I am new to Nova Roma, but I must say that this is one of the most noble
things I've ever seen.

It's easy to stand by a friend. It's more difficult to stand by an
opponent (I refrain from calling him an enemy since I don't know the
specifics of your relationship).

For what it's worth, you have my heartfelt respect.

Titus Metallus

gaiusequitiuscato wrote:

> G. Equitius Cato quirites S.P.D.
>
> Salvete, omnes.
>
> I think it is necessary for someone to step up to the Forum in
> opposition. Several citizens have announced that G. Agorius
> Taurinus does not deserve a defense, or help from his fellow-
> citizens. This is absurd, and flies in the face of every ideal we
> hold as Romans. Every citizen deserves a fair standing before the
> law; he appealed to us, not knowing much about NR law, to help him.
> Justice finds a home where She is most welcome, and to turn Her away
> bodes ill for us if we follow that path.
>
> Taurinus is certainly no friend of mine. I have been excoriated by
> him on several occasions, on a private List, to a degree that I have
> yet to match in my lifetime. I have, to be honest, returned the
> favor. Yet that was a private List, one open to much horseplay and
> vitriol, sarcasm and downright sordidness. When I subscribed to
> that List, I knew it to be so, and accepted it on its own terms. As
> a private List, owned by an individual who, by happenstance, is also
> a citizen in Nova Roma.
>
> THIS is our Forum. THIS is where we conduct business, discuss
> issues, gripe and laugh and share our common Roman-ness within Nova
> Roma. That being said, I have offered, been accepted, and now stand
> before you as advocate for G. Agorius Taurinus. I will defend him
> to the best of my abilities. Not because I think he is the most
> righteous person on earth, or even a necessarily very agreeable
> person, or because of any friendship or partisan fellowship we have,
> but simply because he is a citizen. Like me. Like all of you. I
> only hope and pray that if, the Gods forbid, I should ever need
> assistance, even one of those with whom I most heartily disagree
> would stand by my side as a fellow-citizen.
>
>
> Valete,
>
> Cato
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
> click here
> <http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129dufivk/M=298184.5285298.6392945.3001176/D=groups/S=1705313712:HM/EXP=1093815330/A=2319498/R=0/SIG=11thfntfp/*http://www.netflix.com/Default?mqso=60185352&partid=5285298>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> <mailto:Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>

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

Salvete omnes;
I will be visiting Rome September, and amidst everything realized I
do not have a proper guide for the Forum, temples all things
pertaining to Roma Antiqua.
Can any make suggestions in English or Italian for a superior
guidebook for a civis such as myself.
Even better, if someone put one together I'm sure it would sell in
the Macellum.
bene valete
M. Arminia Maior Fabiana

Propraetrix Hiberniae
scriba Iuris et
Investigatio CFQ

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

> F. Galerius Aurelianus S.P.D.
> I call
> upon all honorable Nova Roman citizens to review the posts (both

current and in

> the past) from the person using the name G. Agorius Taurinus to

decide for

> themselves whether or not he merits any aid or assistance from the

populi. I

> feel that a legal action has been taken and should be allowed to

continue to

> its conclusion under the leges and edicta of Nova Roma.
>
> Valete.

Salve,

Whether or not a person merits any aid or assistance from the populi
is irrelevant. Every Nova Roman has the right of provocatio
regardless of whether anyone thinks they deserve it or not. That is
the difference between the rule of law and the rule of the mob.

Hopefully someone will come forward to be an advocate for G. Agorius
Taurinus. I'd do it out of principle but as a scribe to the
Censor's office there would be a direct conflict of interest.

Vale,

Q. Cassius Calvus

Salve,

I tried to answer your email you sent to the webmaster but I'm
getting a bounce message.

Vale,

Q. Cassius Calvus

I would recommend "Rome, An Oxford Archaeological Guide" by Amanda Claridge
This goes into quite an amount of detail about all of the visible remaining
monuments of ancient Rome. Paperback, easy to carry, 450+ pages, illustrated,
fairly recent (1998)
I think that this book is an excellent resource.
Valete
John Carlson


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

Salvete Omnes!

Thank you sir for the wise and learned interjection of reason and
common sense. Out of respect for such I shall decline to reply to
any further taunts regarding Back Alley topics.

I was invited, I joined, I found out what went on there, and I left.

--Sabina Equitia Doris
de Oppresso Liber




--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "FAC" <sacro_barese_impero@l...>
wrote:

> Salvete Omnes,
> I came back from my holidays and now I'm again fully active in NR
> finding ever a boring mailing list talking about off-topic matters.
>
> About the sexual discussions, I agree with Diana that they are

funny

> and sometimes interesting but I would remember you that this is a
> list about Nova Roma and Roma Antiqua. Sexual discussion would be
> very accepted only if srictly linked with the History of Rome. In

my

> personal opinion we could talk about sexual practices, love,
> pornography, etc. if they are inserted in a cultural contest about
> Rome like for example the pernicious images in the lupanaria of
> Pompeii. Any other discussions like the pornographical practices

in

> Mexico would be off-topic and would be avoided to hurt no people
> here. Citizens, we're all different here, we come from different
> lands and from different cultures and if the sex with animals

could

> interest a people living in Thailandia (no personal and direct
> offense to our oriental citizens), they could hurt people coming
> from more "moralist" lands.
> About the Back Alley List, I don't understand why we talk about

it.

> The BA list is not Nova Roman, it's not official and everything
> about it is absolutely off-topic. We wouldn't talk ever about it
> because it haven't anything about Rome and Nova Roma. Why you talk
> about Back Alley? Why the discussion of the BA are here in the
> mailiang list of Nova Roma?
>
> As I said in the recent past, sadly 80% of the discussions of this
> list are off-topic. I would invite you again to re-take the

correct

> way.
>
> This is my personal opinion, it could be wrong but it's my

personal

> view. Thank you.
>
> Valete
> Fr. Apulus Caesar
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Casta Meretrix <meretrix4@y...>
> wrote:
> > Salve Doris,
> >
> > > To the third: "Casta Meretrix", you presume to tell
> > > me and fellow
> > > quirites where "the line *should* be drawn". At
> > > such a presumption,
> > > considering its source, I merely laugh.
> >
> > Hey now, I'm glad that I made you laugh :-) I told you
> > that sex was a funny subject!
> >
> > Take care of yourself (no pun intended),
> > Vale,
> > Diana
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
> > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

Salvete Quirites, et salve Gai Equiti,

gaiusequitiuscato wrote:

> ... Every citizen deserves a fair standing before the
> law; he appealed to us, not knowing much about NR law, to help him.
> Justice finds a home where She is most welcome, and to turn Her away
> bodes ill for us if we follow that path.

[...]

> THIS is our Forum. THIS is where we conduct business, discuss
> issues, gripe and laugh and share our common Roman-ness within Nova
> Roma. That being said, I have offered, been accepted, and now stand
> before you as advocate for G. Agorius Taurinus. I will defend him
> to the best of my abilities.

*applause*

Well said sir. And well done. This is about finding the truth, and
securing justice. I hope that together we can do both for the republic
and for your client.

Valete Quirites,

-- Marinus

Ex Officio Consulis Gnaei Equiti Marini


EDICTVM CONSVLARE X

EDICTVM DE GRATIIS ACCENSIS AD FORVM MODERANDVM AGENDIS

Gratitude to Accensi for Forum Moderation

Now that a new praetor suffectus has been elected and has chosen his own
scribae for the purpose of assisting with the moderation of the Nova
Roman Main List, there is no longer any need for consular oversight of
this function.

Quoniam praetor suffectus novus creatus et scribas suos qui in Forum
Novae Romae Praecipuum moderandum adiuvarent elegit, non iam opus est
huius muneris cura consulari.

I therefore discharge Renata Corva Cantrix and Decius Iunius Palladius
Invictus as accensi for the purpose of assisting with the moderation of
the Main List of Nova Roma, and thank both most heartily for their
service. Both have served honorably and well under difficult circumstances.

Dimitto ergo ad Novae Romae Forum Praecipuum moderandum accensos Renatam
Corvam Cantricem et Decium Iunium Palladium Invictum, atque gratias quam
plurimas ambobus ex corde ago pro ministerio eorum. Ambo bene et honeste
temporibus in adversis servivere.

This edict takes effect immediately.

Hoc edictum statim valet.


Given under my hand this 28th day of August, 2004 of the Common Era and
2757 since the founding of the City of Rome

Datum sub manu mea ante diem V Kal. SEPTEMBRES MMDCCLVII a.u.c.


In the consulship of Gnaeus Salix Astur and Gnaeus Equitius Marinus

Gnaeo Salici Asturi Gnaeo Equitio Marino Consulibus

Salve John Carlson;
thank you very much indeed, it sounds perfect & will order it
tomorrow. You will feel my gratitude emanating from the Palatine
Hill;)
bene vale
M. Arminia Maior Fabiana


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

> I would recommend "Rome, An Oxford Archaeological Guide" by Amanda

Claridge

> This goes into quite an amount of detail about all of the visible

remaining

> monuments of ancient Rome. Paperback, easy to carry, 450+ pages,

illustrated,

> fairly recent (1998)
> I think that this book is an excellent resource.
> Valete
> John Carlson
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salvete,

As many know last week I had to make the tough decision of putting
my pet hamster, Rodie, to sleep after little over two years of being
a bright spot in my life. Last night I made a visit to Petsmart
just to look. There I saw an adorable little black bear hamster all
by his lonesome (which is how hamsters like it as two hamsters are
going to do one of three things, mate, fight, both). He was busy
grooming himself and it looked like he was playing peek-a-boo.
Anyway I was just there to enjoy looking at the critters.

After a day of thinking, "You know you want to buy him and the place
seems so empty without a furry friend." I broke down and re-set up
the summer cage (the summer cage is a normal cage, but for cold
months I have a set of Habitrail modules to protect from drafts, yes
I spoil my critters rotten) and made a trip back to Petsmart. I
figured he would probably already be sold, but he was still there.
He's now running around the cage getting accustomed to his new
home. I'll take a picture and post it on my website in a few days
after he's had time to calm down over being moved to a new home.
I've named him "Boo" since "Peek-A-Boo" is more of a girl name.

Vale,

Calvus

M. Gladius Agricola to M. Arminia Maior Fabiana, greetings,


I found ROME An Oxford Archaeological Guide, by Amanda Claridge, 1998,
ISBN 0-19-288003-9 to be excellent.

I have a few minor points that I think could be improved upon:

The key to each chapter's guide map should also be indexed to the
location of each site's description. I simply added the page numbers
in pencil to my copy.

You will need a good map of modern Rome for navigation purposes. You
can buy one anywhere, but it is a little difficult to find a detailed
street by street map of just the central city.

The "opening times and charges" section needs to be updated. Italy now
uses Euros, not Lire.

As I said, it is an excellent book and represents the scholarship up
to its date of publication. It is packed with information, far too
much to be used as just a field guide, so I suggest getting a copy now
and reading through as much as you can. There are interesting sections
on Roman building techniques and museums.

May the Immortals protect you on your trip.

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@y...> wrote:
> Salvete omnes;
> I will be visiting Rome September, and amidst everything realized I
> do not have a proper guide for the Forum, temples all things
> pertaining to Roma Antiqua.
> Can any make suggestions in English or Italian for a superior
> guidebook for a civis such as myself.
> Even better, if someone put one together I'm sure it would sell in
> the Macellum.
> bene valete
> M. Arminia Maior Fabiana
>
> Propraetrix Hiberniae
> scriba Iuris et
> Investigatio CFQ

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

> A. Apollonius Cordus Galo Agorio Taurino omnibusque
> sal.
>

> I have two points of vantage on this question, because
> I've studied ancient literature and history (not, I
> admit, in the original languages except to a very
> limited degree) and because I also write plays. Both
> activities make me feel that it's too simple to say,
> 'this play is a political tract, that one is a sacred
> treatise'. If the author had meant to write a
> political tract and nothing else, he would not have
> written a play;

Don't be so certain- many writers in all times have chosen different
means to express their views- Think of Dante, Goethe, and many
others. It doesn't really matter who or when you were.



Listen- to cut this debate short, let me just state the following
things, and bear in mind, this is what I believe, I and the
mythologists that I gain my understandings of the literal side of all
these matters from, Kerenyi, Burkert, and the like, as well as my own
rational conclusions:



1. I think the Gods can take human form if they want to, and have in
the past. But I don't think that this is their primary mode of
activity, nor are they limited in any manner by what they appear to
be, or by what we feel they must be. One cannot rule out the human
experience of the Gods, when it comes to trying to understand them,
but likewise, we (in the name of piety) have to take into clear
account the very HUMAN-NESS of the observers of the Gods and seperate
the nature of the man struggling to understand from the God.

It's like a delicate balance; you can't incline so far in the
direction of man that you think that every playright, poet or writer
was fully in touch with the nature of the Gods and capable of
speaking for who and what they were; but on the same token, you
cannot ignore what they said.

If moderation is met (and "Nothing to excess, All in moderation" was
a very familiar saying to the Ancient Greeks, and indeed all people
of wisdom)- then a person can mentally "come to" a place where they
don't get locked into, say, Homeric depictions of the Gods as literal
truth, but they do allow for Homer to have some room for inspiration.

What emerges from that "middle way" of looking at the issue of the
Nature of the Gods is that they aren't anthropomorphic powerful and
beautiful "supermen and Superwomen" on top of a mountain, being petty
and causing wars- and yet, the images used for them, and their
motivations, DO REVEAL SOMETHING about their nature, using
metaphorical language.



2. The Gods are far more ancient than Homer or his epics, and people
in Greece (and everywhere else) dealt with them on a daily basis, for
thousands of years Before Homer. Playrights were not the primary
souce of religious information for the people of the ancient world-
families, Temples and Priesthoods were- institutions that had been
around since time out of mind.

Just like in Rome, Greek Families had the Father as a "head" of the
domestic cult, and he taught children about the Gods and the
Ancestors. Temples, along with their rather large staffs of clergy,
were responsible for overseeing PUBLIC sacrifices and internal,
private sacrifices- and when dealing with the public, myths and
stories of the Gods were probably recited, sung, or told- (see
Burkert, again). Considering how often sacrifice was done (for it was
at heart, a community strengthening affair) I'm sure that by the time
people heard an epic like Homer's, they had already heard a
considerable amount about the Gods of their Polis, village, or
region, from the Cults of those Gods- Cults that preserved not plays,
but myths and stories that were likely native to those regions,
likely from the Oral traditions of those regions, and not
really "canonical" in any sense until MUCH later- after Gods and
Goddesses from many regions were gathered together into huge City
States- like Athens, and Later Rome.



3. The Gods had (and still have) HUNDREDS of Epithets- titles and
names. This is important to remember, because Zeus is presented VERY
narrowly in Homer's epic Iliad; but everywhere in the ancient world,
he was worshipped under different aspects- the most common was (not
surprisingly) Zeus Mellikhos- the Kindly One (or the Gentle one).

