A. Apollónius Cordus Cn. Equitió Marínó C. Júlió
Scauró amícís omnibusque sal.

An interesting legal question. It is indeed illegal
(with the current proportion of patricians) for the
concilium plébis to legislate on subjects other than
its own procedures; but nothing in law states what
happens if it should illegally vote on such a subject.
There are three possibilities:

1. The resulting léx would be totally invalid.
2. The resulting léx would be totally valid.
3. The resulting léx would be binding only on the
plébs.

Number 3 also has two possible versions - either the
léx would be binding on all plebeians whether in
plebeian or in curule magistracies, or it would be
binding only on the magistracies of the plébs. To
discover which of these it would be, and whether it
would be number 3 at all, we have to look at the exact
nature of the limitation on the power of the
concilium.

The constitution doesn't mention anywhere that the
concilium plébis lacks the competence to bind the
patricians if the latter constitute more than 10% of
the population. What it says is that the tribúní
plébis may not convene the concilium plébis if the
patricians constitute more than 10% of the population.
This is different: it is the difference between "my
gun is not loaded" and "my gun is loaded but I can't
reach it". The outcome of both is the same: "I'm not
going to be able to shoot a hole in the target", but
the reason is different, and therefore what needs to
be done to get around the problem is different in each
case.

Now, strictly speaking, the constitution doesn't allow
the tribúní plébis to convene the concilium plébis *at
all* if the patricians constitute more than 10% of the
population. This clearly won't do, because in that
case it would be impossible ever to elect new plebeian
magistrates or to amend the concilium's procedures.
So, as often when we deal with the constitution, we
must do a little creative interpretation. Thus we have
the convention - technically unconstitutional but
nonetheless well-established in Nova Róma and
enshrined in the léx Salicia dé tribúnicia comitiórum
cónvocátióne - that the concilium plébis may be
convened to elect magistrates and to vote on its own
procedures.

Since this is a convention, it is impossible to say
anything dogmatically about its scope; but it appears
that the convention allows the concilium to legislate
only concerning its own procedures, and not on other
subjects of relevance to the plébs alone. That, at any
rate, is what the léx Salicia says. So we can't take
the argument "if a tribúnus plébis proposes
legislation to the concilium plébis, we must assume
that it is implicitly intended only to be relevant to
the plébs and therefore only binding upon it,
otherwise it would be illegal"; we would rather have
to argue "if a tribúnus plébis proposes legislation to
the concilium plébis, we must assume that it is
implicitly intended to be legislation concerning the
internal procedures of the concilium plébis, otherwise
it would be illegal".

But if we try to take that view in this case, we'll be
stretching plausibility beyond its limit, for a
statute about resignations can in now way be argued to
be anything to do with the internal procedures of any
assembly. So there is no way to use creative
interpretation to save the legality of this proposal
by narrowing its scope. It is not to do with either of
the two things which the léx Salicia allows the
concilium plébis to meet to consider, so it cannot but
be illegal.

This eliminates 3, but leaves us with 1 and 2. This
choice is a wider problem in Nova Róma's law
generally, and hasn't yet been satisfactorily
resolved. One can argue "it was illegal for the
tribúnus to propose it, but now that he has done so
the concilium plébis may vote on it and enact it as
binding legislation nonetheless, because there is
nothing in any law which says that it may not do so";
on the other hand one may argue "it was illegal for
the tribúnus to propose it, and therefore any léx
resulting from that illegal proposal will itself be
illegal and therefore invalid". Both arguments have
some sense in them. Common sense may appear to support
the latter argument; Roman law and constitutional
precedent supports the former. I tend to prefer to
former, but others disagree.

Anyway, this is all now academic. Interesting, though.





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

Ladies and Gentlemen;

The subject event, while not a Nova Roma sponsored event, is one which
is certainly of consideration to those who are interested in the
different religions and cults of ancient Rome. It is a long-enduring
event and was one of the first events offered in the Provinca Nova
Britannica. The worship of Mithra was a popular one with the officers
and men of the Legions, and it is believed in some quarters that this
religion had a significant impact on ancient Christianity, in regard to
the different aspects of the religion and the way the Religion was
honored and celebrated.

I therefore urge any within the Province who may be interested in
Mithracism, ancient Roman Religions and cults, or just in an opportunity
to meet others so interested for discussions and a good time to consider
this offer.

------Cornicularius Cornelianus:---

Would you please forward this message to the lady who we are awaiting a
rely for her address to get her Roman name back for her? Also any
citizens that may not be hooked into Nova Britannia weblist as yet, or
who may need a bit more emphasis. I would certainly like to eliminate
as much as possible the later cries of, "Ohhhhh, I wish I had
known!!!!!!!!"

Respectfully,

Marcus Audens

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

Sun Tzu -- "The Art of War"

Salvete Omnes: Well, I received my copy three days ago, and am
already well into the story. It is an easy, good read. Rebecca East,
if you are monitoring this list, many thanks again for such a gracious
offer, and prompt delivery. I am in Canada as well. Pompeia, you and
Lanius should have your copies now, but if not, you are in for an
enjoyable story when the book does arrive.

Bene valete, Appius Tullius Cato


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

>
> ---Salvete Dalmatica, Quinte Lani et Omnes:
>
> So far the reviews on this list are quite positive. I'm sure the
> author would appreciate this positive feedback dropped to Amazon,
> and I imagine anywhere else it would be appropriate to make a book
> recommendation.
>
> Lanius and myself, being up here in Canada have probably two weeks
> to get excited about reading it. Strange, I can get postage from
> Canada to France or Italy in about 5 days, but stuff to or from the
> U.S. takes almost two weeks many times. And we are next door
> neighbours.
>
> Go figure <sigh>
> Pompeia

Salve Cordus -

Interesting indeed.
Let me propose another alternative, because I'm curious how you would
interpret it.
Suppose the Plebes are lawfully convened, for the purpose of electing a
Magistrate and perhaps deal with an internal matter or two: What
happens if legislation is proposed and voted on in this perfectly legal
setting?
The argument you have made to void it - that the convening was unlawful
- would no longer hold in such a case.

Vale
- S E M Troianus

On Jan 26, 2005, at 8:25 AM, A. Apollonius Cordus wrote:

>
> A. Apollónius Cordus Cn. Equitió Marínó C. Júlió
> Scauró amícís omnibusque sal.
>
> An interesting legal question. It is indeed illegal
> (with the current proportion of patricians) for the
> concilium plébis to legislate on subjects other than
> its own procedures; but nothing in law states what
> happens if it should illegally vote on such a subject.
> There are three possibilities:
>
> 1. The resulting léx would be totally invalid.
> 2. The resulting léx would be totally valid.
> 3. The resulting léx would be binding only on the
> plébs.
>
> Number 3 also has two possible versions - either the
> léx would be binding on all plebeians whether in
> plebeian or in curule magistracies, or it would be
> binding only on the magistracies of the plébs. To
> discover which of these it would be, and whether it
> would be number 3 at all, we have to look at the exact
> nature of the limitation on the power of the
> concilium.
>
> The constitution doesn't mention anywhere that the
> concilium plébis lacks the competence to bind the
> patricians if the latter constitute more than 10% of
> the population. What it says is that the tribúní
> plébis may not convene the concilium plébis if the
> patricians constitute more than 10% of the population.
> This is different: it is the difference between "my
> gun is not loaded" and "my gun is loaded but I can't
> reach it". The outcome of both is the same: "I'm not
> going to be able to shoot a hole in the target", but
> the reason is different, and therefore what needs to
> be done to get around the problem is different in each
> case.
>
> Now, strictly speaking, the constitution doesn't allow
> the tribúní plébis to convene the concilium plébis *at
> all* if the patricians constitute more than 10% of the
> population. This clearly won't do, because in that
> case it would be impossible ever to elect new plebeian
> magistrates or to amend the concilium's procedures.
> So, as often when we deal with the constitution, we
> must do a little creative interpretation. Thus we have
> the convention - technically unconstitutional but
> nonetheless well-established in Nova Róma and
> enshrined in the léx Salicia dé tribúnicia comitiórum
> cónvocátióne - that the concilium plébis may be
> convened to elect magistrates and to vote on its own
> procedures.
>
> Since this is a convention, it is impossible to say
> anything dogmatically about its scope; but it appears
> that the convention allows the concilium to legislate
> only concerning its own procedures, and not on other
> subjects of relevance to the plébs alone. That, at any
> rate, is what the léx Salicia says. So we can't take
> the argument "if a tribúnus plébis proposes
> legislation to the concilium plébis, we must assume
> that it is implicitly intended only to be relevant to
> the plébs and therefore only binding upon it,
> otherwise it would be illegal"; we would rather have
> to argue "if a tribúnus plébis proposes legislation to
> the concilium plébis, we must assume that it is
> implicitly intended to be legislation concerning the
> internal procedures of the concilium plébis, otherwise
> it would be illegal".
>
> But if we try to take that view in this case, we'll be
> stretching plausibility beyond its limit, for a
> statute about resignations can in now way be argued to
> be anything to do with the internal procedures of any
> assembly. So there is no way to use creative
> interpretation to save the legality of this proposal
> by narrowing its scope. It is not to do with either of
> the two things which the léx Salicia allows the
> concilium plébis to meet to consider, so it cannot but
> be illegal.
>
> This eliminates 3, but leaves us with 1 and 2. This
> choice is a wider problem in Nova Róma's law
> generally, and hasn't yet been satisfactorily
> resolved. One can argue "it was illegal for the
> tribúnus to propose it, but now that he has done so
> the concilium plébis may vote on it and enact it as
> binding legislation nonetheless, because there is
> nothing in any law which says that it may not do so";
> on the other hand one may argue "it was illegal for
> the tribúnus to propose it, and therefore any léx
> resulting from that illegal proposal will itself be
> illegal and therefore invalid". Both arguments have
> some sense in them. Common sense may appear to support
> the latter argument; Roman law and constitutional
> precedent supports the former. I tend to prefer to
> former, but others disagree.
>
> Anyway, this is all now academic. Interesting, though.
>
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!
> http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Salvete omnes -

Sounds interesting, Senator Audens.
If any are considering going to Mithracon, you may also want to
consider printing out and taking along some NR flyers and pamphlets.
Can't let a potential recruitment opportunity be wasted!

