiction" in the broad sense that some
Left wingers use it, but in a narrow legal sense, something that does
not exist in nature, but is created to sastify a point of law.

Calling Nova Roma a nation and it's organizational structure a
government is Legal Fiction and refering to it as such is a kindness,
because it is neither a nation nor a government of a nation under any
reasonable definitions of the words.

Legal Fictions can be convienant in cases like Nova Roma, but
mistaking it for anything other than what it is will quickly destroy it.

L. Sicinius Drusus

Salvete Senator Druse et omnes,

I was not going to comment further on the current thread that, as
usual, sees a divide that involves more personal stances than logical
reasoning.
I have become concerned however at the apparent lack of respect to
our common rules expressed by Senator Drusus. As he clearly stated,
supported in that by illustrious Senator et Censor Cornelius Sulla,
Nova Roma is indeed a voluntary organisation that any member can
leave at will. But as a voluntary organisation we do not coerce
anybody to join either ! As such, voluntary membership implies a
voluntary acceptance to live by the rules of the community,
regardless of the fact that we agree with them in form or content :
If that was the case we wouldn't have sent the application form in
the first place!
I do not know of any group that does not operate with internal rules
(let's call them leges). We have agreed on the method upon which such
leges should be drafted and accepted : whether we agree among us
whether or not there are too many leges, or whether or not they are
relevant or necessary is besides the point. These leges have been
voted by our membership and have inherent force of law WITHIN Nova
Roma : they give us the power WITHIN our community to impose
restriction of membership on any citizen that does not abide by OUR
rules.

Now we can talk all we want about the low turn out and that any law
or magistrate chosen in these circumstances does not represent the
will of the majority. I recognise here one of Senator Drusus'
favourite red herring : I am afraid Senator, to paraphrase a great
man, democracy is not perfect but it is the best option we've got.
Beside, those who do not vote know that they forfeit their right to
complain or comment on the legislation they couldn't be bothered to
defend or criticize before the voting.

That said, I am worried that a senior member of our community, a
Senator, has so little faith in our institutions that he repeatedly
calls from external interference before any litigious matter may be
resolved internally. I cannot help but wonder, Senator, if you trust
the system that sets the rules by which we live together in Nova Roma
so little, then why do you still want to be part of it ?
I do not deny you the right to express yourself but if you cannot
reconcile your personal convictions with the way our small society
works then I see no alternative than to request that you stepped down
from your position of Senator. You can shout all you like as a
privatus. As a senator and leading member of our community, a member
of the board of director, it seems to me that you should adopt a
public position that supports the hand that feeds you. Remember that
you are only a senator because the State needs and allows it. If you
undermine the State you undermine your position and you might as well
just go bak to ploughing your fields : if a crisis arises we will
call youÂ…

Optime Valete

C Moravius Laureatus Armoricus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gaius Moravius Laureatus Armoricus"
<serenusnova@a...> wrote:

> I see no alternative than to request that you stepped down
> from your position of Senator.

DRUSUS: NO, I will not step down.

> You can shout all you like as a
> privatus. As a senator and leading member of our community, a member
> of the board of director, it seems to me that you should adopt a
> public position that supports the hand that feeds you. Remember that
> you are only a senator because the State needs and allows it.

DRUSUS: Is that a threat?

I Have done no more than openly state the reality of the situition we
are in. Anyone who has been a citizen longer than 3 years should be
aware of the the results of the Gender Name edict and law. That was
another case of a good intention turned into a bad law, one that
resulted in conflicts that tore Nova Roma apart, in grudges that still
poison Nova Roma years later, in mass resignations, in the creation of
a rival Roman organization.

That law started with a good intention. The Civil code started with a
good intention. Intentions aren't enough. An old Xtian saying, "The
Road to Hell is paved with Good Intentions" applies in both cases.

Nova Roma is a voulantary organization, and if the minority who want
to reenact government don't wise up to that fact, then it's just a
mater of time until the remainder of the citizens wander away. Telling
you that fact isn't the threat to Nova Roma, those who refuse to
accept it are the threat.

This Obsessive need that some of you have to order people around, to
enforce your will on others is dangrous to any voulantary
organization, and if you continue with this law mania all that is
going to be left in Nova Roma is a handful of political junkies. You
are going to chase off the people who are only intrested in the
Religio or the Legions along with anyone else who dosen't want to play
some endless political game.

L. Sicinius Drusus

Salve honourable Senator Druse,

Thank you for your prompt reply. Since I am at work and that my boss
is not looking I shall take a few minutes to anwer the concerns you
have expressed.

I said earlier : I see no alternative than to request that you
stepped down

> from your position of Senator.

DRUSUS: NO, I will not step down.

Let me reply : Somehow I didn't expect you would 

Again I said earlier : > You can shout all you like as a

> privatus. As a senator and leading member of our community, a member
> of the board of director, it seems to me that you should adopt a
> public position that supports the hand that feeds you. Remember that
> you are only a senator because the State needs and allows it.

DRUSUS: "Is that a threat?"

Laureatus : It is not a threat senator, it is a fact. You are a
senator because the state needs and allows it. Nothing more, nothing
less. Besides, how could I threaten you ? With my virtual Gladius ?
With my imaginary club ? And for what purpose ? I am not a violent
man as you know very well : I would be very grateful if you could
refrain from such strong language when replying a legitimate concern.

Drusus : "I Have done no more than openly state the reality of the
situition we
are in. Anyone who has been a citizen longer than 3 years should be
aware of the the results of the Gender Name edict and law. That was
another case of a good intention turned into a bad law, one that
resulted in conflicts that tore Nova Roma apart, in grudges that still
poison Nova Roma years later, in mass resignations, in the creation of
a rival Roman organization."

Laureatus : Yes, I remember. And the way we interpret the effect of
that event still remain subject to personal inclinations : The way
you see it is just that, a way to see it and not necessarily the
whole truth.
I would also respectfully point out that the Societas Via Romana, the
organization you refer to, is by no mean a rival one. They just go on
a different path to share their passion and, actually, I don't think
they care much about usÂ…

Drusus : "That law started with a good intention. The Civil code
started with a
good intention. Intentions aren't enough. An old Xtian saying, "The
Road to Hell is paved with Good Intentions" applies in both cases."

Laureatus : once again you are colouring facts with your own
judgement. I shall not comment on that particular point again. If
anybody is remotely interested in digging the past, he/she can always
read the archives.

Drusus : "Nova Roma is a voulantary organization, "

Laureatus : Good, we agree on something !

Drusus : "and if the minority who want
to reenact government don't wise up to that fact, then it's just a
mater of time until the remainder of the citizens wander away. Telling
you that fact isn't the threat to Nova Roma, those who refuse to
accept it are the threat."

Laureatus : Again I don't recall expressing any threat. I just said
that as a senior member of our community you ought to abide, if not
agree, by our rules. If you had quoted my earlier post in its
entirety that message would have been clear to all. Unfortunately you
have fallen again into the temptation of editing my post so that you
can twist its original meaning. Never mind, I didn't expect anything
elseÂ…I'll just leave the readers to decide for themselves. You will
notice that I do endeavour to reproduce your post in its entirety so
as to keep it in context.

Drusus : "This Obsessive need that some of you have to order people
around, to
enforce your will on others is dangrous to any voulantary
organization, and if you continue with this law mania all that is
going to be left in Nova Roma is a handful of political junkies."

Laureatus : Some of us ? Ordering people around ? Well, it seems
delusion is really the ill of our times. As you said time and again
we are a voluntary organization. I chose freely to be part of Nova
Roma just as everybody else. I accept the rules that govern it and so
far I haven't been involved in drafting any, let alone forcing people
to do anything against their will. If you understand laws and
policies as tyrannical means to maintain order then I can understand
where our disagreement lies. I see laws and policies as a guarantee
for civility and liberties. They regulate our lives in the macro
world and I think they should also provide a necessary framework in
Nova Roma : No coercion here, just a philosophical comment.

Drusus : "You are going to chase off the people who are only
intrested in the
Religio or the Legions along with anyone else who dosen't want to play
some endless political game."

Laureatus : Actually, since I have been around a bit here, I can tell
you that the people I know and who resigned did so because of the
uncivility of the ML and the apparent bullying organized by some well
known members of our community. Adherence to and enforcement of our
laws would have prevented these losses.

Respectfully Yours

Optime Vale

C. Moravius Laureatus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gaius Moravius Laureatus Armoricus"
<serenusnova@a...> wrote:

> Laureatus : Actually, since I have been around a bit here, I can tell
> you that the people I know and who resigned did so because of the
> uncivility of the ML and the apparent bullying organized by some well
> known members of our community. Adherence to and enforcement of our
> laws would have prevented these losses.
>

Uncivility? I was opposed to the law, and the biggest problem I had in
trying to get people to vote against it was ill feelings stirred up by
opponants of the law. Rash accusations like "Nazi" and "Homophobic",
and words like "Oligarch" were hardly civil.

Both sides were struck with madness in that unfortunate episode, but I
found many people who agreed with me that it shouldn't be passed to be
far more uncivil than any of the people who supported it, and the
worst ones were those who resigned to form the SVR.

L. Sicinius Drusus

I, Albertus Minius Abrahaeus Vaticinator (Christian De Sande) swear
to uphold and defend the Religio Romana as the State Religion of
Nova Roma and swear never to act in a way that would threaten its
status as the State Religion.

I, Albertus Minius Abrahaeus Vaticinator (Christian De Sande) swear
to protect and defend the Constitution of Nova Roma.

I, Albertus Minius Abrahaeus Vaticinator (Christian De Sande)
further swear to fulfill the obligations and responsibilities of the
office of Scriba Propraetoris (Praefectus) of Provincia Gallia to
the best of my abilities.

On my honor as a Citizen of Nova Roma, and in the presence of the
Gods and Goddesses of the Roman people and by their will and favor,
do I accept the position of Scriba Propraetoris (Praefectus) of
Provincia Gallia and all the rights, privileges, obligations, and
responsibilities attendant thereto.

Given to Fuctus, this day July the 18, Year 2004 of the current Era,
in the year of the consulship of Gnaeus Salix Astur and Gnaeus
Equitius Marinus ante ante diem XV Kal. SEXTILES MMDCCLVII AUC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------

Ego, Albertus Minius Abrahaeus Vaticinator (Christian De Sande) hoc
ipso facto sollemniter IVRO Novae Romae decus defendere et semper
pro Novae Romae Populo atque Senatu agere. Ut Novae Romae
magistratus ego Albertus Minius Abrahaeus Vaticinator (Christian De
Sande) Romae deos deasque colere IVRO in omnibus publicae vitae
temporibus atque Romanas virtutes et publica et privata vita
persequi.

Ego Albertus Minius Abrahaeus Vaticinator (Christian De Sande)
Romanam religionem favere et defendere IVRO ut Novae Romae
Reipublicae religionem et numquam agere ita ut eius status publicae
religionis aliquid detrimenti capiat. Praeterea ego Albertus Minius
Abrahaeus Vaticinator (Christian De Sande) IVRO quam optime fungi
officium muneris Provinciae Scriba Propraetoris (Praefectus).

Meo Novae Romae civis honore et coram Populi Romani deis atque
deabus et eorum voluntate et favore, munus Galliae Provinciae Scriba
Propraetoris (Praefectus) ACCIPIO una cum iuribus, privilegiis.
munera atque officia quae meum munus comportat.

In Gallia Provincia, Regio Aquitania Narbonensis, Fuctus, ante diem
XV Kal. SEXTILES MMDCCLVII AUC.

===============================================


Moi, soussigné Albertus Minius Abrahaeus Vaticinator (Christian De
Sande) jure solennellement de soutenir l'honneur de Nova Roma et
d'agir toujours au mieux des intérêts du peuple et du Sénat de Nova
Roma.

En tant que magistrat de Nova Roma, moi, Albertus Minius Abrahaeus
Vaticinator (Christian De Sande) jure d'honorer les Dieux et Déesses
de Rome dans mes relations publiques et d'adopter les Vertus
Romaines dans ma vie privée aussi bien que publique.

Moi, Albertus Minius Abrahaeus Vaticinator (Christian De Sande) jure
de soutenir et défendre la Religion Romaine en tant que Religion
d'Etat de Nova Roma et jure de ne jamais agir d'une façon qui
menacerait son statut de Religion d'Etat.

Moi, Albertus Minius Abrahaeus Vaticinator (Christian De Sande) jure
de soutenir et défendre la Constitution de Nova Roma.

Moi, Albertus Minius Abrahaeus Vaticinator (Christian De Sande) jure
en outre de remplir les obligations et les responsabilités de la
fonction de Scriba Propraetoris (Praefectus) de la Province de
Gallia du mieux dont je suis capable.

Sur mon honneur de Citoyen de Nova Roma, et en présence des Dieux et
Déesses du peuple Romain, et par leur volonté et bienveillance,
j'accepte le poste de Scriba Propraetoris (Praefectus) de la
Province de Gallia et tous les droits, privilèges, obligations et
responsabilités qui s'y attachent.

Fait à Fuctus (Foix) le 18 Juillet, Année 2004 de l'Ere courante,
année du Consulat de Gnaeus Salix Astur et Gnaeus Equitius Marinus
ante ante diem XV Kal. SEXTILES MMDCCLVII AUC.
_________________
ALBERTUS MINIUS ABRAHAEUS VATICINATOR
PROVINCIAE GALLIAE PRAEFECTUS
CIVIS GENTIS MINIA
CIVIS GALLIAE PROVINCIAE
CIVIS NOVAE ROMAE, OPTIMA MAXIMA

--- Publius Albucius <albucius_aoe@...> wrote:

> P.Minius Albucius Gaio Iuliano s.d.,
>
> S.V.G.E.V.R.
>
> Bene vale tu quoque.
>
> Scr. Cadomago, Gallia, a.d. XVI Kal. Augusti
> MMDCCLVII a.u.c.
>
> SALVE PVBLI ALBVCI! Gratias tibi ago for your

greetings! So far you are the only one who did so! DI
TE INCOLUMEN CVSTODIANT! VALE! Frater tvvs, G. I.
IVLIANVS, PGI

>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: GAIVS IVLIANVS
> To: nova-roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 6:00 PM
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] OMNIBVS SALVTEM!
>
>
> OMNIBVS SALVTEM DICIT GAIVS IVLIVS IVLIANVS! DI
> VOS
> INCOLVMES CVSTODIANT! BENE VALETE!
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Vote for the stars of Yahoo!'s next ad campaign!
>
>

http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/yahoo/votelifeengine/

>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>
>

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

> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an
> email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
> Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

Salve omnes,

For what it is worth I think it only fair to point out that (again)
that the Pontifex Maximus himself has essentially told us that we
should not obey silly laws just because they are laws. That is far
more blunt than what we have heard in this thread I feel.

Clearly the Pontifex Maximus is still installed and no one called for
his dismissal when he issued that very blunt statement that called
into question the direction and purpose of enacting a civil code,
rather than relying on list policies.

Should the Pontifex Maximus not have to resign by this logic? He is a
senator, a founder, yet no one has demanded his head on a plate.

There appears to be a significant inconsistency in this approach.

Vale
Gnaeus Iulius Caesar



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

> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gaius Moravius Laureatus

Armoricus"

> <serenusnova@a...> wrote:
>
> > Laureatus : Actually, since I have been around a bit here, I can

tell

> > you that the people I know and who resigned did so because of the
> > uncivility of the ML and the apparent bullying organized by some

well

> > known members of our community. Adherence to and enforcement of

our

> > laws would have prevented these losses.
> >
>
> Uncivility? I was opposed to the law, and the biggest problem I had

in

> trying to get people to vote against it was ill feelings stirred up

by

> opponants of the law. Rash accusations like "Nazi" and "Homophobic",
> and words like "Oligarch" were hardly civil.
>
> Both sides were struck with madness in that unfortunate episode,

but I

> found many people who agreed with me that it shouldn't be passed to

be

> far more uncivil than any of the people who supported it, and the
> worst ones were those who resigned to form the SVR.
>
> L. Sicinius Drusus

F. Galerius Aurelianus to Senator L. Sicinius Drusus and the Senate
and People of Nova Roma. Salvete

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

> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@a... wrote:
> > F. Galerius Aurelianus Rogator to Senator & Pontiff L. Sicinius

Drusus.