His Greatest Altar in the Aegean region, in fact, was devoted to Zeus
Mellikhos. This is a form of Zeus that was beloved by Domestic cults
and merchants alike- and therefore the most widespread- but VERY far
from the meddling, plotting Zeus from the Iliad, who is presented
more as a king piece of Fate, causing mortal events, than he is the
Kindly and Sovereign God of the Heavens and the Increase of the
Ground- (the Cthonic Zeus, his other greatest Aspect, as a great
serpent).


My point with this point is that the Gods are massive and complex
divine "phenomena" of types- living beings that are "made" of SO many
different strands of Fate, of event, occurence, and power that they
have not only merited scores of Epithets from humans, but they cannot
be summed up by any one playright's depiction in any epic, or even a
score of epics.


The Bible has an interesting saying, which has always impressed me-
(I have found that the bible has about 7 good lines in it- this is
one of them) and this line really shows a good, ancient hebraic
awarness of the true, boundless nature of divinity- it says that "the
moment a man thinks he knows God, is the moment he is lost forever".
I quite agree with this sentiment; anyone that has ever truly
experienced the power of a God or Goddess in their life, EVEN A DROP
of their power, can sense the infinity that each God conceals in
their nature. It is a truly awesome experience.


At this point, I suppose we will just have to disagree about the
Playright thing, for the views I have outlined in this short letter
are the views that I have come to evolve from study, experience, and
I know the truth of them from religious practise and experience. I am
always open to as much more debate as you like- and please remember,
I do think that the Gods can take human form (or ANY form they like)
and I do think that poets like Homer were divinely inspired- but you
have to be cautious and take into account the facts of humanity, and
divinity, to see your way through the interpretations and theological
debate.



Galus Agorius Taurinus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Marcus Gladius Agricola"
<whogue@a...> wrote:

> M. Gladius Agricola to M. Arminia Maior Fabiana, greetings,
>
>
> I found ROME An Oxford Archaeological Guide, by Amanda Claridge, 1998,
> ISBN 0-19-288003-9 to be excellent.

This link:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0192880039/ref%3Dase%5Fnovaroma00A/
should get you to Amazon's page for this book, AND I think it will
credit Nova Roma's Amazon Affiliates account.


M. Gladius Agricola

anyone know who appollos mother is?

=====
S P Q R

Fidelis Ad Mortem.

Marcvs Flavivs Fides
Roman Citizen





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

Ave

A somewhat detailed map of the centre of Rome can be obtained in the
turistical info boxes scattered around the city centre for free.
Incidentally, there\'s no better guide than a roman Nova Roman ;) I\'m sure
we\'ll manage something, if it will have to be in the week-end, due the fact
most of us here do work (annoying...)

Vale

DCF


--------- Original Message --------
Da: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
To: \"Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com\" <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Oggetto: [Nova-Roma] Re: Best Guide for Rome?
Data: 29/08/04 05:47



M. Gladius Agricola to M. Arminia Maior Fabiana, greetings,


I found ROME An Oxford Archaeological Guide, by Amanda Claridge, 1998,
ISBN 0-19-288003-9 to be excellent.

I have a few minor points that I think could be improved upon:

The key to each chapter\'s guide map should also be indexed to the
location of each site\'s description. I simply added the page numbers
in pencil to my copy.

You will need a good map of modern Rome for navigation purposes. You
can buy one anywhere, but it is a little difficult to find a detailed
street by street map of just the central city.

The \"opening times and charges\" section needs to be updated. Italy now
uses Euros, not Lire.

As I said, it is an excellent book and represents the scholarship up
to its date of publication. It is packed with information, far too
much to be used as just a field guide, so I suggest getting a copy now
and reading through as much as you can. There are interesting sections
on Roman building techniques and museums.

May the Immortals protect you on your trip.
--
Email.it, the professional e-mail, gratis per te: http://www.email.it/f

Sponsor:
Migliaia di prodotti a tua disposizione di Telefonia, Informatica,
Audio Video, Climatizzazione, Orologi e tantissime offerte on-lineÂ…
Clicca qui: http://adv.email.it/cgi-bin/foclick.cgi?mid=2648&d=20040829



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

Ave

Latona. See http://www.webster-dictionary.org/definition/Leto for a quick
reference to the story.

Vale

DCF

--------- Original Message --------
Da: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
To: \"nova-roma@yahoogroups.com\" <nova-roma@yahoogroups.com>
Oggetto: [Nova-Roma] mom?
Data: 29/08/04 07:58



anyone know who appollos mother is?

=====
S P Q R

Fidelis Ad Mortem.

Marcvs Flavivs Fides
Roman Citizen
--
Email.it, the professional e-mail, gratis per te: http://www.email.it/f

Sponsor:
Vuoi risparmiare sulla tua polizza RCAuto senza rinunciare alla qualità?
Con
LINEAR puoi! Fai un preventivo e blocca il prezzo ottenuto!
Clicca qui: http://adv.email.it/cgi-bin/foclick.cgi?mid=2713&d=20040829



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

G. Equitius Cato Q. Cassius Calvus S.P.D.

Salve, Calvus!

Felicitations on the newest member of your household :-) May he
live long, prosper, and bring you many squeaky toys...or wait, is it
the other way around?

Vale,

Cato

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

> Salvete,
>
> As many know last week I had to make the tough decision of putting
> my pet hamster, Rodie, to sleep after little over two years of

being

> a bright spot in my life. Last night I made a visit to Petsmart
> just to look. There I saw an adorable little black bear hamster

all

> by his lonesome (which is how hamsters like it as two hamsters are
> going to do one of three things, mate, fight, both). He was busy
> grooming himself and it looked like he was playing peek-a-boo.
> Anyway I was just there to enjoy looking at the critters.
>
> After a day of thinking, "You know you want to buy him and the

place

> seems so empty without a furry friend." I broke down and re-set

up

> the summer cage (the summer cage is a normal cage, but for cold
> months I have a set of Habitrail modules to protect from drafts,

yes

> I spoil my critters rotten) and made a trip back to Petsmart. I
> figured he would probably already be sold, but he was still

there.

> He's now running around the cage getting accustomed to his new
> home. I'll take a picture and post it on my website in a few days
> after he's had time to calm down over being moved to a new home.
> I've named him "Boo" since "Peek-A-Boo" is more of a girl name.
>
> Vale,
>
> Calvus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, raymond fuentes
<praefectus2324@y...> wrote:

> anyone know who appollos mother is?
>
> =====
> S P Q R
>
> Fidelis Ad Mortem.
>
> Marcvs Flavivs Fides
> Roman Citizen
>
>

He was the Son of the Goddess Leto.


Leto was the daughter of the Titans Phoebe and Coeus. Known as the
hidden one and bright one, her name came to be used for the moon
Selene.

Hera was jealous of Leto because Zeus, the husband of Hera, had
fallen in love with her. From their union Leto bore the divine twins,
Artemis and Apollo. Leto found this to be an arduous task, as Hera
had refused Leto to give birth on either terra firma or on an island
out at sea.

The only place safe enough to give birth was Delos because Delos was
a floating island. Therefore, Leto did not refute the wishes of Hera.
In some versions, Leto was refused by other vicinities because they
feared the great power of the god she would bear.

To show her gratitude, Leto anchored Delos to the bottom of the
Aegean with four columns, to aid its stability. A conflict of legends
arises when in one version it says that Artemis was born one day
before Apollo, and the birth took place on the island of Ortygia.
Then the next day, Artemis helped Leto to cross to the island of
Delos, and aided Leto with the delivery of Apollo.

Leto was worshiped throughout Greece, but principally in Lycia (Asia
Minor). In Delos and Athens, there were temples dedicated to her,
although in most regions she was worshiped in conjunction with her
children, Artemis and Apollo. In Egypt there is the Temple of Leto
(Wadjet) at Buto, which was described by Herodotus as being connected
to an island which floated. On this island (Khemmis) stood a temple
to Apollo, but Herodotus dismissed the claim that it floated as
merely the legend of Delos brought to Egypt from Greek tradition. The
Romans called Leto "Latona".



That's pretty much the official, Late Mythological version- I think
Kerenyi had some pretty interesting things to say about older
versions of the origin of Mighty Apollon. I could look it up for you,
if you wanted me to.



G. Agorius Taurinus

From Burkert, "Greek Religion" Chapter V. Polis and Polytheism:



"...(It was thought that) Even religious conduct should not be
excessive. Piety (Eusebeia) goes together with Caution (Eulabeia).
Too little and too much will cause equal offence....Piety is
restraint, but not indifference."


"If Piety is expressed in cult, the problem arises that the rich and
powerful once more have a chance to outdo the poor. Against this it
was emphasized at least since Hesiod that for the Gods it is not the
absolute value of the gift that matters, but that each man make
sacrifice according to his means. From most probably the sixth
century BC onward, the question about the 'most pious man' was
answered by an anecdote in the Seven Wise Men style: the God of
Delphi, asked who was most pious, did not name the rich man who
brought him hecatombs (animal sacrifices), but a simple peasant who
used to throw a handful of barley corns into the flames on his
hearth. Thus again, Piety avoids the extravagant and excessive."





G. Agorius Taurinus

Romans,
Please tell me that you all have something better to argue about, I mean
come on, I sure am glad that only members of NR see this kinda stuff,
otherwise we would be laughed at all over the net.

Titus Cornelius Iberius

----- Original Message -----
From: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 2:56 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Digest Number 1513