Valete
- S E M Troianus

On Jan 26, 2005, at 10:35 AM, MarcusAudens@... wrote:

>
> Ladies and Gentlemen;
>
> The subject event, while not a Nova Roma sponsored event, is one which
> is certainly of consideration to those who are interested in the
> different religions and cults of ancient Rome. It is a long-enduring
> event and was one of the first events offered in the Provinca Nova
> Britannica. The worship of Mithra was a popular one with the officers
> and men of the Legions, and it is believed in some quarters that this
> religion had a significant impact on ancient Christianity, in regard to
> the different aspects of the religion and the way the Religion was
> honored and celebrated.
>
> I therefore urge any within the Province who may be interested in
> Mithracism, ancient Roman Religions and cults, or just in an
> opportunity
> to meet others so interested for discussions and a good time to
> consider
> this offer.
>
> ------Cornicularius Cornelianus:---
>
> Would you please forward this message to the lady who we are awaiting a
> rely for her address to get her Roman name back for her? Also any
> citizens that may not be hooked into Nova Britannia weblist as yet, or
> who may need a bit more emphasis. I would certainly like to eliminate
> as much as possible the later cries of, "Ohhhhh, I wish I had
> known!!!!!!!!"
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Marcus Audens
>
> Command is a matter of wisdom, integrity, humanity, courage and
> dicipline.
>
> Sun Tzu -- "The Art of War"
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

A. Apollónius Cordus Ser. Equitió Trojánó amícó
omnibusque sal.

Hmm. Let me check that I've understood your
hypothetical correctly:

- A tribúnus plébis convenes the concilium plébis with
an initial agenda of an election and maybe a léx
concerning the internal procedures of the concilium
plébis;
- Later, after that initial call for the concilium
plébis to convene, an item of general legislation (not
specific to the procedures of the assembly) is added
to the agenda.

Is that right? So now one could argue as follows:

"The law says the tribúní can only convene the
plebeian assembly in order to do these certain things;
they have convened the assembly to do those certain
things. The law doesn't say that the assembly, having
been convened to do those certain things, can't then
also do other things while it's there; so any
legislation added to the agenda and then approved will
be valid."

Is that what you have in mind? Well, to begin with,
this argument is basically an attempt to exploit a
loophole (and I don't say that in a derogatory way -
some of the most important developments of Roman law
were the result of the creative exploitation of
loopholes), so we have to look carefully at the legal
language involved.

The léx Salicia says:

"The Tribuni Plebis shall always be allowed to call
the Comitia Plebis Tributa to order when the issues at
hand concern the internal operation of the Comitia
Plebis Tributa themselves, or to elect the plebeian
magistrates."

... and...

"In any other occasion, a Tribunus Plebis that wishes
to present his proposals to the People shall..." [use
the comitia populí tribúta].

We have to construe the first sentence carefully. The
most natural reading, I think, is this:

"The tribúní shall always be allowed to call the
concilium plébis when the issues at hand (i.e. the
issues to be voted upon) concern the internal
operation of the concilium; and the tribúní shall
always be allowed to call the concilium plébis in
order to elect the plebeian magistrates."

So the loophole-argument above, which depends on some
wording like "in order to" or "for the purpose of",
would work as long as the original reason for
convening the assembly was for an election; the first
part of the sentence, involving "when the issues at
hand", wouldn't cover it. The loophole-argument is
also helped by the use here of the word "call" rather
than "convene", because strictly speaking the assembly
"convenes" at the moment when it begins to vote, which
would be too late, whereas with "call" the argument
can still work.


Now, how could we refute this loophole-argument? Hmm,
hmmm. Let's try this:

Refutant: "The tribúní are only allowed to call the
plebeian assembly for an election or when the issues
to be voted upon concern the internal procedures of
the assembly."

Loophole-arguer: "Yes, but once the plebeian assembly
has been called in order to hold an election the
tribúnus can then add legislative items to its
agenda."

Refutant: "But nothing in written law permits
presiding magistrates to add items to the agenda of an
assembly after it has been called at all."

Loophole-arguer: "Ah, but there is a clear and
well-established convention which allows this to be
done."

Refutant: "This is true, but according to this
well-established convention, the way the magistrate
adds items to the agenda is by issuing an amended
version of the original edict which he issued to call
the assembly in the first place."

Loophole-arguer: "So?"

Refutant: "So the convention is to re-issue the edict
which calls the assembly, not to issue a supplementary
edict which changes the agenda. So the re-issued edict
is actually a second attempt to call the assembly. And
the law says the plebeian assembly can't be called to
legislate except on its own procedures."

Loophole-arguer: "But the tribúnus could get around
that by not re-issuing the call, but rather just
issuing an edict amending the agenda, as you
suggested."

Refutant: "But there's no law or convention which
allows him to do that."


I can't at the moment think of any way to escape from
the case being put forward by our refutant here, so
for now I'd be inclined to say that the
loophole-argument, ingenious though it be, doesn't
work. But perhaps someone can think of another way to
do it.

Not that I think we should try too hard to think of a
way around it, frankly, because the 10% rule is
clearly there for a good reason; but it's an
interesting exercise in abstract legal reasoning, and
as such it can't hurt.





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

Salve Cordus et salvete omnes -

On Jan 26, 2005, at 2:50 PM, A. Apollonius Cordus wrote:

Yes, loopholes can be interesting!
This is going to get frightfully long, but....
(Read *all* the way through - comments are inserted at odd moments!)
>
> A. Apollónius Cordus Ser. Equitió Trojánó amícó
> omnibusque sal.
>
> Hmm. Let me check that I've understood your
> hypothetical correctly:
>
> - A tribúnus plébis convenes the concilium plébis with
> an initial agenda of an election and maybe a léx
> concerning the internal procedures of the concilium
> plébis;
> - Later, after that initial call for the concilium
> plébis to convene, an item of general legislation (not
> specific to the procedures of the assembly) is added
> to the agenda.
>
> Is that right? So now one could argue as follows:

Pretty much what I was thinking, though I've come up with some variants.
>
> "The law says the tribúní can only convene the
> plebeian assembly in order to do these certain things;
> they have convened the assembly to do those certain
> things. The law doesn't say that the assembly, having
> been convened to do those certain things, can't then
> also do other things while it's there; so any
> legislation added to the agenda and then approved will
> be valid."
>
How about to do those certain things plus other things?

> Is that what you have in mind? Well, to begin with,
> this argument is basically an attempt to exploit a
> loophole (and I don't say that in a derogatory way -
> some of the most important developments of Roman law
> were the result of the creative exploitation of
> loopholes), so we have to look carefully at the legal
> language involved.
>
> The léx Salicia says:
>
> "The Tribuni Plebis shall always be allowed to call
> the Comitia Plebis Tributa to order when the issues at
> hand concern the internal operation of the Comitia
> Plebis Tributa themselves, or to elect the plebeian
> magistrates."

That's right: So long as either of those are on the Agenda, the Call is
allowed. Where does it say other things can't be on the Agenda?
- or -

Slightly different possible loophole - the Lex Salicia says "internal
operations"... "or"..."elect...magistrates", yet it's fairly obvious
that a call would be allowed to do both, correct? In which case, what
is meant is that either of these things in and of itself is sufficient
for a Call, so if there is another thing then that's all right too -
elect a Magistrate AND vote a procedure, so long as one of the required
items is part of the Agenda. So if either item is sufficient to allow
the Call, then why couldn't the other item be a piece of Legislation?
A required-for-Call item being present, the Call would be legal - the
Legislation would be improper, but if no Tribune vetoes it, then what?
If passed, would it hold?
>
> ... and...
>
> "In any other occasion, a Tribunus Plebis that wishes
> to present his proposals to the People shall..." [use
> the comitia populí tribúta].

Ah, yes - but the question remains if either of the permissible items
justifies the Call, then can other items be included in the Edict? It
isn't an "other occasion" since I'm stipulating that there is indeed a
Magistrate to be elected and perhaps internal items as well - those are
permissible "occasions" - merely with other business added as well.

Virtually all of our current Elections include both Magistrates and
Leges - nobody has ever claimed they must be split out as separate
"occasions". So why couldn't a Call be justified for permitted reasons
and Legislation be included? Again, I'll admit it would be improper,
but would it be illegal? Even if it was deemed unlawful, if the
Tribunes don't veto it then would it stand if passed?
>
> We have to construe the first sentence carefully. The
> most natural reading, I think, is this:
>
> "The tribúní shall always be allowed to call the
> concilium plébis when the issues at hand (i.e. the
> issues to be voted upon) concern the internal
> operation of the concilium; and the tribúní shall
> always be allowed to call the concilium plébis in
> order to elect the plebeian magistrates."
>
Exactly: Either of those items make for a valid Call. Where does it
say other things can't be considered at the same time?

> So the loophole-argument above, which depends on some
> wording like "in order to" or "for the purpose of",
> would work as long as the original reason for
> convening the assembly was for an election; the first
> part of the sentence, involving "when the issues at
> hand", wouldn't cover it. The loophole-argument is
> also helped by the use here of the word "call" rather
> than "convene", because strictly speaking the assembly
> "convenes" at the moment when it begins to vote, which
> would be too late, whereas with "call" the argument
> can still work.

Another variant:
What if the request for the Call included a whole raft of items,
starting with the election of a Magistrate and then moving on to a
whole slew of nit-picky "internal operations" that no one reads all the
way through, then ends with a piece of Legislation?

In this way there wouldn't be any need for a second Call. If the Call
is granted on the basis of careless reading, would the Legislative item
then proceed to a legal and binding vote?
>
>
> Now, how could we refute this loophole-argument? Hmm,
> hmmm. Let's try this:
>
> Refutant: "The tribúní are only allowed to call the
> plebeian assembly for an election or when the issues
> to be voted upon concern the internal procedures of
> the assembly."
>
> Loophole-arguer: "Yes, but once the plebeian assembly
> has been called in order to hold an election the
> tribúnus can then add legislative items to its
> agenda."
>
Skip that. I'm maintaining that the election itself makes it a valid
call, even if other items are included additionally.
No need for the amended Agenda bit, or the Second Call.

> Refutant: "But nothing in written law permits
> presiding magistrates to add items to the agenda of an
> assembly after it has been called at all."

Does anything specifically forbid it?
Also, what if - as I mentioned above - everything were included in the
original Call request but nobody caught it?
>
> Loophole-arguer: "Ah, but there is a clear and
> well-established convention which allows this to be
> done."
>
> Refutant: "This is true, but according to this
> well-established convention, the way the magistrate
> adds items to the agenda is by issuing an amended
> version of the original edict which he issued to call
> the assembly in the first place."
>
Another hypothetical (though unorthodox and even a bit sleazy): What if
the person requesting the Call asks everyone with the authority:
"Re-issue the Call, some language has had to be changed" then publishes
an amended version that includes Legislation as one of the items - if
the Second Call goes out (because the addition went unnoticed) would it
hold up?

> Loophole-arguer: "So?"
>
> Refutant: "So the convention is to re-issue the edict
> which calls the assembly, not to issue a supplementary
> edict which changes the agenda. So the re-issued edict
> is actually a second attempt to call the assembly. And
> the law says the plebeian assembly can't be called to
> legislate except on its own procedures."

Ah, but the Call I am stipulating *is* to do those things - they would
just be adding other things as well. I'm just not seeing anything that
strictly forbids multi-purpose Calls, only language that says
Legislative items (standing alone) must be put before everyone and that
the Plebes may be called if one or both specific items is included on
the Agenda - nothing that says *only* those things may be on the
Agenda, only language that says for a Call to be valid at least one of
those things must be on the Agenda. A fine point, but a point
nonetheless. Tiny, as loopholes go. I freely admit I could be wrong.
>
> Loophole-arguer: "But the tribúnus could get around
> that by not re-issuing the call, but rather just
> issuing an edict amending the agenda, as you
> suggested."

