Gnaeus Equitius Marinus Consul Quiritibus Salutem Plurimam Dicit

In accordance with our laws, pullarius Gaius Iulius Scaurus has taken
an auspicium at my request, for the purpose of convening the Comitia
Populi Tributa. The augury being favorable, I now call the Comitia
Populi Tributa for the purpose of electing one Quaestor to fill the
vacancy left by the resignation of Diana Octavia Aventina; one Curator
Araneum to fill the vacancy left by the resignation of Marcus Octavius
Germanicus, and to vote on a law that will correct two titles of minor
magistrates to better Latin forms.

The presidium shall be Pollilia.

Due to the complications of the calendar at this time of year, the
Contio will not begin until a week from today. This will permit a
voting interval uninterrupted by dies fastus. Informal discussion of
the candidates and the law proposal may begin immediately, with due
regard to the religious calendar between now and the formal commencement
of the Contio period.

Schedule for the Contio and vote:

30 Quintillis (dies comitialis) Contio begins 00:01 Roma time
31 Quintillis (dies comitialis) Contio continues
1 Sextillis (dies fastus) Contio suspended 00:00 Roma time
2 Sextillis (dies fastus) Contio suspended until midnight
3 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Contio resumes 00:01 Roma time
4 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Contio continues
5 Sextillis (dies fastus) Contio suspended 00:00 Roma time
6 Sextillis (dies fastus)
7 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Voting for all begins 00:01 Roma time
8 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Voting continues
9 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Voting continues
10 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Voting continues
11 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Voting continues
12 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Voting continues until midnight
13 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Voting ends 00:00 Roma time


The candidates for the vacant offices are


QUAESTOR (One position open)

Domitius Constantinus Fuscus, date of citizenship 2000/06/04
Caius Moravius Laureatus Armoricus, date of citizenship 2002/12/02


CURATOR ARANEUM (Webmaster, one position open)

Flavius Vedius Germanicus, date of citizenship 1998/03/01


LEX EQVITIA DE MVTANDIS APPELLATIONIBVS DVORVM MAGISTRATVVM MINORVM

Equitian Law concerning changing the titles of two minor magistrates

Since correct Latin is an important part of Nova Roma's public image and
of our mission to disseminate Romanitas, we endeavor to correct mistakes
in our public Latin, in order to make ourselves understandable to
readers, writers, and speakers of modern Latin.

I. The titles of two of our minor magistrates, whose offices
did not exist in antiquity, have until this time been
incorrect Latin.

II. The titles of these two magistracies shall be changed as
follows:

A. The title "curator araneum" shall be changed
to "magister aranearius."

B. The title "curator differum" shall be changed
to "editor commentariorum."


Valete Quirites,

--
Gnaeus Equitius Marinus
Consul

Ave,

There should be a correction on this post. You are using the wrong calendar. Three years ago the College of Pontiffs adopted the Gregorian Calendar. Therefore the use of Quintillis and Sextillis is wrong. They should be Iulius and Augustus. Here is the link.

http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/pontifices/2001-03-25-i.html

Vale,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

----- Original Message -----
From: Gnaeus Equitius Marinus
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com ; NovaRoma-Announce@yahoogroups.com ; mediatlanticaprovincia@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 2:05 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Comitia Centuriata Convened


Gnaeus Equitius Marinus Consul Quiritibus Salutem Plurimam Dicit

In accordance with our laws, pullarius Gaius Iulius Scaurus has taken
an auspicium at my request, for the purpose of convening the Comitia
Centuriata. The augury being favorable, I have convened the Comitia
Centuriata for the purpose of electing a replacement for Praetor Gnaeus
Octavius Noricus, who has been declared missing in accordance with the
requirements of the Lex Equitia Galeria Ordinariis.

Candidates for Praetor suffectus:

Gaius Popillius Laenas, date of Citizenship: 2001/02/12
Pompeia Minucia Tiberia Strabo, date of Citizenship: 2000/01/16


The Centuria Praerogativa, which shall vote first, will be the VII Century.

Schedule for the Contio and vote:

24 Quintillis (dies comitialis) Contio begins 00:01 Roma time
25 Quintillis (nefastus publicus) Contio suspended 00:00 Roma time
26 Quintillis (dies nefastus) Contio suspended
27 Quintillis (dies comitialis) Contio resumes 00:01 Roma time
28 Quintillis (dies comitialis) Contio continues
29 Quintillis (dies comitialis) Contio continues
30 Quintillis (dies comitialis) Vote of Cent VII begins 00:01 Roma time
31 Quintillis (dies comitialis) Vote of Cent VII continues
1 Sextillis (dies fastus) Voting suspended 00:00 Roma time
2 Sextillis (dies fastus) Voting suspended until midnight
3 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Vote of I Class begins 00:01 Roma time
4 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Vote of I Class continues
5 Sextillis (dies fastus) Voting suspended 00:00 Roma time
6 Sextillis (dies fastus) Voting suspended until midnight
7 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Voting for all begins 00:01 Roma time
8 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Voting continues
9 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Voting continues
10 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Voting continues
11 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Voting continues until midnight
12 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Voting ends 00:00 Roma time

Please note that the time in Roma is Central European Time (CET), which
is six hours later than Eastern Standard Time in the United States, and
one hour later than Greenwich Mean Time (GMT).


Valete Quirites,

Gn. Equitius Marinus
Consul


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,

There should be a correction on this post. You are using the wrong calendar. Three years ago the College of Pontiffs adopted the Gregorian Calendar. Therefore the use of Quintillis and Sextillis is wrong. They should be Iulius and Augustus. Here is the link.

http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/pontifices/2001-03-25-i.html

Vale,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

----- Original Message -----
From: Gnaeus Equitius Marinus
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com ; NovaRoma-Announce@yahoogroups.com ; mediatlanticaprovincia@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 2:35 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Comitia Populi Tributa called


Gnaeus Equitius Marinus Consul Quiritibus Salutem Plurimam Dicit

In accordance with our laws, pullarius Gaius Iulius Scaurus has taken
an auspicium at my request, for the purpose of convening the Comitia
Populi Tributa. The augury being favorable, I now call the Comitia
Populi Tributa for the purpose of electing one Quaestor to fill the
vacancy left by the resignation of Diana Octavia Aventina; one Curator
Araneum to fill the vacancy left by the resignation of Marcus Octavius
Germanicus, and to vote on a law that will correct two titles of minor
magistrates to better Latin forms.

The presidium shall be Pollilia.

Due to the complications of the calendar at this time of year, the
Contio will not begin until a week from today. This will permit a
voting interval uninterrupted by dies fastus. Informal discussion of
the candidates and the law proposal may begin immediately, with due
regard to the religious calendar between now and the formal commencement
of the Contio period.

Schedule for the Contio and vote:

30 Quintillis (dies comitialis) Contio begins 00:01 Roma time
31 Quintillis (dies comitialis) Contio continues
1 Sextillis (dies fastus) Contio suspended 00:00 Roma time
2 Sextillis (dies fastus) Contio suspended until midnight
3 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Contio resumes 00:01 Roma time
4 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Contio continues
5 Sextillis (dies fastus) Contio suspended 00:00 Roma time
6 Sextillis (dies fastus)
7 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Voting for all begins 00:01 Roma time
8 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Voting continues
9 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Voting continues
10 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Voting continues
11 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Voting continues
12 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Voting continues until midnight
13 Sextillis (dies comitialis) Voting ends 00:00 Roma time


The candidates for the vacant offices are


QUAESTOR (One position open)

Domitius Constantinus Fuscus, date of citizenship 2000/06/04
Caius Moravius Laureatus Armoricus, date of citizenship 2002/12/02


CURATOR ARANEUM (Webmaster, one position open)

Flavius Vedius Germanicus, date of citizenship 1998/03/01


LEX EQVITIA DE MVTANDIS APPELLATIONIBVS DVORVM MAGISTRATVVM MINORVM

Equitian Law concerning changing the titles of two minor magistrates

Since correct Latin is an important part of Nova Roma's public image and
of our mission to disseminate Romanitas, we endeavor to correct mistakes
in our public Latin, in order to make ourselves understandable to
readers, writers, and speakers of modern Latin.

I. The titles of two of our minor magistrates, whose offices
did not exist in antiquity, have until this time been
incorrect Latin.

II. The titles of these two magistracies shall be changed as
follows:

A. The title "curator araneum" shall be changed
to "magister aranearius."

B. The title "curator differum" shall be changed
to "editor commentariorum."


Valete Quirites,

--
Gnaeus Equitius Marinus
Consul


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]

Salvete;
in regard to voting, when the time comes could we have a post that
day indicating which century votes.

Also, I live in Hibernia which is GMT and still, I am sad to say,
get confused about Rome time & when to vote, I can't be the only
numerically challenged civis;-

May we on the voting day have a notice posted like this

Voting begins: 12am Rome time
11pm GMT England
6pm EST US

and so forth for South America and Australia as well, I really think
this simple idea will be helpful

valete
M. Arminia Maior Fabiana

Salvete;
today I have tried to post twice to the Religio Romana list in
answer to Trainus's discussion & not one appeared. Is it working; as
far as I know I am under no moderation. Does anyone know what's
happening?
bene valete
M. Arminia Maior Fabiana

F. Galerius Aurelianus Rogator S.P.D.

I address the Senate and People of Nova Roma about the upcoming Comitia
Centuriata to determine whether G. Popillius Laenas or Pompeia Minucia Tiberia
Strabo will serve out the Praetorship of Gn. Octavius Noricus. As a Rogator, I
help to count the votes in our elections and I encourage every citizen who reads
this to go to the Album to learn exactly which Century you have been assigned
to in Nova Roma. Following the last election, the Rogators agreed to make
announcements on the ML of when each Century is allowed to cast their vote in
the Cista. The announcements will give information on exactly when each Century
is allowed to begin to vote. Please vote according to these announcements
and do not waste your vote by invalidating it by voting at the wrong time.

The office of Praetor is one of the most important in our organization for
the day-to-day function of communication. The Praetors act as our moderators
and they listen to complaints from citizens about lapses of civility and good
manners within our organization. The new Praetor will have the authority to
attempt to settle problems by intervention and compromise. The new Praetor also
has the power (barring Intercessio) of placing citizens in moderated status for
up to two months.

Please review the posts of the candidates for the last year and to form your
opinion about which candidate you feel will give the best service in this post
to Nova Roma. There will probably be some posts supporting one or the other
candidate plus the usual political activities of a less pleasant nature.
Remember, the final decision on who to vote for is yours.

Valete.


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

G. Iulius Scaurus S. P. D.

Salvete, Quirites.

Today is ante diem X Kalendas Augusti, the Ludi Victoriae Caesaris, and
the Neptunalia; the day is nefastus publicus. The precise nature of the
Neptunalia, like that of the Lucaria, is obscure. Festus (377) reports
that it was celebrated in booths or huts made of foliage to keep the
summer sun off Neptune's worshipers. Some scholars have suggested that
Neptunus was worshipped at this time as a deity of cooling waters and
springs. However, the ancient formula preserved in Aulus Gellius
(xiii.23.2), "Salacia Neptuni a salo," preserves a more ancient still
form of "salax" (lustful, potent), which points to the possibility of
the rites also focusing on Neptunus as "pater," a divine progenitor.

Tomorrow is ante diem IX Kalendas Augusti and the Ludi Victoriae
Caesaris; the day is nefastus.

Valete.

G. Iulius Scaurus
Aedilis Curulis, Flamen Quirinalis et Pontifex

Too cool! And they have a live webcam, too!

-FVG

http://www.chester.gov.uk/amphitheatre/index.html

Over the next 3 years the largest uncovered amphitheatre in the UK is to
be the subject of a major archaeological project. In a partnership
between English Heritage
<http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/archaeology> and Chester City
Council <http://www.chester.gov.uk>a top team of experts will carry out
exhaustive research on the historic Roman site.

This website will be your calling point for all the latest news and
information regarding the Amphitheatre Project, and we have many
exciting plans to make it as informative and useful resource as possible.

As I said before in my general post [with the draft of suggestion
concerning current issues], I've started work on some temple images
for Nova Roma. Some pictures can be found of the one that is the
furthest along in the PHOTO SECTION; it's a undifferentiated feminine
bust, and does not yet conform to any god form or any specific
Immortal. Comments and questions are most appreciated. I'll be
checking the list periodically today for responses to my general post
(which I'm not sure if most have read actually saw), as well as this
one. I actually wanted some suggestions as well on which diety I
should specifically sculpt on this piece, and what casting medium I
should use. The casting mediums I can execute the piece in are as
follows:

Bronze (difficult to do as it would require using the lost wax
method, but the benefits obviously speak for themselves)
Plaster (easy to do, cheap, but can produce even microscopic detail
and needless to say, is a beautiful media)
Polyeurathane (incrediby durable material.. this is what most
commercial sculptures are cast in these days)
Acrylic (which can be completely clear... lending an otherworldly
look to the finished image)
And possibly, high quality glass, if I can aquire the materials.

I'm also taking commissions for sculptures if any of you are
interested... I would need to be reimbursed for the material and some
labour, and keep in mind it will take some time to complete. And if
any of you would like an image for personal domestic worship, I
actually specialize in detailed small sculptures with minute details.
Anything I cast in plaster can be painted in the fresco style, and
anything cast in terra cotta or polymer clay can be painted, leafed,
etc. You would need to contact me directly via instant messenger in
order to specify EXACTLY what you wanted, and what I'm capable of
doing. Ultimately, I can give you something of better quality,
materials, and workmanship than you would probably be able to
purchase, at a fraction of the price they would charge ( I have no
markup on any of my art, at least for citizens of Nova Roma ;-) ).

I can also produce working tools, dinnerware, storage vessels,
paintings, wood carvings, and occasionally.. clothing and furniture;
all with ornate decoration. Contact me to see if I'm actually willing
to do something you might want to commission.

Look forward to hearing some comments and suggestions.

Kaelus Iulius

Salvete

--- Gnaeus Equitius Marinus <gawne@...>
escreveu:

> Gnaeus Equitius Marinus Consul Quiritibus Salutem
> Plurimam Dicit
>

[..] I now call the Comitia Populi Tributa for the
purpose of electing [..]
[..]

> The presidium shall be Pollilia.

[..]

> Valete Quirites,
> --
> Gnaeus Equitius Marinus
> Consul

M.Arminius: Just for clarification, is Tribus 20
Poblilia, or Tribus 21 Pollia ?