>
> There are 25 messages in this issue.
>
> Topics in this digest:
>
> 1. RE: Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial Nota
> From: "Casta Meretrix" <meretrix@...>
> 2. Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial Nota
> From: "sabina_equitia_doris" <doris-butler@...>
> 3. Re: Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial Nota
> From: Casta Meretrix <meretrix4@...>
> 4. Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial Nota
> From: "sabina_equitia_doris" <doris-butler@...>
> 5. Re: RE: Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial Nota
> From: raymond fuentes <praefectus2324@...>
> 6. Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial Nota
> From: "gaiusequitiuscato" <mlcinnyc@...>
> 7. RE: Re: Worship of the Gods/ The Nature of Truth
> From: "A. Apollonius Cordus" <a_apollonius_cordus@...>
> 8. Re: Asking for Help from Nova Roma
> From: "A. Apollonius Cordus" <a_apollonius_cordus@...>
> 9. Re: Asking for Help from Nova Roma
> From: AthanasiosofSpfd@...
> 10. Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial Nota
> From: "FAC" <sacro_barese_impero@...>
> 11. Re: Fwd: RE: The meaning of sacrifice Re: [[ReligioRomana]
> From: "A. Apollonius Cordus" <a_apollonius_cordus@...>
> 12. Re: Asking for Help from Nova Roma
> From: "gaiuspopilliuslaenas" <ksterne@...>
> 13. RE: Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial Nota
> From: "Mike Abboud" <mikeabboud@...>
> 14. Question about Olympiads (WAS: Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial
Nota)
> From: "A. Apollonius Cordus" <a_apollonius_cordus@...>
> 15. Re: Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial Nota
> From: Servius Equitius Mercurius Troianus
<hermeticagnosis@...>
> 16. Status of NR Sestertii
> From: "Marcus Gladius Agricola" <whogue@...>
> 17. Nature of the back alley
> From: QFabiusMaxmi@...
> 18. RE: Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial Nota
> From: "Casta Meretrix" <meretrix@...>
> 19. Re: Asking for Help from Nova Roma
> From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@...
> 20. Re: Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial Nota
> From: Servius Equitius Mercurius Troianus
<hermeticagnosis@...>
> 21. Re: Asking for Help from Nova Roma
> From: "L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@...>
> 22. Defense
> From: "gaiusequitiuscato" <mlcinnyc@...>
> 23. Re: Asking for Help from Nova Roma
> From: "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
<pompeia_minucia_tiberia@...>
> 24. Re: Defense
> From: Tom Knighton <swordwarrior1066@...>
> 25. Best Guide for Rome?
> From: "Maior" <rory12001@...>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 12:40:35 +0200
> From: "Casta Meretrix" <meretrix@...>
> Subject: RE: Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial Nota
>
>
> > I do stand forth as one who removed herself from subscription
> > to the Back Alley on account of its pornographic nature.
>
> That's a shame Doris since making pornographic jokes in the BA is about
the
> only time that we don't argue in Nova Roma...
>
> Pornography has existed since ancient times. Just take a look at all of
the
> beautifually made Greek vases depicting various sex acts. It is only now
in
> this modern sexually repressed society that people make believe that they
> are offended by sex. After all unless someone has taken an oath of
celebacy
> they will be sexually active even if their activeness consists of
themselves
> and one of both of their hands... Is talking about sex pornographic or is
> doing it pornographic? Is the missionary position ok but anything else is
> pornographic? Is discussing a rubber dildo pornographic but discussing a
> statue of Priapus isn't?
>
> Where does one draw the line? I'll tell you where the line *should* be
> drawn: As long as everyone is above 18 and consenting, anything goes. It
is
> not up to any of us to try to enforce our sexually preferences on others.
>
> And face facts, it is bettter to laugh at sex considering all of the
> embarrassing things that can wrong during a few moments when we want to
put
> our best foot forward (so to speak).
>
> Vale,
> Diana Octavia Aventina
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 11:16:10 -0000
> From: "sabina_equitia_doris" <doris-butler@...>
> Subject: Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial Nota
>
> Salvete Omnes!
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Casta Meretrix" <meretrix@p...>
> wrote:
>
> > That's a shame Doris since making pornographic jokes in the BA is
> about the
> > only time that we don't argue in Nova Roma...
> >(snippage)
> >
> > Where does one draw the line? I'll tell you where the line
> *should* be
> > drawn: As long as everyone is above 18 and consenting, anything
> goes. (snippage)
>
> > Vale,
> > Diana Octavia Aventina
>
> Three issues:
>
> To the first: I enjoy deep and fascinating correspondence with
> dozens of NR citizens who share common interests from military
> history, antiquities collecting, philosophy and comparative religion
> to birdwatching, *all* with minimal if any reference to sex, and
> that in historical or zoological context (example the latter: "the
> corvids are in mating display now")
>
> To the second: I pay for my internet service. I have full right to
> choose what I either accept or decline to accept via that medium of
> exchange. I choose not to accept sexually oriented material.
>
> To the third: "Casta Meretrix", you presume to tell me and fellow
> quirites where "the line *should* be drawn". At such a presumption,
> considering its source, I merely laugh. If sexuality is all you
> have to offer, then that offer is declined.
>
> --Sabina Equitia Doris,
> up before dawn to survey the figurative battlefield and fill the
> literal birdfeeders
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 04:25:43 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Casta Meretrix <meretrix4@...>
> Subject: Re: Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial Nota
>
> Salve Doris,
>
> > To the third: "Casta Meretrix", you presume to tell
> > me and fellow
> > quirites where "the line *should* be drawn". At
> > such a presumption,
> > considering its source, I merely laugh.
>
> Hey now, I'm glad that I made you laugh :-) I told you
> that sex was a funny subject!
>
> Take care of yourself (no pun intended),
> Vale,
> Diana
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 11:56:57 -0000
> From: "sabina_equitia_doris" <doris-butler@...>
> Subject: Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial Nota
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Casta Meretrix <meretrix4@y...>
> wrote:
> > Salve Doris,
>
> (snippage)
> > Take care of yourself (no pun intended),
> > Vale,
> > Diana
>
> Reply: Actually I do have *quite* a sense of humor as many friends
> will attest.
>
> As to your suggestion that I take care of myself, I shall take that
> at surface value as a good wish, and assure you that I do. Please
> allow me to repay the compliment by returning the gentle
> admonition 'right back at ya'.
>
> --Sabina Equitia Doris,
> who has even been known to peer through binoculars at the sight of
> wild doves, uh, actively preparing for another generation of wild
> doves (*wink*)
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
> > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 04:59:05 -0700 (PDT)
> From: raymond fuentes <praefectus2324@...>
> Subject: Re: RE: Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial Nota
>
> would it be wrong to say that youre hot?
> --- meretrix@... <meretrix@...> wrote:
> >
> > > I do stand forth as one who removed herself from
> subscription
> > > to the Back Alley on account of its pornographic
> nature.
> >
> > That's a shame Doris since making pornographic jokes
> in the BA is about the
> > only time that we don't argue in Nova Roma...
> >
> > Pornography has existed since ancient times. Just
> take a look at all of the
> > beautifually made Greek vases depicting various sex
> acts. It is only now in
> > this modern sexually repressed society that people
> make believe that they
> > are offended by sex. After all unless someone has
> taken an oath of celebacy
> > they will be sexually active even if their
> activeness consists of themselves
> > and one of both of their hands... Is talking about
> sex pornographic or is
> > doing it pornographic? Is the missionary position ok
> but anything else is
> > pornographic? Is discussing a rubber dildo
> pornographic but discussing a
> > statue of Priapus isn't?
> >
> > Where does one draw the line? I'll tell you where
> the line *should* be
> > drawn: As long as everyone is above 18 and
> consenting, anything goes. It is
> > not up to any of us to try to enforce our sexually
> preferences on others.
> >
> > And face facts, it is bettter to laugh at sex
> considering all of the
> > embarrassing things that can wrong during a few
> moments when we want to put
> > our best foot forward (so to speak).
> >
> > Vale,
> > Diana Octavia Aventina
> >
>
>
> =====
> S P Q R
>
> Fidelis Ad Mortem.
>
> Marcvs Flavivs Fides
> Roman Citizen
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
> http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 12:57:19 -0000
> From: "gaiusequitiuscato" <mlcinnyc@...>
> Subject: Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial Nota
>
> G. Equitius Cato D. Octaviae Aventinae S.P.D.
>
> Salve, Octavia Aventina.
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Casta Meretrix" <meretrix@p...>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I do stand forth as one who removed herself from subscription
> > > to the Back Alley on account of its pornographic nature.
> >
> > That's a shame Doris since making pornographic jokes in the BA is
> about the
> > only time that we don't argue in Nova Roma...
>
> CATO: Except, Diana, as you know, the "Back Alley" List is NOT a
> part of, or "in" Nova Roma. It is absolutely seperate, and nothing
> that is said or done there can have any repercussions in Nova Roma.
> If the BA were a part of NR, everyone on it would be under charges
> of blasphemy, calumny, slander, libel, or something --- includng
> myself :-)
>
> It's true that the gentleman who runs/owns the BA happens to be a
> citizen in NR, but not all the members of the BA are citizens, and
> it's certainly not a place where any official NR business gets
> done. But it IS a hoot.
>
> Vale,
>
> Cato
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 14:42:30 +0100 (BST)
> From: "A. Apollonius Cordus" <a_apollonius_cordus@...>
> Subject: RE: Re: Worship of the Gods/ The Nature of Truth
>
> A. Apollonius Cordus Dianae Octaviae Aventinae
> omnibusque sal.
>
> > ... Interesting that you'll defend anyone who
> > is not in agreement with
> > Drusus. You are defending Taurinus who *regularly*
> > curses out people in his
> > emails. And he is not only cursing out Drusus (to
> > you that would be ok) but
> > anyone who tries to have a civil conversation with
> > him. Taurinus can dish it
> > out just as well as he can take it. Not everyone is
> > a mealymouthed weakling
> > in Nova Roma.
>
> I'm having a civil conversation with Taurinus on this
> very list, and he has not yet shown any sign of
> cursing me.
>
> Could it be, perhaps, that in your eagerness to tell
> us all about the Consul's alleged selective blindness
> you are demonstrating a selective blindness of your own?
>
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo!
Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 14:52:26 +0100 (BST)
> From: "A. Apollonius Cordus" <a_apollonius_cordus@...>
> Subject: Re: Asking for Help from Nova Roma
>
> A. Apollonius Cordus C. Iulio Scauro amico suo
> omnibusque sal.
>
> > Notice from a praetor that one is reus in an actio
> > is not a private
> > message. It has the legal status of an edictum
> > (since the praetor can
> > compel appearance before the tribunal by imperium
> > and the information is
> > a notice that imperium can be exercised) and is,
> > thus, a public document
> > from which anyone may quote freely.
>
> I am rightly corrected; thank you. I hadn't realized
> that a notice of action was a sort of edict, though
> now you say it I feel I ought to have worked it out.
> :)
>
> Such mistakes happen, I suppose, when one tries to
> represent views which one doesn't share. Being aware
> that some people were very strongly opposed to the
> publication of private messages, but not sharing that
> feeling myself, I wasn't sure quite what such people
> would count as a private message and therefore get
> upset about. But yes, there's certainly no reason why
> Taurinus ought not to publish such a thing (though
> even that is no guarantee that someone won't get upset
> about it).
>
> > ... The petitio
> > actionis is also itself
> > a public document. I would urge the praetores to
> > post such notices to
> > the ML so that appropriate legal notice may be taken
> > of them by all
> > citizens.
>
> I agree that petitiones ought to be made available to
> the public, but I wonder whether posting them on the
> main list wouldn't cause inordinate excitement;
> perhaps the praetores could find some way to make them
> available to those who want to know without putting
> them in the path of those who don't.
>
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo!
Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:13:24 EDT
> From: AthanasiosofSpfd@...
> Subject: Re: Asking for Help from Nova Roma
>
> Gaius Modius Athanasius S.P.D.
>
> Perhaps a section on the website? Were a person could see all of them.
>
> Valete;
>
> Gaius Modius Athanasius
>
> In a message dated 8/28/2004 9:52:35 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> a_apollonius_cordus@... writes:
> I agree that petitiones ought to be made available to
> the public, but I wonder whether posting them on the
> main list wouldn't cause inordinate excitement;
> perhaps the praetores could find some way to make them
> available to those who want to know without putting
> them in the path of those who don't.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 14:37:28 -0000
> From: "FAC" <sacro_barese_impero@...>
> Subject: Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial Nota
>
> Salvete Omnes,
> I came back from my holidays and now I'm again fully active in NR
> finding ever a boring mailing list talking about off-topic matters.
>
> About the sexual discussions, I agree with Diana that they are funny
> and sometimes interesting but I would remember you that this is a
> list about Nova Roma and Roma Antiqua. Sexual discussion would be
> very accepted only if srictly linked with the History of Rome. In my
> personal opinion we could talk about sexual practices, love,
> pornography, etc. if they are inserted in a cultural contest about
> Rome like for example the pernicious images in the lupanaria of
> Pompeii. Any other discussions like the pornographical practices in
> Mexico would be off-topic and would be avoided to hurt no people
> here. Citizens, we're all different here, we come from different
> lands and from different cultures and if the sex with animals could
> interest a people living in Thailandia (no personal and direct
> offense to our oriental citizens), they could hurt people coming
> from more "moralist" lands.
> About the Back Alley List, I don't understand why we talk about it.
> The BA list is not Nova Roman, it's not official and everything
> about it is absolutely off-topic. We wouldn't talk ever about it
> because it haven't anything about Rome and Nova Roma. Why you talk
> about Back Alley? Why the discussion of the BA are here in the
> mailiang list of Nova Roma?
>
> As I said in the recent past, sadly 80% of the discussions of this
> list are off-topic. I would invite you again to re-take the correct
> way.
>
> This is my personal opinion, it could be wrong but it's my personal
> view. Thank you.
>
> Valete
> Fr. Apulus Caesar
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Casta Meretrix <meretrix4@y...>
> wrote:
> > Salve Doris,
> >
> > > To the third: "Casta Meretrix", you presume to tell
> > > me and fellow
> > > quirites where "the line *should* be drawn". At
> > > such a presumption,
> > > considering its source, I merely laugh.
> >
> > Hey now, I'm glad that I made you laugh :-) I told you
> > that sex was a funny subject!
> >
> > Take care of yourself (no pun intended),
> > Vale,
> > Diana
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
> > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 16:23:04 +0100 (BST)
> From: "A. Apollonius Cordus" <a_apollonius_cordus@...>
> Subject: Re: Fwd: RE: The meaning of sacrifice Re: [[ReligioRomana]
>
> A. Apollonius Cordus Galo Agorio Taurino omnibusque
> sal.
>
> > Not all poetry is divinely inspired, but it has
> > divine power, if the
> > Muses literally visit a person and endow them with
> > inspiration. Was
> > Homer inspired? Some thought so. Others didn't. It's
> > rather up to the
> > person. Most Liberal Arts people who have studied
> > Greece are more
> > than capable of reading a poet or playright and
> > seeing when the plays
> > or poems are political barbs, or meant to be sacred
> > drama.
>
> I have two points of vantage on this question, because
> I've studied ancient literature and history (not, I
> admit, in the original languages except to a very
> limited degree) and because I also write plays. Both
> activities make me feel that it's too simple to say,
> 'this play is a political tract, that one is a sacred
> treatise'. If the author had meant to write a
> political tract and nothing else, he would not have
> written a play; and similarly with respect to the
> sacred treatise. If one's sole purpose is to record
> something about the true nature of the gods, there is
> simply no point in writing a play about it. Plays
> contain all sorts of things, and there is no reason
> why a play cannot contain a true depiction of some
> aspect of divinity and simultaneously make a point
> about contemporary politics. And remember that the
> clearest and most immediate purpose of every surviving
> Athenian play was to win a prize for the best play.
> For all we know Hesiod may have written the Theogony
> to win a prize (certainly he wasn't averse to writing
> for mundane purposes, if we accept that his Works &
> Days were meant to give practical advice for the
> contemporary farmer). Would that mean the Theogony
> couldn't contain any theological truths?
>
> > > If you use only sources which were thought
> > > to be divinely inspired, and if you further only
> > use
> > > sources which we know were thought to be divinely
> > > inspired, does that not leave you with a very
> > small
> > > set of sources indeed?
> >
> > Not really. There are lots of myths that come from
> > places other than
> > dramatists. And then there are sacred writings from
> > people like
> > Parmenides, which are nothing short of amazing, and
> > clearly inspired.
>
> By what criteria are you making that judgement,
> though? Surely someone whose idea of the divine was
> fundamentally different from yours - a Christian, for
> example, or a Hindu - would not find it so obvious
> that Parmenides was inspired? So do you see what I
> mean when I suggest that maybe your preconceived idea
> of the gods' nature informs your view of which texts
> and traditions are inspired and which are not?
>
> > > Another thought comes to mind, too. Animals were
> > > expensive in the ancient world, and yet poor
> > Romans
> > > nonetheless sacrificed animals from time to time
> > and
> > > offered part (certainly not much, but more than
> > none)
> > > to the gods. If they did so, was it not because
> > they
> > > believed it to be required?
> >
> > Or just that the believed it to be pleasing, they
> > wanted to eat the
> > meat, and thus share in a meal with the Gods, and it
> > was an ancient