No need. The permissible items allow a Call; does anything
specifically forbid other items being on the same Agenda?
>
> Refutant: "But there's no law or convention which
> allows him to do that."
>
>
> I can't at the moment think of any way to escape from
> the case being put forward by our refutant here, so
> for now I'd be inclined to say that the
> loophole-argument, ingenious though it be, doesn't
> work. But perhaps someone can think of another way to
> do it.

Maybe. It's good mental exercise.
>
> Not that I think we should try too hard to think of a
> way around it, frankly, because the 10% rule is
> clearly there for a good reason; but it's an
> interesting exercise in abstract legal reasoning, and
> as such it can't hurt.

Oh, I agree - but it's the sort of mental exercise that leads to better
law writing in the future.
In truth, it's my opinion that proposed Laws should be put up months in
advance - or at least posted *somewhere* - so long and careful thought
can be given to possible ambiguities and loopholes.

As a Patrician whose vote would be disallowed by such exploitation, it
is a question that I feel should be thoroughly explored so any
potential loopholes could be closed by future Legislation.

Vale
- Troianus
>
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!
> http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

TRIBUNE P. MINIUS ALBUCIUS EDICT (n° 58-12)
ON THE CONVENING OF THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA
(Latin text available on demand)


I, Publius Minius Albucius, Tribune of the Plebs, by the authority
vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of Nova Roma,

In view of the Constitution of Nova Roma, specially its article
III.C., IV.7.d2 and IV.A.5,
In view of my Edict 58-9, 22 January 2005, on the convening of the
comitia plebis tributa,
In view of Lex Salicia de Tribunicia Comitiorum Convocatione, 26
nov. 2002,
In view of Lex Fabia de Ratione Comitiorum Populi Tributorum, 2 dec.
2003,
In view of the censorial message, 23 January 2005, giving
confirmation that patrician citizens are above 10 % of the total
amount of novaroman citizens, which allows the Tribunes of the Plebs
to call to order the comitia populi tributa,

Considering that the legal rules in Nova Roma ask that a matter
interesting all the People of Nova Roma shall be presented to the
comitia populi tributa,
Considering that the bills on « the aediles of the Plebs (Lex Minia
de aedilibus plebis) » and on
« the resignation of citizenship and of office (Lex Minia de
eiuratione civitatis officiorumque) » need the largest debate
through the appropriate places,
Considering the interest of a productive collaboration between the
magistrates of Nova Roma,


Edicts :


Article 1

The Comitia populi tributa are called to order.


Article 2

The schedule of this comitial session is the following one :

- debates (contio) :

. beginning on January 26, 2005, at 23 :59 Rome time ;
. ending on January 31, 2005, at 23 : 59 Rome time.

- vote :

. beginning on February 18, 2005, at 12 :01 Rome time ;
. ending on February 25, 2005, at 12 :01 Rome time.


Article 3

The agenda of this comitial session is the following one :


2. Adoption of two laws :

2.1. « Minian law on the aediles of the Plebs (Lex Minia de
aedilibus plebis) » whose draft
text is added below.

2.2. « Minian law on the resignation of citizenship and of office
(Lex Minia de eiuratione
civitatis officiorumque) » whose draft text is added below.


Article 4

The appropriate magistrates of Nova Roma and their departments are
responsible, as far as each one is concerned by the present edict,
for executing it. This edict which will be published in the
Tabularium of Nova Roma.


Issued in Caen, city of the Viducasses, France, this twenty sixth
day of January, 2005 C.E. (26 January 2758), during the consulate of
Fr. Apulus Caesar and Ga. Popillius Laenas


LAW TEXTS PROPOSED TO ADOPTION (cf article 3.2.1 above)


First text


MINIAN LAW ON THE AEDILES OF THE PLEBS
(LEX MINIA DE AEDILIBUS PLEBIS)


The comitia plebis tributa have adopted by XX votes
against YY with WW abstentions the following text.

Tribune P. Minius Albucius, as presiding magistrate,
promulgates the law in the following terms :


In view of article IV.A.5 of the Constitution of Nova
Roma which creates ordinary magistrates designated as
"Aediles of the Plebs" ;

In view of the Gryllan law on the securing of
magistrates of the Plebs (lex Grylla de securandis
magistratus plebis) of November 14,1999 ;

In view of the Arminian law on the duties of
Aediles of the Plebs (lex Arminia de officiis aedilium
plebis) of June 2, 2004 ;

In view of the Arminian law on the cursus honorum
(lex Arminia de cursu honorum) of June 2, 2004 ;

In view of the Fabian centuriate law (lex Fabia
centuriata) of December 2, 2003 ;

In view of the management and moderation of public
forums ;

In view of the need to specify the functions of these
Aediles in order best to implement the constitutional
rules which concern them ;

In view of the need to strengthen the coherence of the
institutions of the Plebs ;

Whereas a law may not restrict the dispositions
laid down by the Constitution of Nova Roma ;

It is disposed:


Article 1

In the present law, "aedility of the Plebs" means
either the office held by one or more Aediles of the
Plebs (hereinafter called also "Aediles"), or the institution
as a whole, whatever the number of Aediles of the Plebs
in office at a certain time.


Article 2

The Arminian law on the functions of the Aediles of
the Plebs (lex Arminia de officiis aedilium plebis) of
June 2, 2004 is abrogated and replaced by the present
law.

The Arminian law on the cursus honorum (lex
Arminia de cursu honorum) of June 2, 2004 is abrogated
and replaced by the present law.


Article 3

Citizens belonging to the order of the Plebs, and
thus called "plebeians", are the only ones
authorized to stand for the plebeian magistracies
defined by the Constitution of Nova Roma.


Article 4

The only plebeians authorized to stand for the
aedility of the Plebs are those who are able to prove
that they have served for at least one year as Tribune
of the Plebs, quaestor, curator, provincial governor,
or assistant (scribe) to an Aedile of the Plebs. In
the last office, the scribe must be serving at the date
when the comitia are convened for the election of one
or both Aediles of the Plebs.


Article 5

According to the Constitution, Aediles of the Plebs
are fully responsible for the following duties:

- the organization of public games and other festivals, events, and
gatherings ;
- the maintenance of order during public religious events ;
- the management of any public property that the State of Nova Roma
may acquire ;
- the administration of law.

By the present law, Aediles are also entrusted with the two
following duties :

- the management (also called in this special case "ownership") of
the public forums
of the comitia plebis tributa;

- the preservation of the whole legal corpus of Nova Roma, in force
or obsolete, which concerns the Plebs or which has been edicted or
promulgated by magistrates of the Plebs.

For these two duties, the Aediles are directed to maintain a close
collaboration with the Tribunes of the Plebs.


Article 6

Aediles of the Plebs shall exercise their functions
jointly. They may divide up, as they see fit, the
duties that they have to carry out, so as to render the
best public service to the citizens of Nova Roma.

When an election, in the appropriate and duly convened comitia, does
not succeed in filling an aedilician office and then creates a
prolonged vacancy of this office, the Aedile of the Plebs who is
alone in office shall take charge of all the tasks which are
ordinarily entrusted by constitution, laws,
edicts, &c. to both Aediles.


Article 7

According to article 5 above, the Aediles are
responsible for the organization of public games and
other festivals, events, and gatherings.

The public games whose organization is incumbent on
the Aediles of the Plebs are the games of Ceres and
the Plebeian games. Both events are acknowledged as
official games of the Republic of Nova Roma and shall
thus receive the support of all the institutions of
Nova Roma and the financial commitment of the State as
far as necessary.

Aediles of the Plebs shall appoint and organize, as
they see fit, the dates of the games, their length,
and their agenda.

The Aediles shall manage the budget of the games - if
there be one - and make expenditures and receipts
according to the rules defined by any relevant senatus
consultum. The treasury of Nova Roma will reimburse,
upon presentation of proofs of expenditure, all
expenses incurred by the Aediles from their own
pockets.

When the treasury of Nova Roma is asked by the Aediles
to participate in the organization, occurrence,
development, or financing of the games, the Aediles
must create a presentation file which contains :
- an estimated budget for each event, including
expenses and receipts provided for ;
- a summary presentation note accompanying this
budget ;
- any useful additional documents.

This file shall be sent to a Tribune of the Plebs, who
shall immediately convene the Senate, to examine these documents.
The Tribune shall pass this file to the Senate, and may add her /
his own comments.

The Senate shall approve or reject this file. A rejection forbids
the Aediles to organize the games, unless they do it without funds
from Nova Roma. An approval allows the games to be organized at the
expense of the treasury of Nova Roma as
set out in the file. The Senate shall modify, if necessary,
the general budget of Nova Roma in collaboration with the
consular quaestors.

The Aediles shall supervise these events with an eye
to their correct development, their morality, their
dignity, and their respect for the values of Nova
Roma. They shall maintain order at these events.

In case of default or prolonged vacancy of both
Aediles, the Tribunes of the Plebs shall act in
concert with the consuls to ensure that the games take
place. In this case, the curule Aediles may be invited
to take responsibility for the games, but may not be
compelled to do so.


Article 8

According to article 5 above, the Aediles are
responsible for the maintenance of order during public
religious events. They shall thus supervise these
events with an eye to their correct development, their
morality, their dignity, and their respect for the
values of Nova Roma.

The Aediles shall perform this duty in collaboration
with the priestly colleges and their delegates.

This task is to be performed within the limits set
down by the law of Nova Roma and by the laws to which It is
submitted.


Article 9

According to article 4 above, the Aediles are
responsible for the management of any public property
that the State of Nova Roma may acquire.

In the present law, the word "property" means any
personal property or real estate as defined by the law
of Nova Roma or, in the absence of any relevant law of
Nova Roma, as defined by the macronational legal rules of the
place where the property is duly registered.

In the present law, the word "public" signifies
any property, as defined above, acquired by Nova Roma
according to its law, whatever its use.

All public property entrusted to the Aediles is
considered to have been acquired according to the
macronational law of the country where the property is
located or where the contract took place by which Nova
Roma acquired the property.

Any Aedile who suspects that any public property
entrusted to him has been acquired irregularly, as set
out in the paragraph above, may issue a note in which
she / he officially exempts herself / himself from
responsibility, considering the facts which have come
to her / his knowledge.

The Aediles shall present every year to the Senate a
report on the management of the public property
entrusted to them. This report, before it is presented
to the Senate, shall be sent to the Tribunes of the
Plebs and to the consuls, who may add their own
comments. These comments shall be communicated to the
Senate together with the report. The Tribunes of the
Plebs shall convene the Senate for this purpose.

"The Senate shall ratify or reject this report. A
rejection exempts the State from responsibility for
the Aediles' management, and the Aediles must take
responsibility under the law of Nova Roma and any
relevant macronational law."

Exceptionally, even if the term of the Aediles' annual
mandate has been reached, their term may be extended
until their modified report has been approved by the
Senate. This extension is solely to allow the Aediles
to modify the report, and shall not prevent the newly
elected Aediles from entering office and taking up
their duties.