Vale
M.Arminius





_______________________________________________________
Yahoo! Mail agora com 100MB, anti-spam e antivírus grátis!
http://br.info.mail.yahoo.com/

Salve

Since the Collegium Pontificum dont endorse the
deification of Iulius Caesar and Augustus (i am not
sure about that), i believe that the Decreta refers to
the system of the Gregorian calendar (number of days),
not the details (the name of each month).
What is the opinion of the Pontifices about the use of
the old names? Otherwise, i need to change the names
in the Annales page too.


Vale
M.Arminius

--- "L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@...>
escreveu: > Ave,

>
> There should be a correction on this post. You are
> using the wrong calendar. Three years ago the
> College of Pontiffs adopted the Gregorian Calendar.
> Therefore the use of Quintillis and Sextillis is
> wrong. They should be Iulius and Augustus. Here is
> the link.
>
>

http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/pontifices/2001-03-25-i.html

>
> Vale,
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

_______________________________________________________
Yahoo! Mail agora com 100MB, anti-spam e antivírus grátis!
http://br.info.mail.yahoo.com/

Salve Marce Armini, et salvete Quirites,

M Arminius Maior <marminius@...> writes:

> --- Gnaeus Equitius Marinus <gawne@...>
> escreveu:
> [..]
> > The presidium shall be Pollilia.
> [..]
> > Valete Quirites,
> > --
> > Gnaeus Equitius Marinus
> > Consul
>
> M.Arminius: Just for clarification, is Tribus 20
> Poblilia, or Tribus 21 Pollia ?

It's Tribe 21, Pollia. I'll correct that in a revised posting. Thank you for
bringing the typo to my attention.

Valete Quirites,

-- Marinus

Salve,

I noticed that the Decretum on the Calendar had some side effects that
might be unintentional and bought this to the attention of the Collegium.

One of these is changing the names of the 7th and 8th months, and the
other is the Gregorian Calander uses the Common Era (CE) to number the
years rather than numbering them from the founding of Roma.

I Will be preparing a new Decretum to address the year numbering
making the AUC official.

Personally I prefer the Gregorian names of the 7th and 8th months
because it cause less confusion to moderns and the change didn't seem
to offend the Immortals 2000 years ago. I am open to reverting back to
the Republican names if that is what the majority of the citizens wish
however, and can include this in the Decretum in the other Pontifices
agree.

L. Sicinius Drusus
Pontifex

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, M Arminius Maior <marminius@y...> wrote:
> Salve
>
> Since the Collegium Pontificum dont endorse the
> deification of Iulius Caesar and Augustus (i am not
> sure about that), i believe that the Decreta refers to
> the system of the Gregorian calendar (number of days),
> not the details (the name of each month).
> What is the opinion of the Pontifices about the use of
> the old names? Otherwise, i need to change the names
> in the Annales page too.
>
>
> Vale
> M.Arminius
>
> --- "L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@e...>
> escreveu: > Ave,
> >
> > There should be a correction on this post. You are
> > using the wrong calendar. Three years ago the
> > College of Pontiffs adopted the Gregorian Calendar.
> > Therefore the use of Quintillis and Sextillis is
> > wrong. They should be Iulius and Augustus. Here is
> > the link.
> >
> >
> http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/pontifices/2001-03-25-i.html
> >
> > Vale,
> > Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________
> Yahoo! Mail agora com 100MB, anti-spam e antivírus grátis!
> http://br.info.mail.yahoo.com/

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "L. Cornelius Sulla"
<alexious@e...> wrote:

> Ave,
>
> Is that the best response you can come up with? I am so

disappointed that you could not simply do better than say, "Hey if
you do not like it, go start another organization." So, you cannot
refute any points I brought up.

Salve,

I didn't answer any of your points because I really didn't think they
were worthy of an answer.

Why don't any other countries recognize our sovereign status? Because
we have a *goal* of recognized sovereignty, not the immediate reality
of it.

Do we intend to fight other macronations for land, in violation of
the words of our Constitution? No, we plan to buy land, or possibly
recieve it by donation, *as other parts of our official literature
have always stated.*

No point you raised seemed any better than those. If you cannot ask
questions that seem genuine, why should I waste the time to craft
answers for them?

Vale,

Marcus Cassius Julianus
Pater Patriae

I don't know whether or not it could be divined whether it offended
the Immortals or not.. The Gregorian calendar was devised by a
Christian monk long after Christianity had become the official
religion of the empire, and was approved of for use by the pope
Gregory (hence why it's called Gregorian). Also... the Gregorian
calendar we use today is a revised edition of the original one
proposed by the aforementioned monk, as some of his calculations were
off and was often prone to error. We still don't have a perfectly
accurate calendar (think Leap Years). While I don't advocate the
creation of a newer, more accurate calendar (as that may very well be
one more thing to cause confusion and frustration for newcomers), the
context, and the pros and cons of various calendrical systems should
be kept in mind. Especially so when determing holidays and festivals.
Maybe the archaic Roman lunar calendar might be useful in that
regard, simply overlayed upon the Gregorian calendar? I don't know.
As Jews are the only modern people I know of to use a lunar religious
calendar, it wouldn't be without precedent, but it would still be
somewhat difficult to implement. The finalisation of the dating of
events, holidays, and the context within Nova Roma in reference to
our long-term goals seems to be one more thing that needs to be
discussed and worked out, in due time.

-Kaelus Iulius
(AIM: xkaelusx)

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "John Dobbins" <drusus@b...> wrote:
> Salve,
>
> I noticed that the Decretum on the Calendar had some side effects
that
> might be unintentional and bought this to the attention of the
Collegium.
>
> One of these is changing the names of the 7th and 8th months, and
the
> other is the Gregorian Calander uses the Common Era (CE) to number
the
> years rather than numbering them from the founding of Roma.
>
> I Will be preparing a new Decretum to address the year numbering
> making the AUC official.
>
> Personally I prefer the Gregorian names of the 7th and 8th months
> because it cause less confusion to moderns and the change didn't
seem
> to offend the Immortals 2000 years ago. I am open to reverting back
to
> the Republican names if that is what the majority of the citizens
wish
> however, and can include this in the Decretum in the other
Pontifices
> agree.
>
> L. Sicinius Drusus
> Pontifex
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, M Arminius Maior <marminius@y...>
wrote:
> > Salve
> >
> > Since the Collegium Pontificum dont endorse the
> > deification of Iulius Caesar and Augustus (i am not
> > sure about that), i believe that the Decreta refers to
> > the system of the Gregorian calendar (number of days),
> > not the details (the name of each month).
> > What is the opinion of the Pontifices about the use of
> > the old names? Otherwise, i need to change the names
> > in the Annales page too.
> >
> >
> > Vale
> > M.Arminius
> >
> > --- "L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@e...>
> > escreveu: > Ave,
> > >
> > > There should be a correction on this post. You are
> > > using the wrong calendar. Three years ago the
> > > College of Pontiffs adopted the Gregorian Calendar.
> > > Therefore the use of Quintillis and Sextillis is
> > > wrong. They should be Iulius and Augustus. Here is
> > > the link.
> > >
> > >
> > http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/pontifices/2001-03-25-i.html
> > >
> > > Vale,
> > > Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________________
> > Yahoo! Mail agora com 100MB, anti-spam e antivírus grátis!
> > http://br.info.mail.yahoo.com/

A. Apollonius Cordus to his friend M. Arminia Maior,
and to all citizens and peregrines, greetings.

Yes, I'm sure my colleagues and I can do those things
(post the time for each century to begin, with the
Roman time correspondences). Thank you for your suggestions.





___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://www.allnewmessenger.com

Salve,
I don't use Windows(except at work, where I am now) but I found this
Roman Clock program
called TempusFugit. TempusFugit is a small program to display time in
Roman numerals and date in Latin in the Windows systray (near the
clock). Here is the url:
http://www.freewareweb.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?ID=1256

GnCL
--
iChatAV/AIM: RomanHillbilly

Ave Kaelus Iulius,

The Grerorian Calendar was introduced in 1582 CE and is a modification
of the Julian Calendar, differeing from it in two respects.

The first is a more accurate method of determining which years will
recive an extra day in Feburary, and dropping 10 days from the year
1582 in order to correct for extra leap years that the Julian Calendar
used. Since 1582 the Gregorian and Julian calendars have diverged an
additional 3 days because 1700, 1800, and 1900 CE were leapyears in
the Julian Calendar but not in the Gregorian Calendar.

Neither the Gregorian nor the Julian Calendar are primarly the work of
the men they are named after. The Julian Calendar was mostly the work
of Sosigenes and proclaimed by G. Julius Caesar with some
modifications, and modified again by Augustus.

The Gregorian Calendar's modifications to the Julian Calendar are the
work of a panel of Mathimaticans and astromners led by Christoph Clavius.

The Names of the months in the Gregorian and Julian Calendar (as
revised by Augustus) are the same and were in use in the early
principate. If the Gods had any objections it surely would have been
noticed at a time when the Pontifices still had access to all of the
ancient records.

L. Sicinius Drusus
Pontifex

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Kaelus Iulius" <xkaelusx@y...> wrote:
> I don't know whether or not it could be divined whether it offended
> the Immortals or not.. The Gregorian calendar was devised by a
> Christian monk long after Christianity had become the official
> religion of the empire, and was approved of for use by the pope
> Gregory (hence why it's called Gregorian). Also... the Gregorian
> calendar we use today is a revised edition of the original one
> proposed by the aforementioned monk, as some of his calculations were
> off and was often prone to error. We still don't have a perfectly
> accurate calendar (think Leap Years). While I don't advocate the
> creation of a newer, more accurate calendar (as that may very well be
> one more thing to cause confusion and frustration for newcomers), the
> context, and the pros and cons of various calendrical systems should
> be kept in mind. Especially so when determing holidays and festivals.
> Maybe the archaic Roman lunar calendar might be useful in that
> regard, simply overlayed upon the Gregorian calendar? I don't know.
> As Jews are the only modern people I know of to use a lunar religious
> calendar, it wouldn't be without precedent, but it would still be
> somewhat difficult to implement. The finalisation of the dating of
> events, holidays, and the context within Nova Roma in reference to
> our long-term goals seems to be one more thing that needs to be
> discussed and worked out, in due time.
>
> -Kaelus Iulius
> (AIM: xkaelusx)
>
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "John Dobbins" <drusus@b...> wrote:
> > Salve,
> >
> > I noticed that the Decretum on the Calendar had some side effects
> that
> > might be unintentional and bought this to the attention of the
> Collegium.
> >
> > One of these is changing the names of the 7th and 8th months, and
> the
> > other is the Gregorian Calander uses the Common Era (CE) to number
> the
> > years rather than numbering them from the founding of Roma.
> >
> > I Will be preparing a new Decretum to address the year numbering
> > making the AUC official.
> >
> > Personally I prefer the Gregorian names of the 7th and 8th months
> > because it cause less confusion to moderns and the change didn't
> seem
> > to offend the Immortals 2000 years ago. I am open to reverting back
> to
> > the Republican names if that is what the majority of the citizens
> wish
> > however, and can include this in the Decretum in the other
> Pontifices
> > agree.
> >
> > L. Sicinius Drusus
> > Pontifex
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, M Arminius Maior <marminius@y...>
> wrote:
> > > Salve
> > >
> > > Since the Collegium Pontificum dont endorse the
> > > deification of Iulius Caesar and Augustus (i am not
> > > sure about that), i believe that the Decreta refers to
> > > the system of the Gregorian calendar (number of days),
> > > not the details (the name of each month).
> > > What is the opinion of the Pontifices about the use of
> > > the old names? Otherwise, i need to change the names
> > > in the Annales page too.
> > >
> > >
> > > Vale
> > > M.Arminius
> > >
> > > --- "L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@e...>
> > > escreveu: > Ave,
> > > >
> > > > There should be a correction on this post. You are
> > > > using the wrong calendar. Three years ago the
> > > > College of Pontiffs adopted the Gregorian Calendar.
> > > > Therefore the use of Quintillis and Sextillis is
> > > > wrong. They should be Iulius and Augustus. Here is
> > > > the link.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/pontifices/2001-03-25-i.html
> > > >
> > > > Vale,
> > > > Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________________
> > > Yahoo! Mail agora com 100MB, anti-spam e antivírus grátis!
> > > http://br.info.mail.yahoo.com/

OR

Credibility, we don't need no stinkin' creditiblity!

This is a revision of an email I sent to the now infamous Back Alley
list. I have removed my use of the "f-bomb" for those girlie-men and
others prone to fainting at it's mention.

One of our disgruntled former citizens was doing research into dead
micronations. Another, current citizen posted this link to a site
devoted to micronations:

> Here is a link to site site on Micronations and more.
> http://www.angelfire.com/nv/micronations/enter.html

**********start of BA post********

[First statement EDITED]

NR is listed under the "New Country Projects" link with other such
nifty "micronations" as the white supremists nation of Aryan National
Socialist Empire; the United Kingdom of ATLANTIS which was discovered
to be a money laundering ring & hoax (one of several micronation
hoaxes who's aim was to take money from stupid people); the Kingdom
of INFINIA who makes the statements like:

"The New Message is that The Republic of The United States of America
had still committed Judicial Suicide and was Dissolved despite Our
best efforts to prevent it from happening. Instead We created a legal
document where at the very same instant that The Republic of The
United States of America was Dissolved We established a new
government to take it's place";

Nation of VENOX who states: "Venox is a very flexible, entertaining,
and potentially powerful country. Our current country motto is 'One
can always make a difference.' The government type is a Limited
Government with a mixture of Polity and Aristocracy";


Plus many, many libertarian micronations, and a whole bunch of
freakin nutbags.

CREDIBILITY??? WHAT [EDIT] CREDIBILITY??? & guess what, NR has
it's flag and this statment right in the [EDIT] middle of that mess:

" "We are seeking to establish a Culture and People on an
international basis and establish a 108 acre 'world headquarters' for
it, (somewhat along the lines of a cultural Vatican) rather than
attempting to be a secessionist state or founders of a
new 'homeland'. Our hope is that at some future time our cultural
headquarters will be able to achieve serious sovereign nation status
and international recognition as the Vatican and the Knights of Malta
enjoy." - from an e-mail"

Who the [EDIT] sent that email????


****end original message******

Neat huh? If I had seen this site before applying, I would have
NEVER joined thinking this to be a group of nutbags and morons (& the
question of the day is....would I have been right?). So while some
of you are enjoying argueing over the consitution, the new (or old)
law of the day, and other more-or-less meaningless things
(meaningless because little if nothing is ever done about the issues
raised), you may want to consider this nifty bit o' advertising
that's out there for us.