> > custom/Sacred Tradition- that's three great reasons
> > to sacrifice an
> > animal. But to say that the Gods "required" it is
> > not right, because
> > it begins to reduce the gods to the level of
> > "demanders"
> > and "orderers", and I don't feel, after copious
> > spiritual experience
> > and research, that the True Gods are like that. A
> > two-way
> > relationship with the Divine is not one of
> > slave/master.
>
> A very fair view as far as I can see, but it brings up
> that same question I was asking above: if you reject
> the idea that the gods demand sacrifice because it
> doesn't fit your understanding of the nature of the
> gods, then the question is, from where does your
> understanding of the nature of the gods come? For all
> I know your understanding may be quite correct - I
> personally don't believe that the gods have any
> relationship with humans at all, if indeed they exist
> - but in order for other people to accept your view
> you must show it to be soundly based. 'The gods don't
> demand sacrifices because they're not like that' isn't
> going to persuade people - you need to actually
> produce some evidence to suggest that the gods aren't
> like that.
>
> > > I think this statement is not sufficiently obvious
> > to
> > > go by without the need for some evidence.
> > Certainly,
> > > there were intellectuals in both Greece and Rome
> > who
> > > objected to the depiction of the gods in Homer;
> > but
> > > can we really assume that no one believed in gods
> > just
> > > like the Homeric ones?
> >
> > Sure, simpletons may have. But the trouble here is
> > that the average
> > man or woman in greece *didn't* turn to Homer to
> > find out what the
> > Gods were like- they were born into towns, villages,
> > and traditions
> > of godly worship that were taught to them by OTHER
> > people- How people
> > knew the Gods and approached the Gods was already a
> > part of their
> > understanding, and was long before Homer wrote some
> > epics. People
> > didn't need Homer to teach them about the Gods.
>
> Again, you need, I think, to back this statement up
> with some evidence. The simple fact is that we know
> absolutely nothing about where Homer's contemporaries
> got their ideas from, let alone Homer's predecessors.
> There's just no evidence for the intellectual history
> of that period except Homer and, a little later,
> Hesiod. Hesiod's Work & Days is written as a manual
> for farmers, which suggests that people might be
> expected to learn about such basic and everyday things
> as making a living by listening to poetry. If people
> learned about farming from poets as well as from their
> parents, why should they not learn about theology in
> the same way? Of course there's absolutely no evidence
> to suggest that they did; but there is no evidence to
> the contrary either, you see. That's the point. If you
> want people to see that you're making a reasoned and
> empirical argument, rather than simply asserting an
> irrational dogma, you can't get away with making very
> tenuous statements without citing evidence. *Any*
> statement about what life was like in Homer's time is
> going to be very tenuous indeed, and you really can't
> expect people to take you seriously if you claim to
> know for certain what Homer's ancestors thought about
> the gods.
>
> > >If no one believed such stories
> > > as the literal truth, why did Varro, writing some
> > > thousands of years after Homer, waste his time and
> > ink
> > > urging people not to believe them?
> >
> > I told you, simpletons might have. But then, not
> > knowing Varro,
> > there's not telling what his angle was. He might
> > have been an atheist.
>
> I very much doubt he was. If he had been an atheist,
> why would he have objected to stories which depicted
> the gods behaving in an undignified manner?
>
> But if you're not familiar with Varro, have a look for
> yourself. After all, it's only common sense to check
> the sources your opponent cites. If, when you cited
> your essay on Prometheus, I had dismissed it without
> reading it, you would quite rightly have accused me of
> having a closed mind and being uninterested in honest
> debate. Varro's surviving works can be found here:
>
> http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/varro.html
>
> > > Well, we must make a distinction here. "Dogma" is
> > a
> > > religious satire - quite explicitly so.
> >
> > And Aristophanes wrote many satires, along with the
> > other Satirists-
> > and the Gods sometimes figure in those as well- but
> > never as objects
> > of ridicule!
>
> Have a look at Plautus' "Amphitruo" and see whether
> you think the gods were immune from ridicule in Roman
> comedy (and presumably they took it in good part, for
> Plautus had a long and prosperous career and was the
> most popular comic dramatist for generations to come).
> The Latin text and an English translation are
> available in the Perseus library:
>
>
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0030
>
>
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0092
>
> > >The surviving fragments of
> > > Latin tragedy show no hint that the gods were
> > treated
> > > in any way but earnestly. And T. P. Wiseman has
> > > assembled some fairly persuasive evidence that it
> > was
> > > precisely through tragedies and historical plays
> > that
> > > the mass of ordinary people in Rome learned their
> > > mythology.
> >
> > I can only speak for Greece on this matter, and it
> > was your family
> > and Clan/Tribe/Kin Group that taught you what you
> > knew about the Gods
> > of your region.
>
> Perhaps it would be worth your while doing a little
> reading on Roman popular culture, otherwise you will
> begin to feel a little like a fish out of water trying
> to discuss Roman religion. Nicholas Horsfall has
> published a short book recently which would be a good
> place to start - "The Culture of the Roman Plebs". I
> think it's also available in Italian. And also
> anything by Wiseman.
>
> > > So far from assuming that no one believed
> > > in the gods as they were depicted in Euripides or
> > in
> > > Ennius, it's quite likely that Euripides and
> > Ennius
> > > were actually where many people got their ideas of
> > the
> > > gods from.
> >
> > I have to disagree. I think the Greeks were a little
> > more intelligent
> > than that, on the average.
>
> You seem to be assuming that people fall into two
> camps: those who share your view of the gods, and
> those who are stupid. Why should intelligent people
> not taken part of their understanding of the gods'
> nature from watching plays and hearing epic and lyric
> poems? There's nothing logically impossible or
> incoherent about such depictions of the gods, unless
> you start with an a priori assumption that the gods
> are different.
>
> > > It is equally possible that the earlier writers
> > you
> > > mention had political or other agendas of their
> > own
> > > which coloured their writing.
> >
> > Well, we'll have to disagree again, because my
> > writers don't start
> > their books by "praising the Emperor Caesar"- LOL!
> > They don't present
> > am upfront and obvious political agenda, like some
> > of these Romans do.
> >
> > So you can say these Greeks "might" have had some
> > agenda, but there
> > is no evidence for that.
>
> There's some comparative evidence, inasmuch as for
> pretty much every poem about which we have
> circumstancial information, and many other poems
> besides, it is possible to identify some sort of
> agenda. If all poets we know about had agendas, why
> shouldn't we assume that those we don't know about had
> agendas too? But my point is this: why does having an
> agenda preclude the possibility that the poet is also
> communicating an important truth?
>
> > > I think there is a
> > > danger that you are accepting texts as
> > authoritative
> > > not because they are necessarily more so than
> > those
> > > you reject, but rather because they are so early
> > in
> > > date that the circumstancial details which would
> > make
> > > you reject them have simply been lost.
> >
> > This is not true. I use them because they are all we
> > have; until we
> > build a time machine, some source materials are
> > needed. But we also
> > can't let ourselves be constrained in every detail
> > by sources.
> > Reconstructionism has a lot to do with relying on
> > the Gods for
> > personal guidance, inspiration, and good "inspired
> > recovery".
>
> I quite agree that we need sources, but that's why I'm
> puzzled by the enthusiasm with which you reject not
> only whole sources but whole groups of sources.
> Academic historians are often able to extract
> important and reliable information from even a few
> words in an otherwise unreliable source. Surely when
> we know so little it is unwise to reject sources in
> great sweeps by saying "plays are not reliable",
> "Augustan poetry is not reliable", and suchlike?
>
> > As for "all the
> > > other 'well known' sources for mythology", surely
> > the
> > > best know source for mythology is Homer,
> >
> > Nonsense. He didn't write the myths out in a huge
> > canon form- SO many
> > other writers and sources (and non dramatists, I
> > might add!) are our
> > main sources for various myths.
>
> Yes, indeed, but you said "well known". Of all the
> texts which contain mythological stories, wouldn't it
> be fair to call the Odyssey and the Iliad the best
> known?
>
> > whose
> > > versions of many mythological stories were later
> > > accepted as absolutely canonical, but whose poems
> > you
> > > have already rejected as sources for mythology
> > because
> > > their depictions of the gods do not conform to a
> > > certain standard of behaviour?
> >
> > No, I am rejecting the notion that these people tell
> > us precisely how
> > the Gods are, or how people saw them in the past.
> > That is not the
> > case.
>
> So which sources do tell us precisely how the gods are
> and how people saw them in the past?
>
> > > I would be interested
> > > to hear more about the precise criteria you use to
> > > determine which sources are reliable and which are
> > > not, for at the moment I can't help wondering
> > whether
> > > you're not to some extent accepting or rejecting
> > them
> > > according to whether they conform to a
> > pre-existing
> > > idea you have about the nature of the gods.
> >
> > No human being can claim to know the Nature of the
> > Gods, and I never
> > claimed that myself. I have no pre-existing notions
> > about what they
> > are, ultimately; I am not rejecting anything in
> > regards to the Gods
> > except the notion that these playrights were
> > inspired prophets that
> > we should use to tell us how the Gods are- that
> > would turn the Gods
> > into some scary monsters, to be sure!
>
> If you have no preconceived notion of what the gods
> are like, why do you exclaim at the idea that they
> might be scary monsters? Surely that's just as likely
> as anything else? There's plenty of evidence from
> reliable sources that ancient people were very
> frightened indeed of the gods.
>
> > > Incidentally, another thought about Homer. You
> > > mentioned in another message his very clear
> > > description of rituals; I take it, then, that you
> > > regard him as a reliable source for that.
> >
> > Considering the ritual was a normal social activity,
> > yes. He would
> > have no reason to alter that into some fantasitical
> > form that it
> > wasn't in before.
> >
> > > The logic, I
> > > presume, is like this: this was something his
> > audience
> > > would have seen and done, and it would therefore
> > have
> > > been bizarre for him to describe it incorrectly,
> > for
> > > it would have alienated his audience and damaged
> > his
> > > listeners' sense of the authenticity and
> > plausibility
> > > of his story. Is that about right? If it is, then
> > I am
> > > not sure why the same argument cannot be applied
> > to
> > > his depiction of the gods:
> >
> > Because the Gods are not big human beings that
> > actually pick up
> > weapons and fight; they don't do the things that he
> > says they did-
> > they are supernatural forces, that have no form that
> > we can relate
> > to, and exist in a Daimonic state above our
> > comprehension.
>
> Do you see what you've done there? I said,
> effectively, "how do we know Homer's wrong?" and
> you've said, effectively, "because he's wrong".
>
> > Your logic does not follow. In the Movie "It",
> > wherein a powerful
> > spiritual monstrous force is eating a small New
> > England Town, there
> > is a scene with the kids using a telephone. They
> > pick up the reciever
> > and dial it. We've all seen that done, and we've all
> > used a phone.
> >
> > But when the story switches over to the supernatural
> > element- the
> > monster- it departs from reality and expresses the
> > monster's behavior
> > in what terms it needs to, to make it's point.
>
> But in that film the human characters are surprised by
> the appearance of the monster, don't they? In other
> words, the film clearly shows that using the telephone
> is a normal activity, but being attacked by a
> supernatural monster is not normal. That's how a
> historian, wanting to know about 20th-century people's
> beliefs about supernatural monsters, would work out
> that they didn't believe supernatural monsters were
> really in the habit of attacking villages.
>
> Homer, on the other hand, depicts his characters
> taking the appearance and intervention of the gods in
> their everyday lives more or less in their stride.
> They frequently make the point that one never knows
> whether the person one is talking to is really a god
> in disguise. They talk about the gods making them mad,
> or helping them in battle, even when they have no
> actual evidence that that's what happened. In other
> words, they actually assume that the gods are walking
> amongst them, fighting against them, making them ill,
> making them mad, talking to them in dreams. Many of
> their expressions (like being made mad by the gods)
> were still used in classical Greece. In "It", humans
> are unsurprised by telephones but are surprised by the
> monster - so we assume that telephones are part of the
> audience's normal experience but monsters are not. In
> the Iliad, humans are unsurprised by rituals and are
> unsurprised by gods throwing spears at them - so by
> the same logic, shouldn't we assume that both things
> were equally plausible to Homer's audience?
>
> > Homer was no different- he wanted the Gods in his
> > story, so he
> > expressed them the best he could. Having some
> > non-supernatural
> > elements in a story that also includes the
> > supernatural doesn't mean
> > that "Both sides" of the equation have to be "the
> > way it was". A
> > writer has the license to do what he needs to do
> > when he deals with
> > supernatural themes, to tell a story.
>
> Yet you argued earlier with reference to Aristophanes
> that a writer is not at liberty to do what he wants
> with the supernatural, didn't you?
>
> > > if he showed the gods
> > > behaving in ways which his audience found totally
> > > implausible, would this not have diminished the
> > power
> > > of his story to entertain; and so can we not
> > reverse
> > > the argument and say that, since Homer depicts the
> > > gods in this way, his audience must have thought
> > of
> > > the gods in that way?
> >
> > Not at all. It was *just a story*. The audience
> > could suspend their
> > disbelief for the purposes of the story, just like
> > moviegoers today
> > do.
>
> Well, here's an interesting thing. Have you seen that
> abominable film "Troy"? Let's compare it to the Iliad.
> Both are, or try to be, very realistic in their
> depiction of war. The fighters don't have magic
> powers, they don't have amazing resistance to wounds.
> They get tired, wounded, killed, just like the humans
> we meet in the shops and see on the news. That's
> because anything else would have been unbelievable to
> the audience. But there's a big difference between the
> two versions of the same story (apart from the fact
> that the film was deadly boring): in Homer, there are
> gods who walk around, fight, argue, and so on; in
> "Troy", there are no gods. Why are there no gods in
> "Troy"? Because the audiences would have laughed.
> Modern audiences simply can't accept the idea of
> divine beings interacting with humans on the physical
> plane, or at least they can't accept it in a realistic
> narrative setting. But the Iliad is just as realistic
> in its depiction of human life and behaviour - even
> more so, because Homer's characters don't behave in
> the absurd ways "Troy"'s do. The Iliad also contains
> gods physically interacting with humans in a way which
> modern audiences would find totally implausible (just
> like you find it totally implausible). What do we
> conclude from that? Maybe we ought to conclude that
> Homer's audience didn't see it as implausible. (For
> those who haven't seen "Troy", imagine the same
> argument with reference to Shakespeare's "Troilus and
> Cressida", which also tells a story from the Trojan
> War without the gods.)
>
> > > The story of Prometheus and the
> > > first sacrifice you are content to interpret in a
> > > symbolic, non-literal way, and indeed you use it
> > in
> > > that way to support your argument. But for proof
> > that
> > > the gods demand animal-sacrifice you seem prepared
> > to
> > > accept nothing less than a literal and explicit
> > > statement in a reliable source that a god at some
> > time
> > > asked for animals regularly to be sacrificed to
> > him.
> > > Do you see a discrepancy here, or is there a real
> > > difference between the two cases?
> >
> > There is no discrepancy. First off, ANY real myth
> > will have a depth
> > of metaphors in it- the language of myth is one of
> > metaphor.
> >
> > Secondly, there aren't any other myths that deal
> > with what you might
> > call "the origins of animal sacrifice" other than
> > this one- and this
> > one is clearly highly metaphorical, like all myths.
> >
> > If you interpreted the myth metaphorically OR
> > Literally, it still
> > doesn't communicate that the Gods demanded
> > sacrifice.
>
> No, it doesn't, but that's not the point. The point
> is, if you accept a symbolic interpretation of the
> Prometheus myth as evidence in support of your view,
> will you apply the same standard by accepting a
> symbolic, non-literal interpretation of a different
> story as evidence against your view? Because so far
> you've given the impression that you will accept
> nothing less than a story in which a god literally and
> explicitly demands an institutional animal-sacrifice.
>
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo!
Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 15:22:53 -0000
> From: "gaiuspopilliuslaenas" <ksterne@...>
> Subject: Re: Asking for Help from Nova Roma
>
> G. Popillius Laenas Quiritibus salutem plurimam dicit.
>
> Praetor Ex-Officio
>
> The trial of Galus Agorius Taurinus will be conducted under the
> public scrutiny in accordance with the Lex Salicia Ivdiciaria as, in
> my judgment, the dignitas of innocents is not at stake.
>
> Rather than encumber the main list with the proceedings, it is my
> intention to set up a separate list that any cive may read, but that
> only the iudices, actor, reus, and officers of the court may post to.
>
> I notified Galus Agorius Taurinus of my formal acceptance of the
> petitio in a private correspondence because I felt no need to make
> the case public at that time. He is certainly free to make the same
> public.
>
> Indeed, he seems to be asking for an advocatus, which, under the
> provisions of the Lex Salicia Ivdiciaria, he may appoint or choose
> to represent himself.
>
> For the information of the cives, I have made a random selection of
> iudices from a list of assidui cives with a Nova Roma tenure
> exceeding one year. I will shortly begin notifying those selected