Article 10

According to article 5 above, the Aediles are
responsible for the administration of law.

This responsibility is held concurrently with the
responsibility of other magistrates who have the same
responsibility.


Article 11

According to article 5 above, the Aediles are
responsible for the management (also called in this
special case "ownership") of the public forums of the
comitia plebis tributa.

They shall supervise these forums with an eye to good
behaviour, dignity, and respect for civil rights and
for the values of Nova Roma.

They shall comply with any request by a presiding Tribune of the
Plebs to issue a communication in these forums.

The management of the comitia plebis tributa is the responsibility
of the Tribunes of the Plebs.


Article 12

According to article 5 above, the Aediles are
responsible for the preservation of the whole legal corpus
of Nova Roma, in force or obsolete, which concerns the Plebs or
which has been edicted or promulgated by magistrates of
the Plebs.

This provision concerns obsolete law as well as
current law and does not limit the way in which the
law is compiled (whether individually, by type, in a
codex, &c.)

This duty is to be performed in close collaboration
with the Tribunes of the Plebs.

The Aediles shall comply, within these limits, with
every instruction by a Tribune of the Plebs as well as
with every request by a Tribune of the Plebs for a new
or forgotten document, support or rule, to be inserted.
The Aediles shall communicate to the Tribunes of the Plebs,
on request, all information contained within the collections which
they manage.

In addition to the duty of conserving the plebeian legal corpus,
the Aediles shall take care to provide the citizens of Nova Roma
with the best possible public service by means of access to the
collections which they manage.


Article 13

In order to perform their duties, the Aediles of the
Plebs shall organize their staffs as they see fit.
Like the other magistrates dealt with by the
Constitution of Nova Roma, they may issue edicts,
appoint assistants (scribes) to whom they may delegate
their powers as limited by legal rules, create discussion
forums (also called "lists") whose membership may be,
at their discretion, either public or restricted to
administrative and managerial communication within the
Aediles' staffs.


Article 14

An Aedile of the Plebs may also be a senator under
the conditions set out in the Arminian senatorial
law (lex Arminia senatoria) of June 2, 2004, but shall not, as any
magistrate or office holder defined by the paragraph IV.A. of the
Constitution of Nova Roma, hold at the same time another office
defined in this paragraph.


Article 15

The part of paragraph II.B.1 of the Fabian centuriate
law (lex Fabia centuriata) of December 2, 2003 which
concerns the Aediles of the Plebs is replaced by the following
paragraph :

« II.B.1. MAGISTRATI ORDINARII
If a magistrate only serves part of his term as a suffectus or
resigns his/her office while in office, Past Service points will be
awarded partially. This will be based on two-month increments
rounding down. Current Service points will be awarded for the period
remaining, also based on two-month increments rounding down.
Censor:
30 CP
15 CP (past service)

Consul:
30 CP
15 CP (past service)

Praetor and Tribunus Plebis:
20 CP
10 CP (past service)

Aedilis curulis or plebis
14 CP
7 CP (past service)

Quaestor and Vigintisexvir:
10 CP
5 CP (past service) »



The present law shall be executed as a law of
the Republic of Nova Roma.


Issued in Roma, on [month] [day], 2005/2758 a.u.c.
during the consulate of Fr. Apulus Caesar and Ga. Popillius Laenas

The presiding magistrate,
P. Minius Albucius
Tribune of the Plebs



Second text


MINIAN LAW ON THE RESIGNATION OF CITIZENSHIP AND OF OFFICE
(LEX MINIA DE EIURATIONE CIVITATIS OFFICIORUMQUE)


The comitia plebis tributa have adopted by XX votes
against YY with WW abstentions the following text.

Tribune P. Minius Albucius, as presiding magistrate,
promulgates the law in the following terms:


In view of the Constitution of Nova Roma, specifically
its paragraph II.A.4 ;

In view of the Cornelian Marian law on the
resignation of citizenship (lex Cornelia Maria de
civitate eiuranda) of May 20, 2001 specifically its
first and second paragraphs ;

In view of the need to clarify the conditions of
resignation of citizenship and of office in Nova Roma ;


It is disposed :



Article 1

The first (I) and second (II) paragraphs of the
Cornelian Marian law on the resignation of
citizenship (lex Cornelia Maria de civitate eiuranda)
of May 20, 2001are replaced by the following ones :

« I. Resignation of citizenship from Nova Roma, as
stated in paragraph II.A.4 of the constitution of Nova
Roma, is made either by notification to the censors, or
by a message posted to an official Nova Roma e-mail
list or electronic message board.

The information then communicated must make clear, from
the citizen willing to resign of her/his novaroman citizenship,
her/his clear intent to do it.

If the citizen specifies a future date from which her / his
resignation shall become effective, the following rules will apply :

a) if this date is more than eight (8) days after the
day when the notification is sent, the resignation
will be effective from this date specified ;

b) if this date is fewer than eight (8) days after the
day when the notification is sent, the resignation
will be effective from the ninth day after the day
when the notification is sent, regardless of the date
specified.

If the citizen does not specify a date for her / his
resignation, the resignation becomes effective on the
ninth day after the day when the notification is sent.

This eight day period is called, for the purpose of the
present law, « the nundinum ».

The resignation may be published through a message
posted either to the e-mail "Main List" of Nova Roma,
or to another official e-mail list or electronic message
board of Nova Roma.

A message of resignation posted to the e-mail "Main
List" of Nova Roma is considered, because of the large
membership of this list, to be communicated to many
citizens. Accordingly, the nundinum shall begin
immediately from the registered posting date of the
resignation message.

If a message of resignation is posted to another
official e-mail list or electronic message board, the
nundinum shall begin as soon as the message has been
followed, in the chronological list of the messages
sent to the list or board in question, by at least
three messages posted by three different citizens.

A resignation communicated verbally or in writing to
the censors must be published by them on the "Main
List" of Nova Roma no more than 18 hours after they
received it. In doing so, the censors shall also state
the date and hour when they received the resignation,
and the nundinum shall begin from this date and hour.

In the present law :

- "date" and "day" mean the calendar date of the
action in question and its hour, if the hour is known ;

- periods of time, as for example the nundinum, are to
be counted from the date and hour in question.


« II. The nundinum allows the resigning citizen to
withdraw his or her resignation. During it, the
resigning citizen keeps all her / his rights of citizenship.
When the nundinum ends, the person in question
automatically loses her / his citizenship if she / he has not
previously withdrawn her / hisresignation.

The citizen in question may, during the nundinum,
freely withdraw her / his resignation without penalty, except
as defined in the third paragraph of this law.
This withdrawal must take the form of a message posted to the e-
mail "Main List" of Nova Roma making clear the decision of the
citizen to withdraw her / his former resignation.
The subject of this message, written in capital letters, must be :
"RESIGNATION WITHDRAWAL". A citizen who does not
follow these formal rules is considered not to have withdrawn her /
his resignation.

During the nundinum, a citizen who has declared her / his
resignation also keeps all her / his duties toward the Res publica.
Thus a citizen who holds at that time one or more public office(s),
honour(s), or distinction(s) shall retain this (these) and continue
to perform her / his duties as normal.

A citizen who does not perform her / his public duties
during the nundinum shall receive, during this period
or after its end, if the citizen in question is still in default, an
admonition. This admonition shall be issued by edict by her / his
magistrate if the citizen is an apparitor, or, in the case of other
positions provided for by the constitution of Nova Roma, by one of
the censors or, if the citizen in question holds a
collegial magistracy (one which she / he holds with at least one
other citizen), by one of her / his colleagues.

A citizen who withdraws her / his resignation as provided by this
law but who receives such an admonition must request authorization
to resume office. Authorization may only be granted by the agreement
of both censors together with all the
citizen's colleagues in office.

If any one of these magistrates does not agree to give
authorization, the citizen in question is considered to have
resigned her / his office. This authorization must be issued by
edict within eight days from the request of the citizen.
If no authorization is given within these eight days, the request is
considered to have been rejected, and the citizen in question is
considered to have resigned her / his office.

If by the means mentioned in the present law a citizen is considered
to have resigned her / his office, an election to fill the vacancy
thus created shall be organized as soon as
possible by the appropriate magistrates. »


The present law shall be executed as a law of
the Republic of Nova Roma.


Issued in Roma, on [month] [day], 2005/2758 a.u.c.
during the consulate of Fr. Apulus Caesar and Ga. Popillius Laenas

The presiding magistrate,
P. Minius Albucius
Tribune of the Plebs

Salvete Quirites, et salve Publi Mini Albuci,

Publius Minius Albucius <albucius_aoe@...> writes:

> TRIBUNE P. MINIUS ALBUCIUS EDICT (n° 58-12)
> ON THE CONVENING OF THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA

[snip]

First of all, Tribune Minius, I want to assure you that since you've come into
office I have a generally positive impression of you and great hope for your
year as tribune. I think you're a good citizen and a generally thoughtful
person.

That said, these two proposed laws are just awful. I feel certain you have
the best of intentions at heart, but these things are full of overly
complicated requirements, ill-considered changes to current practice, and
unnecessary change for - as far as I can tell - the sake only of change. If
anyone wishes my detailed analysis I can provide it, though I can save us all
a lot of time by simply refering to A. Apollonius Cordus' masterful analyses
posted yesterday.

I shall be voting against both of these and I urge all citizens to do
likewise. These proposed changes would not serve our Republic well.

Valete Quirites,

-- Marinus

Sakvete Quirites;
do the plebes wish me to discuss this with the other Tribunes? I
can if it is what you all want.
bene valete
M. Hortensia Maior TRP

Propraetrix Hiberniae
caput Officina Iuriis
et Investigatio CFQ

> That said, these two proposed laws are just awful. I feel certain

you have

> the best of intentions at heart, but these things are full of overly
> complicated requirements, ill-considered changes to current

practice, and

> unnecessary change for - as far as I can tell - the sake only of

change. If

> anyone wishes my detailed analysis I can provide it, though I can

save us all

> a lot of time by simply refering to A. Apollonius Cordus' masterful

analyses

> posted yesterday.
>

The vote cast with tracking code 5527 is damaged (missing one or more
entries.) Quirites, please check your tracking code, and re-cast your
vote if necessary.


Caius Minucius Scaevola
Diribitor
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

The vote cast with tracking code 5585 is damaged (missing one or more
entries.) Quirites, please check your tracking codes and re-cast your
vote if necessary.


Caius Minucius Scaevola
Diribitor
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

P. Minius Albucius Gn. Equitio Marino s.d.

S.V.G.E.R.


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Gnaeus Equitius Marinus
<gawne@c...> wrote:

>
> That said, these two proposed laws are just awful.

I consider this appreciation of a sign of acknowlegment, from the
master you are.

>If anyone wishes my detailed analysis I can provide it, though I

can save us all

> a lot of time by simply refering to A. Apollonius Cordus'

masterful analyses

> posted yesterday.