>>I feel that I must point out that even though Nova Roma is a

voluntary organization it has rules that have been put into place by
its members (citizens).

DRUSUS: No it has rules that have been put in place by a minority of
members who are intrested in a Government simulation. The Majority of
the members do not take part in that aspect of Nova Roma and never
have.

AURELIANUS: You are mistaken. The citizens who voted for the laws
represent a majority of the active membership and whether you refer
to the magistrates as Government Simulators or not, they are
corporate officers. You are a Corporate Officer of sorts although
not elected, you serve in an advisatory capacity. You are currently
advising members to act contrary to the established rules (laws) of
our organization.

>>As a Senator and Pontiff, you are a leader and should be supporting

the rules of our organization even if you did not vote in favor of
certain of the rules. If a leader of our organization is unwilling
to support the rules or to only choose to follow only the rules that
you like, then you do more to hurt the organization than to help it.

DRUSUS: As a member of the Board of Directors I have to consider the
wishes of ALL the members, and that includes those who have no intrest
in the Governmental recreation. Attempts to force these people to
accept the governmental area are no different than attempting to force
everyone to join a Legio or to practice the Religio.

AURELIANUS: As a member of the Board of Directors, you can only
consider the wishes of ALL the members that are active and
participate in our organization. If they do not participate, then
why would you want to consider their wishes OR rather HOW can you
consider their opinions when they have not voiced those opinions by
participation in the governmental policies of the organization?
I did not think much of the law that allowed the Socii to be created
and I would support any new rule (law) that would strip the roles of
any member who doesn't have the time to devote at least an occasional
message or indication of interest after a year. That way we could
all be sure that those left are an actual representation of WHAT ALL
THE MEMBERS really want.

> > As a Senator, most citizens expect you do support the laws that

have been made even if you do not like those laws. We can understand
if you want to change or revise them but until such time as the laws
are changed, revised, or done away with, you should abide by the laws
as any good citizen or organizational member is expected to do.

>

DRUSUS: Are you willing to blindly accept the regulations that a
Legio that you have no intrest in? There are many people here who
look on the Government as just one of a group of activities in Nova
Roma, and you will never be able to force them to view it otherwise.
Attempting to do so will only result in a smaller organization.

AURELIANUS: I am not a member of a legio. I am a citizen and
magistrate of Nova Roma. Whether or not there are many people here
who look on the Government as just one of a group of activities in
Nova Roma, they are the duly elected representatives of our
organization and there job is to administrate and attempt to practice
good government. I am VERY WILLING to have a smaller organization as
long as it remains true to the Religio, the Virtues, the Constitution
of Nova Roma as a corporation, and the laws that are proposed and
voted on by the active membership.

>>As a Pontiff, it is expected that you would defend and support the

autonomy of the Sacred Colleges from changes made by non-
practitioners of the Religio, but it is also expected that you would
contribute to the Religio by increasing Nova Roma's knowledge by
writing articles, posting festivals and rites, and demonstrating your
willingness to educate others about the Religio.

>

DRUSUS: If you saw the Collegium List you would quickly realize that I
am one of the most active Pontiffs in Nova Roma. Foundations are not
visable, but if they aren't carefully laid the structure will have
weaknesses that will cause problems and which can cause it to
collapse.

AURELIANUS: You are correct that I have not seen the Collegium List
and you may well be one of the most active Pontiffs in Nova Roma. I
know that you strongly support the autonomy of the Sacred Colleges
from interference by those who shouldn't be meddling in the workings
of it. However, if the membership (active or otherwise) doesn't see
their pontiffs practicing and celebrating the Religio, then your
strong foundation is just a well-structured hole in the ground.

>>The low voter turnout in the last election may have more to do with

the fact that it was an interim election for one magistracy and
several laws than a flat indicator of lack of interest.

DRUSUS: A Low voter turnout is the norm in Nova Roma, typically less
than 1/4 of the people who are active in some area of the
organization, Has never approached 50% of the people who are active in
some area of Nova Roma, and dropping below 10% isn't at all unusual.
The turn out when a Law is the only thing on the ballot is even worse
than election of magistrates. The simple truth is the majority of
people in Nova Roma could care less who it's magistrates are, or which
"laws" it passes as long as it dosen't interfere with the areas they
are intrested in, and there is nothing that either of us can do to
change that fact.

AURELIANUS: Actually there is something we can do as individuals. If
you feel strongly about a proposed law or candidate one way or the
other, you can post to the ML or subsidiary lists to present your
case to as many members as possible. You can contact the active
citizens and persuade them to your point of view and they can contact
others.

>>There is usually more than one reason for people to join an

organization and usually more than one reason that they leave it. If
there were not people in Nova Roma that I genuinely enjoyed
communicating with and learning from as well as the Religio, I would
likely have left the organization when I began to have a serious
problem with another member. I have had problems with several
members and have either worked them out or am trying to work them
out. Some people may have left Nova Roma because of the prolifera-
tion of laws and rules that make no sense to them. Others may have
left because they saw that certain members were at each other's
throats because of disagreements. Still others might have left
because they felt that if the leaders of the group will not follow
the rules then our organization is indeed a joke.

>>You and I do not like one another and I doubt that we ever will.

DRUSUS: You are at least partialy mistaken there. I Care little for
your style, but that dosen't mean I take it to the point of personal
dislike. I'm quite capable of seperating my views of a person's
politics or his rhetoric from him as a person. If you look in the
United States Senate you will notice that Senator Kerry and Senator
McCain are in different parties, have vastly different styles of
rhetoric, and are apart far more often than they are togather on most
votes. That has no effect on a personal friendship that the two men
share.

AURELIANUS: Actually you are also partially mistaken. I not only
care little for your style but based on the number of things we have
posted about each other, I have to be honest and say that I don't
like you at all. I truly regret anything I may have said about your
family or parents because that was truly out of line and I also
regret that I questioned your mental stability. However, I still
feel that you are a very abrasive individual for the most part even
when I agree with your opinions.

>>There are some points that you have made that I am in agreement

with even though I do not like the way you present your arguments. I
understand frustration and anger when I read a post I do not like but
if it has substance or value then I can reach around to grasp it.

AURELIANUS: You could probably be much more persuasive if you would
take time to be more careful in your grammar and not descend to the
level that you believe your opponents are taking with you.

>>Nova Roma is based on the Religio and the Virtues, public and

private, but that is not all we are anymore (although these are the
bedrock on which we were created). There are those interested in
poetry, Latin, fiction, archaeology, cooking, vintning, history,
philosophy, and those who have found friends and family in the
organization that they want to keep. These individuals deserve
to have the Senators, Pontiffs, Flamens, Rogators, Consuls, Tribunes,
and all the other leaders and magistrates of Nova Roma doing their
best to support the entire organization and not just the parts they
want to, disregarding the rest like so much trash. Those individuals
deserve to see their leaders and magistrates making the best effort
to strengthen Nova Roma rather than trying to tear it down into their
own little bailiwicks.

DRUSUS: Recognizing the reality that Nova Roma consists of a group of
related activites that members have different levels of intrests in is
the best way to strengthen the organization. Attempts by those in any
one area, be it the Legion Reenactors, The Religio, or the Government
to enforce their will on the entire group will weaken it or destroy
it. Nova Roma is more of a Coalition of groups rather than a single
entity, and judging from voter returns the Government area is not the
most popular activity in Nova Roma.

AURELIANUS: The historic Roman Republic & Empire were more than just
the sum of their parts. There were many underlying commonalities
that were imposed from the Eternal City--law, religion, the military,
the roads. Nova Roma may have certain aspects of a coalition but the
underlying commonalities of our organization are the Religio, the
Virtues, and our organization of corporate government. I would
rather see us be numerically weaker but stronger in purpose as a
group. I would prefer if our magistrates would quit just trying to
patch the boat with minor changes to our laws and begin to carefully
put together meaningful long-lasting changes to strengthen our
organization and make it run smoother. I really would like to see
the deadwood (laws and inactive citizens)chopped off the apple tree
so we can get a bigger harvest of fruit.

L. Sicinius Drusus

F. Galerius Aurelianus

Salvete:
if I recollect that quote came from the brouhaha over resignations
and lawsuits in May.
The Pontifex Maximus, from my own experience,( he was the only one
on the Collegium Pontificium who voted against my dismissal) is one
of the most admired and kind persons in Nova Roma, he is held in
esteem by all. He never divides by religion and never engages in
cruel vituperative. He is the great reconciler loved by all the
cives; Christians, Jews, members of the Religio, Populares and Boni.
He has never abandoned the res publica and always remains Pontifex
Maximus and Pater Patriae.
bene valete in pace deorem
M. Arminia Maior Fabiana

Propraetrix Hiberniae
scriba Iuris et
Investigatio CFQ





In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gnaeus Iulius Caesar"
<gn_iulius_caesar@y...> wrote:

> Salve omnes,
>
> For what it is worth I think it only fair to point out that (again)
> that the Pontifex Maximus himself has essentially told us that we
> should not obey silly laws just because they are laws. That is far
> more blunt than what we have heard in this thread I feel.
>
> Clearly the Pontifex Maximus is still installed and no one called

for

> his dismissal when he issued that very blunt statement that called
> into question the direction and purpose of enacting a civil code,
> rather than relying on list policies.
>
> Should the Pontifex Maximus not have to resign by this logic? He is

a

> senator, a founder, yet no one has demanded his head on a plate.
>
> There appears to be a significant inconsistency in this approach.
>
> Vale
> Gnaeus Iulius Caesar
>
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Lucius Sicinius Drusus"
> <drusus@b...> wrote:
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gaius Moravius Laureatus
> Armoricus"
> > <serenusnova@a...> wrote:
> >
> > > Laureatus : Actually, since I have been around a bit here, I

can

> tell
> > > you that the people I know and who resigned did so because of

the

> > > uncivility of the ML and the apparent bullying organized by

some

> well
> > > known members of our community. Adherence to and enforcement of
> our
> > > laws would have prevented these losses.
> > >
> >
> > Uncivility? I was opposed to the law, and the biggest problem I

had

> in
> > trying to get people to vote against it was ill feelings stirred

up

> by
> > opponants of the law. Rash accusations like "Nazi"

and "Homophobic",

> > and words like "Oligarch" were hardly civil.
> >
> > Both sides were struck with madness in that unfortunate episode,
> but I
> > found many people who agreed with me that it shouldn't be passed

to

> be
> > far more uncivil than any of the people who supported it, and the
> > worst ones were those who resigned to form the SVR.
> >
> > L. Sicinius Drusus

Salve M. Arminia Maior Fabiana,

Indeed, but applying the dictum of "if you speak ill of legislation
and the process" (my summary) you should resign, does that not
imperil the Pontifex Maximus? If not, is the call for resignation not
selective depending on who the person is who makes these utterances?

I note that in your sumamry of the Pontifex Maximus's career you laid
emphasis on the respect he is held in and his non-divisive nature. I
am sure that you cannot be suggesting that this insulates him from
the same yard-stick that would be applied to Senator Drusus, for to
do so would be partisan surely? The Pontifex Maximus's own words, I
say again, in a macro state could well be construed as a call to
civil disobediance. If Drusus is expected to resign because he dared
to pose questions, what then should happen to someone who appears to
call for the ignoring of laws?

Personally, I don't think anything should happen to either for
expressing an opinion, which as Senators they are entitled to do, but
to hang Drusus for asking questions and award a medal the size of a
soup plate to the Pontifex Maximus after his stated views seems
biased and illogical - unless of course as I say it matters not what
you say but who you are - and whether you are in favour with the
hangman or not.

Vale
Gnaeus Iulius Caesar

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@y...> wrote:
> Salvete:
> if I recollect that quote came from the brouhaha over resignations
> and lawsuits in May.
> The Pontifex Maximus, from my own experience,( he was the only
one
> on the Collegium Pontificium who voted against my dismissal) is one
> of the most admired and kind persons in Nova Roma, he is held in
> esteem by all. He never divides by religion and never engages in
> cruel vituperative. He is the great reconciler loved by all the
> cives; Christians, Jews, members of the Religio, Populares and Boni.
> He has never abandoned the res publica and always remains
Pontifex
> Maximus and Pater Patriae.
> bene valete in pace deorem
> M. Arminia Maior Fabiana
>
> Propraetrix Hiberniae
> scriba Iuris et
> Investigatio CFQ
>
>
>
>
>
> In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gnaeus Iulius Caesar"
> <gn_iulius_caesar@y...> wrote:
> > Salve omnes,
> >
> > For what it is worth I think it only fair to point out that
(again)
> > that the Pontifex Maximus himself has essentially told us that we
> > should not obey silly laws just because they are laws. That is
far
> > more blunt than what we have heard in this thread I feel.
> >
> > Clearly the Pontifex Maximus is still installed and no one called
> for
> > his dismissal when he issued that very blunt statement that
called
> > into question the direction and purpose of enacting a civil code,
> > rather than relying on list policies.
> >
> > Should the Pontifex Maximus not have to resign by this logic? He
is
> a
> > senator, a founder, yet no one has demanded his head on a plate.
> >
> > There appears to be a significant inconsistency in this approach.
> >
> > Vale
> > Gnaeus Iulius Caesar
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Lucius Sicinius Drusus"
> > <drusus@b...> wrote:
> > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gaius Moravius Laureatus
> > Armoricus"
> > > <serenusnova@a...> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Laureatus : Actually, since I have been around a bit here, I
> can
> > tell
> > > > you that the people I know and who resigned did so because of
> the
> > > > uncivility of the ML and the apparent bullying organized by
> some
> > well
> > > > known members of our community. Adherence to and enforcement
of
> > our
> > > > laws would have prevented these losses.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Uncivility? I was opposed to the law, and the biggest problem I
> had
> > in
> > > trying to get people to vote against it was ill feelings
stirred
> up
> > by
> > > opponants of the law. Rash accusations like "Nazi"
> and "Homophobic",
> > > and words like "Oligarch" were hardly civil.
> > >
> > > Both sides were struck with madness in that unfortunate
episode,
> > but I
> > > found many people who agreed with me that it shouldn't be
passed
> to
> > be
> > > far more uncivil than any of the people who supported it, and
the
> > > worst ones were those who resigned to form the SVR.
> > >
> > > L. Sicinius Drusus

A. Apollonius Cordus to the Senator & Consular L.
Cornelius Sulla Felix, and to all citizens and
peregrines, greetings.

Owing to the nature of the day, I shan't reply to the
wider thread today, but I hope it is all right to
reply to this small item since it is not a substantive
disagreement but a simple misunderstanding:

> You have also trotted out one of your old
> favourites,
> the 'people will leave' argument. Do you remember
> the
> private correspondence you and I had recently with
> Senator Sulla, Equitius Cato, and Octavia
> Indagatrix?
> One of the things we talked about was whether it's
> acceptable to deviate from the mos maiorum in
> order to
> avoid people leaving. I think we all agreed that
> it
> was not acceptable - certainly Senator Sulla said
> so
> several times, quite clearly, and he said that he
> thought you would agree. Yes? Well, then, why do
> we
> once again see you saying that we ought to behave
> in
> an unhistorical way (belittling, bypassing, and
> ignoring the laws of the res publica) in order to
> stop
> people leaving?
>
> Sulla: Actually, I do not recall saying that it
> is appropriate to deviate from the Mos Maiorum to
> prevent people from leaving the organization. Nova
> Roma is a voluntary organization, and there is
> absolutely nothing to prevent someone from leaving.
> So, please do not speak for me, or put words in my
> posts, or try to spin them. I am more than capable
> of speaking for myself, A. Apollonius. And, I have
> a copy of my conversation and I stated all
> throughout our conversation that we must stay as
> close to the Mos Maiorum as possible and that
> deviation should be kept to the barrest minimum.

Please, Senator, read carefully what I write and don't
assume that I'm attacking you just because you dislike
me. What I wrote (you will find it above) is this:

> One of the things we talked about was whether it's
> acceptable to deviate from the mos maiorum in
> order to
> avoid people leaving. I think we all agreed that
> it
> was not acceptable - certainly Senator Sulla said
> so
> several times, quite clearly, and he said that he
> thought you would agree.