> of their obligation to serve.
>
> Valete.
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "A. Apollonius Cordus"
> <a_apollonius_cordus@y...> wrote:
> > A. Apollonius Cordus C. Iulio Scauro amico suo
> > omnibusque sal.
> >
> > > Notice from a praetor that one is reus in an actio
> > > is not a private
> > > message. It has the legal status of an edictum
> > > (since the praetor can
> > > compel appearance before the tribunal by imperium
> > > and the information is
> > > a notice that imperium can be exercised) and is,
> > > thus, a public document
> > > from which anyone may quote freely.
> >
> > I am rightly corrected; thank you. I hadn't realized
> > that a notice of action was a sort of edict, though
> > now you say it I feel I ought to have worked it out.
> > :)
> >
> > Such mistakes happen, I suppose, when one tries to
> > represent views which one doesn't share. Being aware
> > that some people were very strongly opposed to the
> > publication of private messages, but not sharing that
> > feeling myself, I wasn't sure quite what such people
> > would count as a private message and therefore get
> > upset about. But yes, there's certainly no reason why
> > Taurinus ought not to publish such a thing (though
> > even that is no guarantee that someone won't get upset
> > about it).
> >
> > > ... The petitio
> > > actionis is also itself
> > > a public document. I would urge the praetores to
> > > post such notices to
> > > the ML so that appropriate legal notice may be taken
> > > of them by all
> > > citizens.
> >
> > I agree that petitiones ought to be made available to
> > the public, but I wonder whether posting them on the
> > main list wouldn't cause inordinate excitement;
> > perhaps the praetores could find some way to make them
> > available to those who want to know without putting
> > them in the path of those who don't.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW
> Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!
> http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:22:56 -0500
> From: "Mike Abboud" <mikeabboud@...>
> Subject: RE: Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial Nota
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Casta Meretrix [mailto:meretrix@...]
> Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 5:41 AM
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [Nova-Roma] Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial Nota
>
>
>
>
> > I do stand forth as one who removed herself from subscription
> > to the Back Alley on account of its pornographic nature.
>
> That's a shame Doris since making pornographic jokes in the BA is about
the
> only time that we don't argue in Nova Roma...
>
>
> Where does one draw the line? I'll tell you where the line *should* be
> drawn: As long as everyone is above 18 and consenting, anything goes. It
is
> not up to any of us to try to enforce our sexually preferences on others.
>
>
>
> Vale,
> Diana Octavia Aventina
>
>
>
> [Mike Abboud] I can think of several other places one should draw the
line.
> Within the bounds of marriage, as marriage is a pledge to be faithful to
the
> individual you married. There are other sexual acts that one should
probably
> not do (such as asphyxiation games), as they could be dangerous or cost
you
> your life or the life of your partner. Also with the advent AIDS, I would
> argue that sex with many people is morally wrong, if it wasn't before. I
do
> not think Consent can be the only criteria. These are just some of my
> thoughts on the matter take them for what they are worth.
>
>
> Vale,
>
> Tiberius Arcanus Agricola
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
>
>
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12925lk09/M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=gr
>
oups/S=1705313712:HM/EXP=1093776049/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10se96mf6/*http:/compa
> nion.yahoo.com> click here
>
>
>
>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=groups/S=
> :HM/A=2128215/rand=722321357>
>
>
>
> _____
>
> 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
> <mailto:Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 14
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 16:29:38 +0100 (BST)
> From: "A. Apollonius Cordus" <a_apollonius_cordus@...>
> Subject: Question about Olympiads (WAS: Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial
Nota)
>
> A. Apollonius Cordus omnibus sal.
>
> In the spirit of Senator Caesar's request for more
> on-topic discussion, let me ask a question I've been
> wondering about today.
>
> The ancients sometimes dated events by the Olympiad -
> in other words, the four-year period between one
> Olympic festival and the next. But what happened when
> the games didn't happen - did they still count that
> four-year period as an Olympiad or not? If not, how
> did they date events which occurred in the missing
> Olympiad? Or did the situation simply never arise?
>
> Also, does the Olympiad begin at the beginning of the
> festival and run to the beginning of the next, or from
> the end to the end? And was the first Olympiad the
> four years leading up to the first Olympic games or
> the four years from the first games to the second?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo!
Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 15
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 12:19:09 -0400
> From: Servius Equitius Mercurius Troianus
<hermeticagnosis@...>
> Subject: Re: Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial Nota
>
> Salva Diana ~
>
> THERE ARE MINORS ON THE MAIN LIST.
> So where to draw the line? Somewhat shy of "PG-13". Out of necessity,
> not "prudery". Unless you really want this organization to be at risk
> of "Contributing to the Delinquency" charges by some irate parent. The
> "unofficial" Lists can do and say whatever they want ~ NR can't be held
> responsible for them; but the Main List MUST maintain certain standards
> of Historical legitimacy for ANY sexual content. "Entertainment value"
> doesn't qualify.
>
> Vale
> ~ Troianus
>
> On Saturday, August 28, 2004, at 06:40 AM, Casta Meretrix wrote:
> >
> > they will be sexually active even if their activeness consists of
> > themselves
> > and one of both of their hands... Is talking about sex pornographic or
> > is
> > doing it pornographic? Is the missionary position ok but anything else
> > is
> > pornographic? Is discussing a rubber dildo pornographic but discussing
> > a
> > statue of Priapus isn't?
> >
> > Where does one draw the line? I'll tell you where the line *should* be
> > drawn: As long as everyone is above 18 and consenting, anything goes.
> > It is
> > not up to any of us to try to enforce our sexually preferences on
> > others.
> >
> > Vale,
> > Diana Octavia Aventina
> >
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 16
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 16:23:05 -0000
> From: "Marcus Gladius Agricola" <whogue@...>
> Subject: Status of NR Sestertii
>
> From M. Gladius Agricola to all citizens, greeting,
>
> Can anyone tell me the status of the Nova Roma Sestertii? The web page
> simply says "Sold Out", but does not indicate if future production is
> planned.
>
> May you all enjoy the favor of the Immortals.
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 17
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 14:31:26 EDT
> From: QFabiusMaxmi@...
> Subject: Nature of the back alley
>
>
> In a message dated 8/27/04 5:38:23 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
> doris-butler@... writes:
>
> I do stand forth
> as one who removed herself from subscription to the Back Alley on
> account of its pornographic nature. The graphic discussion there of
> the Tijuana Mexico barroom activities between women and domestic
> animals was simply something I do not accept in my "inbox" or on my
> computer.
>
>
>
> And I guess you won't be receiving poems from Catalus in your in-box
either.
>
> The BA is not part of Nova Roma. The two citizens who own it, devised it
> to be a UNOFFICAL list for citizens to hang out and gossip about a lot of
> different
> topics. Sex seems to one of them. There is a clear disclaimer
discribing
> the purpose
> and content of the BA to those joining it. So I have to ask, why are you
> even commenting on it, especially in a public forum? Have you been
mislead in
> anyway? Reading jokes about donkey shows upset you? You would have had
a
> bad time in the real Rome then.
>
> Q. Fabius Maximus
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 18
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 21:05:43 +0200
> From: "Casta Meretrix" <meretrix@...>
> Subject: RE: Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial Nota
>
> Salve Troianus,
>
> > "Entertainment value" doesn't qualify.
>
> Pity! We need a bit of entertainment here. Do we have a Roman stand-up
comic
> in the Forum? :-) Of course his routine would need to be carefully worded
> between the Victorians, the minors, the open-marriages, not insulting
> anyone, not calling anyone a bad name and with all that worry about
> law-suits. <sigh>
>
> Vale,
> Diana
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 19
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 15:09:11 EDT
> From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@...
> Subject: Re: Asking for Help from Nova Roma
>
> F. Galerius Aurelianus S.P.D.
>
> In my opinion, the person using the name G. Agorius Taurinus is not a
person
> of personal honor or integrity and has demonstrated this to me. I believe
> that the Censor and Consul are acting in good faith based on their
previous acts
> on the behalf of Nova Roma; acts that are a matter of public record. I
call
> upon all honorable Nova Roman citizens to review the posts (both current
and in
> the past) from the person using the name G. Agorius Taurinus to decide
for
> themselves whether or not he merits any aid or assistance from the populi.
I
> feel that a legal action has been taken and should be allowed to continue
to
> its conclusion under the leges and edicta of Nova Roma.
>
> Valete.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 20
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 15:27:31 -0400
> From: Servius Equitius Mercurius Troianus
<hermeticagnosis@...>
> Subject: Re: Re: Porn in the BA was Censorial Nota
>
> Ha ha!
>
> Salva, Diana ~
>
> On Saturday, August 28, 2004, at 03:05 PM, Casta Meretrix wrote:
>
> > Salve Troianus,
> >
> >> "Entertainment value" doesn't qualify.
> >
> > Pity! We need a bit of entertainment here.
>
> Too true, too true indeed!
>
> > Do we have a Roman stand-up comic
> > in the Forum? :-) Of course his routine would need to be carefully
> > worded
> > between the Victorians, the minors, the open-marriages, not insulting
> > anyone, not calling anyone a bad name and with all that worry about
> > law-suits. <sigh>
>
> Perhaps some Muse-inspired individual can thread the gauntlet of
> constraints and still manage to amuse us!
>
> One can hope. :-)
> >
> > Vale,
> > Diana
>
> Vale
> ~ Troianus
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 21
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 12:29:51 -0700
> From: "L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@...>
> Subject: Re: Asking for Help from Nova Roma
>
> Ave!
>
> Just for clarification, both Censors signed off on this Nota and both
Consuls were consulted and also gave their support to the Nota. Once
sufficient evidence was reported and investigated. This was not just a nota
drafted by myself, in fact the Constitution of Nova Roma states that Nota's
must be issued collegially. (Section IV. A. 1. f) of the Constitution of
Nova Roma.
>
> In other words, I give full credit and respect to my colleague and the
Consuls for assisting in the nota process and procedure and in preparing the
Nota draft which I posted on the Nova Roma ML and announce list.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@...
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 12:09 PM
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Asking for Help from Nova Roma
>
>
> F. Galerius Aurelianus S.P.D.
>
> In my opinion, the person using the name G. Agorius Taurinus is not a
person
> of personal honor or integrity and has demonstrated this to me. I
believe
> that the Censor and Consul are acting in good faith based on their
previous acts
> on the behalf of Nova Roma; acts that are a matter of public record. I
call
> upon all honorable Nova Roman citizens to review the posts (both current
and in
> the past) from the person using the name G. Agorius Taurinus to decide
for
> themselves whether or not he merits any aid or assistance from the
populi. I
> feel that a legal action has been taken and should be allowed to
continue to
> its conclusion under the leges and edicta of Nova Roma.
>
> Valete.
>
>
> [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]
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 22
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 21:35:28 -0000
> From: "gaiusequitiuscato" <mlcinnyc@...>
> Subject: Defense
>
> G. Equitius Cato quirites S.P.D.
>
> Salvete, omnes.
>
> I think it is necessary for someone to step up to the Forum in
> opposition. Several citizens have announced that G. Agorius
> Taurinus does not deserve a defense, or help from his fellow-
> citizens. This is absurd, and flies in the face of every ideal we
> hold as Romans. Every citizen deserves a fair standing before the
> law; he appealed to us, not knowing much about NR law, to help him.
> Justice finds a home where She is most welcome, and to turn Her away
> bodes ill for us if we follow that path.
>
> Taurinus is certainly no friend of mine. I have been excoriated by
> him on several occasions, on a private List, to a degree that I have
> yet to match in my lifetime. I have, to be honest, returned the
> favor. Yet that was a private List, one open to much horseplay and
> vitriol, sarcasm and downright sordidness. When I subscribed to
> that List, I knew it to be so, and accepted it on its own terms. As
> a private List, owned by an individual who, by happenstance, is also
> a citizen in Nova Roma.
>
> THIS is our Forum. THIS is where we conduct business, discuss
> issues, gripe and laugh and share our common Roman-ness within Nova
> Roma. That being said, I have offered, been accepted, and now stand
> before you as advocate for G. Agorius Taurinus. I will defend him
> to the best of my abilities. Not because I think he is the most
> righteous person on earth, or even a necessarily very agreeable
> person, or because of any friendship or partisan fellowship we have,
> but simply because he is a citizen. Like me. Like all of you. I
> only hope and pray that if, the Gods forbid, I should ever need
> assistance, even one of those with whom I most heartily disagree
> would stand by my side as a fellow-citizen.
>
>
> Valete,
>
> Cato
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 23
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 21:49:07 -0000
> From: "pompeia_minucia_tiberia" <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@...>
> Subject: Re: Asking for Help from Nova Roma
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@a... wrote:
> >Salve Galeri Aueliane, Salvete Omnes:
>
> You wrote:
>
> F. Galerius Aurelianus S.P.D.
> >
> > In my opinion, the person using the name G. Agorius Taurinus is not
> a person
> > of personal honor or integrity and has demonstrated this to me. I
> believe
> > that the Censor and Consul are acting in good faith based on their
> previous acts
> > on the behalf of Nova Roma; acts that are a matter of public
> record. I call
> > upon all honorable Nova Roman citizens to review the posts (both
> current and in
> > the past) from the person using the name G. Agorius Taurinus to
> decide for
> > themselves whether or not he merits any aid or assistance from the
> populi. I
> > feel that a legal action has been taken and should be allowed to
> continue to
> > its conclusion under the leges and edicta of Nova Roma.
>
> Pompeia Respondeo:
>
> I am not seeing public outcry against the Magistrates in question,
> save from the reus, who has apologized, and such apology was accepted
> by Consul Marinus.
>
> With respect to your views on 'comitia' I must point out a couple of
> things. In the Lex Salicia (the one deleanating correct process of
> law) you will read the a citizen is entitled to a fair trial...the
> jurors being comitia members. It is the duty of Rome, regardless of
> how we feel subjectively about the reus (defendent) to render him an
> objective verdict, based on the evidence, and nothing else.
>
> I do not personally find this citizen to be the epitome of
> politeness, or virtue either...but this does not directly weigh into
> the current charges. Is it straining myself to say this? Yes, but as
> a member of Comitiae, to be in keeping with the law...my subjectivity
> has to go out the window, or atleast on a back burner.
>
> Also, G. Apulus Taurinus is further entitled to appeal the nota to
> the Comitia Popli Tributa under the constitutionally mandated right
> of Provacatio...it is a citizens's right, and by the same token, an
> obligation on the part of said comitia members to render evidence as
> to whether public morality was indeed jeopardized, should such appeal
> be launched.
>
> To maintain true justice, we cannot ask comitia to look at anything
> but evidence which led to the charges or the nota...atleast not in my
> view.
>
> Just a some counter thoughts to consider.
>
> Valete,
> P. Minucia Tiberia
>
> ***********optional reading********(well, actually the whole darned
> thing is an option,right??) :)
>
> Johnny was caught stealing candy from the corner store a total of 7
> times. On his eighth charge, can be presume Johnny as being less
> entitled to a fair trial?...can we presume he's guilty? No. We have
> to weigh out the evidence pertainng to this eighth incident, submit a
> verdict based on that alone. Mind you, if the Praetor is aware he
> has 7 previous convictions, this will probably weigh into this
> formula (sentence), or macronationally, a pre sentence report.
> >
> > Valete again...
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 24
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 17:39:08 -0400
> From: Tom Knighton <swordwarrior1066@...>
> Subject: Re: Defense
>
> I am new to Nova Roma, but I must say that this is one of the most noble
> things I've ever seen.
>
> It's easy to stand by a friend. It's more difficult to stand by an
> opponent (I refrain from calling him an enemy since I don't know the
> specifics of your relationship).
>
> For what it's worth, you have my heartfelt respect.
>
> Titus Metallus
>
> gaiusequitiuscato wrote:
>
> > G. Equitius Cato quirites S.P.D.
> >
> > Salvete, omnes.
> >
> > I think it is necessary for someone to step up to the Forum in
> > opposition. Several citizens have announced that G. Agorius
> > Taurinus does not deserve a defense, or help from his fellow-
> > citizens. This is absurd, and flies in the face of every ideal we
> > hold as Romans. Every citizen deserves a fair standing before the
> > law; he appealed to us, not knowing much about NR law, to help him.
> > Justice finds a home where She is most welcome, and to turn Her away
> > bodes ill for us if we follow that path.
> >
> > Taurinus is certainly no friend of mine. I have been excoriated by
> > him on several occasions, on a private List, to a degree that I have
> > yet to match in my lifetime. I have, to be honest, returned the
> > favor. Yet that was a private List, one open to much horseplay and
> > vitriol, sarcasm and downright sordidness. When I subscribed to
> > that List, I knew it to be so, and accepted it on its own terms. As
> > a private List, owned by an individual <br/><br/>(Message over 64 KB, truncated)