Now I see why we get applicants who join thinking they can apply for
a Visa, work permits, etc....


Agrippina Modia Aurelia

-who stays here because she is learning about Ancient Rome as a
scriba to censor CFQ and through a few others I have met here.

G. Equitius Cato A. Modiae Aureliae quiritibusque S.P.D.

salvete, omnes.

Modia Aurelia, you're absolutely right. Our being connected to
entities the likes of which flood the "micronational" mudpits is a
serious impediment to our future plans, which are...

what?

What does Nova Roma want to be? The email sent to that website by
persons as yet unknown does follow logically from the Declaration;
perhaps the Declaration needs to be corrected, to read that we plan
to...

what?

Where are we going?

I see a crossroads here for NR. According to some of our
magistrates, NR should be un-incorporated as a not-for-profit
educational institution and re-incorporated as a religious
institution --- basically, a church for the practitioners of the
religio. This would free the more stubborn, immoderate
practitioners from having to deal with us rascally non-
practitioners.

The problems arising within NR between practitioners and non-
practitioners stems from the fact that moderates, of both kinds, see
a greater vision for the future of Nova Roma than just practicing
the religio romana; the hard-core elements of the practitioners ---
oh what the hell, I'll call them by their self-proclaimed name, the
Boni --- refuse to peer out from beyond the blinkers they have
strapped, ox-like, to their heads to see any but the narrowest
possible path. So anything that is not specifically a part of the
religio romana --- i.e., the laws, the Constitution, the government
itself --- they see as unnecessary impediments to their getting
along with their sacrifices of praise and animals to the Di
Immortales.

I say they are wrong, both factually and emotionally. Factually
because, as has been illustrated repeatedly (to no effect upon the
hard-core elements), without the State there can be no State
Religion. Without the organization of the res publica there cannot
be a religio publica. It is an especially grievous ignorance of the
ancient Roman world to imagine a religio without a state. They are
intertwined to such a degree that they are inseperable. And having
a State, in whatever form we choose to name it, requires a system of
rules by which to operate. We are also (and this is *no* small
point) required by the laws of the state in which we are
incorporated, to have By-Laws which are in concord with the laws of
the macronational entities under which we exist, both local (Maine)
and national (the U.S.). So, unless there is a serious movement to
un-incorporate, and therefore legally free us from having any sort
of structure, we are bound by the law, the law which actually
affects us as citizens of the U.S.

It is also a glaringly obvious error to pretend that the ancient
Romans had a small, neat set of laws they could thumb through while
waiting for dinner. The corpus of Roman law was a vast, confused,
contradictory jumble of individual rulings and cases --- especially
during the Republic. It wasn't until an Eastern Roman emperor, and
a Christian at that, decided to codify *all* Roman law (in the
Corpus Iuris Civilis of Iustinian), that there was truly the
foundation of the case law system. To go against the ancients is a
gross violation of the Republican mos maiorum, an act which, coming
from the hard-core elements, surprises me. One of the most glorious
and lasting endeavors the Romans left us is their understanding of
the law. Yes, NR has a bunch of laws, created to address certain
situations ---EXACTLY as the ancient Romans promulgated their laws.
This *is* the Roman way. To have it mocked by some of our
magistrates is a slap in the face to the ancients.

Emotionally, they are wrong because all of us, practitioners and non-
practitioners who are more moderate in our views, wish to build
something greater here. What we call it is of little importance
*right now* (although I too join in the call to
drop the term "micronation"). What is more important is creating an
atmosphere of education, interest, and practice; learning the art
and joy of being more Roman. There are a couple of specific
instances in which we can pursue these goals successfully.

First, I would call upon the College of Pontiffs to start educating
us, ALL of us, in the history and practices of the religio. Just
because I may not practice it privately does *not* mean I am
uninterested in the vital heartbeat of the State. I want to know
more, and rather than being pointed at a pile of books (although
Iulius Scaurus did kindly send me a list which I found helpful), I'd
like to hear the pontiffs describe their own experiences of the
religio, and how they decide to do certain things, and why. How do
they decide which rites to perform if the ancients are silent? What
is involved in an augury? When Iulius Scaurus tells Consul Mariinus
it's OK to call the comitia to vote, what's he doing exactly? I
think we all, as citizens, would be interested.

Second, we need to present an educated, informed and informative
face to the outside world. There's a whole mass of people out there
who study and practice the things we talk about daily. Classicists,
Latinists, historians, librarians...hundreds of people who we should
be making an effort to attract. But we have to conduct ourselves
appropriately. A perfect example is the current proposed law to
correct the titles of two of the magistrates. Yes, I know, it's
another "stupid" law, some might say; but to a Latinist, a real one
out there in the big macronational world, who reads the
title "Araneum" and wonders where we keep the spiders, it's a joke.

The two curatores, the curator araneum and curator differum, have
incorrect titles. It's that simple. The offices did not exist in
antiquity (a matter that's noted in the law), and the titles are bad
Latin. "Araneum" is marginal Latin; it would have to be construed
as "curator in respect to the (spider) web," a construction which
does occur in Latin, but which seems awkward for a title. The
term "magister aranearius" is the generally accepted modern Latinism
for "webmaster" --- a term that any reader of Latin today would
recognize. The word "differum" in "curator differum" just plain
doesn't exist in Latin. A friend of a friend of mine, a professor of
classics at a local university, was asked...no such word. It took
a number of emails to describe what the "curator differum" actually
does, and he still didn't find it easy to understand. If a man who
has his own website all in Latin, conducts oral Latin groups, knows
about 16 languages, and has had 19 years of Latin can't figure out
the meaning of a Nova Roman magistrate's title, we are in trouble, I
think.

So, we correct them. It's not the end of the world, but in fact
gives us more credibility amongst the kind of people who could most
appreciate it.

These two small steps can reap great benefits. I call upon all
citizens who consider themselves moderate in view to support them.

valete bene,

Cato

Salve Romans

This is my most recent list of those who signed up to get our SPQR Ring

Four payments have been received and we need to send an order in ASAP
So please if you are on this list and still want the ring mail me a check made out to United States Eagle Rings and mail to:

Tim Gallagher 5496 Ross Court
New Market, Maryland 21774

1. Tiberius Galerius Paulinus Size 11 PAID
2. Quintus Lanius Paulinus Size 12
3. Marcus Bianchius Antonius
4. Q. Bianchius Rufinus
5. Appius Tullius Cato
6-11 Equitius Paternus
12. Galius Adoreus Caesar
13. Iono Basilicatus
14 L. Cornelius Sardonicus Size 11
15. Servius Equitius Mercurius Troianus
16 Servius Equitius Mercurius Troianus
17 Gnaeus Scribonius Scriptor Size 9 1/2 PAID
18. Claudia Fabia Calpurnia

19. Servius Fidelius Longinius Size 11 PAID
20. Annia Octavia Indagatrix
21. Dwayne Gillespie Size 11 PAID

If you do not want a ring and are on this kist please e-mail me and I will remove you from this list. If you are not on the list and would like to see the ring we are talking about it is posted at the NR yahoo site and you can place an order by e-mailing me and sending payment as listed above.

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus



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

Just Wonderful,

Some clueless newby comes in and starts attacking people who have been
citizens for years because they disagree with his fixation on government.

Cato YOU are the one who can't get past the concept that there are
people here who are intrested in other aspects of Nova Roma than one
single element, in your case it's government.

Drusus

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

>
> The problems arising within NR between practitioners and non-
> practitioners stems from the fact that moderates, of both kinds, see
> a greater vision for the future of Nova Roma than just practicing
> the religio romana; the hard-core elements of the practitioners ---
> oh what the hell, I'll call them by their self-proclaimed name, the
> Boni --- refuse to peer out from beyond the blinkers they have
> strapped, ox-like, to their heads to see any but the narrowest
> possible path. So anything that is not specifically a part of the
> religio romana --- i.e., the laws, the Constitution, the government
> itself --- they see as unnecessary impediments to their getting
> along with their sacrifices of praise and animals to the Di
> Immortales.

Horrors! One of our traditional pontiffs is actually suggesting doing
something for the convenience of modernity! Where is the real Drusus? Is there a
pod in the basement?

Aurelianus


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

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

Salve, amice!

I would rather --- MUCH rather --- be a "clueless newby" who
believes that more than just government and religion is in the
future for Nova Roma, than a complaining senex who can't see the
silva for the arboreus he's relieving himself against. Sicinius
Drusus, you would do well to read all the way through a post before
responding to it.
Also, it was not an "attack" --- merely a description of one of the
differences I see between the "Boni" and the rest of us.

vale bene,

Cato

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "John Dobbins" <drusus@b...> wrote:
> Just Wonderful,
>
> Some clueless newby comes in and starts attacking people who have
been
> citizens for years because they disagree with his fixation on
government.
>
> Cato YOU are the one who can't get past the concept that there are
> people here who are intrested in other aspects of Nova Roma than
one
> single element, in your case it's government.
>
> Drusus
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "gaiusequitiuscato"
<mlcinnyc@y...>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > The problems arising within NR between practitioners and non-
> > practitioners stems from the fact that moderates, of both kinds,
see
> > a greater vision for the future of Nova Roma than just
practicing
> > the religio romana; the hard-core elements of the practitioners -
--
> > oh what the hell, I'll call them by their self-proclaimed name,
the
> > Boni --- refuse to peer out from beyond the blinkers they have
> > strapped, ox-like, to their heads to see any but the narrowest
> > possible path. So anything that is not specifically a part of
the
> > religio romana --- i.e., the laws, the Constitution, the
government
> > itself --- they see as unnecessary impediments to their getting
> > along with their sacrifices of praise and animals to the Di
> > Immortales.

Salve, Cato.

If the ultimate objective is impaired by a name, in this
case "micronation", and its attendant focus on structure rather than
substance, I think it makes sense to remove the name and consider
whether the focus is on the right aspects.

Clearly being included with such organizations doesn't lend any
credibility to NR. I don't think the NR will collapse if we deal with
this issue.

Vale
Caesar


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

> G. Equitius Cato L. Sicinio Druso S.P.D.
>
> Salve, amice!
>
> I would rather --- MUCH rather --- be a "clueless newby" who
> believes that more than just government and religion is in the
> future for Nova Roma, than a complaining senex who can't see the
> silva for the arboreus he's relieving himself against. Sicinius
> Drusus, you would do well to read all the way through a post before
> responding to it.
> Also, it was not an "attack" --- merely a description of one of the
> differences I see between the "Boni" and the rest of us.
>
> vale bene,
>
> Cato
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "John Dobbins" <drusus@b...>

wrote:

> > Just Wonderful,
> >
> > Some clueless newby comes in and starts attacking people who have
> been
> > citizens for years because they disagree with his fixation on
> government.
> >
> > Cato YOU are the one who can't get past the concept that there are
> > people here who are intrested in other aspects of Nova Roma than
> one
> > single element, in your case it's government.
> >
> > Drusus
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "gaiusequitiuscato"
> <mlcinnyc@y...>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > The problems arising within NR between practitioners and non-
> > > practitioners stems from the fact that moderates, of both

kinds,

> see
> > > a greater vision for the future of Nova Roma than just
> practicing
> > > the religio romana; the hard-core elements of the

practitioners -

> --
> > > oh what the hell, I'll call them by their self-proclaimed name,
> the
> > > Boni --- refuse to peer out from beyond the blinkers they have
> > > strapped, ox-like, to their heads to see any but the narrowest
> > > possible path. So anything that is not specifically a part of
> the
> > > religio romana --- i.e., the laws, the Constitution, the
> government
> > > itself --- they see as unnecessary impediments to their getting
> > > along with their sacrifices of praise and animals to the Di
> > > Immortales.

F. Galerius Aurelianus Senator L. Sicinius Drusus et G. Equitius Cato. Salve.

Both of you are getting out of line calling each other names on the ML. If
you two want to call each other "clueless newby" and "complaining senex" and
other such epitaphs, take it to the Back Alley. You are both confirming to
everyone who is reading this that bickering and name-calling are what most
"active" citizens do on the ML

Also, Cato, do not lump everyone in Nova Roma as either a Boni or "us" as
that is completely untrue and a generalization not based on any factual data or
documentation.

Valete.


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

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

So just what "Horrors" have the "Boni" Pontifices inflicted on Nova
Roma? We wouldn't go along with those who wish to BAN traditional
Sacrifices, nor did we attempt to FORCE people to take part in them.
We stated that they were an option.

Then we took the step of firing an insubordinate Sacerdotes who
publicly stated that other Sacerdotes of the Cult of the Magna Mater
would have to bow to her will on Sacrifices regardless of the decretum
that made them an OPTION.

Despite you silly smear campign against the Collegium, it's your gang
that has an anal-retentive fixation about enforcing it's will on others.

L. Sicinius Drusus

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

> G. Equitius Cato L. Sicinio Druso S.P.D.
>
> Salve, amice!
>
> I would rather --- MUCH rather --- be a "clueless newby" who
> believes that more than just government and religion is in the
> future for Nova Roma, than a complaining senex who can't see the
> silva for the arboreus he's relieving himself against. Sicinius
> Drusus, you would do well to read all the way through a post before
> responding to it.
> Also, it was not an "attack" --- merely a description of one of the
> differences I see between the "Boni" and the rest of us.
>
> vale bene,
>
> Cato
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "John Dobbins" <drusus@b...> wrote:
> > Just Wonderful,
> >
> > Some clueless newby comes in and starts attacking people who have
> been
> > citizens for years because they disagree with his fixation on
> government.
> >
> > Cato YOU are the one who can't get past the concept that there are
> > people here who are intrested in other aspects of Nova Roma than
> one
> > single element, in your case it's government.
> >
> > Drusus
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "gaiusequitiuscato"
> <mlcinnyc@y...>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > The problems arising within NR between practitioners and non-
> > > practitioners stems from the fact that moderates, of both kinds,
> see
> > > a greater vision for the future of Nova Roma than just
> practicing
> > > the religio romana; the hard-core elements of the practitioners -
> --
> > > oh what the hell, I'll call them by their self-proclaimed name,
> the
> > > Boni --- refuse to peer out from beyond the blinkers they have
> > > strapped, ox-like, to their heads to see any but the narrowest
> > > possible path. So anything that is not specifically a part of
> the
> > > religio romana --- i.e., the laws, the Constitution, the
> government
> > > itself --- they see as unnecessary impediments to their getting
> > > along with their sacrifices of praise and animals to the Di
> > > Immortales.