Yes, I have seen that many useful contributions have been posted.
That is precisely the intent of this convening : to let everyone
work on the matters. As I told to many people, I am open to discuss
even if, as yourself, I have my convictions.

> I shall be voting against both of these and I urge all citizens to
>do likewise. These proposed changes would not serve our Republic
>well.

I do not understand very much your position : what kind of emergency
is it ? We are not in a western, are we ? Let us discuss, as adults
can do, and let us see where we can go *together*.

Vale,

PMA

P. Minius Albucius Ma. Hortensiae Maiori s.d.

S.V.G.E.R.

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@y...> wrote:
>
> Sakvete Quirites;
> do the plebes wish me to discuss this with the other Tribunes?
I can if it is what you all want.


As a Plebeian, I will Madam. As I told you in a private post, let us
discuss (see my answer to Hon. Censor Marinus).

So let us discuss *all together*.

Vale,

PMA

P. Minius Albucius Qu. Cassio Calvo s.d.

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

(..)

> If at that time the situation has not been resolved by either
> the withdrawing of the Intercesso by Domitius Constantinus Fuscus
> or if by a vote of the majority of the Tribunes of the Plebs the
> intercesso is denied then the Cista will >>>not<<< open until such
> time as the situation is resolved to allow it to open.

Thanks first for the closeness of your behavior, as the cista
responsible.

You should have seen that I had convened the comitia Populi. A cista
is coming, so.

For the comitia *plebis*, I respectfully let Hon. Fuscus, who has
the idea of the intercessio, to solve this problem.

Optime vale,

Tb PMA

M. Hortensia Maior P. Minio Albucio spd;
Well just withdraw it. There is no fire and we just had a vote.
You can submit it with other laws the other tribs are writing so
we're not constantly asking the Quirites to vote. That is tiresome
and on top of it, it's a lot of work for Calvus the webmaster and the
rogators.
Then, discuss it with some seasoned cives who know the culture of
NR plus good law writers and redraft.
bene vale
M. Hortensia Maior TRP

> As a Plebeian, I will Madam. As I told you in a private post, let

us

> discuss (see my answer to Hon. Censor Marinus).
>
> So let us discuss *all together*.
>
> Vale,
>
> PMA

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Publius Minius Albucius"
<albucius_aoe@h...> wrote:

>
> P. Minius Albucius Qu. Cassio Calvo s.d.
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "quintuscassiuscalvus"
> <richmal@c...> wrote:

<snip>

>
> For the comitia *plebis*, I respectfully let Hon. Fuscus, who has
> the idea of the intercessio, to solve this problem.
>
> Optime vale,
>
> Tb PMA

Salve,

Thanks for your answer. However there is still the matter of being
shy one Plebian Aedile which only the Comitia Plebis Tributa can
elect.

Vale,

Q. Cassius Calvus

Salvete,

We're both (my husband and I) applying to join Nova Roma, and due to the
'familia' rule of the 18-year age gap, will very likely form our own
familia. We have recently joined the mail-list and have been reading the
emails that have come in. Since we are very new we would appreciate
clarification on some matters.

What is the intent of the organisation for the next five to fifteen years?
If land acquisition and the creation of a roman-style community is the
intent, how are funds to be raised and how will the community operate
within the established rules, regulations and by-laws of the 'real-world'
government of the region?

Also I would like to know if there are regional mail-lists (we are
geographically located in Australia) and if there are local events and
get-togethers happening with the Australian Nova-Roma members?

Valete.
Aurelia <gens> Aquilia (name yet to be approved)

Salvete,
Although, I'm unequipped to answer all of your questions I think I can give you a good start. On the Nova Roma main page you'll find all the information you've requested. Just explore through everything. You'll find info on the land that has been acquired, taxes, laws within and without Nova Roma, and all sorts of legal documentation. It is a fairly friendly site that is easy to maneuver through. You will also find what province you live in.
I am sure that someone else will answer this and supply you with all the information that you have requested. You might also want to join the mail list 'New Roman'. It is a bit less hectic than the main list and was created as a means to help with the introduction of new citizens.
I welcome you both to Nova Roma.
Servia Iulia Caesaris Metelliana

----- Original Message -----
From: F & R Parkyn
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 10:18 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] A couple of questions from two prospective citizens



Salvete,

We're both (my husband and I) applying to join Nova Roma, and due to the
'familia' rule of the 18-year age gap, will very likely form our own
familia. We have recently joined the mail-list and have been reading the
emails that have come in. Since we are very new we would appreciate
clarification on some matters.

What is the intent of the organisation for the next five to fifteen years?
If land acquisition and the creation of a roman-style community is the
intent, how are funds to be raised and how will the community operate
within the established rules, regulations and by-laws of the 'real-world'
government of the region?

Also I would like to know if there are regional mail-lists (we are
geographically located in Australia) and if there are local events and
get-togethers happening with the Australian Nova-Roma members?

Valete.
Aurelia <gens> Aquilia (name yet to be approved)







------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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]

P. Minius Albucius Hortensiae s.d.

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@y...> wrote:
>
> M. Hortensia Maior P. Minio Albucio spd;
> Well just withdraw it. There is no fire and we just had a
vote.

Which vote ?

> You can submit it with other laws the other tribs are writing

I have asked my fellow tribunes for an *organization* of our work
since the beginning of January. I am still waiting for proposals.
I am just aware of a will that Tribune Fuscus expressed to propose
four or some general laws to include the whole NR legislation.
So, are you writing some other texts ? Who next ?

>so we're not constantly asking the Quirites to vote.

I prefer trying improving problems through a democratic debate
instead of using intercessio. I have no intention convening the
comitia next, after this session. Will you ?

>That is tiresome and on top of it, it's a lot of work for Calvus
>the webmaster and the rogators.

Yes, as it is (tiresome) for me asking for collaboration and
proposals and waiting for them several weeks long.

> Then, discuss it with some seasoned cives

Which season ? Would I ask the frozen/winter ones or the summer/hot
cives ?

>who know the culture of NR

I am not sure to understand what you mean. The culture of Nova Roma
is, in large part, what each of us brings to it. By definition, it
is thus moving and depends from each point of view.

>plus good law writers and redraft.

This is my proposal.

Vale,

PMA

P. Minius Albucius Qu. Cassio Calvo s.d.

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

>(..) there is still the matter of being shy one Plebian Aedile
> which only the Comitia Plebis Tributa can elect.

I do know it and am not pleased with the situation created by Fuscus
intercessio. I have the feeling that "the baby has been thrown away
with the water of the bath" and am wondering if people realized that
this was a waste of time (because it was possible to let the
concilium plebis take place, then, to add a comitia populi session,
as I had intended to do. But anyway...

For your information, I have written to Aedile Serapio and candidate
Cicero to have their mind upon this.

Keep in touch.

Optime vale Magistrati,


Tb PMA

Salve Aurelia Aquilia,

Welcome to Nova Roma.

F & R Parkyn <frpark@...> writes:

> What is the intent of the organisation for the next five to fifteen years?

It's hard to project out to fifteen years, but I'll try. Working from the set
of priorities adopted by the Senate last year I'd say that over the course of
the next 5 to 15 years Nova Roma will be

-- Building up the religious community of the Religio Romana, including the
development of rites and rituals based on historic research.

-- Continuing to develop our processes for interacting with each other

-- Promoting more local and regional activities

-- Establishing an endowment for long term financial growth

-- Developing ourselves as a social and educational organization

> If land acquisition and the creation of a roman-style community is the
> intent,

Acquisition of land is a long term goal, though it's not intended as a place
where a lot of people would live together. We anticipate that Nova Romans
will continue to be distributed all over the world.

> how are funds to be raised

Right now we have voluntary donations. There's a group of citizens called the
Centum Group who've each donated at least $100.00 USD to Nova Roma during the
past year. We also have a voluntary 'tax' though it is quite low, and really
only covers ongoing expenses.

> Also I would like to know if there are regional mail-lists

There are. I'm sending a copy of this message to Gaius Sentius Bruttius Sura,
the propraetor for Australia. He should be able to get you in touch with
other Nova Romans in Australia.

Vale,

-- Marinus

Salve Publi Mini Albuci, et salvete quirites,

Publius Minius Albucius <albucius_aoe@...> writes:

[about the comments made so far with respect to his law proposals]

> Yes, I have seen that many useful contributions have been posted.
> That is precisely the intent of this convening : to let everyone
> work on the matters. As I told to many people, I am open to discuss
> even if, as yourself, I have my convictions.

If you'd like to discuss and refine these law proposals of yours, I suggest
that we move that focused discussion to somewhere like the NovaRomaLaws
mailing list. The traffic here on this list is already quite high, and for
those people who aren't especially interested in legislation it's an
imposition to be filling their e-mail with dozens of messages discussing
specific points of law.

Vale, et valete,

-- Marinus

Salve Romans FYI



The University of Cincinnati Classics Department is pleased to announce the Summer Residency Program. Summer Residents, in the fields of philology, history and archaeology will come to Cincinnati for a minimum of one month and a maximum of three during the summer (June 15 - September 15). Apart from residence in Cincinnati during term, the only obligation of Summer Fellows is to pursue their own research. They will receive free university housing. They will also receive office space and enjoy the use of the University of Cincinnati and Hebrew Union College Libraries.

The University of Cincinnati Burnam Classics Library (http://www.libraries.uc.edu/libraries/classics/index.html<http://www.libraries.uc.edu/libraries/classics/index.html>) is one of the world's premier collections in the field of Classical Studies. Comprising 210,000 volumes and other research materials, the library covers all aspects of the Classics: the languages and literatures, history, civilization, art, and archaeology. Of special value for scholars is both the richness of the collection and its accessibility -- almost any avenue of research in the classics can be pursued deeply and broadly under a single roof. The unusually comprehensive core collection, which is maintained by three professional classicist librarians, is augmented by several special collections such as 15,000 nineteenth century German Programmschriften, extensive holdings in Palaeography, Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies. At neighboring Hebrew Union College, the Klau Library (http://library.cn.huc.edu/<http://library.cn.huc.edu/>), with holdings in excess of 445,000 volumes and other research materials, is rich in Judaica and Near Eastern Studies.

Application Deadline: February 15. Applicants must have the Ph.D. in hand at the time of application.

For application forms please write:

Director, Summer Residency Program
Department of Classics
University of Cincinnati
Cincinnati, OH 45221-0226

There is an online application for the Summer Residency Program at http://classics.uc.edu/resources/tytus2.html<http://classics.uc.edu/resources/tytus2.html> .

e-mail: secretary@...<mailto:secretary@...>
http://classics.uc.edu/tytus<http://classics.uc.edu/tytus>

.. seen on various lists

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus




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

P. Minius Albucius Gn. Equitio Marino s.d.

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Gnaeus Equitius Marinus
<gawne@c...> wrote:

(..)

> If you'd like to discuss and refine these law proposals of yours,

I suggest

> that we move that focused discussion to somewhere like the

NovaRomaLaws

> mailing list. The traffic here on this list is already quite

high, and for

> those people who aren't especially interested in legislation it's

an

> imposition to be filling their e-mail with dozens of messages

discussing

> specific points of law.