See - "we all agreed that it was *not* acceptable".
That is what you said, and that is what I said you
said, and that is what you said you said.

You said it was not acceptable to deviate from the mos
maiorum simply to stop people leaving. I agreed. You
have said it again in the message I quote above. I
still agree. You and I, in short, agree. I was just
asking Senator Drusus whether he agrees with us.





___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - sooooo many all-new ways to express yourself http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

F. Galerius,

Are you belittling the people on all of these Nova Roma Related lists?

http://groups.yahoo.com/search?query=nova+roma&submit=Search

86 Nova Roma related lists, and that is just a quick search for "Nova
Roma".

I Think you owe all the people who have intrests in areas other than
government an apology. I'm sure they consider their contributions
every bit as import as those of the politicians.

L. Sicinius Drusus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick D. Owen"
<Patrick.Owen@s...> wrote:

> F. Galerius Aurelianus to Senator L. Sicinius Drusus and the Senate
> and People of Nova Roma. Salvete
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Lucius Sicinius Drusus"
> <drusus@b...> wrote:
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@a... wrote:
> > > F. Galerius Aurelianus Rogator to Senator & Pontiff L. Sicinius
> Drusus.
>
> >>I feel that I must point out that even though Nova Roma is a
> voluntary organization it has rules that have been put into place by
> its members (citizens).
>
> DRUSUS: No it has rules that have been put in place by a minority of
> members who are intrested in a Government simulation. The Majority of
> the members do not take part in that aspect of Nova Roma and never
> have.
>
> AURELIANUS: You are mistaken. The citizens who voted for the laws
> represent a majority of the active membership and whether you refer
> to the magistrates as Government Simulators or not, they are
> corporate officers. You are a Corporate Officer of sorts although
> not elected, you serve in an advisatory capacity. You are currently
> advising members to act contrary to the established rules (laws) of
> our organization.
>
> >>As a Senator and Pontiff, you are a leader and should be supporting
> the rules of our organization even if you did not vote in favor of
> certain of the rules. If a leader of our organization is unwilling
> to support the rules or to only choose to follow only the rules that
> you like, then you do more to hurt the organization than to help it.
>
> DRUSUS: As a member of the Board of Directors I have to consider the
> wishes of ALL the members, and that includes those who have no intrest
> in the Governmental recreation. Attempts to force these people to
> accept the governmental area are no different than attempting to force
> everyone to join a Legio or to practice the Religio.
>
> AURELIANUS: As a member of the Board of Directors, you can only
> consider the wishes of ALL the members that are active and
> participate in our organization. If they do not participate, then
> why would you want to consider their wishes OR rather HOW can you
> consider their opinions when they have not voiced those opinions by
> participation in the governmental policies of the organization?
> I did not think much of the law that allowed the Socii to be created
> and I would support any new rule (law) that would strip the roles of
> any member who doesn't have the time to devote at least an occasional
> message or indication of interest after a year. That way we could
> all be sure that those left are an actual representation of WHAT ALL
> THE MEMBERS really want.
>
> > > As a Senator, most citizens expect you do support the laws that
> have been made even if you do not like those laws. We can understand
> if you want to change or revise them but until such time as the laws
> are changed, revised, or done away with, you should abide by the laws
> as any good citizen or organizational member is expected to do.
> >
> DRUSUS: Are you willing to blindly accept the regulations that a
> Legio that you have no intrest in? There are many people here who
> look on the Government as just one of a group of activities in Nova
> Roma, and you will never be able to force them to view it otherwise.
> Attempting to do so will only result in a smaller organization.
>
> AURELIANUS: I am not a member of a legio. I am a citizen and
> magistrate of Nova Roma. Whether or not there are many people here
> who look on the Government as just one of a group of activities in
> Nova Roma, they are the duly elected representatives of our
> organization and there job is to administrate and attempt to practice
> good government. I am VERY WILLING to have a smaller organization as
> long as it remains true to the Religio, the Virtues, the Constitution
> of Nova Roma as a corporation, and the laws that are proposed and
> voted on by the active membership.
>
> >>As a Pontiff, it is expected that you would defend and support the
> autonomy of the Sacred Colleges from changes made by non-
> practitioners of the Religio, but it is also expected that you would
> contribute to the Religio by increasing Nova Roma's knowledge by
> writing articles, posting festivals and rites, and demonstrating your
> willingness to educate others about the Religio.
> >
> DRUSUS: If you saw the Collegium List you would quickly realize that I
> am one of the most active Pontiffs in Nova Roma. Foundations are not
> visable, but if they aren't carefully laid the structure will have
> weaknesses that will cause problems and which can cause it to
> collapse.
>
> AURELIANUS: You are correct that I have not seen the Collegium List
> and you may well be one of the most active Pontiffs in Nova Roma. I
> know that you strongly support the autonomy of the Sacred Colleges
> from interference by those who shouldn't be meddling in the workings
> of it. However, if the membership (active or otherwise) doesn't see
> their pontiffs practicing and celebrating the Religio, then your
> strong foundation is just a well-structured hole in the ground.
>
> >>The low voter turnout in the last election may have more to do with
> the fact that it was an interim election for one magistracy and
> several laws than a flat indicator of lack of interest.
>
> DRUSUS: A Low voter turnout is the norm in Nova Roma, typically less
> than 1/4 of the people who are active in some area of the
> organization, Has never approached 50% of the people who are active in
> some area of Nova Roma, and dropping below 10% isn't at all unusual.
> The turn out when a Law is the only thing on the ballot is even worse
> than election of magistrates. The simple truth is the majority of
> people in Nova Roma could care less who it's magistrates are, or which
> "laws" it passes as long as it dosen't interfere with the areas they
> are intrested in, and there is nothing that either of us can do to
> change that fact.
>
> AURELIANUS: Actually there is something we can do as individuals. If
> you feel strongly about a proposed law or candidate one way or the
> other, you can post to the ML or subsidiary lists to present your
> case to as many members as possible. You can contact the active
> citizens and persuade them to your point of view and they can contact
> others.
>
> >>There is usually more than one reason for people to join an
> organization and usually more than one reason that they leave it. If
> there were not people in Nova Roma that I genuinely enjoyed
> communicating with and learning from as well as the Religio, I would
> likely have left the organization when I began to have a serious
> problem with another member. I have had problems with several
> members and have either worked them out or am trying to work them
> out. Some people may have left Nova Roma because of the prolifera-
> tion of laws and rules that make no sense to them. Others may have
> left because they saw that certain members were at each other's
> throats because of disagreements. Still others might have left
> because they felt that if the leaders of the group will not follow
> the rules then our organization is indeed a joke.
>
> >>You and I do not like one another and I doubt that we ever will.
>
> DRUSUS: You are at least partialy mistaken there. I Care little for
> your style, but that dosen't mean I take it to the point of personal
> dislike. I'm quite capable of seperating my views of a person's
> politics or his rhetoric from him as a person. If you look in the
> United States Senate you will notice that Senator Kerry and Senator
> McCain are in different parties, have vastly different styles of
> rhetoric, and are apart far more often than they are togather on most
> votes. That has no effect on a personal friendship that the two men
> share.
>
> AURELIANUS: Actually you are also partially mistaken. I not only
> care little for your style but based on the number of things we have
> posted about each other, I have to be honest and say that I don't
> like you at all. I truly regret anything I may have said about your
> family or parents because that was truly out of line and I also
> regret that I questioned your mental stability. However, I still
> feel that you are a very abrasive individual for the most part even
> when I agree with your opinions.
>
> >>There are some points that you have made that I am in agreement
> with even though I do not like the way you present your arguments. I
> understand frustration and anger when I read a post I do not like but
> if it has substance or value then I can reach around to grasp it.
>
> AURELIANUS: You could probably be much more persuasive if you would
> take time to be more careful in your grammar and not descend to the
> level that you believe your opponents are taking with you.
>
> >>Nova Roma is based on the Religio and the Virtues, public and
> private, but that is not all we are anymore (although these are the
> bedrock on which we were created). There are those interested in
> poetry, Latin, fiction, archaeology, cooking, vintning, history,
> philosophy, and those who have found friends and family in the
> organization that they want to keep. These individuals deserve
> to have the Senators, Pontiffs, Flamens, Rogators, Consuls, Tribunes,
> and all the other leaders and magistrates of Nova Roma doing their
> best to support the entire organization and not just the parts they
> want to, disregarding the rest like so much trash. Those individuals
> deserve to see their leaders and magistrates making the best effort
> to strengthen Nova Roma rather than trying to tear it down into their
> own little bailiwicks.
>
> DRUSUS: Recognizing the reality that Nova Roma consists of a group of
> related activites that members have different levels of intrests in is
> the best way to strengthen the organization. Attempts by those in any
> one area, be it the Legion Reenactors, The Religio, or the Government
> to enforce their will on the entire group will weaken it or destroy
> it. Nova Roma is more of a Coalition of groups rather than a single
> entity, and judging from voter returns the Government area is not the
> most popular activity in Nova Roma.
>
> AURELIANUS: The historic Roman Republic & Empire were more than just
> the sum of their parts. There were many underlying commonalities
> that were imposed from the Eternal City--law, religion, the military,
> the roads. Nova Roma may have certain aspects of a coalition but the
> underlying commonalities of our organization are the Religio, the
> Virtues, and our organization of corporate government. I would
> rather see us be numerically weaker but stronger in purpose as a
> group. I would prefer if our magistrates would quit just trying to
> patch the boat with minor changes to our laws and begin to carefully
> put together meaningful long-lasting changes to strengthen our
> organization and make it run smoother. I really would like to see
> the deadwood (laws and inactive citizens)chopped off the apple tree
> so we can get a bigger harvest of fruit.
>
> L. Sicinius Drusus
>
> F. Galerius Aurelianus

Ave Caesar,

There are a lot of people in Nova Roma who have some personal grudge
against someone else. They are constantly looking for an excuse to
carry out some vendetta over something or another that happened last
month, last Year, during the Gender War 3 years ago, or even earlier
than that.

Drusus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gnaeus Iulius Caesar"
<gn_iulius_caesar@y...> wrote:

> Salve M. Arminia Maior Fabiana,
>
> Indeed, but applying the dictum of "if you speak ill of legislation
> and the process" (my summary) you should resign, does that not
> imperil the Pontifex Maximus? If not, is the call for resignation not
> selective depending on who the person is who makes these utterances?
>
> I note that in your sumamry of the Pontifex Maximus's career you laid
> emphasis on the respect he is held in and his non-divisive nature. I
> am sure that you cannot be suggesting that this insulates him from
> the same yard-stick that would be applied to Senator Drusus, for to
> do so would be partisan surely? The Pontifex Maximus's own words, I
> say again, in a macro state could well be construed as a call to
> civil disobediance. If Drusus is expected to resign because he dared
> to pose questions, what then should happen to someone who appears to
> call for the ignoring of laws?
>
> Personally, I don't think anything should happen to either for
> expressing an opinion, which as Senators they are entitled to do, but
> to hang Drusus for asking questions and award a medal the size of a
> soup plate to the Pontifex Maximus after his stated views seems
> biased and illogical - unless of course as I say it matters not what
> you say but who you are - and whether you are in favour with the
> hangman or not.
>
> Vale
> Gnaeus Iulius Caesar
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@y...> wrote:
> > Salvete:
> > if I recollect that quote came from the brouhaha over resignations
> > and lawsuits in May.
> > The Pontifex Maximus, from my own experience,( he was the only
> one
> > on the Collegium Pontificium who voted against my dismissal) is one
> > of the most admired and kind persons in Nova Roma, he is held in
> > esteem by all. He never divides by religion and never engages in
> > cruel vituperative. He is the great reconciler loved by all the
> > cives; Christians, Jews, members of the Religio, Populares and Boni.
> > He has never abandoned the res publica and always remains
> Pontifex
> > Maximus and Pater Patriae.
> > bene valete in pace deorem
> > M. Arminia Maior Fabiana
> >
> > Propraetrix Hiberniae
> > scriba Iuris et
> > Investigatio CFQ
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gnaeus Iulius Caesar"
> > <gn_iulius_caesar@y...> wrote:
> > > Salve omnes,
> > >
> > > For what it is worth I think it only fair to point out that
> (again)
> > > that the Pontifex Maximus himself has essentially told us that we
> > > should not obey silly laws just because they are laws. That is
> far
> > > more blunt than what we have heard in this thread I feel.
> > >
> > > Clearly the Pontifex Maximus is still installed and no one called
> > for
> > > his dismissal when he issued that very blunt statement that
> called
> > > into question the direction and purpose of enacting a civil code,
> > > rather than relying on list policies.
> > >
> > > Should the Pontifex Maximus not have to resign by this logic? He
> is
> > a
> > > senator, a founder, yet no one has demanded his head on a plate.
> > >
> > > There appears to be a significant inconsistency in this approach.
> > >
> > > Vale
> > > Gnaeus Iulius Caesar
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Lucius Sicinius Drusus"
> > > <drusus@b...> wrote:
> > > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gaius Moravius Laureatus
> > > Armoricus"
> > > > <serenusnova@a...> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Laureatus : Actually, since I have been around a bit here, I
> > can
> > > tell
> > > > > you that the people I know and who resigned did so because of
> > the
> > > > > uncivility of the ML and the apparent bullying organized by
> > some
> > > well
> > > > > known members of our community. Adherence to and enforcement
> of
> > > our
> > > > > laws would have prevented these losses.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Uncivility? I was opposed to the law, and the biggest problem I
> > had
> > > in
> > > > trying to get people to vote against it was ill feelings
> stirred
> > up
> > > by
> > > > opponants of the law. Rash accusations like "Nazi"
> > and "Homophobic",
> > > > and words like "Oligarch" were hardly civil.
> > > >
> > > > Both sides were struck with madness in that unfortunate
> episode,
> > > but I
> > > > found many people who agreed with me that it shouldn't be
> passed
> > to
> > > be
> > > > far more uncivil than any of the people who supported it, and
> the
> > > > worst ones were those who resigned to form the SVR.
> > > >
> > > > L. Sicinius Drusus

Salve Gnaee Iuli:
the Pontifex Maximus said those words at the time of the Censor
Octavius's resignation and the lawsuit against Scaurus, troubled
times ideed. Some even called for a dicatatorship.
Unlike Senator and Pontifex Drusus who by his actions went to
Yahoo, skipping the legal process of Nova Roma, was chastised and
still does not advocate the legal system, the very leges so dear to
Rome.
By my actions I have shown that I respect the res publica and all
who represent her. De minimus we are a Club and can abide by common
rules.
I admire the Pontifex Cassius for his sympathy to the Censor and
Scaurus equally as for his sympathy and kindness to me.
vale
M. Arminia Maior Fabiana

Propraetrix Hiberniae
scriba Iuris et
Investigatio CFQ

> > the same yard-stick that would be applied to Senator Drusus,
> > you say but who you are - and whether you are in favour with the
> > hangman or not.
> >
> > Vale
> > Gnaeus Iulius Caesar
> >
> >
>

Salve,

Indeed, troubled times - as they mostly are in Nova Roma. Regardless
of whether they are troubled or not, the Pontifex Maximus called on
people to ignore silly laws. Does that mean when the times are
troubled, that is acceptable and if so what is the yardstick for
deciding how much trouble we have to be in before it is acceptable.

Is it just that we are to ignore a flagrant call for civil
disobediance and then string up Senator Drusus becuase he is who he
is?