Ave Quirites;
since the Die Nefastus is over please read my original post.
M. Arminia Maior Fabiana


In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Sp. Fabia Vera" <rory12001@y...> wrote:

> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Salve Consul, salvete Quirites:

Pontifex Gryllus posted about this on the Religio list last
September I believe, and I will look for his posts, where he quotes
the history of Numa, with passages, and disagrees with Scaurus.
This was critical for me in the Religio as I am a firm animal-
lover, vegetarian and also buddhist. I will NEVER do such a thing. If
it is required I will in all conscience resign my priesthood.
optime valete,
Sp. Fabia Vera Fausta
sacerdos Matris deum
--- End forwarded message ---

G. Equitius Cato Gn. Iulio Caesar F. Galerio Aureliano L. Sicinio
Druso S.P.D.

salvete, Iulius Caesar, Galerius Aurelianus et Sicinius Drusus.

Iulius Caesar, I agree entirely. We can just drop the "micronation"
brouhaha, and focus on more positive and constructive ways of
expending our considerable energies. I suggested two in my last
post, with my reasoning behind both.

Galerius Aurelianus, I apologize if I lumped you in with anyone with
whom you would prefer not to be lumped; I assumed from your posts in
the past that you were not one of the "hard-core elements" to which
I was making reference. I also apologize for calling Senator
Sicinius Drusus a "complaining senex" on the ML. I should not have
lowered myself to answering a name-calling with the same.

Sicinius Drusus, I did not use the word "horrors" at all, so you
should not have written it as if I did use it. Nor did I say that
the College of Pontiffs had done anything at all, good or bad,
anywhere in my post. I only asked the College to begin teaching the
citizens about the religio. That was all. As I said, if you'd read
my whole post, you'd have seen that. I cannot imagine that asking
the pontiffs of Nova Roma to perform a simple teaching function that
fits very well into their realm of expertise could be construed in
any way as a "smear campaign". If any other member of the College
takes offense at my suggestion, I do indeed apologize, although
without understanding the reason for the offense taken.

valete,

Cato

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "John Dobbins" <drusus@b...> wrote:
> So just what "Horrors" have the "Boni" Pontifices inflicted on Nova
> Roma? We wouldn't go along with those who wish to BAN traditional
> Sacrifices, nor did we attempt to FORCE people to take part in
them.
> We stated that they were an option.
>
> Then we took the step of firing an insubordinate Sacerdotes who
> publicly stated that other Sacerdotes of the Cult of the Magna
Mater
> would have to bow to her will on Sacrifices regardless of the
decretum
> that made them an OPTION.
>
> Despite you silly smear campign against the Collegium, it's your
gang
> that has an anal-retentive fixation about enforcing it's will on
others.
>
> L. Sicinius Drusus
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "gaiusequitiuscato"
<mlcinnyc@y...>
> wrote:
> > G. Equitius Cato L. Sicinio Druso S.P.D.
> >
> > Salve, amice!
> >
> > I would rather --- MUCH rather --- be a "clueless newby" who
> > believes that more than just government and religion is in the
> > future for Nova Roma, than a complaining senex who can't see the
> > silva for the arboreus he's relieving himself against. Sicinius
> > Drusus, you would do well to read all the way through a post
before
> > responding to it.
> > Also, it was not an "attack" --- merely a description of one of
the
> > differences I see between the "Boni" and the rest of us.
> >
> > vale bene,
> >
> > Cato
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "John Dobbins" <drusus@b...>
wrote:
> > > Just Wonderful,
> > >
> > > Some clueless newby comes in and starts attacking people who
have
> > been
> > > citizens for years because they disagree with his fixation on
> > government.
> > >
> > > Cato YOU are the one who can't get past the concept that there
are
> > > people here who are intrested in other aspects of Nova Roma
than
> > one
> > > single element, in your case it's government.
> > >
> > > Drusus
> > >
> > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "gaiusequitiuscato"
> > <mlcinnyc@y...>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > The problems arising within NR between practitioners and non-
> > > > practitioners stems from the fact that moderates, of both
kinds,
> > see
> > > > a greater vision for the future of Nova Roma than just
> > practicing
> > > > the religio romana; the hard-core elements of the
practitioners -
> > --
> > > > oh what the hell, I'll call them by their self-proclaimed
name,
> > the
> > > > Boni --- refuse to peer out from beyond the blinkers they
have
> > > > strapped, ox-like, to their heads to see any but the
narrowest
> > > > possible path. So anything that is not specifically a part
of
> > the
> > > > religio romana --- i.e., the laws, the Constitution, the
> > government
> > > > itself --- they see as unnecessary impediments to their
getting
> > > > along with their sacrifices of praise and animals to the Di
> > > > Immortales.

F. Galerius Aurelianus G. Equitio Cato Senator L. Sicinius Drusus S.P.D.

Cato, your apology is accepted. My political and religious inclinations put
me in among the Moderati; we who prefer to take the middle ground and strive
for the improvement of Nova Roma through constructive discussion and
compromise. Sometimes I favor some of the ideas or points of the Boni; sometimes I
favor other ideas and arguments.

Drusus, I used the word "Horrors!" in a humorous response to an earlier post
you made about adopting a modern usage of calendar months for the convenience
of the citizens. It was meant to be funny but if it was perceived in another
way, I'm sorry.

Valete.


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

Salve, Cato.

I saw that you agreed the name "micronation" should go, but the crux
is not just the name. It is more about the attendant focus on the
structure of government and laws.

NR is like an appartment block. We are currently more concerned with
constructing the penthouse than laying the foundations. NR has four
walls, weak foundations and a huge structure at the top. That's the
Tabularium. It's making the walls (which were pretty thin to start
with) buckle. The foundations are too weak to support the weight.

Change the name, trim down all these excessive laws and tidy up the
ones that are left. Change the focus to encouraging the understanding
of what consituted Roman life, attitudes, beliefs.

Now you will have to forgive a certain sceptisicm. The call to
educate is in itself laudable. I do have to ask whether Scaurus
explaining the details of the Auspices will not in fact provide a
platform for some readers to throw rocks, and argue and debate, and
ultimately mock (oh - ever so subtly maybe, but mock none the less).
It will become an opprotunity for certain individuals to attack the
CP.

As to what you did or did not say about the CP, well I think it was a
smear. You provide your views on the Boni, which are obviously less
than favourable. You then identify the Boni as practioners of the
Religio and proceed to provide again a less than favourable
description of them:

" the hard-core elements of the practitioners ---
oh what the hell, I'll call them by their self-proclaimed name, the
Boni --- refuse to peer out from beyond the blinkers they have
strapped, ox-like, to their heads to see any but the narrowest
possible path"

So while you don't actually mention the CP, since they are obviously
practioners, you manage to label them all Boni by association, all
hard-core and call them oxen.

It is this sort of subliminal smear that happens continually and
which you are adept in. You don't actually condemn them bluntly;
instead you take this round-about way of doing so, and then issue an
apology, by which time you have achieved your intended result.
Another stab delivered to the CP, which you smoothly withdraw from
trying to demonstrate how moderate and agreeable you are.

It would be a lot more honest if you just did openly what you do
anyway, kick the CP in the head and admit that was the intention.

Just my view point. I don't expect you to admit the tactics.

Vale
Caesar



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

> G. Equitius Cato Gn. Iulio Caesar F. Galerio Aureliano L. Sicinio
> Druso S.P.D.
>
> salvete, Iulius Caesar, Galerius Aurelianus et Sicinius Drusus.
>
> Iulius Caesar, I agree entirely. We can just drop

the "micronation"

> brouhaha, and focus on more positive and constructive ways of
> expending our considerable energies. I suggested two in my last
> post, with my reasoning behind both.
>
> Galerius Aurelianus, I apologize if I lumped you in with anyone

with

> whom you would prefer not to be lumped; I assumed from your posts

in

> the past that you were not one of the "hard-core elements" to which
> I was making reference. I also apologize for calling Senator
> Sicinius Drusus a "complaining senex" on the ML. I should not have
> lowered myself to answering a name-calling with the same.
>
> Sicinius Drusus, I did not use the word "horrors" at all, so you
> should not have written it as if I did use it. Nor did I say that
> the College of Pontiffs had done anything at all, good or bad,
> anywhere in my post. I only asked the College to begin teaching

the

> citizens about the religio. That was all. As I said, if you'd

read

> my whole post, you'd have seen that. I cannot imagine that asking
> the pontiffs of Nova Roma to perform a simple teaching function

that

> fits very well into their realm of expertise could be construed in
> any way as a "smear campaign". If any other member of the College
> takes offense at my suggestion, I do indeed apologize, although
> without understanding the reason for the offense taken.
>
> valete,
>
> Cato
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "John Dobbins" <drusus@b...>

wrote:

> > So just what "Horrors" have the "Boni" Pontifices inflicted on

Nova

> > Roma? We wouldn't go along with those who wish to BAN traditional
> > Sacrifices, nor did we attempt to FORCE people to take part in
> them.
> > We stated that they were an option.
> >
> > Then we took the step of firing an insubordinate Sacerdotes who
> > publicly stated that other Sacerdotes of the Cult of the Magna
> Mater
> > would have to bow to her will on Sacrifices regardless of the
> decretum
> > that made them an OPTION.
> >
> > Despite you silly smear campign against the Collegium, it's your
> gang
> > that has an anal-retentive fixation about enforcing it's will on
> others.
> >
> > L. Sicinius Drusus
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "gaiusequitiuscato"
> <mlcinnyc@y...>
> > wrote:
> > > G. Equitius Cato L. Sicinio Druso S.P.D.
> > >
> > > Salve, amice!
> > >
> > > I would rather --- MUCH rather --- be a "clueless newby" who
> > > believes that more than just government and religion is in the
> > > future for Nova Roma, than a complaining senex who can't see

the

> > > silva for the arboreus he's relieving himself against. Sicinius
> > > Drusus, you would do well to read all the way through a post
> before
> > > responding to it.
> > > Also, it was not an "attack" --- merely a description of one of
> the
> > > differences I see between the "Boni" and the rest of us.
> > >
> > > vale bene,
> > >
> > > Cato
> > >
> > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "John Dobbins" <drusus@b...>
> wrote:
> > > > Just Wonderful,
> > > >
> > > > Some clueless newby comes in and starts attacking people who
> have
> > > been
> > > > citizens for years because they disagree with his fixation on
> > > government.
> > > >
> > > > Cato YOU are the one who can't get past the concept that

there

> are
> > > > people here who are intrested in other aspects of Nova Roma
> than
> > > one
> > > > single element, in your case it's government.
> > > >
> > > > Drusus
> > > >
> > > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "gaiusequitiuscato"
> > > <mlcinnyc@y...>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The problems arising within NR between practitioners and

non-

> > > > > practitioners stems from the fact that moderates, of both
> kinds,
> > > see
> > > > > a greater vision for the future of Nova Roma than just
> > > practicing
> > > > > the religio romana; the hard-core elements of the
> practitioners -
> > > --
> > > > > oh what the hell, I'll call them by their self-proclaimed
> name,
> > > the
> > > > > Boni --- refuse to peer out from beyond the blinkers they
> have
> > > > > strapped, ox-like, to their heads to see any but the
> narrowest
> > > > > possible path. So anything that is not specifically a part
> of
> > > the
> > > > > religio romana --- i.e., the laws, the Constitution, the
> > > government
> > > > > itself --- they see as unnecessary impediments to their
> getting
> > > > > along with their sacrifices of praise and animals to the Di
> > > > > Immortales.

G. Equitius Cato Gn. Iulio Caesar S.P.D.

salve, Iulius Caesar.

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

> Salve, Cato.
>
> I saw that you agreed the name "micronation" should go, but the

crux is not just the name. It is more about the attendant focus on
the structure of government and laws.

>
> NR is like an appartment block. We are currently more concerned

with constructing the penthouse than laying the foundations. NR has
four walls, weak foundations and a huge structure at the top.
That's the Tabularium. It's making the walls (which were pretty
thin to start with) buckle. The foundations are too weak to support
the weight. Change the name, trim down all these excessive laws and
tidy up the ones that are left. Change the focus to encouraging the
understanding of what consituted Roman life, attitudes, beliefs.

CATO: So far, basically, I agree entirely. The violence of
reaction is two-fold, Caesar: a magistrate demeaning the very
government and laws the first of which he is a functioning,
macronationally-legal part and the second of which while he may find
useless nonetheless exist and, until repealed, are the laws. To
pretend that the abundance of laws is unhistorical or oppressive is
absolutely untrue; our very own forebears (Roman-wise) were masters
of layer upon layer of laws, never repealing, just piling up for
centuries. They just ignored the ones that were no longer useful.
With our set-up, however, we cannot do likewise.

> Now you will have to forgive a certain sceptisicm. The call to
> educate is in itself laudable. I do have to ask whether Scaurus
> explaining the details of the Auspices will not in fact provide a
> platform for some readers to throw rocks, and argue and debate,

and ultimately mock (oh - ever so subtly maybe, but mock none the
less). It will become an opprotunity for certain individuals to
attack the CP.

CATO: I'm pretty much as "un-practitioner" as you can get, but I
can still appreciate the historicity of what the pontiffs do; it is
a part of our existence to learn, and to teach.

>
> As to what you did or did not say about the CP, well I think it

was a smear. You provide your views on the Boni, which are obviously
less than favourable. You then identify the Boni as practioners of
the Religio and proceed to provide again a less than favourable
description of them:

>
> " the hard-core elements of the practitioners ---
> oh what the hell, I'll call them by their self-proclaimed name, the
> Boni --- refuse to peer out from beyond the blinkers they have
> strapped, ox-like, to their heads to see any but the narrowest
> possible path"
>
> So while you don't actually mention the CP, since they are

obviously practioners,

CATO: No. Not all of them, Caesar, as you well know.

you manage to label them all Boni by association

CATO: again, no, I didn't. I specifically distinguish
between "hard-core elements" and those who are not hard-core. I
even spoke specifically of non-"hard-core" practioners.

all hard-core and call them oxen. It is this sort of subliminal
smear that happens continually and > which you are adept in. You
don't actually condemn them bluntly; > instead you take this round-
about way of doing so, and then issue an apology, by which time you
have achieved your intended result. > Another stab delivered to the
CP, which you smoothly withdraw from > trying to demonstrate how
moderate and agreeable you are. > It would be a lot more honest if
you just did openly what you do > anyway, kick the CP in the head
and admit that was the intention.> Just my view point. I don't
expect you to admit the tactics.