I forgot to add something to my last post- the God of Delphi was
Apollo- a chief God in Rome, as well as in Greece.



G. Agorius Taurinus

thank you,sir. the info has come in handy.
--- g_agorius_taurinus@...
<g_agorius_taurinus@...> wrote:

> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, raymond fuentes
> <praefectus2324@y...> wrote:
> > anyone know who appollos mother is?
> >
> > =====
> > S P Q R
> >
> > Fidelis Ad Mortem.
> >
> > Marcvs Flavivs Fides
> > Roman Citizen
> >
> >
>
>
>
> He was the Son of the Goddess Leto.
>
>
> Leto was the daughter of the Titans Phoebe and

Coeus. Known as the

> hidden one and bright one, her name came to be used

for the moon

> Selene.
>
> Hera was jealous of Leto because Zeus, the husband

of Hera, had

> fallen in love with her. From their union Leto bore

the divine twins,

> Artemis and Apollo. Leto found this to be an arduous

task, as Hera

> had refused Leto to give birth on either terra firma

or on an island

> out at sea.
>
> The only place safe enough to give birth was Delos

because Delos was

> a floating island. Therefore, Leto did not refute

the wishes of Hera.

> In some versions, Leto was refused by other

vicinities because they

> feared the great power of the god she would bear.
>
> To show her gratitude, Leto anchored Delos to the

bottom of the

> Aegean with four columns, to aid its stability. A

conflict of legends

> arises when in one version it says that Artemis was

born one day

> before Apollo, and the birth took place on the

island of Ortygia.

> Then the next day, Artemis helped Leto to cross to

the island of

> Delos, and aided Leto with the delivery of Apollo.
>
> Leto was worshiped throughout Greece, but

principally in Lycia (Asia

> Minor). In Delos and Athens, there were temples

dedicated to her,

> although in most regions she was worshiped in

conjunction with her

> children, Artemis and Apollo. In Egypt there is the

Temple of Leto

> (Wadjet) at Buto, which was described by Herodotus

as being connected

> to an island which floated. On this island (Khemmis)

stood a temple

> to Apollo, but Herodotus dismissed the claim that it

floated as

> merely the legend of Delos brought to Egypt from

Greek tradition. The

> Romans called Leto "Latona".
>
>
>
> That's pretty much the official, Late Mythological

version- I think

> Kerenyi had some pretty interesting things to say

about older

> versions of the origin of Mighty Apollon. I could

look it up for you,

> if you wanted me to.
>
>
>
> G. Agorius Taurinus
>
>
>
>
>

=====
S P Q R

Fidelis Ad Mortem.

Marcvs Flavivs Fides
Roman Citizen





_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush

SALVE ARMINIA FABIANA

I have to add a very good archaeological guide to your cart,
that's "Roma" of Filippo Coarelli; that's a very complete, uptodated
and really interesting guide. I got the italian one, but I'm sure
there's a spanish and probably english one!!

BENE VALE
L IUL SULLA
Italia


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Dom.con.fus" <dom.con.fus@e...>
wrote:

> Ave
>
> A somewhat detailed map of the centre of Rome can be obtained in

the

> turistical info boxes scattered around the city centre for free.
> Incidentally, there\'s no better guide than a roman Nova Roman ;)

I\'m sure

> we\'ll manage something, if it will have to be in the week-end,

due the fact

> most of us here do work (annoying...)
>
> Vale
>
> DCF
>
>
> --------- Original Message --------
> Da: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> To: \"Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com\" <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
> Oggetto: [Nova-Roma] Re: Best Guide for Rome?
> Data: 29/08/04 05:47
>
>
>
> M. Gladius Agricola to M. Arminia Maior Fabiana, greetings,
>
>
> I found ROME An Oxford Archaeological Guide, by Amanda Claridge,

1998,

> ISBN 0-19-288003-9 to be excellent.
>
> I have a few minor points that I think could be improved upon:
>
> The key to each chapter\'s guide map should also be indexed to the
> location of each site\'s description. I simply added the page

numbers

> in pencil to my copy.
>
> You will need a good map of modern Rome for navigation purposes.

You

> can buy one anywhere, but it is a little difficult to find a

detailed

> street by street map of just the central city.
>
> The \"opening times and charges\" section needs to be updated.

Italy now

> uses Euros, not Lire.
>
> As I said, it is an excellent book and represents the scholarship

up

> to its date of publication. It is packed with information, far too
> much to be used as just a field guide, so I suggest getting a copy

now

> and reading through as much as you can. There are interesting

sections

> on Roman building techniques and museums.
>
> May the Immortals protect you on your trip.
> --
> Email.it, the professional e-mail, gratis per te:

http://www.email.it/f

>
> Sponsor:
> Migliaia di prodotti a tua disposizione di Telefonia, Informatica,
> Audio Video, Climatizzazione, Orologi e tantissime offerte on-lineÂ…
> Clicca qui: http://adv.email.it/cgi-bin/foclick.cgi?

mid=2648&d=20040829

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

A. Apollonius Cordus Galo Agorio Taurino omnibusque
sal.

It sounds as though you've become bored by this
discussion, so I'll stop. Drop me a line if you ever
want to discuss whether or not it's legitimate to read
back classical Greek social and familial structures
into the Homeric period.





___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

A. Apollonius Cordus Dianae Octaviae Aventinae
omnibusque sal.

> Pity! We need a bit of entertainment here. Do we
> have a Roman stand-up comic
> in the Forum? :-) Of course his routine would need
> to be carefully worded
> between the Victorians, the minors, the
> open-marriages, not insulting
> anyone, not calling anyone a bad name and with all
> that worry about
> law-suits. <sigh>

I long ago gave up any hope that you yourself might be
willing to understand our legal system here, but I do
wish you would not mislead other people about it.

In order to get yourself on the wrong side of the law
you have to make a statement about another person
which is both false and defamatory.

So there are three easy ways in which a stand-up
comedian could very easily avoid getting into any
legal trouble.

1. He could make sure that anything he says about
another citizen is actually true.

OR

2. He could not say anything insulting about another
citizen.

OR

3. He could make as many false and insulting jokes
about another citizen as he might wish, so long as he
were to make it clear that they are only jokes and not
to be taken seriously.





___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

A. Apollonius Cordus Pompeiae Minuciae Tiberiae
Straboni omnibusque sal.

I agree with most of what you say, but I've a couple
of comments on this paragraph:

> Also, G. Apulus Taurinus is further entitled to
> appeal the nota to
> the Comitia Popli Tributa under the constitutionally
> mandated right
> of Provacatio...it is a citizens's right, and by the
> same token, an
> obligation on the part of said comitia members to
> render evidence as
> to whether public morality was indeed jeopardized,
> should such appeal
> be launched.

Firstly, Taurinus is an Agorius, not an Apulus. Family
and ancestry were very important to the Romans, and
are very important to many Novaromans, so please try
to get nomina right, especially when there is clearly
some special reason why the person you're talking
about has chosen that nomen (I presume that Taurinus
takes his nomen from the last great pagan philosopher
Agorius Praetextatus).

Secondly, it is not an established legal fact that a
nota can be the subject of a provocatio ad populum. I
know of no example of such a thing in Roman history,
and on the other hand it was a clear convention of
Roman law that the acts of a censorial college could
not be obstructed or overthrown except by a later
censorial college.

It would also, in this particular case, be utterly
absurd for Taurinus to appeal against the nota, since
that would result in two trials simultaneously
examining precisely the same charges.

I presume, however, that the nota will be lifted when
the court has pronounced sentence one way or the
other, since another Roman legal convention holds that
no citizen should be punished by both a nota and a
court sentence.





___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

Salvete omnes,

I still out in the field limited to Sat phone. For the time being you
can reach me at daxmikek@.... My other server is having
problems this weekend.

Regards,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus

P.Minius Albucius A. Apollonio Cordo quiritibusque s.d.,

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

On the second point of your letter, we must not forget that a tribunal will judge according novaroman laws, not according ancient roman law. If real roman law were directly relevant inside NR, there would be no need for our constitution and our laws. Roman law may certainly be useful if our NR law keeps silent, but just as one tool in the hard work of legal interpretation.

So, on the items that you put forward, and according NR law :

1/ nota seems to be legally able to be subject to provocatio ;

2/ if the provocatio track is then followed by Taurinus, the situation will not be absurd, but very interesting : it will give our Praetor and judges the opportunity to complete our law on this point : can we have two trials examining the same charges ? Would it be some prority between them ? On which grounds ? (you certainly saw that I did not use the word "simultaneously" that you wrote, for using it amounts to solving the problem is a certain direction) ;

3/ your third point is very interesting too : which one must prevail ? The censorial nota or the judicial sentence brought in by the consular petitio ?

Vale(te).

Scr. Cadomago, Gallia, a.d. IV Kal. Sept. MMDCCLVII a.u.c.

----- Original Message -----
From: A. Apollonius Cordus
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2004 1:00 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Asking for Help from Nova Roma


A. Apollonius Cordus Pompeiae Minuciae Tiberiae
Straboni omnibusque sal.

I agree with most of what you say, but I've a couple
of comments on this paragraph:

> Also, G. Apulus Taurinus is further entitled to
> appeal the nota to
> the Comitia Popli Tributa under the constitutionally
> mandated right
> of Provacatio...it is a citizens's right, and by the
> same token, an
> obligation on the part of said comitia members to
> render evidence as
> to whether public morality was indeed jeopardized,
> should such appeal
> be launched.

Firstly, Taurinus is an Agorius, not an Apulus. Family
and ancestry were very important to the Romans, and
are very important to many Novaromans, so please try
to get nomina right, especially when there is clearly
some special reason why the person you're talking
about has chosen that nomen (I presume that Taurinus
takes his nomen from the last great pagan philosopher
Agorius Praetextatus).

Secondly, it is not an established legal fact that a
nota can be the subject of a provocatio ad populum. I
know of no example of such a thing in Roman history,
and on the other hand it was a clear convention of
Roman law that the acts of a censorial college could
not be obstructed or overthrown except by a later
censorial college.

It would also, in this particular case, be utterly
absurd for Taurinus to appeal against the nota, since
that would result in two trials
examining precisely the same charges.

I presume, however, that the nota will be lifted when
the court has pronounced sentence one way or the
other, since another Roman legal convention holds that
no citizen should be punished by both a nota and a
court sentence.





___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT





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

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

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

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




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

A. Apollonius Cordus P. Minio Albucio omnibusque sal.

> On the second point of your letter, we must not
> forget that a tribunal will judge according
> novaroman laws, not according ancient roman law. If
> real roman law were directly relevant inside NR,
> there would be no need for our constitution and our
> laws. Roman law may certainly be useful if our NR
> law keeps silent, but just as one tool in the hard
> work of legal interpretation.

Quite so, though as I have often argued in the past
there is, I believe, an unwritten convention of
Novaroman law that where Novaroman law is silent,
unclear, or uncertain, Roman law is to be used to
clarify the matter.

I suppose it could be argued that Novaroman law isn't
silent, unclear, or uncertain on this point; but I
think the strong weight of Roman tradition is enough
to make the point uncertain, especially since the
relevant provision of Novaroman law is very terse and
vague. I can't say definitively that a nota cannot be
subject to provocatio, because I lack the power to
make that decision, but I think we can say that the
point is doubtful and open to argument.

As for what would happen if Taurinus were to appeal,
that certainly would be a point left unclear by
Novaroman law. Roman law, unfortunately, is also
silent on the matter, and the reason is simple: the
Romans were sufficiently sensible that they never
allowed such an absurd situation to arise. In that
case we would have to conclude that the proper Roman
solution to such a situation is to make it go away;
which means that one or other trial would have to be
dismissed, or at least postponed until the other had
ended. If I were a praetor faced with such a problem
to settle, I would dismiss the defendant's appeal on
the ground that he could always appeal again after the
court case had ended. I would also ask the censores to
lift the nota as soon as the court had handed down a
verdict.

As for which would prevail if the nota were not lifted
and a sentence imposed by the court, now it's you who
makes a hidden assumption. :) It would seem to me
that neither could overrule the other. The censores
have no imperium, so they cannot dismiss a sentence
handed down by a panel of iudices using the delegated
imperium of a praetor. On the other hand, the
censores, once elected, are immune from the exercise
of imperium by other magistrates and cannot be called
to account by the comitia for their actions while in
office, so no one but they or their successors would
have the power to remove the nota. So the reus would
be unjustly punished twice unless the censores could
be prevailed upon to lift the nota themselves, and I
trust that they would do so, for one doesn't get to be
censor without a healthy respect for Roman tradition
and for justice and equity.

So yes, they are interesting issues. On the negative
side, they are interesting largely because they ought
not to arise in the first place.





___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

Gaius Modius Athanasius S.P.D.

I announced this on the PeaceNR list several days ago and several people have
suggested I announce it on the main list since the main list is our official
forum and a matter of public record.

I have officially left the faction known as the Boni.

Valete;

Gaius Modius Athanasius
Tribunus Plebis
Flamen Pomonalis, Pontifex, and Augur


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

> 3. He could make as many false and insulting jokes
> about another citizen as he might wish, so long as
> he
> were to make it clear that they are only jokes and
> not
> to be taken seriously.

Thanks Cordus for the details. So in other words as
long as I preceed every insulting comment with a 'this
is only a joke' disclaimer or succeed them with :-))),
I could say whatever I wanted about anyone on this
list and never get moderated or hear the hated words
'lawsuit'?

Hey folks, I think that Cordus has found us a loophole
around NR censorship! But... since you're a Rogator, I
think that maybe, just maybe I'd like to hear a
Praetor verify your statement before I start speaking
my mind with emails filled with smiley faces :-)))))

Vale,
Diana



_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush

Salvete,

Edictum concerning the posting of Edicta

It has come to my attention that our previous Magister Aranearius,
Marcus Octavius Germanicus, began a policy of not posting edicta
that merely contained appointments of scriba and edicta that was
only of provincial nature.

After reviewing the Edicta section of the Tabularium and having
determined that the a vast majority were by nature appointments of
Apparitores and/or only had force of law within a provincial area
and with well over 75% of them now being inactive due to the issuing
magistrate having left office, I agree that his policy should be
formally promulgated.

In my capacity as Magister Aranearius I do issue the following
instructions:

I. Edicta issued merely to appoint Apparitores as prescribe in the
Constitution of Nova Roma, with the exception of Lictors to the
Comitia Curiata, shall not be published in the Tabularium. The
appointment of Lictors to the Comitia Curiata being in the care of
the The Collegium Pontificum, all such Decreta shall be published in
the Tabularium in the Priestly Decreta section thereof.