Yes, I naturally agree.

PMA

> That said, these two proposed laws are just awful. I feel certain

you have

> the best of intentions at heart, but these things are full of overly
> complicated requirements, ill-considered changes to current

practice, and

> unnecessary change for - as far as I can tell - the sake only of

change. If

> anyone wishes my detailed analysis I can provide it, though I can

save us all

> a lot of time by simply refering to A. Apollonius Cordus' masterful

analyses

> posted yesterday.
>
> I shall be voting against both of these and I urge all citizens to do
> likewise. These proposed changes would not serve our Republic well.
>

Salvete Quirites,

With all due respect to Tribune Albucius, I must agree with Censor
Marinus.

I continue all to urge all of our cives to vote "No" for the reason
the censor lists.

Valete,

G. Popillius Laenas
Consul

Salvete Quirites,

Publius Minius Albucius <albucius_aoe@...> writes:

>
>
> P. Minius Albucius Qu. Cassio Calvo s.d.
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "quintuscassiuscalvus"
> <richmal@c...> wrote:
>
> >(..) there is still the matter of being shy one Plebian Aedile
> > which only the Comitia Plebis Tributa can elect.
>
> I do know it

I recommend removing the proposed laws from the agenda of the Comitia Plebis
Tributa so that the vote on the Plebeian Aedile may proceed. From what I can
tell the law proposals were the issue causing the problems. Since they've now
been moved to a separate contio for the entire Comitia Populi Tributa it seems
to me that they can properly be removed from the agenda presented to the
Plebeians and the election for Plebeian Aedile could then proceed.

Valete Quirites,

-- Marinus

Gaius Popillius Laenas Consul Aureli Aquili salutem dicit.

(That is supposed to say, "Consul Gaius Popillius Laenas sends
greetings to the family Aurelia Aquilia" - many of us are still
learning very basic Latin, myself included ;-)

> We're both (my husband and I) applying to join Nova Roma, and due to the
> 'familia' rule of the 18-year age gap, will very likely form our own
> familia. We have recently joined the mail-list and have been reading the
> emails that have come in. Since we are very new we would appreciate
> clarification on some matters.

Laenas: Welcome!

> What is the intent of the organisation for the next five to fifteen

years?

> If land acquisition and the creation of a roman-style community is the
> intent, how are funds to be raised and how will the community operate
> within the established rules, regulations and by-laws of the

'real-world'

> government of the region?

Laenas: We have already acquired a small plot of land. The
acquisition of enough to locate a Froum and a central place for
worship of the Roman Gods remains a goal of Nova Roma, albeit a very
long term one. The fund raising and working within macronational
restricitons that you mention are major obstacles we would have to
overcome.

Our overall goal is the continued promotion of Romanitas in the world,
especially the Religio Romana.

As Servia Iulia pointed out I would also recommend a through read of
our web site. You might find the information in our annals interesting:

http://www.novaroma.org/annales/

Also, the info for newer cives here:

http://www.novaroma.org/newcitizens/

> Also I would like to know if there are regional mail-lists (we are
> geographically located in Australia) and if there are local events and
> get-togethers happening with the Australian Nova-Roma members?

Laenas: As to mailing lists, you have already found our "Mail List"
as we call it. It would probably be better named "The Forum". You
will find a varitey of topics discussed here, however, it is our
primary venue for discussing Nova Roma politics and related issues and
sometimes the discussions become heated. Some cives are put off by
these heated discussions.

At a minimum, you should subscribe to the "Announce List":

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NovaRoma-Announce/?yguid=68807234

This is a low volume list for Official announcements. Subscribing
should ensure you would miss anything important.

Some enjoy the informal discussions, kidding around and hanging out
can be found the "Back Alley":

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BackAlley/?yguid=68807234

Warning: This list is not an official part of Nova Roma in any way and
it is completely uncensored.

A search of Yahoo groups for "Nova Roma" or "Nova-Roma" will return a
number of other lists (approximately 90) for many differing interests.

I hope you enjoy your Nova Roma experience. If you have nay further
questions, please do not hesitiate to contact me directly.

Vale (that is: "Be well"),

Gaius Popillius Laenas
Consul

Ladies and Gentlemen of Nova Roma:

I am most pleased to present the subject publication for your enjoyment.
This publication is brought to you by the generosity of Censor Caeso
Quitillianus -- Publisher, Owner, and Chief Editor, the members of the
"Roman Times" staff and contributing authors.

The URL is:

http://livinghistoryengineer.com/roman/RomanTimesQuarterly/index.htm

Please enjoy and feel free to contribute to the Quarterly as you may
wish to.

Very Respectfully;

Marcus Minucius-Tiberius Audens -- Editor Commetarium (Brevis) -- Nova
Roma


Wishing you all the best, with Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!

I made that proposal during the women/religio tirade a
while back and my head nearly wound up in the forum.
Lengthy, arguementive threads- not good on the ML.
--- albucius_aoe@...
<albucius_aoe@...> wrote:

>
>
>
> P. Minius Albucius Gn. Equitio Marino s.d.
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Gnaeus Equitius

Marinus

> <gawne@c...> wrote:
>
> (..)
> > If you'd like to discuss and refine these law

proposals of yours,

> I suggest
> > that we move that focused discussion to somewhere

like the

> NovaRomaLaws
> > mailing list. The traffic here on this list is

already quite

> high, and for
> > those people who aren't especially interested in

legislation it's

> an
> > imposition to be filling their e-mail with dozens

of messages

> discussing
> > specific points of law.
>
>
> Yes, I naturally agree.
>
> PMA
>
>
>
>

=====
S P Q R

Fidelis Ad Mortem.

Marcvs Flavivs Fides
Roman Citizen





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
All your favorites on one personal page � Try My Yahoo!
http://my.yahoo.com

OSD G. Equitius Cato

Salvete omnes!

It has occurred to me that there might be some use for a List for
Christians within our res publica, and actually anybody interested in
the subject, to discuss ways in which we can learn from and offer
support to our fellow citizens who practice the religio. The List
will be STRICTLY moderated; I am interested in finding a practitioner
who is willing to co-moderate with me (for balance), but the purpose
of the List is really for Christians to find some common ground
amongst each other, and then with our non-Christian citizens; the
purpose is absolutely NOT to engage in any type of religio-bashing,
Christianity-bashing, or evangelization of any kind. It is strictly
for discussion and education.

The link is here:

NR_Christians@yahoogroups.com

I look forward to meeting some of you there.

Valete optimae,

Cato

OOPS here's the link:

NR_Christians-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

I've just joined it! As an ex-Christian, I wanna know the role that played
the religion in Empire decadence.


Valete Optime,

Qvintvs Fabivs Valerivs Maximvs Allectvs
Civis NovaRomanus - http://www.novaroma.org
Tirone Legio I Italica - Villadose (RO) - http://www.legio-i-italica.it



-------Messaggio originale-------

Da: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Data: 01/28/05 01:51:09
A: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Oggetto: [Nova-Roma] New List


OSD G. Equitius Cato

Salvete omnes!

It has occurred to me that there might be some use for a List for
Christians within our res publica, and actually anybody interested in
the subject, to discuss ways in which we can learn from and offer
support to our fellow citizens who practice the religio. The List
will be STRICTLY moderated; I am interested in finding a practitioner
who is willing to co-moderate with me (for balance), but the purpose
of the List is really for Christians to find some common ground
amongst each other, and then with our non-Christian citizens; the
purpose is absolutely NOT to engage in any type of religio-bashing,
Christianity-bashing, or evangelization of any kind. It is strictly
for discussion and education.

The link is here:

NR_Christians@yahoogroups.com

I look forward to meeting some of you there.

Valete optimae,

Cato





------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Has someone you know been affected by illness or disease?
Network for Good is THE place to support health awareness efforts!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/rkgkPB/UOnJAA/Zx0JAA/wWQplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->


Yahoo! Groups Links







.

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

Q. Caecilius Metellus Postumianus QSPD

Salvete,

First, let me apologize for the late posting of this message. I've been
buried under work between Latin, Greek, and English, as well as a few
personal issues and the business of counting votes, so I was unable to
complete this post before I intended to send it. But anyhow, as there
seemed to be some demand to have the calendar for an entire month published
ahead, I include below the calendar for the month of February. That being
so, for those who are not interested, I apologize for the long posting.

=====
Monday, January 24; a.d. IX Kal. Feb.; Nun[dinae]; F[astus]; Sementiva
Telluris

Tuesday, January 25; a.d. VIII Kal. Feb.; C[omitialis].

Wednesday, January 26; a.d. VII Kal. Feb.; C.

Thursday, January 27; a.d. VI Kal. Feb.; C; Commeration of the Dedication of
the Temple of Castor and Pollux.

Friday, January 28; a.d. V Kal. Feb.; C.

Saturday, January 29; a.d. IV Kal. Feb.; C.

Sunday, January 30; a.d. III Kal. Feb.; C.

Monday, January 31; pr. Kal. Feb.; C.

Tuesday, February 1; Kal. Feb.; Nun; F.

Wednesday, February 2; a.d. IV Non. Feb.; N[efastus]; Ater

Thursday, February 3; a.d. III Non. Feb.; N.

Friday, February 4; pr. Non. Feb; N.

Saturday, February 5; Non. Feb.; N.

Sunday, February 6; a.d. VIII Id. Feb.; N; Ater.

Monday, February 7; a.d. VII Id. Feb.; N.

Tuesday, February 8; a.d. VI Id. Feb.; N

Wednesday, February 9; a.d. V Id. Feb.; Nun.; F.

Thursday, February 10; a.d. IV Id. Feb.; N.

Friday, February 11; a.d. III Id. Feb.; N

Saturday, February 12; pr. Id. Feb.; N

Sunday, February 13; Id. Feb.; N[efastus ]P[ublicus]; Religiosus

Monday, February 14; a.d. XVI Kal. Mar.; N; Ater.

Tuesday, February 15; a.d. XV Kal. Mar.; NP; Religiosus; Lupercalia

Wednesday, February 16; a.d. XIV Kal. Mar.; EN[dotercisus]

Thursday, Feburary 17; a.d. XIII Kal. Mar.; Nun.; NP; Religiosus; Quirinalia

Friday, Feburary 18; a.d. XII Kal. Mar.; C; Religiosus

Saturday, February 19; a.d. XI Kal. Mar.; C; Religiosus

Sunday, February 20; a.d. X Kal. Mar.; C; Religiosus

Monday, February 21; a.d. IX Kal. Mar.; F; Religiosus; Feralia

Tuesday, February 22; a.d. VIII Kal. Mar.; C

Wednesday, February 23; a.d. VII Kal. Mar.; NP; Terminalia

Thursday, February 24; a.d. VI Kal. Mar.; N; Regifugium

Friday, February 25; a.d. V Kal. Mar.; Nun.; F

Saturday, February 26; a.d. IV Kal. Mar.; EN

Sunday, February 27; a.d. III Kal. Mar.; NP; Equirria

Monday, February 28; pr. Kal. Mar.; C


Optime Valete,

Quintus Caecilius Metellus

Avete omnibus! Salvia Sempronia Graccha, Titus Sempronius Marcellus,
Iusta Sempronia Iustina, et Tiberia Sempronia Modesta salutem plurimam
dicunt.