CATO: I am sorry that you feel this way. I generally say what I
mean and mean what I say; if it is found objectionable for any
reason *other* than content, I am willing to apologize (i.e., the
point I am trying to make vs. name-calling). If you read my posts
from the beginning, I have never vilified the CP as a whole,
although I have disagreed with specific actions. Ever.

>
> Vale
> Caesar

vale,

Cato

Salve,

Hmmmm. Whatever way you want to cut it Cato, the CP still ends up
with another kick in its head.

Again I am amazed that someone who takes people to task for
undermining the "government", can't see that this sort of behaviour
towards the CP is exactly the same.

As to whether it was 50% of the CP, or 30% or 100% who are Boni and
your targets, it is irrelevant. Utterly irrelevant. The CP takes a
hit as a whole. The Religio in a very subtle way also gets damaged in
the crossfire.

Individual differences that people have had with sitting and past
magistrates have been automatically linked by you and others to an
assault on the structure, mission and people of NR. That's nonsense
of course, but be true to your nonsense and condemn yourself for now
doing the same to the percentage of the CP who are Boni. You have hit
the CP as whole as a result of firing at them.

Caesar


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

> G. Equitius Cato Gn. Iulio Caesar S.P.D.
>
> salve, Iulius Caesar.
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gnaeus Iulius Caesar"
> <gn_iulius_caesar@y...> wrote:
> > Salve, Cato.
> >
> > I saw that you agreed the name "micronation" should go, but the
> crux is not just the name. It is more about the attendant focus on
> the structure of government and laws.
> >
> > NR is like an appartment block. We are currently more concerned
> with constructing the penthouse than laying the foundations. NR

has

> four walls, weak foundations and a huge structure at the top.
> That's the Tabularium. It's making the walls (which were pretty
> thin to start with) buckle. The foundations are too weak to

support

> the weight. Change the name, trim down all these excessive laws and
> tidy up the ones that are left. Change the focus to encouraging

the

> understanding of what consituted Roman life, attitudes, beliefs.
>
> CATO: So far, basically, I agree entirely. The violence of
> reaction is two-fold, Caesar: a magistrate demeaning the very
> government and laws the first of which he is a functioning,
> macronationally-legal part and the second of which while he may

find

> useless nonetheless exist and, until repealed, are the laws. To
> pretend that the abundance of laws is unhistorical or oppressive is
> absolutely untrue; our very own forebears (Roman-wise) were masters
> of layer upon layer of laws, never repealing, just piling up for
> centuries. They just ignored the ones that were no longer useful.
> With our set-up, however, we cannot do likewise.
>
>
> > Now you will have to forgive a certain sceptisicm. The call to
> > educate is in itself laudable. I do have to ask whether Scaurus
> > explaining the details of the Auspices will not in fact provide a
> > platform for some readers to throw rocks, and argue and debate,
> and ultimately mock (oh - ever so subtly maybe, but mock none the
> less). It will become an opprotunity for certain individuals to
> attack the CP.
>
> CATO: I'm pretty much as "un-practitioner" as you can get, but I
> can still appreciate the historicity of what the pontiffs do; it is
> a part of our existence to learn, and to teach.
>
>
> >
> > As to what you did or did not say about the CP, well I think it
> was a smear. You provide your views on the Boni, which are

obviously

> less than favourable. You then identify the Boni as practioners of
> the Religio and proceed to provide again a less than favourable
> description of them:
> >
> > " the hard-core elements of the practitioners ---
> > oh what the hell, I'll call them by their self-proclaimed name,

the

> > Boni --- refuse to peer out from beyond the blinkers they have
> > strapped, ox-like, to their heads to see any but the narrowest
> > possible path"
> >
> > So while you don't actually mention the CP, since they are
> obviously practioners,
>
> CATO: No. Not all of them, Caesar, as you well know.
>
> you manage to label them all Boni by association
>
> CATO: again, no, I didn't. I specifically distinguish
> between "hard-core elements" and those who are not hard-core. I
> even spoke specifically of non-"hard-core" practioners.
>
> all hard-core and call them oxen. It is this sort of subliminal
> smear that happens continually and > which you are adept in. You
> don't actually condemn them bluntly; > instead you take this round-
> about way of doing so, and then issue an apology, by which time

you

> have achieved your intended result. > Another stab delivered to the
> CP, which you smoothly withdraw from > trying to demonstrate how
> moderate and agreeable you are. > It would be a lot more honest if
> you just did openly what you do > anyway, kick the CP in the head
> and admit that was the intention.> Just my view point. I don't
> expect you to admit the tactics.
>
> CATO: I am sorry that you feel this way. I generally say what I
> mean and mean what I say; if it is found objectionable for any
> reason *other* than content, I am willing to apologize (i.e., the
> point I am trying to make vs. name-calling). If you read my posts
> from the beginning, I have never vilified the CP as a whole,
> although I have disagreed with specific actions. Ever.
>
>
> >
> > Vale
> > Caesar
>
> vale,
>
> Cato

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@y...> wrote:

>
> Quirites, Flavius Vedius Germanicus and I founded Nova Roma as a

Sovereign

> Nation for several reasons. The most basic reason is that the

Roman system,

> and specifically the Religio Romana, *cannot exist or function*

without such

> status.
>

**********************************************************************
**********************************************************************

> Salvete Quirites;

how can the Religo surivive and prosper when her pontifeces,
Senators, sacerdotes and Censor appear on the BA (do go see for
yourself) and wish to tear her down, by tearing our state down.

Frankly I think it is time to call for a return to the Lex Domitia de
Sacerdotes.
What is this Lex? It was a Republican Law introduced & struck down
by Sulla and reintroduced by Julius Caesar to permit the cives to
vote for senior priests in the Collegium.

Right now the Collegium Pontificium is entirely in the control of
Boni who do not permit any non Boni to become priests, augurs, or
pontifeces. Postions are unfilled as good, pious applicants are
flatly refused by those who explicitly want to bring our Res Publica
down. How could the gods not loathe that.

The Religio list is dead, frankly I would rather good cives of
conscience whatever their religion vote for priests etc than the
situation we have now, where the majority of the CP ressurects a
punitive fundamentalist view and do not support NR!
I will state that I hereby exclude myself from any position of
priesthood, augur, pontifex etc...it is not about name, title or
points, rather a pious wish to have the cives participate again in
the rites to bring back the PAX DEORUM AND NOVA ROMA!!
bene valete in pace deorum
M. Arminia Maior Fabiana
--- End forwarded message ---

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@a... wrote:

>
> Drusus, I used the word "Horrors!" in a humorous response to an

earlier post

> you made about adopting a modern usage of calendar months for the

convenience

> of the citizens. It was meant to be funny but if it was perceived

in another

> way, I'm sorry.

No Need for an aplogy, I realized it was a bit of humor (something
that this list needs more of). I was simply using the same term as a
means of pointing out the exzagerated nature of Cato's post.

Drusus

Q. Caecilius Metellus Postumianus Quiritibus et M. Arminia Maior Fabiana Verana SPD

I truly have to vehemently refute one explicit point here, which I think is entirely unwarranted, unnecessary, and even more unwanted, and respond to another.

> Right now the Collegium Pontificium is entirely in the control of
> Boni who do not permit any non Boni to become priests, augurs, or
> pontifeces. Postions are unfilled as good, pious applicants are
> flatly refused by those who explicitly want to bring our Res Publica
> down. How could the gods not loathe that.

It does not matter under whom the Collegium Pontificium is controlled. The Collegium is there to ensure that the State is preserved through the proper, genuine, pious observance and performance of necessary rites and rituals on the behalf of the Senate, the People, and the Quirites... in short, maintaining the Pax Deorum. If the Collegium thinks its best to leave a position unfilled rather than allow someone it believes to be uncapable, unsincere, or just unworthy of priesthood to hold it, that is the right of the Collegium, and the Collegium ALONE. Surely it may be our business, as the Religio should concern us all, but it is the right of the Collegium, and it should not even be attempted to impeach that right.

Also, how could you, one who claimed to want to serve the Gods, insult the Collegium by stating the Collegium to 'want to bring our Res Publica down'? I remember a post from Lucius Equitius (and another from Caius Minucius) about how our ancestors viewed religion and the State. Our ancestors viewed the two as one and the same thing. The Collegium cannot be working to bring the Res Publica down, because without the Res Publica, there is no Collegium, and without the Collegium, there is no Res Publica!

Further, I refute that the Collegium rejects all applicants who are not of the Boni. I do not identify with the Boni, and yet the Collegium saw me well fit to apprentice for the position of Fetialis.

I would agree that the Boni are a conservative body. If the Collegium happens to be largely influenced by conservativism, so be it. Honestly, it would be better to have it as such. The Collegium should be conservative. The Religio is based on orthopraxy, not orthodoxy. If the Collegium is not conservative, how can it remain orthopractic? A liberal Collegium would allow rituals which have no historical precedent to become part of the official mos maiorum, so to speak. Adding unprecedented rituals is not orthopraxy! It is the exact opposite! I would rather have a Collegium which rejects me for being to liberal than have one which does not do its utmost to preserve one of the fundamentals of the Religio.

Quirites, I have a question for each of you, not for response, but for your own ponderance: Why are _you_ here in Nova Roma? As you think through that, ask yourself another thing: Are you willing to devote yourself to helping recreate the Religio? If so: How? Just think about it.

Optime Valete in Pace Deorum,

Quintus Caecilius Metellus Postumianus,
Camillus of the Collegium Fetialium
Devotee to the Gods of Rome
Citizen of Nova Roma

. Avete;
The Collegium is neither conservative nor orthopraxic, not one
pontiff joined with the Pontifex Maximus to say there is no Religio
without the State ; an absurdity.

It is fine for you to say the CP should choose and reject whoever
suits them as you are one of the chosen.

>

Why is not Lucius Arminius Faustus either flamen or augur? Why is
such an erudite, honest, pious citizen rejected repeatedly..why are
others rejected.
The CP does not say; the Religio belongs to the cives and the
State not the 'chosen' few.

You may say you do not belong to the Boni, but then you go on
about 'modernistic practices'......Except for the intelligent and
absent Graecus all positions are filled with ultra-fundamentalists.

The Religio is withering due exactly to these reasons, you drive
the cives away.
It was divine Celetre, Faustus, myself who wrote those carmen,
Indagtrix who keeps Vesta's flame...

but you shut us out

in amore deorum
M. Arminia Maior Fabiana

>

Novaromanii S.P.D. Fl Vedius Germanicus

S.V.B.E.E.V.

I have read the discussions of the last few days with great interest.
Allow me to make a few observations.

Nova Roma's status as a sovereign nation must not be brought into
question, for it cannot be altered without destroying Nova Roma's entire
reason for existence. The formula is simple, and my fellow Pater Patriae
Marcus Cassius Julianus stated it in more elegant terms, but permit me
to be a bit more blunt:

1) There can be no true restoration of the Religio Romana without the
restoration of the Religio Publica.
2) There can be no restoration of the Religio Publica in the absense
of a sovereign nation.
3) Any attempt to undo Nova Roma's status as a sovereign nation would
result in the undermining of the restoration of the Religio Romana,
intentionally or not.

Now, we can quibble about terminology; micronations, sovereignty
projects, etc. I've come to simply use "Republic" as being both broad
enough to avoid certain problems and specific enough to suit our needs.
By all means, drop the use of "micronation" if it causes you heartburn;
that is not by any stretch the core of our collective identity. But
sovereignty itself must be off the table. It matters not one iota that
no other nation recognizes that sovereignty. We choose not to exercise
it in terms of fielding armies and exclusively holding territory. But
the Gods recognize it, and so do we. Do we really need anyone else's
approval?

Do we have too many laws? I happen to think we do not, although we
definitely have some clunkers that need revising or abandoning. But
everyone must recognize that that's how we set our procedures and
standards. If we called them "regulations" or "bylaws" or "resolutions",
they'd be no different. But sovereign Republics pass their procedures,
and set their standards, by passing laws. And so do we. Don't blame the
system of laws as a whole; blame specific laws, if you must blame
anything at all. Then fix them. Better yet, don't blame anything; just
make something better.

Do we spend too much effort on "government"? Again, I happen to think
not, but that is only because I happen to believe that there exists
something of an "underground society" in Nova Roma. Politics _appears_
to take center stage because is dominates this email list. (Here's an
idea; let's call it the "NR Politics" list an be done with the idea of a
"Main List" altogether.) But, as our good Pontifex L. Sicinius Drusus
pointed out in an earlier email, there is a LOT going on amongst the
Pontiffs to which none of the rest of us are privy. I daresay there are
similar situations among the various provincial lists. Why, we are told
almost incidentally that there are regular meetings going on in Lacis
Magni, and enough activity to sustain two Oppidia in Italy, and a
days-long event in Gaul. Plus, we hear of informal networks of friends
who come to Nova Roma, find like-minded Citizens, and then go off to
correspond with them exclusively, leaving the so-called "Main List" to
those more politically inclined. Don't tell me we spend too much effort
on "government". A relative handful spend an enormous amount of effort
on government. It just happens that it's very visible.

Don't like it? The answer is simple. Find the thing you DO like and give
it your all! Do you care about the Religio and don't give a rat's ass
about politics? Great! Then participate on that list and stop
complaining about the people who do want to work on Nova Roma's
political infrastructure. Don't care about the Religio but are
interested in Roman history? Great! There's a whole section of the
Sodalitas Musarum that deals with history that is, as I understand it,
moribund. Stop worrying about what we practitioners are doing and go off
to support archaeological digs, talk about history, and so on. Like more
than one aspect that Nova Roma has to offer? Nobody says you have to
limit yourself to one thing. Do as much as you can, but be careful not
to spread yourself too thin. We've had more than our share of folks drop
out because they took on too much too soon.

Nova Roma does not need to be one thing to the exclusion of all the
other things it can be. Historical society, advocacy group, religious
institution, reenactment group, social organization, and even sovereign
nation and more; there is NOTHING there that is mutually exclusive.
Indeed, everything could and should strengthen and benefit everything
else. Please, everyone-- and I do mean everyone-- stop trying to cut off
everything that Nova Roma is except your own specific interest. If we
allow that to happen, then you'll only be hurting your own interests.