II. Edicta issued by proconsul and propraetors for the governance of
their respective provinces shall not be published in the
Tabularium.

Issued August 28, 2004 in the Consulship of Gnaeus Salix Astur and
Gnaeus Equitius Marinus.

Valete,

Q. Cassius Calvus
Magister Aranearius

Ave Cordus

> A. Apollonius Cordus Pompeiae Minuciae Tiberiae
> Straboni omnibusque sal.
>
> It would also, in this particular case, be utterly
> absurd for Taurinus to appeal against the nota, since
> that would result in two trials simultaneously
> examining precisely the same charges.

Well, I agree about the rest of your mail, but not this one. It wouldn't be
absurd, if he thought that he had more chances to make it having as a jury
rather than 10 Nova Romans the whole population of the Res Publica. Yes, you
could have two virdicts in the nd, one from the comitia and one from the
judges, but one would definitely have more authority than the other. It
would also be a matter of timing: I doubt that 10 judges would give a
virdict countrary to the one of the comitia (on the other the comitia, if
voting after the virdict ofteh judges, could very well overrule them, being
that I suspect many of the voters do not follow so much the mailin glist).

Speaking of which, where are the voices that untill a few weeks ago yelled
about the sillyness of trials within Nova Roma, of trials being just a
roleplaying game and so on? Everyone of them asleep now? Funny...

Vale

DCF
--
Email.it, the professional e-mail, gratis per te: http://www.email.it/f

Sponsor:
Scopri come proteggere dai virus il tuo computer e come eliminare
ogni tipo di virus!.
Clicca qui: http://adv.email.it/cgi-bin/foclick.cgi?mid=1558&d=20040829

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

> A. Apollonius Cordus Galo Agorio Taurino omnibusque
> sal.
>
> It sounds as though you've become bored by this
> discussion, so I'll stop. Drop me a line if you ever
> want to discuss whether or not it's legitimate to read
> back classical Greek social and familial structures
> into the Homeric period.
>

I'm not bored with it. I just thought I'd re-clarify my stances, and
the religious reasons why I have them.

Also- I thought I'd mention, over the door of the Delphic oracle, was
written an interesting maxim- it said:


"Called or Uncalled, the God will be Present".


That is an important point- Apollon could not have been a "superman
anthropoid" if his presence could be in the Adytum, whether or not he
was "called". This proves that there was a notion that the Gods
could "be present" in a mystical, seemingly non-physical sort of way-
literally "present", even if not seen, heard, or felt. So, Homer's
depiction of the Gods as literal male or female-shaped figures, with
actual human-level scheming, cannot be taken to be authoritative;
more metaphorical. I think that Greeks were aware of that, in any era-
with the exception of the simpleton, of course!



G. Agorius Taurinus

Salve amice,

I have a great deal of respect for you as a man of personal
integrity, so I know you have given careful thought to your position.
I respect your decision.

Vale,
Ambrosius Artorus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, AthanasiosofSpfd@a... wrote:
> Gaius Modius Athanasius S.P.D.
>
> I announced this on the PeaceNR list several days ago and several
people have
> suggested I announce it on the main list since the main list is our
official
> forum and a matter of public record.
>
> I have officially left the faction known as the Boni.
>
> Valete;
>
> Gaius Modius Athanasius
> Tribunus Plebis
> Flamen Pomonalis, Pontifex, and Augur
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

P.Minius Albucius A. Apollonio Cordo s.d.,

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


I would certainly agree with you on most of content points of our discussion.

It is surely tempting for us to call to Roman law for filling up NR law silence. As a jurist I do know that two opposite positions then exist : this which considers that a system of law is by essence perfect and that the work of interpretation just reveals (un)clear rules ; and the other, more realistic, which tells that law is a human building and, as such, full of holes that judges have to fill interpretating and, in fact, creating law.

Being now far away from the light skies of my early studies, I would place myself in the second way of thinking, particularly reading some of our novaroman texts, which still suffer some lack of preparation.

Using ancient roman law as the sole interpretating tool would be on a first sight the best solution, indeed. But there are two obstacles in it : first, our wise law makers would have to set that this corpus of ancient laws could prevail if not contrary to major (naturally, need defining "major"...) modern ("macronational" would we say ?) rules ; second, that using ancient roman law would ask NR to improve in its knowledge of this field. And this asks the question of specialisation. I am not sure that many today NR citizens have this knowledge. The more we would use the ancient law, the more we would risk creating a specialised field of (legal) knowledge, unreacheable to most of us. And this point is central for me : NR will grow only if every citizen can reach an easy, equal and fair access to information and public offices. We certainly might create a efficient Curia Juris, with servants like you and me, interested in ancient law, but which could create one more type of office and power place in NR.

On the item of "could be a nota subject to provocatio ?", you write that "you can't say definitively" (yes or no) (..) "because (you) lack the power to make the decision. On this formal point, I think that though we do lack you and me, and every NR citizen, the power to make the decision which will give the finally chosen solution its NR legal rule label, we may however freely argue around this point.

As for the stange situation if Taurinus were to appeal, I agree with you : a well built legal system would have avoided it. At the same time, I think that our honorable high magistrates could have avoid it too : perhaps Consul Marinus's petitio has been issued a little bit too early. Could not our constitutional Powers leave the nota live in its whole effects, exhaust its whole ways for appeal before seizing the Praetor ?

On the primacy relations between the nota and the sentence, I cannot succeed in seeing, in fact, any hidden assumption in my question :) : it was just an open question, and you made me the honor to answer it. And on the matter itself, "a meis consiliis ratio tua non abhorret". Ah ! Just one point : be kind enough to tell me which legal disposition tells that judges have "the delegated imperium of a praetor" ?

Litteras tuas valde exspecto.


Vale.

Scr. Cadomago, Gallia, a.d. IV Kal. Sept. MMDCCLVII a.u.c.



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

> Speaking of which, where are the voices that untill a few weeks ago

yelled

> about the sillyness of trials within Nova Roma, of trials being

just a

> roleplaying game and so on? Everyone of them asleep now? Funny...
>
> Vale
>
> DCF
> --

Salvete Domiti Constantine Fusce et omnes,



Salvete omnes,

1) I will admit I am one of the ones who has spoken out about too
much time being spent on "frivalous lawsuits" as opposed to actual
trials of which we have not had since my time here as well as too
much time being spent on laws after laws that govern in reality about
200 active people. I have mentioned our time might be better spent
educating, building sites someday like Violanda, temples for the
religio and all that good stuff. I for one have said my peace off and
on and I see that there are no new moves by our government or some of
our citizens to swing over to my way of thinking. Therefore I
continue on and just have to accept the status quo the way it is
whether I like it or not; alas, Fuscus will have his day with Scaurus
and now Taurinus will have his ordeal. That is that and I hate
repeating my posts over and over like a nicked record. As Caesar said
the die have been cast. There will be charges, lawsuits, trials and
all.

2) I'm out working in the oil field for a moment and just have an
expensive Sat phone for my communications. I can just visit the our
sites a few minutes a day since downloading is slow, the cost is
$1.45 per minute and therefore cannot spend all the time I would like
on the oil company's phone. This situation with the latest trial and
Nota just suddenly came up a few days ago, many silent citizens may
be away but I'm sure you will here more critical discussion soon
enough.


Regards,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus

Ave!

I have also spoken out against trials. I do not like them. For the most part the previous trials in NR were politically motivated pitting one faction against another. However, this situation does not fall into that category. Here we have an issue of Fraud. An individual lying on his citizenship application admitting to it via email. All he will need to do to prove his innocence is to prove just who he really is. As I told Consul Marinus, either he lied on the Back Alley, which is no big deal, or he lied on his citizenship application, which is a big deal. When a citizen commits fraud it is a big deal. As Censor I have taken an oath to protect the Constitution of Nova Roma. When I found out about the possibility of Fraud I reported it directly to the Consuls and my colleague. If Fraud isnt an issue that we should be concerned about, then I will be happy to lift the Nota with the consent of my colleague and the approval of both Consuls.

Vale,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

----- Original Message -----
From: Quintus Lanius Paulinus (Michael Kelly)
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2004 3:35 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Asking for Help from Nova Roma


> Speaking of which, where are the voices that untill a few weeks ago
yelled
> about the sillyness of trials within Nova Roma, of trials being
just a
> roleplaying game and so on? Everyone of them asleep now? Funny...
>
> Vale
>
> DCF
> --

Salvete Domiti Constantine Fusce et omnes,



Salvete omnes,

1) I will admit I am one of the ones who has spoken out about too
much time being spent on "frivalous lawsuits" as opposed to actual
trials of which we have not had since my time here as well as too
much time being spent on laws after laws that govern in reality about
200 active people. I have mentioned our time might be better spent
educating, building sites someday like Violanda, temples for the
religio and all that good stuff. I for one have said my peace off and
on and I see that there are no new moves by our government or some of
our citizens to swing over to my way of thinking. Therefore I
continue on and just have to accept the status quo the way it is
whether I like it or not; alas, Fuscus will have his day with Scaurus
and now Taurinus will have his ordeal. That is that and I hate
repeating my posts over and over like a nicked record. As Caesar said
the die have been cast. There will be charges, lawsuits, trials and
all.

2) I'm out working in the oil field for a moment and just have an
expensive Sat phone for my communications. I can just visit the our
sites a few minutes a day since downloading is slow, the cost is
$1.45 per minute and therefore cannot spend all the time I would like
on the oil company's phone. This situation with the latest trial and
Nota just suddenly came up a few days ago, many silent citizens may
be away but I'm sure you will here more critical discussion soon
enough.


Regards,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus



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]

Gaius Popillius Laenas Praetor Quiritibus salutem plurimam dicit.

Ex-Officio

During the course of the preparation for the trial of Galus Agorius
Taurinus, the actor, Conusl Gn. Equitius Marinus on behalf of the
Rebublic, has been satisfied that the petitio actionis should be
withdrawn.

Since I have no cause of action without a petitio, all proceedings
against Galus Agorius Taurinus are dropped.

To all who have assisted in this matter, or offered their
assistance, my sincere thanks.

Valete.

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

> Ave!
>
> I have also spoken out against trials. I do not like them.

Salve,

I hate to speak out on this issue, but I really can't let this sort
of thing pass without comment. Sulla, prior to the last couple of
months, your main interest in Nova Roma was the creation of a court
system! You lobbied for years for the creation of a trial system so
that you could shine as a Roman advocate.

Now, your friends in the Boni are against it, so you are too.

Interestingly, your second greatest interest was your enthusiasm for
the creation of laws. I recall you bragging about the number of laws
you created while Consul, and your pride in the number (not content)
of edicts you issued while Censor.

But the Boni are against it, so you are too.

For years you've practically been the poster child for the creation
of a complex system of laws and civil courts in Nova Roma. From what
I can see, the Boni seem to be a "mutual approval clique"... If fear
of losing the approval of the other Boni group members has made you
change your tune on these issues for real, it may well be the only
positive thing that group has ever done.

Vale,

Marcus Cassius Julianus
Senator, Pater Patriae

Actually Cassius, I voted against the Lex Salicia Iudiciaria and the Lex Salicia Poenalis .

And I voted against all the laws promulgated this year as well. And since most of this year I have been saying that there are TOO many laws in NR and we are more concerned with laws that tell us basically which magistrates get precedence to wipe their arse instead of focusing on the foundational problems that affect NR.

When the Tribune asked us to put our money where our mouth is about saying what laws needed to get repealed or revised I had a list for him that very same day.

Nova Roma has far too many laws for less than 200 active citizens.

Vale,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

----- Original Message -----
From: Marcus Cassius Julianus
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2004 5:39 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Asking for Help from Nova Roma


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "L. Cornelius Sulla"
<alexious@e...> wrote:
> Ave!
>
> I have also spoken out against trials. I do not like them.

Salve,

I hate to speak out on this issue, but I really can't let this sort
of thing pass without comment. Sulla, prior to the last couple of
months, your main interest in Nova Roma was the creation of a court
system! You lobbied for years for the creation of a trial system so
that you could shine as a Roman advocate.

Now, your friends in the Boni are against it, so you are too.

Interestingly, your second greatest interest was your enthusiasm for
the creation of laws. I recall you bragging about the number of laws
you created while Consul, and your pride in the number (not content)
of edicts you issued while Censor.

But the Boni are against it, so you are too.

For years you've practically been the poster child for the creation
of a complex system of laws and civil courts in Nova Roma. From what
I can see, the Boni seem to be a "mutual approval clique"... If fear
of losing the approval of the other Boni group members has made you
change your tune on these issues for real, it may well be the only
positive thing that group has ever done.

Vale,

Marcus Cassius Julianus
Senator, Pater Patriae


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]

In a message dated 8/29/04 6:09:15 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
_cassius622@..._ (mailto:cassius622@...) writes:

>>I hate to speak out on this issue, but I really can't let this sort

of thing pass without comment. Sulla, prior to the last couple of
months, your main interest in Nova Roma was the creation of a court
system! You lobbied for years for the creation of a trial system so
that you could shine as a Roman advocate. >>

Salvete
I can't let this go by without comment, either.
What Marcus Cassius is saying is Lucius Cornelius Sulla is incapable of
learning. Marcus Cassius is also implying that L. Cornelius Sulla too stupid to
change things when they are not working.

>>Now, your friends in the Boni are against it, so you are too. >>

Actually, I believe that not all the Boni are against a law system, just
against a system that can be used as a club against political foes.

>>Interestingly, your second greatest interest was your enthusiasm for

the creation of laws. I recall you bragging about the number of laws
you created while Consul, and your pride in the number (not content)
of edicts you issued while Censor.<<

Yes, he was. Operational word being "was". He has since come to realize that
some of his edicts were less then effective and some gave diverse results to
NR. So he has learned from his mistakes. Isn't that something politicians and
recreations are supposed to do?

>>For years you've practically been the poster child for the creation

of a complex system of laws and civil courts in Nova Roma. From what
I can see, the Boni seem to be a "mutual approval clique"... If fear
of losing the approval of the other Boni group members has made you
change your tune on these issues for real, it may well be the only
positive thing that group has ever done. <<

I'll let this insult pass, since I'm in a good mood.
After I spent two years working on a law system as my fellow ex-Praetor
Flavius knows, I saw there was much danger in such a system. I convinced Lucius
Cornelius of the same. Interestingly after I abandoned work my system, the Lex
Salica popped up, causing the precise problems I forsaw earlier.
To put a fine touch on the subject, I believe until we are interacting on a
daily basis, a law system is not needed. Also our own corporate by-laws in
Maine, pretty much makes the Senate as the definitive governing body. So, we
are at an impasse.
The Senate as an oligarchic society in Rome could not be the body of the
court. Too much conflict of interest. However in NR that is not the case. Since
most the Senators sitting are not wealthy through NR investments , their
wealth is not tied to their decision process in NR. Running a government like
corporation doesn't work, unless that government is a dictatorship.
Valete
Q. Fabius Maximus




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

G. Equitius Cato Censores L. Cornelio Sullae Felico C. Fabio
Quinilianusque S.P.D.

Salvete, Censores.