Upon the auspicious occasion of our emancipation, in honor of our dear
mater gentis, Julilla Sempronia Magna, those Sempronians who are members
of Aquilaheliaca are privileged to announce the adoption of an eagle owl
we�re calling �Magna�, via the good efforts of the Green Balkans Wildlife
Rehabilitation and Breeding Center. Magna was injured in 1999 but was
lucky enough to reach haven at Green Balkans. Her injuries are such that
she cannot be released to the wild, but she nonetheless has done and
continues to do her bit for owldom: with the assistance of a gentleman
friend she has produced seven owlets and is currently incubating two eggs;
she also serves as a �foster mom� for orphaned owlets brought to the
Center.
Aquilaheliaca was founded by Sabina Equitia Doris to support and protect
the symbol of Roma, the rare and threatened Imperial Eagle, from further
decline, via partnership with the Green Balkans Center. The Center aids
not only wounded eagles but all raptors and other creatures who are
brought to them, like Magna. They also implement programs for ecological
education, habitat conservation, nest protection, etc. Since 1995 they
have received over 500 rare animals in distress; more than 40% were
successfully returned to nature.
They can�t do it without your help.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquilaheliaca
http://www.greenbalkans.org

Valete omnibus! Habitetis in luce deorum.
Salvia Sempronia Graccha
Signum attollete!




__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250

*gulp* I am speechless to be the object of such an honour. I do not know
what to say except gratias to some of the finest NovaRomani I know.

---
@____@ Julilla Sempronia Magna
|||| materfamilias (for a day or two),
@____@ Gens Sempronia
|||| www.villaivlilla.com/GensSempronia

-----Original Message-----
From: Salvia Sempronia Graccha [mailto:alysentellure@...]
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 8:55 PM
To: nova-roma@yahoogroups.com
Cc: GensSempronia@yahoogroups.com; aquilaheliaca@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [GensSempronia] mama Magna



Avete omnibus! Salvia Sempronia Graccha, Titus Sempronius Marcellus,
Iusta Sempronia Iustina, et Tiberia Sempronia Modesta salutem plurimam
dicunt.

Upon the auspicious occasion of our emancipation, in honor of our dear
mater gentis, Julilla Sempronia Magna, those Sempronians who are members
of Aquilaheliaca are privileged to announce the adoption of an eagle owl
were calling Magna, via the good efforts of the Green Balkans Wildlife
Rehabilitation and Breeding Center. Magna was injured in 1999 but was
lucky enough to reach haven at Green Balkans. Her injuries are such that
she cannot be released to the wild, but she nonetheless has done and
continues to do her bit for owldom: with the assistance of a gentleman
friend she has produced seven owlets and is currently incubating two eggs;
she also serves as a foster mom for orphaned owlets brought to the
Center.
Aquilaheliaca was founded by Sabina Equitia Doris to support and protect
the symbol of Roma, the rare and threatened Imperial Eagle, from further
decline, via partnership with the Green Balkans Center. The Center aids
not only wounded eagles but all raptors and other creatures who are
brought to them, like Magna. They also implement programs for ecological
education, habitat conservation, nest protection, etc. Since 1995 they
have received over 500 rare animals in distress; more than 40% were
successfully returned to nature.
They cant do it without your help.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquilaheliaca
http://www.greenbalkans.org

Valete omnibus! Habitetis in luce deorum.
Salvia Sempronia Graccha
Signum attollete!




__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250



--
Visit the Gens Sempronia web site:
www.villaivlilla.com/GensSempronia
Yahoo! Groups Links

Salvete omnes

I will soon (middle of February) be attending a Classics Colloquium
presented by the University of South Africa. If possible, I would
like to hand out pamphlets on Nova Roma to the participants there.

What I would like to know is whether someone can draw up a brochure
or pamphlet giving general information on Nova Roma? I know that one
exists, but I think the information in it is a bit outdated. Since
this would be mainly an academic community, it would be good if we
could stress the academic links which do exist, i.e. the fact that
some well known professors have participated in our Interview the
Expert program (including their names in the brochure), other links
with academic institutions which we have, our work with the Magna
Mater project, etc., all with a view on emphasising our credibility
as a serious, real-life organisation which is persuing its goals
professionally.

Would someone or a group of people be interested in drawing up
something such as this? I'm sure it would be great for future use by
other cives as well when wanting to introduce NR to a more
academically minded audience than what our normal brochure caters for.

I think few people are aware of the strides that have been made in
contact with academics in the field of Roman History and with
projects such as the Magna Mater project.

Bene Vale,

Lucius Cornelius Cicero
Interpreter
Quaestor

Thank-you Marinus, this did clarify a lot of our questions.

Vale.

>Salve Aurelia Aquilia,
>
>Welcome to Nova Roma.
>
>F & R Parkyn <frpark@...> writes:
>
>> What is the intent of the organisation for the next five to fifteen years?
>
>It's hard to project out to fifteen years, but I'll try. Working from the set
>of priorities adopted by the Senate last year I'd say that over the course of
>the next 5 to 15 years Nova Roma will be
>
>-- Building up the religious community of the Religio Romana, including the
>development of rites and rituals based on historic research.
>
>-- Continuing to develop our processes for interacting with each other
>
>-- Promoting more local and regional activities
>
>-- Establishing an endowment for long term financial growth
>
>-- Developing ourselves as a social and educational organization
>
>> If land acquisition and the creation of a roman-style community is the
>> intent,
>
>Acquisition of land is a long term goal, though it's not intended as a place
>where a lot of people would live together. We anticipate that Nova Romans
>will continue to be distributed all over the world.
>
>> how are funds to be raised
>
>Right now we have voluntary donations. There's a group of citizens called the
>Centum Group who've each donated at least $100.00 USD to Nova Roma during the
>past year. We also have a voluntary 'tax' though it is quite low, and really
>only covers ongoing expenses.
>
>> Also I would like to know if there are regional mail-lists
>
>There are. I'm sending a copy of this message to Gaius Sentius Bruttius Sura,
>the propraetor for Australia. He should be able to get you in touch with
>other Nova Romans in Australia.
>
>Vale,
>
>-- Marinus
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Salvete omnes,

I was trying to find out about international conventions or laws with
regards with what to do if you are visiting a foreign country which
suddenly declares war against your country or vice versa. I think
embassies have several days to clean up and leave but what about your
average Joe who is there as a tourist, teacher or whatever. I guess
an example would be English people in Germany in Sept. 39, German
tourists in Canada, Canadians stuck in Japanese Asia etc. Do you
report to the police with your return tickets, stay in staging areas
for disembarking or just unluckly get detained for the duration of
the conflict? Thanks!


Quintus Lanius Paulinus

Salve Quinte Lani, et salvete Quirites,

"Quintus Lanius Paulinus (Michael Kelly)" <mjk@...> writes:

> I was trying to find out about international conventions or laws with
> regards with what to do if you are visiting a foreign country which
> suddenly declares war against your country or vice versa.

Civilian citizens of hostile countries are covered in the IV Geneva Convention
(1949), based on the recommendations of the XV International Conference of the
Red Cross (1934). Unfortunately for many, many people, the recommendations
had not been adopted at the beginning of WW II. The International Red Cross
went to a lot of effort to get people to comply with their recommendations,
but they had no enforcement authority.

To answer your question directly, there is no 'grace period' for
non-combatants to withdraw from a foreign country once war is declared. They
may become prisoners of war, or they may be deported, or they may be held in
specific geographic areas provided those places are provided with adequate
food and water.

Vale,

-- Marinus

Censor Marinus;

My thanks for your comments. My Staff and I appreciate them greatly.
The "RTQ" was well supported by the "promulgator" (printer) right up to
the virtual moment of release. However, it is my Staff that deserves
the praise for reviewing , editing, and contributing to the overall
publishing of the "RTQ". It is very pleasant working with dedicated,
and and hardworking staff. They respond well to kind words, and
friendly treatment, as we have both found here in Nova Roma.

With any luck at all, and my Staff's excellent support, we look forward
to three more such newsletters in the coming year for your viewing
pleasure.

Very Respectfully;

Marcus Minucius-Tiberius Audens

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

Sun Tzu -- "The Art of War"

Salve Censor Marine,

Great, thanks for your fast reply on this; that answers my question!

Regards,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Gnaeus Equitius Marinus
<gawne@c...> wrote:

> Salve Quinte Lani, et salvete Quirites,
>
> "Quintus Lanius Paulinus (Michael Kelly)" <mjk@d...> writes:
>
> > I was trying to find out about international conventions or laws

with

> > regards with what to do if you are visiting a foreign country

which

> > suddenly declares war against your country or vice versa.
>
> Civilian citizens of hostile countries are covered in the IV Geneva

Convention

> (1949), based on the recommendations of the XV International

Conference of the

> Red Cross (1934). Unfortunately for many, many people, the

recommendations

> had not been adopted at the beginning of WW II. The International

Red Cross

> went to a lot of effort to get people to comply with their

recommendations,

> but they had no enforcement authority.
>
> To answer your question directly, there is no 'grace period' for
> non-combatants to withdraw from a foreign country once war is

declared. They

> may become prisoners of war, or they may be deported, or they may

be held in

> specific geographic areas provided those places are provided with

adequate

> food and water.
>
> Vale,
>
> -- Marinus

A. Apollónius Cordus Ser. Equitió Trojánó amícó
omnibusque sal.

To save space I'll paraphrase rather than quote.

So your principal idea is that perhaps a tribúnus
could legally call the concilium plébis to vote on an
agenda including legislation of general import so long
as the agenda also contained a vote to elect a new
magistrate of the plébs. So there are two questions
here - first, would such a call indeed be legal in the
first place?; and second, if it were, would the
resulting legislation be binding? And indeed a third
question is implied - even if it were not legal to do
so but the tribúnus managed to get away with it anyway
without being vetoed, would the resulting legislation
be binding?

I'll take the second and third questions together,
since they're related. It seems to me fairly obvious
that a léx enacted by an assembly which has been
properly and legally convened will necessarily be
binding so long as it is within the legal competence
of that assembly to make binding law on the subject.
Let me unpack that: an assembly which has no legal
competence to make law on a certain subject cannot
make law on that subject even if it should somehow end
up voting to do so; for instance, it would not be
illegal for the pontifex máximus to summon the comitia
cúriáta to vote on a proposal about resignation of
citizenship, but since Nova Róma's constitution
explicitly limits the legislative competence of the
comitia cúriáta to the enactment of the léx dé imperió
it cannot possibly be argued that the resulting vote
would have any legal effect any more than if the
sodálitás Músárum had voted on it. (This example would
be less clear in the ancient republic because the
limitation on the legislative competence of the
comitia cúriáta was purely customary, though very
strong.)