Vale
Caesar

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@y...> wrote:
> Salve Gnaee Iuli:
> the Pontifex Maximus said those words at the time of the Censor
> Octavius's resignation and the lawsuit against Scaurus, troubled
> times ideed. Some even called for a dicatatorship.
> Unlike Senator and Pontifex Drusus who by his actions went to
> Yahoo, skipping the legal process of Nova Roma, was chastised and
> still does not advocate the legal system, the very leges so dear to
> Rome.
> By my actions I have shown that I respect the res publica and
all
> who represent her. De minimus we are a Club and can abide by common
> rules.
> I admire the Pontifex Cassius for his sympathy to the Censor
and
> Scaurus equally as for his sympathy and kindness to me.
> vale
> M. Arminia Maior Fabiana
>
> Propraetrix Hiberniae
> scriba Iuris et
> Investigatio CFQ
>
>
> > > the same yard-stick that would be applied to Senator Drusus,
> > > you say but who you are - and whether you are in favour with
the
> > > hangman or not.
> > >
> > > Vale
> > > Gnaeus Iulius Caesar
> > >
> > >
> >

I, Pompeius Minius Aquila Palladius (Nathanaël Mini) do hereby
solemnly swear to uphold the honor of Nova Roma, and to act always
in the best interests of the people and the Senate of Nova Roma.

As a magistrate of Nova Roma, I, Pompeius Minius Aquila Palladius
(Nathanaël Mini) swear to honor the Gods and Goddesses of Rome in my
public dealings, and to pursue the Roman Virtues in my public and
private life.

I, Pompeius Minius Aquila Palladius (Nathanaël Mini) swear to
uphold and defend the Religio Romana as the State Religion of Nova
Roma and swear never to act in a way that would threaten its status
as the State Religion.

I, Pompeius Minius Aquila Palladius (Nathanaël Mini) swear to
protect and defend the Constitution of Nova Roma.

I, Pompeius Minius Aquila Palladius (Nathanaël Mini) further swear
to fulfill the obligations and responsibilities of the office of
Scriba Propraetoris (Praefectus) of Provincia Gallia to the best of
my abilities.

On my honor as a Citizen of Nova Roma, and in the presence of the
Gods and Goddesses of the Roman people and by their will and favor,
do I accept the position of Scriba Propraetoris (Praefectus) of
Provincia Gallia and all the rights, privileges, obligations, and
responsibilities attendant thereto.

Given to Carcaso, this day July the 18, Year 2004 of the current
Era, in the year of the consulship of Gnaeus Salix Astur and Gnaeus
Equitius Marinus ante ante diem XV Kal. SEXTILES MMDCCLVII AUC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------

Ego, Pompeius Minius Aquila Palladius (Nathanaël Mini) hoc ipso
facto sollemniter IVRO Novae Romae decus defendere et semper pro
Novae Romae Populo atque Senatu agere. Ut Novae Romae magistratus
ego Pompeius Minius Aquila Palladius (Nathanaël Mini) Romae deos
deasque colere IVRO in omnibus publicae vitae temporibus atque
Romanas virtutes et publica et privata vita persequi.

Ego Pompeius Minius Aquila Palladius (Nathanaël Mini) Romanam
religionem favere et defendere IVRO ut Novae Romae Reipublicae
religionem et numquam agere ita ut eius status publicae religionis
aliquid detrimenti capiat. Praeterea ego Pompeius Minius Aquila
Palladius(Nathanaël Mini) IVRO quam optime fungi officium muneris
Provinciae Scriba Propraetoris (Praefectus).

Meo Novae Romae civis honore et coram Populi Romani deis atque
deabus et eorum voluntate et favore, munus Galliae Provinciae Scriba
Propraetoris (Praefectus) ACCIPIO una cum iuribus, privilegiis.
munera atque officia quae meum munus comportat.

In Gallia Provincia, Regio Aquitania Narbonensis, Carcaso, ante diem
XV Kal. SEXTILES MMDCCLVII AUC.

===============================================


Moi, soussigné Pompeius Minius Aquila Palladius (Nathanaël Mini)
jure solennellement de soutenir l'honneur de Nova Roma et d'agir
toujours au mieux des intérêts du peuple et du Sénat de Nova Roma.

En tant que magistrat de Nova Roma, moi, Pompeius Minius Aquila
Palladius (Nathanaël Mini) jure d'honorer les Dieux et Déesses de
Rome dans mes relations publiques et d'adopter les Vertus Romaines
dans ma vie privée aussi bien que publique.

Moi, Pompeius Minius Aquila Palladius (Nathanaël Mini) jure de
soutenir et défendre la Religion Romaine en tant que Religion d'Etat
de Nova Roma et jure de ne jamais agir d'une façon qui menacerait
son statut de Religion d'Etat.

Moi, Pompeius Minius Aquila Palladius(Nathanaël Mini) jure de
soutenir et défendre la Constitution de Nova Roma.

Moi, Pompeius Minius Aquila Palladius (Nathanaël Mini) jure en outre
de remplir les obligations et les responsabilités de la fonction de
Scriba Propraetoris (Praefectus) de la Province de Gallia du mieux
dont je suis capable.

Sur mon honneur de Citoyen de Nova Roma, et en présence des Dieux et
Déesses du peuple Romain, et par leur volonté et bienveillance,
j'accepte le poste de Scriba Propraetoris (Praefectus) de la
Province de Gallia et tous les droits, privilèges, obligations et
responsabilités qui s'y attachent.

Fait à Carcaso le 18 Juillet, Année 2004 de l'Ere courante, année du
Consulat de Gnaeus Salix Astur et Gnaeus Equitius Marinus ante ante
diem XV Kal. SEXTILES MMDCCLVII AUC.


POMPEIUS MINIUS AQUILA PALLADIUS

I, Calogerus Minius Eloquens (Valentino Mameo) do hereby solemnly
swear to uphold the honor of Nova Roma, and to act always in the
best interests of the people and the Senate of Nova Roma.

As a magistrate of Nova Roma, I, Calogerus Minius Eloquens
(Valentino Mameo) swear to honor the Gods and Goddesses of Rome in
my public dealings, and to pursue the Roman Virtues in my public and
private life.

I, Calogerus Minius Eloquens (Valentino Mameo) swear to uphold and
defend the Religio Romana as the State Religion of Nova Roma and
swear never to act in a way that would threaten its status as the
State Religion.

I, Calogerus Minius Eloquens (Valentino Mameo) swear to protect and
defend the Constitution of Nova Roma.

I, Calogerus Minius Eloquens (Valentino Mameo) further swear to
fulfill the obligations and responsibilities of the office of Scriba
Propraetoris (Praefectus) of Provincia Gallia to the best of my
abilities.

On my honor as a Citizen of Nova Roma, and in the presence of the
Gods and Goddesses of the Roman people and by their will and favor,
do I accept the position of Scriba Propraetoris (Praefectus) of
Provincia Gallia and all the rights, privileges, obligations, and
responsibilities attendant thereto.

Given to Palladia Tolosa, this day July the 18, Year 2004 of the
current Era, in the year of the consulship of Gnaeus Salix Astur and
Gnaeus Equitius Marinus ante ante diem XV Kal. SEXTILES MMDCCLVII
AUC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------

Ego, Calogerus Minius Eloquens (Valentino Mameo) hoc ipso facto
sollemniter IVRO Novae Romae decus defendere et semper pro Novae
Romae Populo atque Senatu agere. Ut Novae Romae magistratus ego
Calogerus Minius Eloquens (Valentino Mameo) Romae deos deasque
colere IVRO in omnibus publicae vitae temporibus atque Romanas
virtutes et publica et privata vita persequi.

Ego Calogerus Minius Eloquens (Valentino Mameo) Romanam religionem
favere et defendere IVRO ut Novae Romae Reipublicae religionem et
numquam agere ita ut eius status publicae religionis aliquid
detrimenti capiat. Praeterea ego Calogerus Minius Eloquens
(Valentino Mameo) IVRO quam optime fungi officium muneris Provinciae
Scriba Propraetoris (Praefectus).

Meo Novae Romae civis honore et coram Populi Romani deis atque
deabus et eorum voluntate et favore, munus Galliae Provinciae Scriba
Propraetoris (Praefectus) ACCIPIO una cum iuribus, privilegiis.
munera atque officia quae meum munus comportat.

In Gallia Provincia, Regio Aquitania Narbonensis, Palladia Tolosa,
ante diem XV Kal. SEXTILES MMDCCLVII AUC.

===============================================


Moi, soussigné Calogerus Minius Eloquens (Valentino Mameo) jure
solennellement de soutenir l'honneur de Nova Roma et d'agir toujours
au mieux des intérêts du peuple et du Sénat de Nova Roma.

En tant que magistrat de Nova Roma, moi, Calogerus Minius Eloquens
(Valentino Mameo) jure d'honorer les Dieux et Déesses de Rome dans
mes relations publiques et d'adopter les Vertus Romaines dans ma vie
privée aussi bien que publique.

Moi, Calogerus Minius Eloquens (Valentino Mameo) jure de soutenir et
défendre la Religion Romaine en tant que Religion d'Etat de Nova
Roma et jure de ne jamais agir d'une façon qui menacerait son statut
de Religion d'Etat.

Moi, Calogerus Minius Eloquens (Valentino Mameo) jure de soutenir et
défendre la Constitution de Nova Roma.

Moi, Calogerus Minius Eloquens (Valentino Mameo) jure en outre de
remplir les obligations et les responsabilités de la fonction de
Scriba Propraetoris (Praefectus) de la Province de Gallia du mieux
dont je suis capable.

Sur mon honneur de Citoyen de Nova Roma, et en présence des Dieux et
Déesses du peuple Romain, et par leur volonté et bienveillance,
j'accepte le poste de Scriba Propraetoris (Praefectus) de la
Province de Gallia et tous les droits, privilèges, obligations et
responsabilités qui s'y attachent.

Fait à Palladia Tolosa le 18 Juillet, Année 2004 de l'Ere courante,
année du Consulat de Gnaeus Salix Astur et Gnaeus Equitius Marinus
ante ante diem XV Kal. SEXTILES MMDCCLVII AUC.

CALOGERUS MINIUS ELOQUENS

Salve,
Is it possible that a Census be performed on all of Nova Roma
Citizens?
Does any one know how to ask that it be done? As I think that it is
needed to find out how many people are in Our Nation. Also to unList
those no longer with Us.
Lucius Martianus Paullus

Salve,
It matters not. These wars and other stuff matters have caused alot
of people to just not care any more. Those that do, are members of
other groups or just drifted off. Not even to tell the Censors that
they no longer wish to be listed as citizens. or there are those who
are on this site who only look in once in awhile to see if the smoke
cleared.
Hate to say this but, this is a most unRoman situation, by the most
unRoman people. Who get elected by the lack of intrest of people.
Drop the B.S. and start acting like Romans.
All I see is people that in selfintrest, not in the intrest of Nova
Roma.
Serve Nova Roma insted of trying to force Nova Roma to serve You.
Vale,
Lucius Martianus Paullus

Salve,
Is there any news on the website? Is some one going to update it?
Luci

Salve, you all...

please i need help to get the citizenship and to create a new
province in south america. i already delivered my proyect to the
censors and the consuls. i need the support of the citizens, the
senate, and the governors specially those that are in a latin
province.

The proyect is to unificate the 5 counties liberated by Bolivar:
venezuela, peru, colombia, ecuador y bolivia; and named the province
Latinia Bolivarea in honor to our Liberator. and to be appoint by the
senate to rule this province. and the capital of it should be the
venezuelan cities of coro, in falcon state, or valencia, in carabobo
state.

i ask you all for your help and support, in the name of integration.

thank you.

my mail is imperatorxvii@... or horus1@....

Aurelianus to Drusus.

Please do me the same courtesy that I gave to you and answer my email point
by individual point. Do not pick one item out of many and try to make that be
my entire answer. It is not in keeping with our new relationship. If you are
unwilling to walk the walk, at least be good enough to talk the talk. And
for the record, two of my previous posts on this thread dealt with the active
members on the subsidiary lists.

Vale.


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

Gnaeus Iulius Caesar writes:

Indeed, troubled times - as they mostly are in Nova Roma. Regardless
of whether they are troubled or not, the Pontifex Maximus called on
people to ignore silly laws. Does that mean when the times are
troubled, that is acceptable and if so what is the yardstick for
deciding how much trouble we have to be in before it is acceptable.

Salve,

I am afraid that Gnaeus Iulius Caesar has misrepresented my words here,
possibly simply from misremembering my original post. The posts of mine referred
to here must be #2315 and #2316 in the list archives. Please do check them
out, nowhere do I "call on people to ignore silly laws."

I *did* strongly state my belief that Nova Roma does not need a complex
"civil law" system where Citizens can "sue" one another over petty verbal
disagreements. People argue on lists constantly all over the planet these days, and
somehow seem to survive it. "Lawsuits" and "Trials" can only serve to make
temporary bad episodes into much longer ones. Harsh words can be easily
forgotten... months of complex and bitter legalistic wrangling are not so easily put
aside. Why turn a day or two of easily moderated argument into months of
argument that really can't be removed from the public forum?

I was not saying we should "ignore" the current civil law. I was saying we
should realize that it was an error, that it cannot possibly make things better
for our community, and repeal it officially with all due legal process.

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus
Senator, Pontifex Maximus




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

Q. Caecilius Metellus L. Martiano Paullo Quiritibusque salutem

Salvete,

>Is it possible that a Census be performed on all of Nova Roma
>Citizens?
>Does any one know how to ask that it be done? As I think that it is
>needed to find out how many people are in Our Nation. Also to unList
>those no longer with Us.

As it just so happens, the Lex Fabia de Censo requires that a census be performed once every two years. The last one was conducted last year, and another, then, due for next year. So, for now, those who are listed are those who we have. But this brings me to another issue which I have been pondering for some time now: What do we do with all these socii from the last census?

Optime Valete in Pace Deorum,

Q. Caecilius Metellus

Q. Caecilius Metellus L. Martiano Paullo sal.

Salve,

>Is there any news on the website? Is some one going to update it?

The only news to date is that Flavius Vedius has stepped in to stand for Curator. Once we get an election underway to elect a Curator, hopefully the People will start seeing updates, especially to the translations.


Vale,

Q. Caecilius Metellus

C. Minucius Hadrianus Felix Quiritibus S.P.D.

Salvete!

Here are installments five through eight. Again I've fallen behind!

Carmen 30

"Alfenus, thoughtless and deceitful to your congenial pals,
Have you no pity whatsoever, hardheart, for your beloved friend?
Don't you now hesitate to betray me, to mislead me, you rogue?
Nor are the wicked deeds of treacherous men pleasing to the gods.
Like this deed you overlook: deserting me here wretched in my woes.
What are men to do? Alas! Tell me! Or in whom should they place trust?
You, indeed unjust, kept ordering me to entrust my soul,
Leading me on into friendship as if everything were fine.
You, that same person, now withdraw yourself, entrusting to the winds
All of your words, all of your deeds, carried away nebulously.
Even if you choose to forget, mindful are the gods, even Faith,
Who will make damn sure that you regret your deeds afterwards, my friend."

"Alfene immemor atque unanimis false sodalibus,
iam te nil miseret, dure, tui dulcis amiculi?
iam me prodere, iam non dubitas fallere, perfide?
nec facta impia fallacum hominum caelicolis placent.
quae tu neglegis ac me miserum deseris in malis.
eheu quid faciant, dic, homines cuiue habeant fidem?
certe tute iubebas animam tradere, inique, me
inducens in amorem, quasi tuta omnia mi forent.
idem nunc retrahis te ac tua dicta omnia factaque
uentos irrita ferre ac nebulas aereas sinis.
si tu oblitus es, at di meminerunt, meminit Fides,
quae te ut paeniteat postmodo facti faciet tui."

Carmen 31

"Of the penninsula of the almost island, Sirmio,
the jewel of the islands and the almost islands,
whatever island either Neptune
carries on lakes or on the vast sea,
how willingly and with what happiness I look upon
hardly myself believing that I have abandonded Thynia
and the Bithyninan fields, and that I see you in one piece
O what is a greater source of happiness, worries having been removed
when the mind puts aside its burden and when we come
tired by foreign work to our household gods
we rest in our having been longed for bed?
This is the one thing that is worth so much work
Hello, o charming Sirmio, and rejoice with the
rejoicing master; and you, O lydian waves of the lake
laugh whatever of laughter is at home."