In short, breadth gives us strength, sovereignty gives us the Religio.

May the Gods guide your safety.

Flavius Vedius Germanicus
Pater Patriae

Salve omnes

And that is what it is all this fuss is about isn't it? Being "shut
out". You ever had to refuse someone a position at a job interview?
Bet they thought they were perfect for the job. Bet their friends and
family did. Institutions of all shapes and sizes, faiths - whatever
have to make choices. So some people got chosen and some people
didn't. Big deal. Anyone here had to fire someone? Bet when they got
walked out the door a lot of them still felt perfect for the job -
even though the majority of their co-workers breathed a collective
sigh of relief.

So the real root of all of this is who gets chosen for what. How
typically like an internet community. There is an awful lot of talk
about respecting institutions, and when one of them exercises its
rights of choice, someone complains about unfairness. Guess respect
for instituions depends on timing and which institution. When some
people occupy the curule chairs respect will be forthcoming, then if
they loose I bet it gets removed. Respect the "government" but don't
respect the CP....because of the composition of its members.

This is selective hypocrisy at work here. Bruised egos. Blocked
ambitions, but hey lets start babbling about plots, and hardnosed
views and people leaving. You'd be better off pondering why we only
have 200 people, than why 3 people or so leave each month in a huff.
Couldn't be because Micronations are viewed as full of weirdos; no -
it has to be that they know a bunch of evil old priests in turbans
are waiting to grind down their rights...blah blah blah. Yeah right...

Well at least we got it in writing. Its all about not being allowed
in the playpen.

Caesar

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@y...> wrote:
> . Avete;
> The Collegium is neither conservative nor orthopraxic, not one
> pontiff joined with the Pontifex Maximus to say there is no Religio
> without the State ; an absurdity.
>
> It is fine for you to say the CP should choose and reject whoever
> suits them as you are one of the chosen.
> >
> Why is not Lucius Arminius Faustus either flamen or augur? Why is
> such an erudite, honest, pious citizen rejected repeatedly..why are
> others rejected.
> The CP does not say; the Religio belongs to the cives and the
> State not the 'chosen' few.
>
> You may say you do not belong to the Boni, but then you go on
> about 'modernistic practices'......Except for the intelligent and
> absent Graecus all positions are filled with ultra-fundamentalists.
>
> The Religio is withering due exactly to these reasons, you drive
> the cives away.
> It was divine Celetre, Faustus, myself who wrote those
carmen,
> Indagtrix who keeps Vesta's flame...
>
> but you shut us out
>
> in amore deorum
> M. Arminia Maior Fabiana
>
>
>
>
> >

G. Iulius Scaurus M. Arminiae Maiori Fabianae salutem dicit.

Salve, M. Arminia.

> The Collegium is neither conservative nor orthopraxic, not one
> pontiff joined with the Pontifex Maximus to say there is no Religio
> without the State ; an absurdity.

I should by now be accustomed by experience to your scant familiarity
with the truth, but this lie will not pass unanswered. I have
repeatedly in this forum, on the constitutional list, and in the
Collegium Pontificum list insisted that there can be no reconstruction
of the Religio Publica without a respublica in which its magistrates
perform the obligatory caerimoniae associated with those offices.
Without reconstruction of the Religio Publica there can be no
reconstruction of the Religio Romana. Our "state" will remain an
offence to the Gods so long as we tolerate magistrates who do not even
adhere to impious fiction that they "delegate" these sacred
responsibilities to practitioners of the Religio. We must fundamentally
rethink the premise that those who refuse to offer to the Gods
personally should be permitted to hold offices which entail duties
essential to maintaining the pax Deorum. A respublica where a
magistrate can cast aside the most important duties of the office
because he owes allegiance to a deity which demands he abandon those
duties because they entail offerings to the Di Immortales is the
antithesis of a Roman respublica. To the extent that there is absurdity
here it is because your ludicrously syncretist,
Buddhist-Jewish-pseudo-Roman "all things to all people" world-view has
embraced a division of religious and secular magistracies born of
secular humanism's eighteenth-century compromise with monotheism and
poisoned genuine restoration of the pax Deorum.

> It is fine for you to say the CP should choose and reject whoever
> suits them as you are one of the chosen.
> >
> Why is not Lucius Arminius Faustus either flamen or augur? Why is
> such an erudite, honest, pious citizen rejected repeatedly..why are
> others rejected.
> The CP does not say; the Religio belongs to the cives and the
> State not the 'chosen' few.

The Religio belongs to no one. The Religio is a contract between the
respublica and the Di Immortales. To the extent that you mock the
institutions and rituals of the Religio and continue to do so in the
face of clear reprimand by those legally charged with the Religio's
defence, you expose the impious and political-personal character of your
agenda of vendetta.

> You may say you do not belong to the Boni, but then you go on
> about 'modernistic practices'......Except for the intelligent and
> absent Graecus all positions are filled with ultra-fundamentalists.

How dare you libel my colleague by the imputation that he stands with
your impiety? Graecus joined his colleagues in opposing your parody of
the Religio Romana and justly reversing the Collegium's blunder in ever
considering your application. Graecus supported the decretum on
sacrifice; you opposed it. Do not try to soil the reputation of a good
and pious man by attempting to wrap your vitriol in it.

> The Religio is withering due exactly to these reasons, you drive
> the cives away.
> It was divine Celetre, Faustus, myself who wrote those carmen,
> Indagtrix who keeps Vesta's flame...

That you write a poem as facilely as you pen a diatribe is no testimony
to pietas. It does not conceal your all-consuming hatred of those who
defend a traditional reconstruction of the Religio against your modern
fantasies. And once again you cannot resist the temptation to cloak
your vendetta in the names of others and shield your campaign against
the mos maiorum by association with their piety.

> but you shut us out

You shut yourself out by your own behaviour.

> in amore deorum

May the Di Immortales take note of your hypocrisy and in their due time
repay it as it deserves.

Vale.

Scaurus

From
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=4&Article_id=6556

-FVG

Myths surrounding ancient religions and cults have long preoccupied
humanity's understanding of history. Yet they remain a mystery to us,
especially in the absence of written texts.

One such cult, that of Mithrae, said to have existed during the age of
the Roman Empire, was widely spread among Rome's army. Vestiges going
back to this faith have been discovered in areas under Roman control, in
Europe, Britain and even Asia. Archaeologists used to believe this cult
was born in the Middle East, that it had its roots in the Persian
Zoroastrian cult and later spread to Europe. But a major archaeological
discovery of a cave in Syria seems to suggest the opposite.

The small village of Hurrarte lies stranded in the middle of the Syrian
desert. It is here that a few years ago a Polish excavation team
unearthed a cave from underneath a Byzantine church. Its walls were
covered with paintings dating to the Roman period - paintings such as a
god cutting the throat of a bull, monsters being defeated by a beam of
light and lions protecting the entrance.

These paintings appear to validate the theory that the cult of the god
Mithrae existed in the Syrian desert.

"It is one of the rare examples of the worship of the god Mithare in the
Middle East, it shows that this divinity is not linked to the Persian
Zoroastre cult," says archaeologist Michel Gawlikowski, director of the
polish team, in a recent lecture at the American University of Beirut's
Museum of Archaeology.

"Mithrae is always represented as a young male who is cutting the throat
of a bull. He is here to revitalize nature and his worshippers, and not
to impose a code of justice upon his followers, as was the case in
Persian cults. Mithrae was mentioned in a Latin poem dating from the 1st
century and it seems that this religion was made up by a Roman thinker
who has merged Persian religion with the Hellenistic one and invented a
new mythology," says Gawlikowski.

This religion seems to have been very popular with Roman warriors who in
turn have spread it into the different corners of the Roman Empire.
Paintings illustrating the god Mithrae cutting the throat of a bull were
found in many cities and districts of the empire. What exactly this cult
preached though is unknown. It seems to have been a very male-oriented
religion, as the army was made up entirely of men, they were the only
ones to attend the meetings, hoping to receive vitality.
The Mithrae religion was secret; the inexistence of texts describing its
mythology has placed this cult among the unknowns of history. The
paintings covering the walls of the cave of Hurrarte are rare indicators
of what this religion may have preached. "It seems that Mithrae was born
as an adult from a rock," says Gawlikowski "and after chasing the bull
and killing it in a cave he shared his meal with another divinity
representing the Sun."

This sacred meal pictured on the walls became a ritual to be practiced
by the followers of this religion, as discoveries in the cave in Syria
have shown.

Stairs are carved into the entrance of the cave leading into the main
cell where the feast was celebrated. Oil lamps were used to provide
enough light to allow the congregation to lie down on the long seat
which was carved inside the cave. This sitting area served for food
sharing while admiring the paintings representing the god Mithrae.
Chicken, sheep and pig meat were served during the reunions which were
hosted by a "priest" who would tell the story of the god by explaining
the mural paintings.

Unfortunately, the paintings preserved in this cave have suffered
partial destruction in the 5th or 6th centuries due to the construction
of the Byzantine church just above. After the adoption of Christianity
as religion of the Roman Empire, all other cults and religions were
banned and their cells destroyed. It is discoveries like the cave at
Hurrarte which offer mankind insight into pre-Christianity beliefs, the
existence of a different kind of faith, they lay testimony to a certain
zeitgeist.

Salve M. Arminia,

> Why is not Lucius Arminius Faustus either flamen or augur? Why is
> such an erudite, honest, pious citizen rejected repeatedly..why are
> others rejected.

In response to this, I have just one thing to say: What is keeping Lucius Arminius Faustus, and those "others" you so anonomously mention, from performing those rites and rituals which they would be performing if they had the State sanction? I can bend on augury and the auspices, but the only difference between a flamen and your standard-issue straight-from-the-hills priest is, honestly, a state sanction. Anyone can perform a ritual to whichsoever god they choose on the correct day with the correct materials. A state sanction is not needed. Perform your rituals, show honor to and placate the Gods, and they will take notice. The Gods care not who does the rituals, so long as they are performed, correctly.

You say you are shut out. You are only shut out because you shut yourself out. Perform the rituals, offer the sacrifices, placate the Gods. They will take notice, be sure. You need not a sanction to do that.

Vale,

Metellus

Oh Most Mighty Sole Consul & Praetores Extraordinaire,

May I suggest that you tidy up that voting schedule so that newer citizens
can figure out when they are supposed to vote? Last I heard, we use augustus
for August and not Sextillis.

Vale,
Diana

Salve Fabiana,

Hey for once we agree: miracles do happen ;-)

> May we on the voting day have a notice posted like this
>
> Voting begins: 12am Rome time
> 11pm GMT England
> 6pm EST US

Most US citizens are time difference difficient. When I was Tribune calling
for a vote I included this link which will give you your current time as
opposed to Roman.
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/

Vale,
Diana

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@y...> wrote:

> . Avete;

> You may say you do not belong to the Boni, but then you go on
> about 'modernistic practices'......Except for the intelligent and
> absent Graecus all positions are filled with ultra-fundamentalists.

He can 't be all bad, he voted with the rest of the CP to remove you
from your priesthood.

Palladius

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@y...> wrote:

> Ave Quirites;
> since the Die Nefastus is over please read my original post.
> M. Arminia Maior Fabiana
>
>
> In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Sp. Fabia Vera" <rory12001@y...>

wrote:


Is there a reason you are forwarding messages of yours written in May
to the list again? It's not as if the topics are being revisted.
We're familiar with your views, must you literally repeat yourself?


Palladius

Salve Palladi,

It is a diversionary tactic. Suddenly, as I was discussing with Cato
why attacking a segment of the CP (ya know the Evil Old Boni Priests)
is an attack on the CP as a whole, which is what they claim others do
to the "state" who question the quantity of laws etc, this post pops
up. Completely out of sync with anything, but just controversial
enough to try to entice focus on that rather than the other issue.

About as subtle and effective as the Charge of the Light Brigade.

Caesar

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "deciusiunius" <bcatfd@t...> wrote:
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@y...> wrote:
> > Ave Quirites;
> > since the Die Nefastus is over please read my original post.
> > M. Arminia Maior Fabiana
> >
> >
> > In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Sp. Fabia Vera" <rory12001@y...>
> wrote:
>
>
> Is there a reason you are forwarding messages of yours written in
May
> to the list again? It's not as if the topics are being revisted.
> We're familiar with your views, must you literally repeat
yourself?
>
>
> Palladius

Salve Drusus,

> So just what "Horrors" have the "Boni" Pontifices inflicted
> on Nova Roma? We wouldn't go along with those who wish to BAN
> traditional Sacrifices, nor did we attempt to FORCE people to
> take part in them.
> We stated that they were an option.

That's correct and I think that the compromise was an excellent one. As a
Boni and a practitioner of the Religio, I don't think that I am capable of
performing an animal sacrifice and no one gave me my Boni walking papers or
said that I HAD to perform an animal sacrifice or else. That said, I fully
support the right of anyone who wishes to perform an animal sacrifice. It is
a matter of religious freedom.

People who perform animal sacrifices honor the animal which is to be
slaughtered and then they eat it. Our ancestors knew just what a precious
gift they were getting when they could eat a piece of meat. To me, the
problem is with those who eat shrink wrapped meat and who are so out of
touch with nature that they don't even consider the meat that they are
eating as once being a living breathing creature who gave their life to
support us. They are the problem and not the animal sacrificers, hunters or
farmers who keep an animal, raise it and then eventually let it feed the
family for a month.

Vale,
Diana

G. Equitius Cato D. Octaviae Aventinae L. Sicinio Druso Gn. Iulio
Caesar quiritibusque S.P.D.

salvete, omnes.

As it happens, I thought the compromise was an excellent step as
well, and I said so at the time. So I'm not blind or stupid when it
comes to recognizing the effort.

Sicinius Drusus and Iulius Caesar, I would like to take this
opportunity, then, to take a good look at the Pater Patriae's
words. I agree that yes, as a non-practitioner I focus on things
other than the religio. I believe that both "government" and the
religio are inseperable, and that both are necessary for the
furthering of Nova Roma. I even agree with Iulius Scaurus when he
says that all magistrates should be required to at *least* make sure
the rituals proper to their offices are being performed by *someone*.

So can we all agree, then to allow each other (and all citizens) to
function as best their temperament suits them within Nova Roma?
Without the fear of backstabbing and wasted time? Ancient Rome was
a foetid mass of political intrigue, so in this particular case
perhaps we could rise above them. I will concentrate my efforts in
NR on "government", helping to offer solutions to the morass you
both see as holding NR back; you in turn can focus on the religio,
its proper function and the recreation of the rites necessary to
repair the pax deorum.