In view of the dismissal of all charges against my client, Galus
Agorius Taurinus, I call upon you to remove this Nota against him;
it was issued under circumstances which have been found invalid,
prompting the dismisal of said charges.

Valete,

G. Equitius Cato
Advocatus, G. Agorio Taurinum


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

> Avete Omnes,
>
> In accordance with Section IV A 1 f i of the Constitution of Nova
> Roma, the Censors have the authority to issue notae to safeguard

the

> public morality. Recently, an issue was discovered involving

citizen

> Galus Agorius Taurinus's citizenship application that required an
> investigation by Censor L. Cornelius Sulla Felix and Consul Gn.
> Equitius Marinus. Our investigation determined that citizen Galus
> Agorius Taurinus provided false information on his citizenship
> application which is the same as a probrum. In conference and

accord

> with the Consuls, the Censors hereby issue this Nota against

citizen

> Galus Agorius Taurinus.
>
> This Nota will be effective until the Censors deem it proper to
> remove it. The Nota will remove Galus Agorius Taurinus's right to

vote

> in all cases except as a member of the Comitia Populi Tributa

should

> that Comitia investigate a claim of Provocatio by Galus Agorius
> Taurinus, where he may vote only on the matter of provocatio. This
> nota is effective immediately.
>
> Issued August 27, 2004 in the Consulship of Gnaeus Salix Astur and

Gnaeus

> Equitius Marinus.
>
> Most Respectfully,
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
> Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
> Censors of Nova Roma
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

oops. please read "dismissal" where appropriate.

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

> G. Equitius Cato Censores L. Cornelio Sullae Felico C. Fabio
> Quinilianusque S.P.D.
>
> Salvete, Censores.
>
> In view of the dismissal of all charges against my client, Galus
> Agorius Taurinus, I call upon you to remove this Nota against him;
> it was issued under circumstances which have been found invalid,
> prompting the dismisal of said charges.
>
> Valete,
>
> G. Equitius Cato
> Advocatus, G. Agorio Taurinum
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "L. Cornelius Sulla"
> <alexious@e...> wrote:
> > Avete Omnes,
> >
> > In accordance with Section IV A 1 f i of the Constitution of Nova
> > Roma, the Censors have the authority to issue notae to safeguard
> the
> > public morality. Recently, an issue was discovered involving
> citizen
> > Galus Agorius Taurinus's citizenship application that required an
> > investigation by Censor L. Cornelius Sulla Felix and Consul Gn.
> > Equitius Marinus. Our investigation determined that citizen

Galus

> > Agorius Taurinus provided false information on his citizenship
> > application which is the same as a probrum. In conference and
> accord
> > with the Consuls, the Censors hereby issue this Nota against
> citizen
> > Galus Agorius Taurinus.
> >
> > This Nota will be effective until the Censors deem it proper to
> > remove it. The Nota will remove Galus Agorius Taurinus's right

to

> vote
> > in all cases except as a member of the Comitia Populi Tributa
> should
> > that Comitia investigate a claim of Provocatio by Galus Agorius
> > Taurinus, where he may vote only on the matter of provocatio.

This

> > nota is effective immediately.
> >
> > Issued August 27, 2004 in the Consulship of Gnaeus Salix Astur

and

> Gnaeus
> > Equitius Marinus.
> >
> > Most Respectfully,
> >
> > Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
> > Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
> > Censors of Nova Roma
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Once we have verification on the accuracy of his citizenship information, I will speak to my colleague regarding the removal of the Nota. All I am aware of his Taurinus's admission that his citizenship application is not accurate.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

----- Original Message -----
From: gaiusequitiuscato
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2004 7:57 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Censorial Nota


G. Equitius Cato Censores L. Cornelio Sullae Felico C. Fabio
Quinilianusque S.P.D.

Salvete, Censores.

In view of the dismissal of all charges against my client, Galus
Agorius Taurinus, I call upon you to remove this Nota against him;
it was issued under circumstances which have been found invalid,
prompting the dismisal of said charges.

Valete,

G. Equitius Cato
Advocatus, G. Agorio Taurinum


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "L. Cornelius Sulla"
<alexious@e...> wrote:
> Avete Omnes,
>
> In accordance with Section IV A 1 f i of the Constitution of Nova
> Roma, the Censors have the authority to issue notae to safeguard
the
> public morality. Recently, an issue was discovered involving
citizen
> Galus Agorius Taurinus's citizenship application that required an
> investigation by Censor L. Cornelius Sulla Felix and Consul Gn.
> Equitius Marinus. Our investigation determined that citizen Galus
> Agorius Taurinus provided false information on his citizenship
> application which is the same as a probrum. In conference and
accord
> with the Consuls, the Censors hereby issue this Nota against
citizen
> Galus Agorius Taurinus.
>
> This Nota will be effective until the Censors deem it proper to
> remove it. The Nota will remove Galus Agorius Taurinus's right to
vote
> in all cases except as a member of the Comitia Populi Tributa
should
> that Comitia investigate a claim of Provocatio by Galus Agorius
> Taurinus, where he may vote only on the matter of provocatio. This
> nota is effective immediately.
>
> Issued August 27, 2004 in the Consulship of Gnaeus Salix Astur and
Gnaeus
> Equitius Marinus.
>
> Most Respectfully,
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
> Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
> Censors of Nova Roma
>
>
> [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]

Citizens of Nova Roma;

I come before you today to apologize to one of our citizens. I have
made an error of statement and wish to apologize for that error. Some
time ago, I posted to this list a message of caution regarding
entrusting Citizen Germanicus with certain responsibilities. In giving
my reasons for that caution , I erroniously indicated that Citizen
Germanicus had quit Nova Roma on three occasions. That statement was
not accurate. He only quit twice. My mistake was that when he withdew
from the Main List to my knowledge for a significant period of time,
between the times that he had left, I thought that he had left again,
and I was so informed by some citizens in Nova Roma who have since left
NR. So I was wrong. Citizen Germanicus only quit NR twice, and with
his second departure (either by he or his wife) also went the entire
contents of the Main List data up to that time, which has never been
restored to my knowledge, except through the outstanding technical
efforts of ProConsul Octavius.

However, I submit my sincere apology to Citizen Germanicus for my
erronius statement. I recognize now that he only quit Nova Roma twice
instead of three times. I submit this apology to him on the same list
as the one that I communicated my error. I hope this apology and
admission will relieve some of the tension created over this matter
which resulted in Citizen Germanicus calling me a "liar" on the PeaceNR
List. I further apologize for the time it has taken to get this apology
before you, but considering past events, it was prudent for me to check
with others the validity of Citizen Germanics' claim before apologizing.
Having checked with two Citizens in which I have a great deal of trust,
I am now able to make this apology, and offer it most sincerely to the
gentleman who has suffered under this burden for so very long!!!

Respectfully and Regretfully;

Marcus Miucius-Tiberius Audens

Command is a matter of wisdom, integrity, humanity, courage and
dicipline.

Sun Tzu -- "The Art of War"

Ave Senator,

Thank you for pointing out the resignation of Flavius Vedius, it prompted me to do some checking as well and it revealed to me that your citizenship date is inaccurate, given that you resigned from Nova Roma during the Civil War and was re-admitted by Dictatorial Decree, if I recall correctly on the date of 7/7/99. Based on this post:

http://www.novaroma.org/forum/mainlist/1999/1999-07-07.html#M0015

Vale,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor

----- Original Message -----
From: MarcusAudens@...
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2004 9:27 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Apology


Citizens of Nova Roma;

I come before you today to apologize to one of our citizens. I have
made an error of statement and wish to apologize for that error. Some
time ago, I posted to this list a message of caution regarding
entrusting Citizen Germanicus with certain responsibilities. In giving
my reasons for that caution , I erroniously indicated that Citizen
Germanicus had quit Nova Roma on three occasions. That statement was
not accurate. He only quit twice. My mistake was that when he withdew
from the Main List to my knowledge for a significant period of time,
between the times that he had left, I thought that he had left again,
and I was so informed by some citizens in Nova Roma who have since left
NR. So I was wrong. Citizen Germanicus only quit NR twice, and with
his second departure (either by he or his wife) also went the entire
contents of the Main List data up to that time, which has never been
restored to my knowledge, except through the outstanding technical
efforts of ProConsul Octavius.

However, I submit my sincere apology to Citizen Germanicus for my
erronius statement. I recognize now that he only quit Nova Roma twice
instead of three times. I submit this apology to him on the same list
as the one that I communicated my error. I hope this apology and
admission will relieve some of the tension created over this matter
which resulted in Citizen Germanicus calling me a "liar" on the PeaceNR
List. I further apologize for the time it has taken to get this apology
before you, but considering past events, it was prudent for me to check
with others the validity of Citizen Germanics' claim before apologizing.
Having checked with two Citizens in which I have a great deal of trust,
I am now able to make this apology, and offer it most sincerely to the
gentleman who has suffered under this burden for so very long!!!

Respectfully and Regretfully;

Marcus Miucius-Tiberius Audens

Command is a matter of wisdom, integrity, humanity, courage and
dicipline.

Sun Tzu -- "The Art of War"


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]

Salve Sulla

So, it is my understanding that the whole thing is based on a Back Alley
post. Interesting. Exactly, where on the back Alley list is written
\"Whatever you say might be used against you\"? Shall we use all the Back
Alley posts within Nova Roma? Because if it is like that, gee, how many
people will have to go under trial for falsum, defamation and even
blasphemy. Were you not the one always saying that Nova Roma and the Back
Alley are two different things? And exactly where do we draw the line? Can
we use informations found over external websites? Private emails? Usenet
newsgroups? Can we hire a private investigator to use the discoveries within
Nova Roma?

Also, does a mail over the BA list in the mid of a heated discussion the
equivalent of a confession (the kind of heated discussion where one says
\"you are a racist\" and the other replies with a \"yeah, right\") becaise
if it is not, then it is upon you, Sulla, the burden of the proof that the
application\'s data is false or not correct. Just like it is on the
Consul\'s shoulders proving that Agorius has ever exercised his right to
vote.

It is not him having to prove that what he said in the official channels is
true, it is you, Sulla, presenting teh charge, having to prove that what he
said is false.

Incidentally, I\'m not saying all of this because Agorius is a friend of
mine, I actually find his attitude awful and his position about christianity
loathsome.

DCF


--------- Original Message --------
Da: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
To: \"Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com\" <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Oggetto: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Asking for Help from Nova Roma
Data: 30/08/04 00:35



Ave!

I have also spoken out against trials. I do not like them. For the most part
the previous trials in NR were politically motivated pitting one faction
against another. However, this situation does not fall into that category.
Here we have an issue of Fraud. An individual lying on his citizenship
application admitting to it via email. All he will need to do to prove his
innocence is to prove just who he really is. As I told Consul Marinus,
either he lied on the Back Alley, which is no big deal, or he lied on his
citizenship application, which is a big deal. When a citizen commits fraud
it is a big deal. As Censor I have taken an oath to protect the Constitution
of Nova Roma. When I found out about the possibility of Fraud I reported it
directly to the Consuls and my colleague. If Fraud isnt an issue that we
should be concerned about, then I will be happy to lift the Nota with the
consent of my colleague and the approval of both Consuls.

Vale,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
--
Email.it, the professional e-mail, gratis per te: http://www.email.it/f

Sponsor:
I prezzi salgono? Con LINEAR assicurazioni puoi fare un preventivo online e
bloccare il prezzo ottenuto fino alla scadenza della tua polizza!
Clicca qui: http://adv.email.it/cgi-bin/foclick.cgi?mid=2714&d=20040830



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

Salve Audens,

A fine apology, but it looked to me that you added a couple of digs while
you were at it.

<He only quit twice.

You know, if I founded an organization and it went out of the direction that
I wanted it to go, I might quit as well. The point is, Vedius Germanicus is
back now and maybe we should take advantage of his experience and knowledge
rather than digging up old arguments. I for one am glad that he is back.

This digging up old arguments and grudge holding -- for years-- is a virus
here in NR. And then everyone wonders why people join NR and then disappear.
This list is supposed to be about old Rome and instead it is a Forum for
people who want to gain followers by discreding those who have ever
disagreed with them. This is quite boring for new comers who expect to learn
something about old Rome.
Vale,
Diana Octavia

Salve, Fuscus.

There is no need to start an argument over this. I think Sulla,
Marinus, and Laenas have made the positions and circumstances clear
enough in their preceeding posts. But you've apparently misunderstood
them.

Sulla said there was a CONFLICT between the information Taurinus
implied was truthful on the Back Alley list, and the information he
submitted on his citizenship application. So, the legal charges
brought against him have nothing to do with what was said about in
the Back Alley, except that it prompted investigation. However, as
Laenas said, the action was dropped as that isn't grounds for a
charge that will stick, until such time as the accuracy of the
information he submitted can be verified. For that purpose, the Nota
remains (or at least that's what I gathered from Laenas and Cato).
Sulla made the information public, but the actor was Marinus, not
Sulla. I have a difficult time seeing where you're going with this
attack on Sulla. And yes, I think any information available can be
used to illuminate something that might be suspicious, but charges
must be made on stable ground.

This, at least, is my understanding, though I may have missread.

In any case, it's not of immediate concern to the res publica. It's
in the hands of those who are conducting any ongoing investigation.

Vale,
L. Kaelus Modius Iulianus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Domitius Constantinus Fuscus
<dom.con.fus@e...> wrote:

> Salve Sulla
>
> So, it is my understanding that the whole thing is based on a Back

Alley

> post. Interesting. Exactly, where on the back Alley list is written
> \"Whatever you say might be used against you\"? Shall we use all

the Back

> Alley posts within Nova Roma? Because if it is like that, gee, how

many

> people will have to go under trial for falsum, defamation and even
> blasphemy. Were you not the one always saying that Nova Roma and

the Back

> Alley are two different things? And exactly where do we draw the

line? Can

> we use informations found over external websites? Private emails?

Usenet

> newsgroups? Can we hire a private investigator to use the

discoveries within

> Nova Roma?
>
> Also, does a mail over the BA list in the mid of a heated

discussion the

> equivalent of a confession (the kind of heated discussion where one

says

> \"you are a racist\" and the other replies with a \"yeah, right\")

becaise

> if it is not, then it is upon you, Sulla, the burden of the proof

that the

> application\'s data is false or not correct. Just like it is on the
> Consul\'s shoulders proving that Agorius has ever exercised his

right to

> vote.
>
> It is not him having to prove that what he said in the official

channels is

> true, it is you, Sulla, presenting teh charge, having to prove that

what he

> said is false.
>
> Incidentally, I\'m not saying all of this because Agorius is a

friend of

> mine, I actually find his attitude awful and his position about

christianity

> loathsome.
>
> DCF