"Paene insularum, Sirmio, Insularumque
ocelle, quascumque in liquentibus stagnis
marique vasto fert uterque neptunus,
quam te libenter quamque laetus inviso,
vix mi ipse credens Thyniam atque Bithynos
liquisse campos et videre te in tuto.
O quid solutis est beatius curis,
cum mens onus reponit, ac peregrino
labore fessi venimus larem ad nostrum,
desideratoque acquiescimus lecto?
Hoc est quod unum est pro laboribus tantis.
Salve, o venusta Sirmio, atque ero gaude
gaudente; vosque, o Lydiae lacus undae,
ridete quidquid est dome cachinnorum."

Carmen 32:

"I beg you, my sweet, my Ipsitilla,
my darling, my sophisticated beauty,
summon me to a midday assignation;
and, if you're willing, do me one big favor:
don't let another client shoot the door bolt,
and don't decide to suddenly go cruising,
but stay at home & get yourself all ready
for nine - yes, nine - successive copulations!
Honestly, if you want it, give the order:
I've eaten, and I'm sated, supinated!
My prick is poking through my cloak and tunic."

"Amabo, mea dulcis Ipsitilla,
meae deliciae, mei lepores,
iube ad te veniam meridiatum.
Et si iusseris, illud adivuato,
ne quis liminis obseret tabellam,
neu tibi lubeat foras abire,
sed domi maneas paresque nobis
novem continuas fututiones.
Verum si quid ages, statim iubeto:
nam pransus iaceo et satur supinus
pertundo tunicamque palliumque."

Carmen 33:

"O greatest of thieves skulking about the bathouses,
The father, Vibennius, and Vibennius Junior, the catamite son
(For dad is the one with the more sordid thieving hand,
While sonny boy is busy peddling his voracious fundament):
Why don't you both get the hell out of here and go to the devil?
Since the thieveries of the father are common knowledge
And you, son, couldn't sell that hairy ass of yours for a penny."

"O furum optime balneariorum
Vibenni pater et cinaede fili
(nam dextra pater inquinatiore,
culo filius est voraciore),
cur non exilium malasque in oras
itis? Quandoquidem patris rapinae
notae sunt populo, et natis pilosas,
fili, non potes asse venditare."


Valete,

C. Minucius Hadrianus Felix
Pontifex et Minervae Aedis Sacerdos

Ave Marcus Cassius,

The intresting part is I haven't told anyone to break any laws, rather
I have warned that there are a lot of people who will simply tell the
person who is trying to enforce some what part of their anatomy they
can stick the law and Nova Roma up.

It's also rather amusing to watch these people claim I have violated
some law. It's rather obivious that they haven't bothered reading the
law they are accusing me of violating.

The lex Salicia Judiciria states

"Any citizen of Nova Roma shall be able to bring an action against
another citizen of Nova Roma"

That phrase is worded in a manner that makes it an option. It dosen't
say "Must bring an action" It creates the option of bringing an action.

I Haven't broken any laws by failing to use an optional procedure.

Now there is another Lex Salicia, the Lex Salicia Poenalis which has
this intresting section,

CALVMNIAE (Libel and Slander):

1. Whoever is proven to have made to a third party a false and
defamatory statement about a person which has damaged the dignity or
reputation of that person may be compelled to make a DECLARATIO PVBLICA...

Which brings up the question, are all of these false accusations
leveled at me covered by this law?

Good thing I'm not one of those people who have a .00001 mm thick skin.

Let's just end this mess by getting rid of the laws before we wind up
driving people out of Nova Roma and increasing what is allready far
too many personal grudges.

L. Sicinius Drusus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, cassius622@a... wrote:
> Gnaeus Iulius Caesar writes:
>
> Indeed, troubled times - as they mostly are in Nova Roma. Regardless
> of whether they are troubled or not, the Pontifex Maximus called on
> people to ignore silly laws. Does that mean when the times are
> troubled, that is acceptable and if so what is the yardstick for
> deciding how much trouble we have to be in before it is acceptable.
>
> Salve,
>
> I am afraid that Gnaeus Iulius Caesar has misrepresented my words
here,
> possibly simply from misremembering my original post. The posts of
mine referred
> to here must be #2315 and #2316 in the list archives. Please do
check them
> out, nowhere do I "call on people to ignore silly laws."
>
> I *did* strongly state my belief that Nova Roma does not need a
complex
> "civil law" system where Citizens can "sue" one another over petty
verbal
> disagreements. People argue on lists constantly all over the planet
these days, and
> somehow seem to survive it. "Lawsuits" and "Trials" can only serve
to make
> temporary bad episodes into much longer ones. Harsh words can be
easily
> forgotten... months of complex and bitter legalistic wrangling are
not so easily put
> aside. Why turn a day or two of easily moderated argument into
months of
> argument that really can't be removed from the public forum?
>
> I was not saying we should "ignore" the current civil law. I was
saying we
> should realize that it was an error, that it cannot possibly make
things better
> for our community, and repeal it officially with all due legal
process.
>
> Valete,
>
> Marcus Cassius Julianus
> Senator, Pontifex Maximus
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Ave!

Thank you for the clarification.

Vale,

Sulla

----- Original Message -----
From: A. Apollonius Cordus
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 4:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Enough is enough children....


A. Apollonius Cordus to the Senator & Consular L.
Cornelius Sulla Felix, and to all citizens and
peregrines, greetings.

Owing to the nature of the day, I shan't reply to the
wider thread today, but I hope it is all right to
reply to this small item since it is not a substantive
disagreement but a simple misunderstanding:

> You have also trotted out one of your old
> favourites,
> the 'people will leave' argument. Do you remember
> the
> private correspondence you and I had recently with
> Senator Sulla, Equitius Cato, and Octavia
> Indagatrix?
> One of the things we talked about was whether it's
> acceptable to deviate from the mos maiorum in
> order to
> avoid people leaving. I think we all agreed that
> it
> was not acceptable - certainly Senator Sulla said
> so
> several times, quite clearly, and he said that he
> thought you would agree. Yes? Well, then, why do
> we
> once again see you saying that we ought to behave
> in
> an unhistorical way (belittling, bypassing, and
> ignoring the laws of the res publica) in order to
> stop
> people leaving?
>
> Sulla: Actually, I do not recall saying that it
> is appropriate to deviate from the Mos Maiorum to
> prevent people from leaving the organization. Nova
> Roma is a voluntary organization, and there is
> absolutely nothing to prevent someone from leaving.
> So, please do not speak for me, or put words in my
> posts, or try to spin them. I am more than capable
> of speaking for myself, A. Apollonius. And, I have
> a copy of my conversation and I stated all
> throughout our conversation that we must stay as
> close to the Mos Maiorum as possible and that
> deviation should be kept to the barrest minimum.

Please, Senator, read carefully what I write and don't
assume that I'm attacking you just because you dislike
me. What I wrote (you will find it above) is this:

> One of the things we talked about was whether it's
> acceptable to deviate from the mos maiorum in
> order to
> avoid people leaving. I think we all agreed that
> it
> was not acceptable - certainly Senator Sulla said
> so
> several times, quite clearly, and he said that he
> thought you would agree.

See - "we all agreed that it was *not* acceptable".
That is what you said, and that is what I said you
said, and that is what you said you said.

You said it was not acceptable to deviate from the mos
maiorum simply to stop people leaving. I agreed. You
have said it again in the message I quote above. I
still agree. You and I, in short, agree. I was just
asking Senator Drusus whether he agrees with us.





___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - sooooo many all-new ways to express yourself http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



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

Ave,

Nope, its just some people like a double standard. It is quite clear. Thank you for pointing it out, Caesar.

Vale,

Sulla

----- Original Message -----
From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 4:56 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: A reply - not edited - to Drusus


Salve,

Indeed, troubled times - as they mostly are in Nova Roma. Regardless
of whether they are troubled or not, the Pontifex Maximus called on
people to ignore silly laws. Does that mean when the times are
troubled, that is acceptable and if so what is the yardstick for
deciding how much trouble we have to be in before it is acceptable.

Is it just that we are to ignore a flagrant call for civil
disobediance and then string up Senator Drusus becuase he is who he
is?

Vale
Caesar

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@y...> wrote:
> Salve Gnaee Iuli:
> the Pontifex Maximus said those words at the time of the Censor
> Octavius's resignation and the lawsuit against Scaurus, troubled
> times ideed. Some even called for a dicatatorship.
> Unlike Senator and Pontifex Drusus who by his actions went to
> Yahoo, skipping the legal process of Nova Roma, was chastised and
> still does not advocate the legal system, the very leges so dear to
> Rome.
> By my actions I have shown that I respect the res publica and
all
> who represent her. De minimus we are a Club and can abide by common
> rules.
> I admire the Pontifex Cassius for his sympathy to the Censor
and
> Scaurus equally as for his sympathy and kindness to me.
> vale
> M. Arminia Maior Fabiana
>
> Propraetrix Hiberniae
> scriba Iuris et
> Investigatio CFQ
>
>
> > > the same yard-stick that would be applied to Senator Drusus,
> > > you say but who you are - and whether you are in favour with
the
> > > hangman or not.
> > >
> > > Vale
> > > Gnaeus Iulius Caesar
> > >
> > >
> >


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



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

Ave Lucius Martianus,

But that has happened since day one. There have been people who left and did not tell the Censors, that is why I promulgated the first Census law, and the Pater registration law. To try to find out the true numbers of citizens.

Vale,

Sulla

----- Original Message -----
From: David Bustillos
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 4:27 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Aurelianus to Drusus et SPQNR


Salve,
It matters not. These wars and other stuff matters have caused alot
of people to just not care any more. Those that do, are members of
other groups or just drifted off. Not even to tell the Censors that
they no longer wish to be listed as citizens. or there are those who
are on this site who only look in once in awhile to see if the smoke
cleared.
Hate to say this but, this is a most unRoman situation, by the most
unRoman people. Who get elected by the lack of intrest of people.
Drop the B.S. and start acting like Romans.
All I see is people that in selfintrest, not in the intrest of Nova
Roma.
Serve Nova Roma insted of trying to force Nova Roma to serve You.
Vale,
Lucius Martianus Paullus



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



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

Ave Lucius Martianus,

There is a law that deals with the Census.

It is the Lex Fabio de Censo

http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2003-05-31-i.html

Vale,

Sulla

----- Original Message -----
From: David Bustillos
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 4:34 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] census


Salve,
Is it possible that a Census be performed on all of Nova Roma
Citizens?
Does any one know how to ask that it be done? As I think that it is
needed to find out how many people are in Our Nation. Also to unList
those no longer with Us.
Lucius Martianus Paullus



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



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

Ave,

When did you deliver it to the Censors? To date I have not received anything, Can you email me privately and I will try to assist you. My email address is alexious@....

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor

----- Original Message -----
From: imperatorxvii
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 5:55 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] IMPERIAL MESSAGE


Salve, you all...

please i need help to get the citizenship and to create a new
province in south america. i already delivered my proyect to the
censors and the consuls. i need the support of the citizens, the
senate, and the governors specially those that are in a latin
province.

The proyect is to unificate the 5 counties liberated by Bolivar:
venezuela, peru, colombia, ecuador y bolivia; and named the province
Latinia Bolivarea in honor to our Liberator. and to be appoint by the
senate to rule this province. and the capital of it should be the
venezuelan cities of coro, in falcon state, or valencia, in carabobo
state.

i ask you all for your help and support, in the name of integration.

thank you.

my mail is imperatorxvii@... or horus1@....



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



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

G. Iulius Scaurus S. P. D.

Salvete, Quirites.

Today is ante diem XIV Kalendas Augusti and the first Lucaria; the day
is nefastus publicus. The two Lucaria are festivals shrouded in
obscurity, probably arising from the proximity of a large wood
(Leucaria) which once existed between the Via Salaria and the Riber.
The term Lucaria derives from lucar (an archaic forme of lucus, sacred
grove) and is almost certainly related to the luci which were cultic
sites, like those associated with Dea Dia, Anna Perenna, Robigo,
Furrina, Iuno, and Iuppiter. There is debate among scholars whether the
two luci in questions were the Arx and the Capitolium or the Leucaria
and grove of Rhea Silva, although the latter are probably to be
preferred. The precise character of the festivals is unknown, but
appears to have been connected to clearing a sacred area within the grove.

Tomorrow is ante diem XIII Kalendas Augusti and the first day of the
Ludi Victoriae Caesaris; the day is comitialis.

Valete.

G. Iulius Scaurus
Aedilis Curulis, Flamen Quirinalis et Pontifex

Salvete Omnes

Venator scripsit:

On the matter of a web master for Nova Roma.

Once an election is set, I shall vote for my friend Flavius Vedius
Germanicus.

I have the advantage over many of some occasional personal
correspondence with him, as well as a few telephone conversations.

I believe he has remained steadfast in his personal ethics, regardless
of what the facile impression of him may show.

He was my first contact with Nova Roma, and his passion for our New
Republic is a large part of why I am here.

I am aware of some of the personal quests he has undertaken. He has
remained, in my view, a good, honorable man.

F. Vedius has my support, and my thanks.

=========================================
In Amicus sub Fidelis -
Stephanus Ullerius Venator Piperbarbus
Civis Nova Romana

"Without the sword, the law is only words." - Cicero

Salve Pontifex Maximus,

Indeed you are correct. It was not "silly" but "stupid" you used as
an adjective.

Message 23755 of 26107
From: "Marcus Cassius Julianus" <cassius622@a...>
Date: Sat May 22, 2004 5:31 am
Subject: Free Speech (was: Re: The recent legal business (Scaurus))

Vale
Gn. Iulius Caesar.

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, cassius622@a... wrote:
> Gnaeus Iulius Caesar writes:
>
> Indeed, troubled times - as they mostly are in Nova Roma.
Regardless
> of whether they are troubled or not, the Pontifex Maximus called on
> people to ignore silly laws. Does that mean when the times are
> troubled, that is acceptable and if so what is the yardstick for
> deciding how much trouble we have to be in before it is acceptable.
>
> Salve,
>
> I am afraid that Gnaeus Iulius Caesar has misrepresented my words
here,
> possibly simply from misremembering my original post. The posts of
mine referred
> to here must be #2315 and #2316 in the list archives. Please do
check them
> out, nowhere do I "call on people to ignore silly laws."
>
> I *did* strongly state my belief that Nova Roma does not need a
complex
> "civil law" system where Citizens can "sue" one another over petty
verbal
> disagreements. People argue on lists constantly all over the planet
these days, and
> somehow seem to survive it. "Lawsuits" and "Trials" can only serve
to make
> temporary bad episodes into much longer ones. Harsh words can be
easily
> forgotten... months of complex and bitter legalistic wrangling are
not so easily put
> aside. Why turn a day or two of easily moderated argument into
months of
> argument that really can't be removed from the public forum?
>
> I was not saying we should "ignore" the current civil law. I was
saying we
> should realize that it was an error, that it cannot possibly make
things better
> for our community, and repeal it officially with all due legal
process.
>
> Valete,
>
> Marcus Cassius Julianus
> Senator, Pontifex Maximus
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

G. Iulius Scaurus S. P. D.

Salvete, Quirites.

Today is ante diem XIII Kalendas Augusti and the first day of the Ludi
Victoriae Caesaris; the day is comitialis.

Tomorrow is ante diem XII Kalendas Augusti and the second Lucaria; the
day is nefastus publicus. The two Lucaria are festivals shrouded in
obscurity, probably arising from the proximity of a large wood
(Leucaria) which once existed between the Via Salaria and the Riber.
The term Lucaria derives from lucar (an archaic forme of lucus, sacred
grove) and is almost certainly related to the luci which were cultic
sites, like those associated with Dea Dia, Anna Perenna, Robigo,
Furrina, Iuno, and Iuppiter. There is debate among scholars whether the
two luci in questions were the Arx and the Capitolium or the Leucaria
and grove of Rhea Silva, although the latter are probably to be
preferred. The precise character of the festivals is unknown, but
appears to have been connected to clearing a sacred area within the grove.

Valete.

G. Iulius Scaurus
Aedilis Curulis, Flamen Quirinalis et Pontifex

Salve Quirites,

I will miss during 15 days, I leave in vacancy with the majority the
members Gens Minia, the groups Carcaso and Palladia Tolosa (Gallia).
I envisage to look at my e-mail every 3 days. I will be back to
Carcaso on August 4.

Vale in pace deorum.