What ever came of the idea of revoking the consulta of St.
Theodosius I, along with a "national" day of mourning and the
offering of a piaculum? Psychologically I still think it's a good
step to take.

valete,

Cato



--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Casta Meretrix" <meretrix@p...>
wrote:

> Salve Drusus,
>
> > So just what "Horrors" have the "Boni" Pontifices inflicted
> > on Nova Roma? We wouldn't go along with those who wish to BAN
> > traditional Sacrifices, nor did we attempt to FORCE people to
> > take part in them.
> > We stated that they were an option.
>
> That's correct and I think that the compromise was an excellent

one. As a

> Boni and a practitioner of the Religio, I don't think that I am

capable of

> performing an animal sacrifice and no one gave me my Boni walking

papers or

> said that I HAD to perform an animal sacrifice or else. That said,

I fully

> support the right of anyone who wishes to perform an animal

sacrifice. It is

> a matter of religious freedom.
>
> People who perform animal sacrifices honor the animal which is to

be

> slaughtered and then they eat it. Our ancestors knew just what a

precious

> gift they were getting when they could eat a piece of meat. To me,

the

> problem is with those who eat shrink wrapped meat and who are so

out of

> touch with nature that they don't even consider the meat that they

are

> eating as once being a living breathing creature who gave their

life to

> support us. They are the problem and not the animal sacrificers,

hunters or

> farmers who keep an animal, raise it and then eventually let it

feed the

> family for a month.
>
> Vale,
> Diana

G. Iulius Scaurus S. P. D.

Salvete, Quirites.

Today is ante diem VIII Kalendas Augusti, the Ludi Victoriae Caesaris,
and the Furrinalia; the day is nefastus publicus. The Goddess Furrina
and the Furrinalia were of such antiquity that her cult and the nature
of the festival were unknown even to Varro and Verrius Flaccus. We are
simply at a loss to know what Romans of the late republic did not.

Tomorrow is ante diem VII Kalendas Augusti and the Ludi Victoriae
Caesaris; the day is comitialis.

Valete.

G. Iulius Scaurus
Aedilis Curulis, Flamen Quirinalis et Pontifex

F. Galerius Aurelianus M. Arminia Maior Fabiana. Salve.

I must oppose you on this proposal, domina, as you did not state the
historical and political rationale behind this particular law. The Lex Domitia de
Sacerdotes (according to the Oxford History of Ancient Rome) was a political
instrument designed to allow Marius and, later, C. Iulius Caesar, to use the power
of their populism and, if necessary, threat of violence, to have their
candidates voted in so as to control the auguries used to call the assemblies, the
power of the Flamen of Cerealis to withdraw his temple's protection of any
particular Tribune, and in other ways significantly impair their opponents'
ability to have any hope of working within the Republican System.

Also, you are incorrect in saying that the Collegium Pontificium is entirely
in the hands of the Boni. That is a misrepresentation of the facts. The
correct statement should be that the majority of the most active flamens, augurs,
and pontiffs are members of the Boni. This means, ipso facto, that most of
the other members are inactive and failing to fulfill the conditions of their
sacred oath or obligation to Dii Immortales. At least the Boni holding these
offices are true to their commitment of service to and defense of the Religio.
I am considering applying to the Sacred Colleges to fulfill a currently empty
position and, while I am not a Boni, I believe that I will receive a very fair
hearing from the Collegiae.

I do not argue that there is some substance to your statements, domina, but
it ill behooves you to post less than the total correct information as some
could perceive this action as a populist tactic that would not serve Dii
Immortales well.

Vale.


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

F. Galerius Aurelianus S.P.D.

Metellus is correct in that no state sanction is necessary to publicly post
or perform a rite on the correct day. With the assistance of Scaurus and
material found on the RR list, I created the caerimonia of the Vinalia Prioria in
April. I also wished Gryllus a happy birthday privately since his name day
occurs on the Vinalia Prioria.

Scaurus posted it to the ML on the correct day because I was holding the
actual caerimonia at the Pagan Unity Festival with the assistance of two other
Nova Romans attending the event. I performed it clad in the toga virilis because
I am an ordinary citizen but in all other manner performed it in the required
manner. I have not considered applying for a position in the Sacred Colleges
until recently because it was unnecessary for me to have any sanction to
perform as a priest. Every citizen can function as a priest whether it is private
household rites, specific rites to a family or provincial deity, or for the
benefit of the whole of Nova Roma.

Valete.


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

Tacky, Palladius, definitely tacky. Would you like some milk while you
re-sharpen your claws? Or a glass of wine while you twist your knife again?

F G A


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

F. Galerius Aurelianus to the Consuls, Tribunes, People and Senate of
Nova Roma.

I take my place in the public Forum and formally make appeal to the
Senate and People of Nova Roma and especially our Consuls and
Tribumes to vote AGAINST the LEX EQUITIA DE MUTANDIS APPELLATIONIBUS
DUORUM MAGISTRATUUM MINORUM. I make this appeal based on two reasons:

I. This lex would make no significant or necessary improvement to
Nova Roma at this time and;

II. This lex was not proposed by the magistracies who it would effect.

I also formally request that the assemblies be called in the
immediate future or by no later than the major elections in December
to repeal and remove the following leges from the Tabularium as being
detrimental to the public peace and concord of Nova Roma:

I. Lex Salicia Iudiciaria
II. Lex Salicia Poenalis

Finally, I request that the proper magistrates, expecially the
rogators, tribunes, curator differum, curator aranem, enter into
discussion to revise the following leges and all other leges
(proposed or enacted) related to them but not mentioned in this
request so as to create a new combined lex (& subsequent repeal by
vote of these leges) to be voted on at the proper time but not later
than the December elections:

I. Lex Vedia Vigintisexviri
II. Lex Octavia de Sermone
III. Lex Minucia de Rogatoribus
IIII. Lex Equitia de Mutandis Appellationibus Duorum Magistatuum
Minorum (proposed)

The new combined lex should include the names of the prior
magistrates to recognize and honor their contributions to Nova Roma.

May Dii Immortales grant wisdom, peace, concord, and unity to the
Senate and People of Nova Roma.

Salve Diana,


Could you explain me what it is about ?

Thanks.

Vale !
Titus Apollonius Germanicus

----- Original Message -----
From: Casta Meretrix
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2004 10:18 AM
Subject: RE: [Nova-Roma] Re: Comitia Centuriata Convened


Salve Fabiana,

Hey for once we agree: miracles do happen ;-)

> May we on the voting day have a notice posted like this
>
> Voting begins: 12am Rome time
> 11pm GMT England
> 6pm EST US

Most US citizens are time difference difficient. When I was Tribune calling
for a vote I included this link which will give you your current time as
opposed to Roman.
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/

Vale,
Diana


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. Equitius Cato F. Galerio Aureliano quiritibusque S.P.D.

salve, Galerius Aurelianus, et salvete omnes.

I will re-post the relevant part of an earlier post I made regarding
this below the comment by Galerius Aurelianus ---

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

> F. Galerius Aurelianus to the Consuls, Tribunes, People and Senate

of

> Nova Roma.
>
> I take my place in the public Forum and formally make appeal to
>the Senate and People of Nova Roma and especially our Consuls and
> Tribumes to vote AGAINST the LEX EQUITIA DE MUTANDIS
>APPELLATIONIBUS DUORUM MAGISTRATUUM MINORUM. I make this appeal
>based on two reasons:
>
> I. This lex would make no significant or necessary improvement to
> Nova Roma at this time and;

CATO:

"Second, we need to present an educated, informed and informative
face to the outside world. There's a whole mass of people out there
who study and practice the things we talk about daily. Classicists,
Latinists, historians, librarians...hundreds of people who we should
be making an effort to attract. But we have to conduct ourselves
appropriately. A perfect example is the current proposed law to
correct the titles of two of the magistrates. Yes, I know, it's
another "stupid" law, some might say; but to a Latinist, a real one
out there in the big macronational world, who reads the
title "Araneum" and wonders where we keep the spiders, it's a joke.

The two curatores, the curator araneum and curator differum, have
incorrect titles. It's that simple. The offices did not exist in
antiquity (a matter that's noted in the law), and the titles are bad
Latin. "Araneum" is marginal Latin; it would have to be construed
as "curator in respect to the (spider) web," a construction which
does occur in Latin, but which seems awkward for a title. The
term "magister aranearius" is the generally accepted modern Latinism
for "webmaster" --- a term that any reader of Latin today would
recognize. The word "differum" in "curator differum" just plain
doesn't exist in Latin. A friend of a friend of mine, a professor of
classics at a local university, was asked...no such word. It took
a number of emails to describe what the "curator differum" actually
does, and he still didn't find it easy to understand. If a man who
has his own website all in Latin, conducts oral Latin groups, knows
about 16 languages, and has had 19 years of Latin can't figure out
the meaning of a Nova Roman magistrate's title, we are in trouble, I
think.

So, we correct them. It's not the end of the world, but in fact
gives us more credibility amongst the kind of people who could most
appreciate it."

So, my fellow-citizens, I would very strongly urge the passage of
this lex. For all the cries that we have no credibility in
the "outside" world, here's a good place to start; simple, yet
effective.

vale et valete,

G. Equitius Cato

G. Iulius Scaurus F. Galerio Aureliano salutem dicit.

Salve, Aureliano.

> I take my place in the public Forum and formally make appeal to the
> Senate and People of Nova Roma and especially our Consuls and
> Tribumes to vote AGAINST the LEX EQUITIA DE MUTANDIS APPELLATIONIBUS
> DUORUM MAGISTRATUUM MINORUM. I make this appeal based on two reasons:
>
> I. This lex would make no significant or necessary improvement to
> Nova Roma at this time and;
>
> II. This lex was not proposed by the magistracies who it would effect.

Bluntly put, this is philistine. How can a thinking person oppose a law
aimed at correcting illiterate Latin in the laws of a Roman
reconstructionist organisation? Would you prefer we look like
ignoramuses who can't consult a Latin dictionary or grammar?

I should point out also that neither magistracy is empowered to present
legislation to Comitia, nor should their preferences matter a whit if
they were to prefer to perpetuate Latin illiteracy in Nova Roma.

Vale.

Scaurus

F. Galerius Aurelianus S.P.D.

I have responded to both Cato and Scaurus privately about their opinions and
made my own known to them. If any other citizen wishes to contact me
privately or publicly about my proposals, please feel free to do so. I can be reached
at padruigtheuncle@....

Valete.


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

F Galerius Aurelianus S.P.D. Fl Vedius Germanicus

Your call to vote against the Lex Equitia de Mutandis Appellationibus
Duorum Magistratuum Minorum is simply bizzarre.

As a candidate for one of the two magistrates mentioned in the lex, I
wholeheartedly support it.

And, as the "ignoramus" who mis-named the magistracies in the first
place, I also wholeheartedly support it.

This is a perfect example of a good law; I count the use of correct
Latin as a "significant and necessary improvement". Why the heck
wouldn't you want us to use correct Latin? That just makes no sense.

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus
Pater Patriae
Candidate for Curator Araneum/Magister Aranearius

Patrick D. Owen wrote:

> F. Galerius Aurelianus to the Consuls, Tribunes, People and Senate of
> Nova Roma.
>
> I take my place in the public Forum and formally make appeal to the
> Senate and People of Nova Roma and especially our Consuls and
> Tribumes to vote AGAINST the LEX EQUITIA DE MUTANDIS APPELLATIONIBUS
> DUORUM MAGISTRATUUM MINORUM. I make this appeal based on two reasons:
>
> I. This lex would make no significant or necessary improvement to
> Nova Roma at this time and;
>
> II. This lex was not proposed by the magistracies who it would effect.
>
> I also formally request that the assemblies be called in the
> immediate future or by no later than the major elections in December
> to repeal and remove the following leges from the Tabularium as being
> detrimental to the public peace and concord of Nova Roma:
>
> I. Lex Salicia Iudiciaria
> II. Lex Salicia Poenalis
>
> Finally, I request that the proper magistrates, expecially the
> rogators, tribunes, curator differum, curator aranem, enter into
> discussion to revise the following leges and all other leges
> (proposed or enacted) related to them but not mentioned in this
> request so as to create a new combined lex (& subsequent repeal by
> vote of these leges) to be voted on at the proper time but not later
> than the December elections:
>
> I. Lex Vedia Vigintisexviri
> II. Lex Octavia de Sermone
> III. Lex Minucia de Rogatoribus
> IIII. Lex Equitia de Mutandis Appellationibus Duorum Magistatuum
> Minorum (proposed)
>
> The new combined lex should include the names of the prior
> magistrates to recognize and honor their contributions to Nova Roma.
>
> May Dii Immortales grant wisdom, peace, concord, and unity to the
> Senate and People of Nova Roma.

I don't see my name included. Why?

Stephen Gallagher <spqr753@...> wrote:Salve Romans

This is my most recent list of those who signed up to get our SPQR Ring

Four payments have been received and we need to send an order in ASAP
So please if you are on this list and still want the ring mail me a check made out to United States Eagle Rings and mail to:

Tim Gallagher 5496 Ross Court
New Market, Maryland 21774

1. Tiberius Galerius Paulinus Size 11 PAID
2. Quintus Lanius Paulinus Size 12
3. Marcus Bianchius Antonius
4. Q. Bianchius Rufinus
5. Appius Tullius Cato
6-11 Equitius Paternus
12. Galius Adoreus Caesar
13. Iono Basilicatus
14 L. Cornelius Sardonicus Size 11
15. Servius Equitius Mercurius Troianus
16 Servius Equitius Mercurius Troianus
17 Gnaeus Scribonius Scriptor Size 9 1/2 PAID
18. Claudia Fabia Calpurnia

19. Servius Fidelius Longinius Size 11 PAID
20. Annia Octavia Indagatrix
21. Dwayne Gillespie Size 11 PAID

If you do not want a ring and are on this kist please e-mail me and I will remove you from this list. If you are not on the list and would like to see the ring we are talking about it is posted at the NR yahoo site and you can place an order by e-mailing me and sending payment as listed above.

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus



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


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


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

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

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

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




S P Q R

Fidelis Ad Mortem.

Marcvs Flavivs Fides
Roman Citizen



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!

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

I will mail the payment, just put me on the list please...size 9

Stephen Gallagher <spqr753@...> wrote:Salve Romans

The SPQR ring project is going ahead but we need your payment NOW. We have 4 paid orders in hand and we need the other 16 or so who are on the order list.

You said you wanted one so please send me a check or money order made out to

United States Eagle Ring Company and mail to

Tim Gallagher
5496 Ross Court
New Market, Maryland 21774

Remember it is $85.00 for size 11 and $100.00 for any other size

PLEASE Email me to tell me the payment has been mailed

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus

***********************************************************


Tim, I have completed the SPQR ring and was planning
to post it on our website or develop a separate site
for marketing. Are you prepared to submit the 20
orders? Please respond though email or give me a call
ASAP. Thanks. Mike

--- Stephen Gallagher >

Hi Mike

>
> No I have not forgotten you or you gorgeous SPQR
> Ring. We have been trying to get as many orders as
> possible. Right now we have 20 people signed up to
> buy the SPQR ring. Is enough to get started?
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Tim Gallagher
>

=====
Mike Carroll
United States Eagle Rings
http://www.eaglerings.com
or - http://www.carrollcollection.com
16144 Port Clinton Rd.
Prairie View, IL 60069
847-821-1333
mike@...




__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Vote for the stars of Yahoo!'s next ad campaign!
http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/yahoo/votelifeengine/


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


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


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

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

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

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




S P Q R

Fidelis Ad Mortem.

Marcvs Flavivs Fides
Roman Citizen



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!

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

Salve Sorry must have mislayed an e-mail post again with size and I will fix it.

TGP

----- Original Message -----
From: raymond fuentes
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 7:46 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] The SPQR Ring orders


I don't see my name included. Why?

Stephen Gallagher <spqr753@...> wrote:Salve Romans

This is my most recent list of those who signed up to get our SPQR Ring

Four payments have been received and we need to send an order in ASAP
So please if you are on this list and still want the ring mail me a check made out to United States Eagle Rings and mail to:

Tim Gallagher 5496 Ross Court
New Market, Maryland 21774

1. Tiberius Galerius Paulinus Size 11 PAID
2. Quintus Lanius Paulinus Size 12
3. Marcus Bianchius Antonius
4. Q. Bianchius Rufinus
5. Appius Tullius Cato
6-11 Equitius Paternus
12. Galius Adoreus Caesar
13. Iono Basilicatus
14 L. Cornelius Sardonicus Size 11
15. Servius Equitius Mercurius Troianus
16 Servius Equitius Mercurius Troianus
17 Gnaeus Scribonius Scriptor Size 9 1/2 PAID
18. Claudia Fabia Calpurnia

19. Servius Fidelius Longinius Size 11 PAID
20. Annia Octavia Indagatrix
21. Dwayne Gillespie Size 11 PAID

If you do not want a ring and are on this kist please e-mail me and I will remove you from this list. If you are not on the list and would like to see the ring we are talking about it is posted at the NR yahoo site and you can place an order by e-mailing me and sending payment as listed above.

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus



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


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


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

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

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

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




S P Q R

Fidelis Ad Mortem.

Marcvs Flavivs Fides
Roman Citizen



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!

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


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]

Well said, Germanicus! I am not politically inclined, I am a Roman
soldier, but I agree wholeheartedly with what you have written. Let
each person enjoy what they love about Nova Roma as individuals, and
respect what each other have specialized interests in. I may not be a
politician, but I respect all of you who ARE interested in that, and
all of you who are interested in other areas as well. I have learned
that diversity makes us all stronger people.
In honored service,
Lucius Aurelius Metellus
Praefectus Auxilia
Sodalitas Militarium
Nova Roma
--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Flavius Vedius Germanicus
<germanicus@g...> wrote:

> Novaromanii S.P.D. Fl Vedius Germanicus
>
> S.V.B.E.E.V.
>
> I have read the discussions of the last few days with great

interest.

> Allow me to make a few observations.
>
> Nova Roma's status as a sovereign nation must not be brought into
> question, for it cannot be altered without destroying Nova Roma's

entire

> reason for existence. The formula is simple, and my fellow Pater

Patriae

> Marcus Cassius Julianus stated it in more elegant terms, but permit

me

> to be a bit more blunt:
>
> 1) There can be no true restoration of the Religio Romana without

the

> restoration of the Religio Publica.
> 2) There can be no restoration of the Religio Publica in the

absense

> of a sovereign nation.
> 3) Any attempt to undo Nova Roma's status as a sovereign nation

would

> result in the undermining of the restoration of the Religio Romana,
> intentionally or not.
>
> Now, we can quibble about terminology; micronations, sovereignty
> projects, etc. I've come to simply use "Republic" as being both

broad

> enough to avoid certain problems and specific enough to suit our

needs.

> By all means, drop the use of "micronation" if it causes you

heartburn;

> that is not by any stretch the core of our collective identity. But
> sovereignty itself must be off the table. It matters not one iota

that

> no other nation recognizes that sovereignty. We choose not to

exercise

> it in terms of fielding armies and exclusively holding territory.

But

> the Gods recognize it, and so do we. Do we really need anyone

else's

> approval?
>
> Do we have too many laws? I happen to think we do not, although we
> definitely have some clunkers that need revising or abandoning. But
> everyone must recognize that that's how we set our procedures and
> standards. If we called them "regulations" or "bylaws"

or "resolutions",

> they'd be no different. But sovereign Republics pass their

procedures,

> and set their standards, by passing laws. And so do we. Don't blame

the

> system of laws as a whole; blame specific laws, if you must blame
> anything at all. Then fix them. Better yet, don't blame anything;

just

> make something better.
>
> Do we spend too much effort on "government"? Again, I happen to

think

> not, but that is only because I happen to believe that there exists
> something of an "underground society" in Nova Roma. Politics

_appears_

> to take center stage because is dominates this email list. (Here's

an

> idea; let's call it the "NR Politics" list an be done with the idea

of a

> "Main List" altogether.) But, as our good Pontifex L. Sicinius

Drusus

> pointed out in an earlier email, there is a LOT going on amongst

the

> Pontiffs to which none of the rest of us are privy. I daresay there

are

> similar situations among the various provincial lists. Why, we are

told

> almost incidentally that there are regular meetings going on in

Lacis

> Magni, and enough activity to sustain two Oppidia in Italy, and a
> days-long event in Gaul. Plus, we hear of informal networks of

friends

> who come to Nova Roma, find like-minded Citizens, and then go off

to

> correspond with them exclusively, leaving the so-called "Main List"

to

> those more politically inclined. Don't tell me we spend too much

effort

> on "government". A relative handful spend an enormous amount of

effort

> on government. It just happens that it's very visible.
>
> Don't like it? The answer is simple. Find the thing you DO like and

give

> it your all! Do you care about the Religio and don't give a rat's

ass

> about politics? Great! Then participate on that list and stop
> complaining about the people who do want to work on Nova Roma's
> political infrastructure. Don't care about the Religio but are
> interested in Roman history? Great! There's a whole section of the
> Sodalitas Musarum that deals with history that is, as I understand

it,

> moribund. Stop worrying about what we practitioners are doing and

go off

> to support archaeological digs, talk about history, and so on. Like

more

> than one aspect that Nova Roma has to offer? Nobody says you have

to

> limit yourself to one thing. Do as much as you can, but be careful

not

> to spread yourself too thin. We've had more than our share of folks

drop

> out because they took on too much too soon.
>
> Nova Roma does not need to be one thing to the exclusion of all the
> other things it can be. Historical society, advocacy group,

religious

> institution, reenactment group, social organization, and even

sovereign

> nation and more; there is NOTHING there that is mutually exclusive.
> Indeed, everything could and should strengthen and benefit

everything

> else. Please, everyone-- and I do mean everyone-- stop trying to

cut off

> everything that Nova Roma is except your own specific interest. If

we

> allow that to happen, then you'll only be hurting your own

interests.

>
> In short, breadth gives us strength, sovereignty gives us the

Religio.

>
> May the Gods guide your safety.
>
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus
> Pater Patriae

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@a... wrote:

> Tacky, Palladius, definitely tacky. Would you like some milk while

you

> re-sharpen your claws? Or a glass of wine while you twist your
>knife again?

I generally prefer the knife and wine thanks. I leave the milk and
claws to her.


Palladius

In a message dated 7/25/04 3:23:09 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
mlcinnyc@... writes:

The
term "magister aranearius" is the generally accepted modern Latinism
for "webmaster" --- a term that any reader of Latin today would
recognize. The word "differum" in "curator differum" just plain
doesn't exist in Latin. A friend of a friend of mine, a professor of
classics at a local university, was asked...no such word. It took
a number of emails to describe what the "curator differum" actually
does, and he still didn't find it easy to understand. If a man who
has his own website all in Latin, conducts oral Latin groups, knows
about 16 languages, and has had 19 years of Latin can't figure out
the meaning of a Nova Roman magistrate's title, we are in trouble, I
think.




The Vatican had a constuct word for webmaster. Granted its not Classical
Latin,
but it could be a starting point. I just wanted the word Curator, a
spider's web never entered into it.

Fabius


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

I rarely voice an opinion here, but I have to agree with CATO here.
I apologize for any misspells, its late and its easier to say your
sorry then to go back and correct :)

>I say they are wrong, both factually and emotionally. Factually
>because, as has been illustrated repeatedly (to no effect upon the
>hard-core elements), without the State there can be no State
>Religion. Without the organization of the res publica there cannot
>be a religio publica.

But where I disagree is what the State has to be. I am an Citizen of
the Unitied States, I practice daily the Lararium rites, When the
holidays approach I include the United States of American as well as
Nova Roma in my prayers.

as Pontifex Maximus Marcus Cassius Iulianus says.
(Private worship was the foundation of Religion in ancient Rome. The
Public rites, with their grand Temples and many festivals have
received the most attention from historians. Yet such things were
possible only because of the pietas which grew from household and
family rites. Each household in Rome was in a sense a temple to the
Gods. All Roman homes had a household altar, or "lararium", at
which the family interacted with the Goddesses and Gods on a
personal level each day. The rites of the home and family were so
important to the Romans that such worship persisted into very late
antiquity, surviving centuries longer than the public
manifestations of the Religio Romana which were officially banned in
the late 4th century CE.)

The most important thing is honoring the Gods. Maybe the Pontifex's
could get together and redo some of the rights to include the
peoples current real nation. Maybe the job of the ponitfexs should
be to put together the rites from this perspective rather then from
the perspective of ancient(and non existent) Rome. I joined Nova
Roma for the religious aspect, for community with others like me. I
saw and see the Religio coinsiding perfectly with my countries
founding principles(family, patriotism, republicanism on a scale
undreamed of by the Romans) and our great power in the world today.
I think it is the the Job of the Ponifex's to mold the religio into
our current nation/states as well as Nova Roma. I think this is a
more complex and worthy task.

T.Arcanos Agricola

The Rogator A. Apollonius Cordus to all citizens,
greetings.

We will soon be voting in the comitia centuriata to
elect a new praetor. The voting will happen in several
phases, and I ask every citizen to read this message
carefully so he or she can vote correctly. Keep a copy
of this message to help you when you come to vote.

The first thing you must do is check which century you
are in. To do this, go to this page:

http://www.novaroma.org/bin/view/gentes

You will see a long list of all the gentes. Find your
gens, and click on the link which says "3 cives" or
"10 cives" or whatever it is.

You will now see a list of names, some of which may
have photographs. Find your name, and click on it.

You will see your personal profile. It contains a
table of information, such as "Citizen ID#" and
"Gens". Near the bottom of this table it says
"Century", and gives a number, and then another number
in brackets, e.g.:

Century: 43 (20 pts)

The first number (43 in the example) is your century
number. Please remember this number.


First phase:

On Friday the 30th of July (a. d. III Kal. Sex.),
members of century number 7 will vote. They may vote
from 00:01 (one minute past midnight) Roman time. That
will be:

Anchorage: 14:01 on Thursday
Athens: 01:01 on Friday
Berlin: 00:01 on Friday
Boston: 18:01 on Thursday
Brazilia: 19:01 on Thursday
Canberra: 08:01 on Friday
Cape Town: 00:01 on Friday
Denver: 16:01 on Thursday
Dublin: 23:01 on Thursday
Guatemala: 16:01 on Thursday
London: 23:01 on Thursday
Madrid: 00:01 on Friday
Mexico City: 17:01 on Thursday
Montreal: 18:01 on Thursday
New Orleans: 17:01 on Thursday
New York: 18:01 on Thursday
Paris: 00:01 on Friday
Perth: 06:01 on Friday
San Francisco: 15:01 on Thursday
Sao Paulo: 19:01 on Thursday

You can check the current time in Rome on the main
page of the Nova Roma website.

Remember, only members of century number 7 may vote
during the first phase. No other votes will be
counted. If you vote too early, I or my colleagues
will send a message to this list asking you to vote
again at the correct time. You will be identified by
your vote tracking number, which you will be given
after you cast your vote.


Second phase:

On Tuesday the 3rd of August (a. d. III Non. Sex.),
members of centuries 1 to 14 may vote. They may vote
from 00:01 (one minute past midnight) Roman time.

Members of century 7 may still vote during this time.
Others who are not members of centuries 1 to 14 may
not vote, and their votes will not be counted.


Third phase:

On Saturday the 7th of August (a. d. VII Id. Sex.),
everyone may vote. They may vote from 00:01 (one
minute past midnight) Roman time.

Members of centuries 1 to 14, including 7, may still
vote during this time.


Suspension of voting:

There will be some days on which no one will be
allowed to vote, for religious reasons. These days
will be:

Sunday 1st August (Kal. Sex.),
Monday 2nd August (a. d. IV Non. Sex.),

Thursday 5th August (Non. Sex.),
Friday 6th August (a. d. VIII Id. Sex.).

No votes cast during these days will be counted. I or
my colleagues will post a notice to this list asking
anyone who votes on these days to vote again later.


All voting will end at the end of Wednesday the 11th
of August (a. d. III Id. Sex.), at 00:00 (midnight)
Roman time. No votes received after that time will be
counted.


If you are uncertain whether you have voted too early,
or think you may have made a mistake, vote again. It
may help, and it won't do any harm.

Note also that there will also be voting going on in
the comitia populi tributa during some of this time.
In the comitia populi tributa, everyone can vote all
at the same time. The phases described above are only
relevant to the comitia centuriata, i.e., the election
for praetor.


My colleagues and I will post further notices during
the run-up to the voting period and during the voting
period itself. Please read all these notices carefully.





___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://www.allnewmessenger.com