CAIUS MINIUS MESSALA BELLATOR
PROVINCIAE GALLIAE LEGATUS
PATER FAMILIAS GENTIS MINIA
CIVIS NOVAE ROMAE GALLIAE PROVINCIAE
OPTIMA MAXIMA

Ave Gnaeus Iulius Caesar

> Should the Pontifex Maximus not have to resign by this logic? He is a
> senator, a founder, yet no one has demanded his head on a plate.
>
> There appears to be a significant inconsistency in this approach.

Not really. I mean, I can't speak for Laureatus, but I see a significant
difference. The PM said that once, and I haven't seen him repeat it over and
over again, while Senator Drusus made it one of his banners (red hearrings? I'd
be interested if someone could explain me the ethimology of that).

Now, if we agree that compaigning for a general disrespect of the rules enacted
by the cives of Nova Roma is wrong, one can still think that one mistake is
allowed to anyone without crucifying him. I do not know if Laureatus followed
this line of thought by suggesting Drusus to resign and not to the PM, but if
he had, I wouldnt' have found it too illogical.

Vale


Domitius Constantinus Fuscus
PF Constantinia
Aedilis Urbis

Salve Honorable Q. Caecilius Metellus !

>As it just so happens, the Lex Fabia de Censo requires that a census
>be performed once every two years. The last one was conducted last
>year, and another, then, due for next year.

Yes this is correct.

>So, for now, those who are listed are those who we have. But this
>brings me to another issue which I have been pondering for some time
>now: What do we do with all these socii from the last census?

One of the main reasons to keep the sociim were that they would be a
"recruitment" base for Nova Roma. I would suggest some kind of
activation period sometime before the Census next year to actvate
them and then I suggest that we sort out those who have been socii
for more than 2 years.

Remember that we have had citizens being socci returning to active
level all the time.

>Optime Valete in Pace Deorum,
>
>Q. Caecilius Metellus

--

Vale

Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Senior Censor, Consularis et Senator
Proconsul Thules
Sodalitas Egressus Beneficarius et Praefectus Provincia Thules
Civis Romanus sum
************************************************
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 Omnes,

Please Forgive me for the delay it has taken to respond to the few
comments made by Senator Drusus and Iulius Caesar on my earlier post.
I would like to address a few things so as to clarify my position :

1. All quotations from my posts were taken out of context and my
conclusions may have appeared a bit rash. In this light, yes, I did
wonder whether or not senator Drusus should consider remaining a
Senator since he could not reconcile is intimate convictions with the
way Nova Roma had developped. BUT and it is a big BUT, the reasoning
behind this conclusion was deliberatley ommitted therefore giving the
impression that I was demanding something that I have no power, nor
any interest, to get. I quote below the relevant exerpt and I refer
our readers to post 26074 for the full message :

Taken from post 26074 : "That said, I am worried that a senior member
of our community, a Senator, has so little faith in our institutions
that he repeatedly calls from external interference before any
litigious matter may be resolved internally. I cannot help but
wonder, Senator, if you trust the system that sets the rules by which
we live together in Nova Roma so little, then why do you still want
to be part of it ?
I do not deny you the right to express yourself but if you cannot
reconcile your personal convictions with the way our small society
works then I see no alternative than to request that you stepped down
from your position of Senator. You can shout all you like as a
privatus. As a senator and leading member of our community, a member
of the board of director, it seems to me that you should adopt a
public position that supports the hand that feeds you. Remember that
you are only a senator because the State needs and allows it. If you
undermine the State you undermine your position and you might as well
just go bak to ploughing your fields : if a crisis arises we will
call youÂ…"

2. I was also accused of double standards for not jumping at PM and
Senator Cassius Iulianus who has also expressed concerns about the
way things are going in NR. Besides the fact that Senator Cassius
Iulianus already responded on this matter, stating that his opinion
was not a reflection of his lack of respect to our institutions, I
woul also like to say that there is quite a difference between an
outburst of hurt feelings (Cassius Iulianus) and a continuous attack
on a system by a senior member of that system (Licinius Drusus).

3. I am in favour of a good system of laws to provide a framework
within which we can all work for the betterment of the Res Publica.
It is my personal opinion and nothing else. It is also my right to
question a leading member of our organisation when he publicly says
that the rules by which we all live are not good enough,
inappropriate or plain rubbish. Whether Senator Drusus likes it or
not, these rules have been voted upon according to constitution. I
will say again that democracy may not be perfect but that is the best
option we have.

4. The very fact that I am in favour of a good system of laws should
be an indication that I do not practice double standards ; If our
laws were properly implemented we would be all equal before them with
the same rights and the same duties. Absence of laws do end up in
bullying and double standards.

I hope this clarification has helped our readers to understand where
I stand. Obviously I am in disagreement with senator Drusus but there
is nothing a good discussion can't cure. I am afraid, however, that
should my post be answered partially again I shall quit commenting on
this thread as these are not honourable practices.

Most respectfully

C Moravius Laureatus Armoricus

A. Apollonius Cordus to Cn. Iulius Caesar, and to all
citizens and peregrines, greetings.

I apologize for the delay in my reply: it was a dies
nefastus yesterday, you see.

At your prompting, I went back to look at the Pontifex
Maximus' message which you cite. It seems to me to
stop short of explicitly inciting civil disobedience.
It's true that he wrote "we must not obey stupid laws
simply because they are laws". This statement, taken
on its own, is, I agree, both wrong and irresponsible.
Being Pontifex Maximus doesn't make one infallible.
But I would like to think that this is not quite what
he meant, for the whole sentence is this: "We must not
obey stupid laws simply because they are laws... we
should look at what the hell we're doing to ourselves
and make better
decisions". This suggests to me that his use of the
word "obey" was an error, for what he seems to have
meant was "respect" or "leave unchanged". Of course,
if he did mean to say that people ought to disobey
laws they consider stupid, that would be a very
serious matter indeed. I hope he will take this
opportunity to explicitly disavow this sentiment.

Now, please do not take this as an apologia by proxy.
I do not think that the general attitude of the
Pontifex Maximus, whom I greatly respect, toward the
judicial system of Nova Roma is a responsible or
helpful one, nor one proper to his position in our
community. I don't think that means he ought to
resign, but I think he ought to reconsider.

Senator Drusus' attitude is not a responsible one
befitting his position in the community either. He has
not explicitly encouraged people to disobey the laws.
He has, however, consistently spoken and behaved in a
way which can hardly have failed to encourage
disrespect for the law and for the judicial system in
particular. I don't think that means he ought to
resign, but I think he ought to reconsider.

Now, it is one thing to say that the offence of
calumnia ought to be revisited, revised, perhaps even
entirely scrapped. That's a perfectly reasonable view,
and we can have a reasonable discussion on that basis.

Both the gentlemen we are talking about here have gone
beyond that to cast doubt on the need for a judicial
system at all. This is not in itself a harmful or
irresponsible argument, though it is an incorrect one,
as I'll explain later. But both gentlemen have
expressed their views on the subject in ways which
could encourage people not just to support the
abolition of the judicial system but to ignore the
judicial system. It may be that they have done this
only accidentally, through lack of care in their
choice of words, but that is the result in any case.
Those who argue for the abolition of the judicial
system are perfectly entitled to do so, but they must
be very careful not to imply that people needn't obey
the laws, or to imply that people ought to pursue
their grievances against other citizens through
outside agencies.

There is a great tendency in some quarters to
disparage the legal, political, and judicial aspects
on Nova Roma as silly, incidental, dispensible, a
fiction, in contrast to the religio, which is
important, real, fundamental. Those who take up this
stance are unwittingly undermining the religio as much
as are those who suggest that the religio is a
side-show to the state. Let me explain why.

The religio publica is an inseparable part of the res
publica. So, too, are law, government, and justice. An
autonomous community has three principal concerns: the
relationship between the community and the gods, the
relationship between the community and its individual
members, and the relationships between its individual
members. The management of the first relationship is
the religio publica, and is the responsibility of the
pontifices, flamines, and to a lesser extent the
curule magistrates (representing the community) and
the gods (representing themselves). The management of
the second relationship is government, and is the
responsibility of the magistrates and the senate
(representing the community) and the comitia
(representing the individual members of the
community). The management of the third relationship
is justice, and is the responsibility of the
individual members of the community and of the
judicial magistrates who facilitate justice. A
community which fails to concern itself with any of
those three relationships is not a res publica in the
proper Roman sense.

Now, some point out that Nova Roma the state was set
up for the benefit of the religio. This is perfectly
true. But this does not mean that the state is
dispensible to the religio. The religio Romana is not
complete without the religio publica. The religio
publica cannot exist except as part of a res publica.
The res publica cannot exist without the state. So
yes, the state was created for the benefit of the
religio, but this does not mean, as some people
suggest, that the state is optional, dispensible, or
less real than the religio. On the contrary, it is
utterly indispensible for the religio.

Of course Nova Roma is not a real state in the sense
meant by international law. By the same token, the
religio is not a real state religion. If the state is
silly, then the religio is silly. If the state is just
role-playing, then so is the religio. A fake state
cannot have a real state religion: if the state is a
simulation, so is the religio. Those who insist on
putting putting words like 'sue', 'law', 'court', or
'government' in quotation marks must also set
quotation marks around 'religio'. There is no state if
there is no law and no justice. As I've said before,
Cicero states quite clearly that justice is the
defining characteristic of the true res publica. So
those who belittle the laws or the judicial system of
Nova Roma are belittling the state itself, and thus
also belittling the religio, because the religio
cannot be more real or important than the res publica
of which it is part.

The Novaroman state is a fiction. So is the religio
publica. In the eyes of the outside world neither is
what it claims to be. But just as in ancient Rome the
state and the religio publica were a single
inseparable res publica, so the Novaroman state and
the Novaroman religio publica are a single and
inseparable fiction. This fiction stands up because we
all collude in it. But you cannot collude only
partially. You are either in on it, or you are not.
Casting doubt on the seriousness or importance of one
part of the fiction undermines the whole edifice.

So why does Nova Roma need a judicial system? Because
a judicial system is a necessary condition - a sine
qua non - for a res publica. The Romans would not have
regarded a community with no judicial system as a res
publica. No one in the modern world would regard a
community without a judicial system as a proper state.
If we want a religio publica, we must have a res
publica, and if we want a res publica, we must have a
judicial system, and we must respect it, and we must
use it in preference to outside agencies. Without
laws, courts, and justice, we have no res publica and
no religio publica, and we might as well pack up and
go home.





___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - sooooo many all-new ways to express yourself http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

while Senator Drusus made it one of his banners (red hearrings? I'd

> be interested if someone could explain me the ethimology of that)

CATO: glad to be of assistance, Fusce:

This term for deliberate misdirection ("red herring") comes from
hunting. Poachers would interpose themselves between the prey and the
hunting party and drag a red herring across the trail to mislead the
dogs. This would give them the opportunity to bag the prey themselves.

A red herring was chosen because dog trainers often used the pungent
fish to create a trail when training their hounds. The dogs, upon
encountering the herring scent, would follow that trail as it was the
one they had been trained with.

Ave Moravius Laureatus,

Earlier you bemoaned "bullying" against those who resigned over the
Gender edict/lex, yet there weren't any calls for their resignations.
Dosen't this call constitute even worse Bullying?

You have a problem with me speaking out against a law that you agree
with, but you don't seem to have any problem with those who spoke out
against the law when the topic was the Gender Edict, including the
Senator who was the founder of your Gens.

Sir, I do see a double standard on your part, a desire to silence
opposition when you agree with the law, coupled with a desire to
defend opposition when you disagree with the law.

L. Sicinius Drusus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gaius Moravius Laureatus Armoricus"
<serenusnova@a...> wrote:

> Salvete Omnes,
>
> Please Forgive me for the delay it has taken to respond to the few
> comments made by Senator Drusus and Iulius Caesar on my earlier post.
> I would like to address a few things so as to clarify my position :
>
> 1. All quotations from my posts were taken out of context and my
> conclusions may have appeared a bit rash. In this light, yes, I did
> wonder whether or not senator Drusus should consider remaining a
> Senator since he could not reconcile is intimate convictions with the
> way Nova Roma had developped. BUT and it is a big BUT, the reasoning
> behind this conclusion was deliberatley ommitted therefore giving the
> impression that I was demanding something that I have no power, nor
> any interest, to get. I quote below the relevant exerpt and I refer
> our readers to post 26074 for the full message :
>
> Taken from post 26074 : "That said, I am worried that a senior member
> of our community, a Senator, has so little faith in our institutions
> that he repeatedly calls from external interference before any
> litigious matter may be resolved internally. I cannot help but
> wonder, Senator, if you trust the system that sets the rules by which
> we live together in Nova Roma so little, then why do you still want
> to be part of it ?
> I do not deny you the right to express yourself but if you cannot
> reconcile your personal convictions with the way our small society
> works then I see no alternative than to request that you stepped down
> from your position of Senator. You can shout all you like as a
> privatus. As a senator and leading member of our community, a member
> of the board of director, it seems to me that you should adopt a
> public position that supports the hand that feeds you. Remember that
> you are only a senator because the State needs and allows it. If you
> undermine the State you undermine your position and you might as well
> just go bak to ploughing your fields : if a crisis arises we will
> call youÂ…"
>
> 2. I was also accused of double standards for not jumping at PM and
> Senator Cassius Iulianus who has also expressed concerns about the
> way things are going in NR. Besides the fact that Senator Cassius
> Iulianus already responded on this matter, stating that his opinion
> was not a reflection of his lack of respect to our institutions, I
> woul also like to say that there is quite a difference between an
> outburst of hurt feelings (Cassius Iulianus) and a continuous attack
> on a system by a senior member of that system (Licinius Drusus).
>
> 3. I am in favour of a good system of laws to provide a framework
> within which we can all work for the betterment of the Res Publica.
> It is my personal opinion and nothing else. It is also my right to
> question a leading member of our organisation when he publicly says
> that the rules by which we all live are not good enough,
> inappropriate or plain rubbish. Whether Senator Drusus likes it or
> not, these rules have been voted upon according to constitution. I
> will say again that democracy may not be perfect but that is the best
> option we have.
>
> 4. The very fact that I am in favour of a good system of laws should
> be an indication that I do not practice double standards ; If our
> laws were properly implemented we would be all equal before them with
> the same rights and the same duties. Absence of laws do end up in
> bullying and double standards.
>
> I hope this clarification has helped our readers to understand where
> I stand. Obviously I am in disagreement with senator Drusus but there
> is nothing a good discussion can't cure. I am afraid, however, that
> should my post be answered partially again I shall quit commenting on
> this thread as these are not honourable practices.
>
> Most respectfully
>
> C Moravius Laureatus Armoricus

Salve Quirites,
We are pleased to announce to you that the Gens Minia will leave on
holiday during 15 days in the South Gallia, to meet together and
make a course in all the Roman sites existing in Savoy. The reason
of great convivium is to traverse the antique Via Domitia (created
by Cnaeus Domitius Ahenobarbus) and to visit the Roman remains at
sides, by taking again the Hannibal's Course. We promise very
beautiful pictures.
Here the program envisaged:

Day, 1 : Arrival in the ancient city of Cularo (Grenoble), visit
Day, 2 : Visit the ancient city of Lemencum (Chambéry)
Day, 3 : Visit of antic Aquae (Aix Les Bains), the thermal baths,
and Diane's Temple.
Day, 4 : Visit the antic Butae (Annecy) and meal around lake.
Day, 5 : Visit the ancian tollgate of Ad Publicanos (Albertville)
Day, 6 : The Mont Blanc
Day, 7 : Break to the Maurienne's Valley and excursion to the
Vanoise's Park.
Day, 8 : Visit via Domitia by the site of Obilinnum (Arbinne).
Day, 9 : Meet Wall of Brigantio (the Villette).
Day, 10 : Via Domitia's Course towards the city of Darentasia
(Moutiers).
Day, 11 : Visit the antique Axima (Aime) Old capital of Provincia
Alpa Graia.
Day, 12 : Visit the antique Bergintrum (Bourg Saint Maurice)
Day, 13 : Excursion towards In Alpe Graia (Col du Petit Saint
Bernard)
Day, 14 : Excursion towards In summo Poenino (Col du Grand St
Bernard), Meet of Colonna Jovis 'Jupiter's Column' and the ancient
Fanum.
Day, 15 : Return towards Carcaso and Palladia Tolosa

Vale in pace deorum.

CAIUS MINIUS MESSALA BELLATOR
PROVINCIAE GALLIAE LEGATUS
PATER FAMILIAS GENTIS MINIA
CIVIS NOVAE ROMAE GALLIAE PROVINCIAE
OPTIMA MAXIMA

_____________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
Grand Convivium et séjour romain pour la Gens Minia


Salve Quirites,

Nous avons le plaisir de vous annoncer que la Gens Minia va
effectuée un Séjour de 15 jours dans le Sud de Gallia, afin de se
retrouver ensemble pour faire un parcours dans la plupart des sites
romains existant en Savoie. Le But de se grand Convivium est de
parcourir l'antique Via Domitia (créé par Cnaeus Domitius
Ahenobarbus) et visiter les vestiges romains à côtés en suivant le
parcours d'Hannibal. Nous vous promettons de très belles photos.

Voici le programme le prévu:

1 jour: Arrivée à la cité antique de Cularo (Grenoble), visite
2 jour : Visite de la cité antique de Lemencum (Chambéry)
3 jour: Visite de l'antique Aquae (Aix les Bains), de ses thermes,
et du Temple de Diane.
4 jour: Visite de l'antique Butae (Annecy) et repas autours de son
lac.
5 jour: Visite de l'ancien poste de péage de Ad Publicanos
(Albertville)
6 jour: Le Mont Blanc
7 jour: Repos dans la vallée de la Maurienne et randonnée dans le
parc de la Vanoise.
8 jour: Visite de la via Domitia en passant par le site de Obilinnum
(Arbinne)
9 jour: Rencontre de la Muraille de Brigantio (Villette)
10 jour: Parcours de la via Domitia vers la cité de Darentasia
(Moutiers)
11 jour: Visite de l'antique Axima (Aime) ancienne capitale de la
Provincia des Alpes Graies
12 jour: Visite de l'antique Bergintrum (Bourg Saint Maurice)
13 jour: Randonnée vers In Alpe Graia (Col du Petit Saint Bernard)
14 jour: Randonnée vers In summo Poenino (Col du Grand St Bernard),
rencontre de la Colonna Jovis 'Colonne de Jupiter' et de son Fanum
antique.
15 jour : Retour vers Carcaso et Palladia Tolosa

Vale in pace deorum.

CAIUS MINIUS MESSALA BELLATOR
PROVINCIAE GALLIAE LEGATUS
PATER FAMILIAS GENTIS MINIA
CIVIS NOVAE ROMAE GALLIAE PROVINCIAE
OPTIMA MAXIMA

Salve Quirites,

We are pleased to announce to you that the Gens Minia will leave on
holiday during 15 days in the South Gallia, to meet together and
make a course in all the Roman sites existing in Savoy. The reason
of great convivium is to traverse the antique Via Domitia (created
by Cnaeus Domitius Ahenobarbus) and to visit the Roman remains at
sides, by taking again the Hannibal's Course. We promise very
beautiful pictures.
Here the program envisaged:

Day, 1 : Arrival in the ancient city of Cularo (Grenoble), visit
Day, 2 : Visit the ancient city of Lemencum (Chambéry)
Day, 3 : Visit the antic Aquae (Aix Les Bains), the thermal baths,
and Diane's Temple.
Day, 4 : Visit the antic Butae (Annecy) and meal around lake.
Day, 5 : Visit the ancian tollgate of Ad Publicanos (Albertville)
Day, 6 : The Mont Blanc
Day, 7 : Break to the Maurienne's Valley and excursion to the
Vanoise's Park.
Day, 8 : Visit via Domitia by the site of Obilinnum (Arbinne).
Day, 9 : Meet Wall of Brigantio (the Villette).
Day, 10 : Via Domitia's Course towards the city of Darentasia
(Moutiers).
Day, 11 : Visit the antique Axima (Aime) Old capital of Provincia
Alpa Graia.
Day, 12 : Visit the antique Bergintrum (Bourg Saint Maurice)
Day, 13 : Excursion towards In Alpe Graia (Col du Petit Saint
Bernard)
Day, 14 : Excursion towards In summo Poenino (Col du Grand St
Bernard), Meet of Colonna Jovis 'Jupiter's Column' and the ancient
Fanum.
Day, 15 : Return towards Carcaso and Palladia Tolosa

Vale in pace deorum.

CAIUS MINIUS MESSALA BELLATOR
PROVINCIAE GALLIAE LEGATUS
PATER FAMILIAS GENTIS MINIA
CIVIS NOVAE ROMAE GALLIAE PROVINCIAE
OPTIMA MAXIMA

_____________________________________________________________________


Grand Convivium et séjour romain pour la Gens Minia


Salve Quirites,

Nous avons le plaisir de vous annoncer que la Gens Minia va
effectuée un Séjour de 15 jours dans le Sud de Gallia, afin de se
retrouver ensemble pour faire un parcours dans la plupart des sites
romains existant en Savoie. Le But de se grand Convivium est de
parcourir l'antique Via Domitia (créé par Cnaeus Domitius
Ahenobarbus) et visiter les vestiges romains à côtés en suivant le
parcours d'Hannibal. Nous vous promettons de très belles photos.

Voici le programme le prévu:

1 jour: Arrivée à la cité antique de Cularo (Grenoble), visite
2 jour : Visite de la cité antique de Lemencum (Chambéry)
3 jour: Visite de l'antique Aquae (Aix les Bains), de ses thermes,
et du Temple de Diane.
4 jour: Visite de l'antique Butae (Annecy) et repas autours de son
lac.
5 jour: Visite de l'ancien poste de péage de Ad Publicanos
(Albertville)
6 jour: Le Mont Blanc
7 jour: Repos dans la vallée de la Maurienne et randonnée dans le
parc de la Vanoise.
8 jour: Visite de la via Domitia en passant par le site de Obilinnum
(Arbinne)
9 jour: Rencontre de la Muraille de Brigantio (Villette)
10 jour: Parcours de la via Domitia vers la cité de Darentasia
(Moutiers)
11 jour: Visite de l'antique Axima (Aime) ancienne capitale de la
Provincia des Alpes Graies
12 jour: Visite de l'antique Bergintrum (Bourg Saint Maurice)
13 jour: Randonnée vers In Alpe Graia (Col du Petit Saint Bernard)
14 jour: Randonnée vers In summo Poenino (Col du Grand St Bernard),
rencontre de la Colonna Jovis 'Colonne de Jupiter' et de son Fanum
antique.
15 jour : Retour vers Carcaso et Palladia Tolosa

Vale in pace deorum.

CAIUS MINIUS MESSALA BELLATOR
PROVINCIAE GALLIAE LEGATUS
PATER FAMILIAS GENTIS MINIA
CIVIS NOVAE ROMAE GALLIAE PROVINCIAE
OPTIMA MAXIMA

Salve,

After couple of years of lurking on this list, I thought I post
something. This might be of interest to those with a 'religious
interest ' on list. I hope this is not too much off topic.

I was recently involved in a Neo-Mithras rite which had all the
following.
Each Planetary guardian was dressed in appropriate planetry
robes +colours
and masks, and each person carries the symbols of the grade
as shown in
mosaics of Felicissimus Mithraeum.

Guardians of the Seven Gates the Planetry initiators:
Mercury (Corax/Raven)
Venus (Nymphus/ bee chrysalis or male bride)
Mars (Miles/ soldier)
Jupites (Leo/ lion)
Moon (Perses /Persian)
Sun (Heliosdromus/sun Runner)
Saturn (Pater/ father)

Guides:
Cautes (Spring) torch upward.
Cautopates (Autumn) torch downward

The seven gates are clearly marked on the hill side with various
symbolic
object as mosaics of Felicissimus Mithraeum etc...

there was lit fire gates, incense burners, swords, raven feathers,
sistrums,
veils, a Stellar altar, torches, even a statue of Mithras slaying the
Bull (and
even a statue of Anahita), candles, a fire shovel, cadesus,
libation bowl and
many many other objects.... basicaly all the Mithraic propes we
could get our
hands on :-)

I have to say the seven fold ritual structure and ascent/descent
through the
planet worked very well. It was very different to working in a 'circle'
as
wiccans
do or some of the other neo pagan ritual structures.

eg even the opening of space was not the usual 4 but a seven
fold opening:
Raven opens East (Air),
Nymphus opens West (water)
Miles opens North (Earth)
Leo opens South (Fire)
Perses opens below (underworld)
Heliosdromus opens above (upper world/ stary sky)
Pater opens within ( boundary of Space).


the lines from Santa Prisca Mithraeum:
" Receive the incense- burners, Father, receive the Lions, Holy
One, through
whom we offer incense, through whom we offer ourselves
consumed."
really stuck in my mind.

as did the following opening lines:
"The soul, having started on its downward course from the
intersection of the
zodiac and the Milk Way to the successive spheres lying
beneath, as it
passes through these spheres, not only takes on the
afore-mentioned
envelopment in each sphere by approaching a luminous body,
but also
acquires each of the attributes which it will exercise later. In the
sphere of
Saturn it obtains reason and understanding, in Jupiter sphere
the power to
act, in Mars' sphere a bold spirit, in the Sun's sphere
sense-perception and
imagination. In Venus' sphere the impulse of passion, in
Mercury's' sphere
the ability to speak and interpret and in the lunar sphere the
function of the
molding and increasing bodies." (from Platonist Macrobius
commentary on
Cicero's `Scipio's dream' fifth century AD. Manfred Clauss "The
Roman cult of
Mithras" ).

another part of the rite was from Mithras liturgy which one person
recited:
Hail Mithras-Sol Invictus, bright sun shine ray, bright lightner,
founder of
earth,
master of water, ruler of wind. I, who was born from the mortal
womb and the
fluid of semen, have now been transformed into an immortal
spirit. Invincible
Sun, I thank thee for bring me revelation regarding the Mithraic
mysteries.
Lord while born again, I am passing away, while growing and
having grown, I
am dying; while born from a life generating birth, I am passing
on, released to
death- as the wheels of life turn, as you have founded and
decreed, and have
established thy mysteries."

It was imho excellent (bearing mind I might biased ;-) as I was
involved in
organising it). Anyway it was a very interesting 'neo-mithraic' rite,
drawing both
on Mithraic material as much as it could and then filling the gap
using general
neopagan revival material.

btw music from Mystera Mithrae CD was used in parts ;-) songs
1, 2 and 7 in
the album are very usefull in helping to set the mood etc..

LUX,
Nabarz

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "A. Apollonius Cordus"
<a_apollonius_cordus@y...> wrote:
Ave Cordus,

> Senator Drusus' attitude is not a responsible one
> befitting his position in the community either. He has
> not explicitly encouraged people to disobey the laws.
> He has, however, consistently spoken and behaved in a
> way which can hardly have failed to encourage
> disrespect for the law and for the judicial system in
> particular. I don't think that means he ought to
> resign, but I think he ought to reconsider.

Sir,

The one thing that does more damage to respect for law than anything
else is passing bad laws and misapplying them.

The entire concept of a complex judicial system for a small
organization like Nova Roma is a bad idea.

The Laws were originally intended to address problems at real world
meetings and applying them elsewhere is a travesty.

The wording of the law clearly creates an option, but you are
attempting to convert that option into a manditory action with no
other recourse.

Converting that into a mandate leaves anyone who lacks the time to go
through a complex procedure to address a simple matter with no
recourse at all. It's Justice reserved only for those who have large
ammounts of free time on their hands.

You are in effect claiming extra-territorial powers for your law by
attempting to apply it to the Mail Server of My Business, something
that Nova Roma has yet to claim ownership of.

You sir, are the threat to resprct for the law. This entire
unrealistic attitude that Nova Roma can claim such widespread
jurisdiction over it's members is a sure fire way to undermine the
only real authority it can ever have voulantary cooperation.

L. Sicinius Drusus

Salve Senator Druse,

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

> Ave Moravius Laureatus,
>
> Earlier you bemoaned "bullying" against those who resigned over the
> Gender edict/lex, yet there weren't any calls for their

resignations.

> Dosen't this call constitute even worse Bullying?
>

There is one simple explanation to that : I wasn't remotely as active
in Nova Roma as I am today. I am now more involved with different
matters and more attuned with what is going on so that I feel
confident to express my opinion. Which is just that, an opinion.

> You have a problem with me speaking out against a law that you agree
> with, but you don't seem to have any problem with those who spoke

out

> against the law when the topic was the Gender Edict, including the
> Senator who was the founder of your Gens.
>

My posts NEVER referred to only ONE law in particular. I am in
disagreement with you on the position you have taken against our
legal and judicial system in general. I offered my views on this
public forum so that other citizens can clearly see that Nova Roma is
not a monolithic entity

> Sir, I do see a double standard on your part, a desire to silence
> opposition when you agree with the law, coupled with a desire to
> defend opposition when you disagree with the law.
>

The law is the law is the law. I didn't draft it, it has been voted
upon and I am now living my life as a Nova Roman citizen by the rules
it sets. Whether I agree or disagree with a law or not is irrelevant
once it is passed. It is now effective and I'll follow it. And to be
perfectly honest with you I voted against the lex Salicia because I
too thought it was going too fast and too far. The majority decided
it was good enough for Nova Roma so I'll follow it.
Now we can argue all night about my supposed double standards. I have
nothing to prove here and you can feel free to carry on spreading
that rumour. Suffice to say that if Consul Marinus tomorrow starts
ranting about how inappropriate our laws are, I will start to
question whether or not he should stay at the head of the State. If
the honourable Censor Quintilianus, my own boss, start commenting
about how useless the rules of our society are, I will resign from
his cohors and also call for his resignation as he wouldn't be fit,
in my eyes, to be a moral guide to us all.
I do not indulge in double standards. Anybody who knows me slighlty
would know that. And I do not persecute you either : We just happen
to disagree on practically everything. That's life.
I have changed my mind on one thing however after reading my friend
Cordus' post : I do not wish to see you step down from your position
of Senator but I would very much like you to look in your heart and
see if your convictions really are compatible with what Nova Roma is
today.

Thank you for copying my last message in its entirety; I am glad we
can carry on this thread on a sensible ground.

Most Respectfully

C. Moravius Laureatus Armoricus

> L. Sicinius Drusus
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gaius Moravius Laureatus

Armoricus"

> <serenusnova@a...> wrote:
> > Salvete Omnes,
> >
> > Please Forgive me for the delay it has taken to respond to the

few

> > comments made by Senator Drusus and Iulius Caesar on my earlier

post.

> > I would like to address a few things so as to clarify my

position :

> >
> > 1. All quotations from my posts were taken out of context and my
> > conclusions may have appeared a bit rash. In this light, yes, I

did

> > wonder whether or not senator Drusus should consider remaining a
> > Senator since he could not reconcile is intimate convictions with

the

> > way Nova Roma had developped. BUT and it is a big BUT, the

reasoning

> > behind this conclusion was deliberatley ommitted therefore giving

the

> > impression that I was demanding something that I have no power,

nor

> > any interest, to get. I quote below the relevant exerpt and I

refer

> > our readers to post 26074 for the full message :
> >
> > Taken from post 26074 : "That said, I am worried that a senior

member

> > of our community, a Senator, has so little faith in our

institutions

> > that he repeatedly calls from external interference before any
> > litigious matter may be resolved internally. I cannot help but
> > wonder, Senator, if you trust the system that sets the rules by

which

> > we live together in Nova Roma so little, then why do you still

want

> > to be part of it ?
> > I do not deny you the right to express yourself but if you cannot
> > reconcile your personal convictions with the way our small

society

> > works then I see no alternative than to request that you stepped

down

> > from your position of Senator. You can shout all you like as a
> > privatus. As a senator and leading member of our community, a

member

> > of the board of director, it seems to me that you should adopt a
> > public position that supports the hand that feeds you. Remember

that

> > you are only a senator because the State needs and allows it. If

you

> > undermine the State you undermine your position and you might as

well

> > just go bak to ploughing your fields : if a crisis arises we will
> > call youÂ…"
> >
> > 2. I was also accused of double standards for not jumping at PM

and

> > Senator Cassius Iulianus who has also expressed concerns about

the

> > way things are going in NR. Besides the fact that Senator Cassius
> > Iulianus already responded on this matter, stating that his

opinion

> > was not a reflection of his lack of respect to our institutions,

I

> > woul also like to say that there is quite a difference between an
> > outburst of hurt feelings (Cassius Iulianus) and a continuous

attack

> > on a system by a senior member of that system (Licinius Drusus).
> >
> > 3. I am in favour of a good system of laws to provide a framework
> > within which we can all work for the betterment of the Res

Publica.

> > It is my personal opinion and nothing else. It is also my right

to

> > question a leading member of our organisation when he publicly

says

> > that the rules by which we all live are not good enough,
> > inappropriate or plain rubbish. Whether Senator Drusus likes it

or

> > not, these rules have been voted upon according to constitution.

I

> > will say again that democracy may not be perfect but that is the

best

> > option we have.
> >
> > 4. The very fact that I am in favour of a good system of laws

should

> > be an indication that I do not practice double standards ; If our
> > laws were properly implemented we would be all equal before them

with

> > the same rights and the same duties. Absence of laws do end up in
> > bullying and double standards.
> >
> > I hope this clarification has helped our readers to understand

where

> > I stand. Obviously I am in disagreement with senator Drusus but

there

> > is nothing a good discussion can't cure. I am afraid, however,

that

> > should my post be answered partially again I shall quit

commenting on

> > this thread as these are not honourable practices.
> >
> > Most respectfully
> >
> > C Moravius Laureatus Armoricus

L IUL SULLA MINIO MESSALAE BELLATORI S.D.

Great trip indeed!

> The reason
> of great convivium is to traverse the antique Via Domitia (created
> by Cnaeus Domitius Ahenobarbus) and to visit the Roman remains at
> sides, by taking again the Hannibal's Course. We promise very
> beautiful pictures.

Yes, but... Hannibal's course arrived much further! Don't tell me
you are going to stop in front of Colonna Jovis! And what about the
rest of that great march, that thanks /gods/ness did stop?
Just kidding, but if you want to go further that column, just tell
me or our Propraetor Ma Con Serapio, that we'll be happy to meet you
all in Italia!

Salve Honorable Caius Minius Messala Bellator!

Sounds wonderful! I just I wish I could be there with You.

>Salve Quirites,
>We are pleased to announce to you that the Gens Minia will leave on
>holiday during 15 days in the South Gallia, to meet together and
>make a course in all the Roman sites existing in Savoy. The reason
>of great convivium is to traverse the antique Via Domitia (created
>by Cnaeus Domitius Ahenobarbus) and to visit the Roman remains at
>sides, by taking again the Hannibal's Course. We promise very
>beautiful pictures.
>Here the program envisaged:

--

Vale

Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Senior Censor, Consularis et Senator
Proconsul Thules
Sodalitas Egressus Beneficarius et Praefectus Provincia Thules
Civis Romanus sum
************************************************
Aut inveniam viam aut faciam
"I'll either find a way or make one"
************************************************
Dignitas, Iustitia, Fidelitas et Pietas
Dignity, Justice, Loyalty and Dutifulness

F. Galerius Aurelianus to Senator L. Sicinius Drusus et al.

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

> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "A. Apollonius Cordus"
> <a_apollonius_cordus@y...> wrote:
> Ave Cordus,
>
> > Senator Drusus' attitude is not a responsible one
> > befitting his position in the community either. He has
> > not explicitly encouraged people to disobey the laws.
> > He has, however, consistently spoken and behaved in a
> > way which can hardly have failed to encourage
> > disrespect for the law and for the judicial system in
> > particular. I don't think that means he ought to
> > resign, but I think he ought to reconsider.
>
> Sir,
>
> The one thing that does more damage to respect for law than anything
> else is passing bad laws and misapplying them.

Nevertheless, once a law or rule for an organization has been voted
on and passed, it needs to be respected until it can be challenged or
removed. Drusus, you ran for a magistracy last year. If elected,
how could you respect your Oath of Office if you willing chose to
ignore the procedures and rules established for the Corporation?

>
> The entire concept of a complex judicial system for a small
> organization like Nova Roma is a bad idea.

It may be a bad idea and it may be a bit complex but it is what we
have now. No one will actually know if it isn't workable until it is
tried in practice. If someone wants to use it AND they have
exhausted all other possible solutions, then shouldn't it be
attempted?

>
> The Laws were originally intended to address problems at real world
> meetings and applying them elsewhere is a travesty.

That is you opinion, Senator, and you are entitled to it but it
doesn't change that it is on the books of our organization. You can
choose never to use it but that doesn't mean that it cannot be used
to affect you. (NOTE: Just for the record, I have no intention of
filing a complaint against you. We have worked out a decent
compromise without such convolutions).

> The wording of the law clearly creates an option, but you are
> attempting to convert that option into a manditory action with no
> other recourse.
>

Converting that into a mandate leaves anyone who lacks the time to go
through a complex procedure to address a simple matter with no
recourse at all. It's Justice reserved only for those who have large
ammounts of free time on their hands.

I expect that anyone who wants to follow such a "mandate" will enlist
aid just as Milo enlisted the aid of Cicero when he was tried. Of
course, Cicero lost that one as I recall.

> You are in effect claiming extra-territorial powers for your law by
> attempting to apply it to the Mail Server of My Business, something
> that Nova Roma has yet to claim ownership of.
>
> You sir, are the threat to resprct for the law. This entire
> unrealistic attitude that Nova Roma can claim such widespread
> jurisdiction over it's members is a sure fire way to undermine the
> only real authority it can ever have voulantary cooperation.

Actually, Drusus, you may both be a threat to respect for law but
your's appears to be aimed at the rules of Nova Roma, which is the
primary concern on the ML. I wouldn't dream of attempting to bring
any kind of legal action against you for anything that you have said
or posted about me because that would just be plain silly and a waste
of time. However, someone with "... large ammounts of time on their
hands" could take exception to your opinions and charge you with
contumacy. If you choose to continue your stance against the duly-
approved laws and policies as a legal fiction, you could end up
exiled for a year. In certain ways, that would be a pity because you
frequently made some good points despite your phrasing.

>
> L. Sicinius Drusus

Di vos incolumes custodiant.

F G A F

Salve,
Fair Warning. To all those who feel the need to send me private e-
mail telling basically to keep my mouth shut. Keep you fingers of my
e-mail address.
I paid my taxs, I voted. I will express myself in what . in Whatever
way I wish. I am not a Peregrini, I am a Citizen. With Full Rights.
I have no intrest in running for any political office. I have a big
intrest in what is going on in MY NATION. I have served my
macronation, now I wish to serve my Micronation. to whit, my voice is
my tool.
No one has a right to send me an e-mail, like that which was sent
yesterday. No One. I will answer it like I did yesterday.
Lucius

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick D. Owen"
<Patrick.Owen@s...> wrote:

Ave,
I Only have time for one quick point right now

> > The Laws were originally intended to address problems at real world
> > meetings and applying them elsewhere is a travesty.
>
> That is you opinion, Senator, and you are entitled to it but it
> doesn't change that it is on the books of our organization.

No sir, that is a fact, one which can be checked with the person who
actually drafted the proposal for the Praetor who introduced it, and
who became one of the first victims of it's misapplication, Scaurus.

L. Sicinius Drusus

Ave Lucius,

It seems that some people who make a great pretense about being
respectful of the law have ZERO respect for one law. Section II B 4 of
Nova Roma's Constitution.

" The right to participate in all public forums and discussions, and
the right to reasonably expect such forums to be supported by the
State. Such communications, regardless of their content, may not be
restricted by the State, except where they represent an imminent and
clear danger to the Republic. Such officially sponsored forums may be
expected to be reasonably moderated in the interests of maintaining
order and civility;"

They seek to silence any dissenting view, they use manners as an
excuse, they threaten law suits, they attempt to intimidate people on
this list with accusations of disloyality, with snowing them under
with multiple responses, and far too often of late harrasement in
their mail boxes.

L. Sicinius Drusus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "David Bustillos" <rotedragon@m...>
wrote:

> Salve,
> Fair Warning. To all those who feel the need to send me private e-
> mail telling basically to keep my mouth shut. Keep you fingers of my
> e-mail address.
> I paid my taxs, I voted. I will express myself in what . in Whatever
> way I wish. I am not a Peregrini, I am a Citizen. With Full Rights.
> I have no intrest in running for any political office. I have a big
> intrest in what is going on in MY NATION. I have served my
> macronation, now I wish to serve my Micronation. to whit, my voice is
> my tool.
> No one has a right to send me an e-mail, like that which was sent
> yesterday. No One. I will answer it like I did yesterday.
> Lucius

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com,
Ciizens of Nova Roma;

In the matter of a webmaster for Nova Roma;

Citizen Germanicus may well be a good and honorable man. I do not know for I have never met him. However, I do know that he has left Nova Roma three times, at least once in anger and frustration.

His wife was the one who held the old Main List hostage and forced a change of the tile in order to again use it. Now Citizen Germanicus is back and he has contacted some of those with whom he has had past frictions, and that is just fine.

However, the position of webmaster for Nova Roma is one in which dependability , long and continuous service, and the ability to be trusted in times of turbulance, anger, and personal frustration is in my view absolutely vital. Citizen Germanicus has shown in the past that his needs are more valuable to him than Nova Roma. I have no argument with anyone who leaves NR and then returns, that is thier business. But I do have a great concern in putting such a person in such a pivotal position, when the individual has shown himself to be someone who runs away fom NR when the times get tough. In my view that is not someone who is either dedicated to NR or who places it's interests efore his own.

Good and honorable Citizen Germanicus may well be, however, steadfast to Nova Roma and to her best intersts, I am afraid in my view he is not!!!

Respectfully;

Marcus Minucius-Tiberius Audens
==================
Stefn_Ullarsson <catamount_grange@i...> wrote:

> Salvete Omnes
>
> Venator scripsit:
>
> On the matter of a web master for Nova Roma.
>
> Once an election is set, I shall vote for my friend Flavius Vedius
> Germanicus.
>
> I have the advantage over many of some occasional personal
> correspondence with him, as well as a few telephone conversations.
>
> I believe he has remained steadfast in his personal ethics, regardless
> of what the facile impression of him may show.
>
> He was my first contact with Nova Roma, and his passion for our New
> Republic is a large part of why I am here.
>
> I am aware of some of the personal quests he has undertaken. He has
> remained, in my view, a good, honorable man.
>
> F. Vedius has my support, and my thanks.
>
> =========================================
> In Amicus sub Fidelis -
> Stephanus Ullerius Venator Piperbarbus
> Civis Nova Romana
>
> "Without the sword, the law is only words." - Cicero

Salve.

The law of Nova Roma has become a totem, a political instrument. The
primacy of the law is not touted for its own sake, but as a means to
constrain political opponents, destablise the CP and generally
provide a rallying point.

Having an opinion is not grounds for exile. Having an opinion as a
Senator or Pontifex Maximus, or as NR's Chief Dog Catcher
(anticipating such a law being introduced) is not grounds for exile,
prosecution or anything similar. To suggest such in iteself damages
the reputation of Nova Roman law and makes the job of legislating
needed and sensible measures that much harder.

I find it highly illuminating that after pointing out the
inconsistency of targetting Senator Drusus, but ignoring the words of
the Pontifex Maximus, a series of explanations were proferred (except
those from Cordus) which attempted to provide a rationale for
inconsitency of condemnation. The PM's character, his track record,
the circumstances, it was the first time, he didn't really mean it
that way; all evidence of why the axe should not fall on his neck as
well. This is a form of intellectual fakery.

The calls for prosecuting or exiling Senator Drusus were not based,
imo, on the need to defend the primacy of the law, the supremacy of
the will of the people or any other explanations; they were based
soley on "Lets poke a stick into the eye of Drusus". For anyone who
truly cares about the reputation of Nova Roman law, this sort of
attempted censorship and misplaced indignation leaves a sour taste.

We are legislating ourselves to death in Nova Roma, the law is being
used as a battering ram for political reasons, many laws are poorly
written with signiifcant gaps in them and large segments of the
population are disinterested in the process of government (and that
is the actual as opposed to imaginary popualtion). Vocalising this
and it being touted on this list as some form of heresy or treason to
do so, has nothing to do with defending the law or the will of the
people. Now I am sure that no one wants to give the impression that
thoughts or opinions are illegal or banned, but the message is loud
and clear - Senator Drusus has to be smacked for pointing out the
Emperor has no clothes on.

Gnaeus Iulius Caesar.



--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick D. Owen"
<Patrick.Owen@s...> wrote:

> F. Galerius Aurelianus to Senator L. Sicinius Drusus et al.
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Lucius Sicinius Drusus"
> <drusus@b...> wrote:
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "A. Apollonius Cordus"
> > <a_apollonius_cordus@y...> wrote:
> > Ave Cordus,
> >
> > > Senator Drusus' attitude is not a responsible one
> > > befitting his position in the community either. He has
> > > not explicitly encouraged people to disobey the laws.
> > > He has, however, consistently spoken and behaved in a
> > > way which can hardly have failed to encourage
> > > disrespect for the law and for the judicial system in
> > > particular. I don't think that means he ought to
> > > resign, but I think he ought to reconsider.
> >
> > Sir,
> >
> > The one thing that does more damage to respect for law than

anything

> > else is passing bad laws and misapplying them.
>
> Nevertheless, once a law or rule for an organization has been voted
> on and passed, it needs to be respected until it can be challenged

or

> removed. Drusus, you ran for a magistracy last year. If elected,
> how could you respect your Oath of Office if you willing chose to
> ignore the procedures and rules established for the Corporation?
> >
> > The entire concept of a complex judicial system for a small
> > organization like Nova Roma is a bad idea.
>
> It may be a bad idea and it may be a bit complex but it is what we
> have now. No one will actually know if it isn't workable until it

is

> tried in practice. If someone wants to use it AND they have
> exhausted all other possible solutions, then shouldn't it be
> attempted?
> >
> > The Laws were originally intended to address problems at real

world

> > meetings and applying them elsewhere is a travesty.
>
> That is you opinion, Senator, and you are entitled to it but it
> doesn't change that it is on the books of our organization. You

can

> choose never to use it but that doesn't mean that it cannot be used
> to affect you. (NOTE: Just for the record, I have no intention of
> filing a complaint against you. We have worked out a decent
> compromise without such convolutions).
>
> > The wording of the law clearly creates an option, but you are
> > attempting to convert that option into a manditory action with no
> > other recourse.
> >
> Converting that into a mandate leaves anyone who lacks the time to

go

> through a complex procedure to address a simple matter with no
> recourse at all. It's Justice reserved only for those who have

large

> ammounts of free time on their hands.
>
> I expect that anyone who wants to follow such a "mandate" will

enlist

> aid just as Milo enlisted the aid of Cicero when he was tried. Of
> course, Cicero lost that one as I recall.
>
> > You are in effect claiming extra-territorial powers for your law

by

> > attempting to apply it to the Mail Server of My Business,

something

> > that Nova Roma has yet to claim ownership of.
> >
> > You sir, are the threat to resprct for the law. This entire
> > unrealistic attitude that Nova Roma can claim such widespread
> > jurisdiction over it's members is a sure fire way to undermine the
> > only real authority it can ever have voulantary cooperation.
>
> Actually, Drusus, you may both be a threat to respect for law but
> your's appears to be aimed at the rules of Nova Roma, which is the
> primary concern on the ML. I wouldn't dream of attempting to bring
> any kind of legal action against you for anything that you have

said

> or posted about me because that would just be plain silly and a

waste

> of time. However, someone with "... large ammounts of time on

their

> hands" could take exception to your opinions and charge you with
> contumacy. If you choose to continue your stance against the duly-
> approved laws and policies as a legal fiction, you could end up
> exiled for a year. In certain ways, that would be a pity because

you

> frequently made some good points despite your phrasing.
> >
> > L. Sicinius Drusus
>
> Di vos incolumes custodiant.
>
> F G A F