So to answer the second question we need to know two
things: first, would it be legal for a tribúnus plébis
to call the concilium plébis for such an agenda in the
first place? (this is, of course, question one, which
we'll come back to later); and second, has the
concilium plébis the competence to enact binding
legislation on the populus at large on any subject?
One could try to answer 'no' to the second on the
grounds that an assembly cannot legally bind people
who are not entitled to vote in it. This argument is
obviously logically untenable, otherwise we would have
to argue that no léx can ever be binding on a resident
foreigner, nor on any legal minor. In addition to
being logically unsustainable it is surely overwhelmed
by the extremely clear statement of article III.C.1 of
the constitution, especially when taken together with
the fact that the concilium plébis enacted
generally-binding legislation throughout most of the
old republic.

Now a detour to the third question: if a tribúnus
managed (deliberately or accidentally) illegally to
get a piece of general legislation onto the agenda of
a meeting of the concilium plébis, and no one stopped
the vote going ahead, would the resulting léx be valid
and generally binding? My view is that it would. There
is virtually no precedent in the history of the
republic for a léx, once enacted, being ruled invalid.
What precedents do exist date from the very late
republic and derived from the fact that the senate had
been given by a léx the power to overturn future légés
on certain specific grounds to do with improper
comitial procedure. Not only are these precedents so
late in the republic that they ought to be treated
with considerable suspicion, but, more importantly, we
must observe that the overturning of légés was never
done, even in the late republic, except by a body
which had been given the clear power to do that by
law. Since a léx cannot be declared invalid without
being declared invalid by some specific person or
body, and since no law in Nova Róma gives any person
or body the power to do this, it is virtually
impossible to come to any conclusion except that, if
the concilium plébis were somehow to end up voting on
legislation of general interest, the resulting léx
would be valid and binding on everyone.

So in a sense it's irrelevant whether what you're
imagining would be legal or illegal - if it were to
get as far as a vote, the resulting léx would be valid
whether the call had been legal or not; and,
contrarywise, it ought to be vetoed whether
technically legal or not since it is clearl
undesirable and contrary to the spirit of the law. But
it's still worth looking at the question, because
apart from anything else it will allow us to know
whether a tribúnus who had done such a thing would be
liable for prosecution. It'll be useful to quote again
the relevant provisions of the léx Salicia:

"The Tribuni Plebis shall always be allowed to call
the Comitia Plebis Tributa to order when the issues at
hand concern the internal operation of the Comitia
Plebis Tributa themselves, or to elect the plebeian
magistrates."

and

"In any other occasion, a Tribunus Plebis that wishes
to present his proposals to the People shall..." [use
the comitia populí tribúta].

You're suggesting, I think, that the language of the
first article quoted above allows a tribúnus to call
the concilium plébis to vote on an agenda including
general legislation as long as the agenda also
includes the election of a magistrate of the plébs,
since the call would then meet the criterion "the
tribúní plébis shall always be allowed to call the
comitia plébis tribúta to order... to elect plebeian
magistrates". So the question is, is this "to"
exclusive or inclusive: in other words, does it mean
"to elect plebeian magistrates and to vote on other
things in addition" or "to elect plebeian magistrates
only"? As you say, the second interpretation is rather
difficult in view of the well-established convention
that the concilium plébis may legally be called to
elect plebeian magistrates and to vote on proposals
concerningt he concilium's own procedures. But the
other interpretation has its own problems: it appears
to conflict with the most natural reading of the
second article quoted above, which seems to say that
on any other occasion - that is, any occasion other
than one when "the issues at hand concern the internal
operation of the comitia" or when the goal is "to
elect plebeian magistrates".

One could perhaps argue that these two articles should
be taken together to form a single legal fact
something like, "on any occasion when the purpose of
the meeting is to elect a magistrate or to vote on the
concilium's own procedures, the tribúní plébis shall
be entitled to call the concilium plébis; but when the
purpose of the meeting is neither of these, the
comitia tribúta shall be used instead". This composite
rule would be compatible with the convention allowing
a single agenda to combine both purposes, but would
still rule out the interpretation you're suggesting.
This is how I would be inclined to approach the issue,
but I must admit that it isn't a significantly
stronger argument that the opposite.

If you want to continue with this, perhaps we'd better
move it across to the Laws list before the natives get
restless. :)





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

Ave Paulinus,

If you wish to find more check out www.genevaconventions.org you can read all 4 parts to the Conventions. They're pretty interesting. In modern times a good read if you are interested is the third one which addresses POW's since that was a big issue reagrding the U.S. and its "detainees".

Vale,

Cornelianus

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

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

Salve Corneliane,

Thanks for the link; I'll check it through.

Regards,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus



--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gn. Julius Caesar Cornelianus"
<julius_cornelianus@y...> wrote:

>
> Ave Paulinus,
>
> If you wish to find more check out

www.genevaconventions.org you can read all 4 parts to the
Conventions. They're pretty interesting. In modern times a good
read if you are interested is the third one which addresses POW's
since that was a big issue reagrding the U.S. and its "detainees".

>
> Vale,
>
> Cornelianus
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Savete omnes,

My book arrived yesterday according to my wife. I'm 1300 km from home
now but I'll be sure to grab it on my midwinter break (if I get one!)
I can hardly wait to start reading it!

Regards,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus

Ladies and Gentlemen;

PR Materials and documentation such as you suggest might well be left to
the Publishing portion of Nova Roma, that is if anyone had ever been
interested enough in the "great strides" that we have made in such to
let the Curator Differum . Editor Commentarium know about such. At this
point putting together a PR document, such as you suggest, would not be
difficult if the information, names, advances, donations, Classical
Involvements, etc. were shared with all Nova-Roma. However they have
not been, and without the information little can be done.

Every now and then I hear about the Mas Maiorum, whatever that is, and I
have asked after it, but have recieved no response. Perhaps what we
need is a somewhat wider release of all this wonderful forward progress
to get people more excited in what is being accomplished. In that way,
the needed information might get into the format which discusses our
accomplishments.

Respectfully;

Marcus Audens

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

Sun Tzu -- "The Art of War"

A. Apollónius Cordus M. Minució Audentí omnibusque
sal.

> PR Materials and documentation such as you suggest
> might well be left to
> the Publishing portion of Nova Roma, that is if
> anyone had ever been
> interested enough in the "great strides" that we
> have made in such to
> let the Curator Differum . Editor Commentarium know
> about such. At this
> point putting together a PR document, such as you
> suggest, would not be
> difficult if the information, names, advances,
> donations, Classical
> Involvements, etc. were shared with all Nova-Roma.
> However they have
> not been, and without the information little can be
> done.

Good idea about bringing this under the supervision of
the éditor (or whatever the title is now); perhaps it
could also be done in concert with Égressus, since
it's to do with recruitment and public relations.

It might be a nice idea, now that I think of it, to
have a standard leaflet about Nova Róma with part of
it left blank so that each province can add something
specifically aimed at a local audience.

As for the new and exciting projects to put in these
documents, I'm afraid I can't be very helpful - the
projects I've been involved with in Nova Róma have
mostly been legislative reforms which would be of
little interest to prospective recruits, and
provincial projects which would be of little interest
to non-Britons. But if you can think of any
information I might have, I'll happily provide it.

> Every now and then I hear about the Mas Maiorum,
> whatever that is, and I
> have asked after it, but have recieved no response.

The mós májórum (or mos maiorum) is literally "the way
of the ancestors". It essentially means "the way
things have always been done" - tradition, custom,
convention, and things like that. To say that
something is contrary to the mós májórum means that
it's a departure from how things used to be done. In a
broad sense it's sometimes used to mean "Roman
historical practice".

If you want to know what the ways of the ancestors
actually were, well... that will take a while to tell!
:)





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

Salve Romans


I believe that this material has already been created and is on our website or the yahoo site I do not remember which, I will look for it and get bake to you.

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus

----- Original Message -----
From: MarcusAudens@...<mailto:MarcusAudens@...>
To: NovaRomaComputer@yahoogroups.com<mailto:NovaRomaComputer@yahoogroups.com>
Cc: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com> ; moonwolfza@...<mailto:moonwolfza@...>
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2005 1:20 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] PR materials


Ladies and Gentlemen;

PR Materials and documentation such as you suggest might well be left to
the Publishing portion of Nova Roma, that is if anyone had ever been
interested enough in the "great strides" that we have made in such to
let the Curator Differum . Editor Commentarium know about such. At this
point putting together a PR document, such as you suggest, would not be
difficult if the information, names, advances, donations, Classical
Involvements, etc. were shared with all Nova-Roma. However they have
not been, and without the information little can be done.

Every now and then I hear about the Mas Maiorum, whatever that is, and I
have asked after it, but have recieved no response. Perhaps what we
need is a somewhat wider release of all this wonderful forward progress
to get people more excited in what is being accomplished. In that way,
the needed information might get into the format which discusses our
accomplishments.

Respectfully;

Marcus Audens

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

Sun Tzu -- "The Art of War"



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

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

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>

c.. 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 -

On Fri, Jan 28, 2005 at 10:34:23AM -0500, Bill Gawne wrote:
> Salve Quinte Lani, et salvete Quirites,
>
> "Quintus Lanius Paulinus (Michael Kelly)" <mjk@...> writes:
>
> > I was trying to find out about international conventions or laws with
> > regards with what to do if you are visiting a foreign country which
> > suddenly declares war against your country or vice versa.
>
> Civilian citizens of hostile countries are covered in the IV Geneva Convention
> (1949), based on the recommendations of the XV International Conference of the
> Red Cross (1934). Unfortunately for many, many people, the recommendations
> had not been adopted at the beginning of WW II. The International Red Cross
> went to a lot of effort to get people to comply with their recommendations,
> but they had no enforcement authority.
>
> To answer your question directly, there is no 'grace period' for
> non-combatants to withdraw from a foreign country once war is declared. They
> may become prisoners of war, or they may be deported, or they may be held in
> specific geographic areas provided those places are provided with adequate
> food and water.

To which I can only add the practical note of "try to make it to your
embassy by (almost) any means possible". This does not mean that you
won't get interned - but you stand a chance of getting out, or staying
on the embassy grounds, or - at the very least - someone will know about
you and you won't be just another "missing person" that so often
disappear in the turmoil of those times.


Valete,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Tamdiu discendum est, quamdiu vivas.
We should learn as long as we may live. (We live and learn.)
-- Seneca Philosophus, "Epistulae"

Edictum Diribitorium Custodiumque de Suffragia Comitiorum Centuriatorum

I. Only those votes which are cast after the start and before the end of
voting by members of the eligible centuries shall be counted.

II. If voting is suspended, votes cast during the period of suspension will
not be counted.

III. Once a voting code has been used to cast a valid vote, any repeated
votes with that voting code shall not be counted.

IV. Voting may be delegated to another citizen of Nova Roma by informing the
presiding magistrate of the proxy arrangement during the contio period prior
to the vote.

Decreed ante diem quintum Kalendas Februarias Fr. Apulo et C. Popillio
consulibus.

Decius Iunius Palladius Invictus, Custos
Gallus Minucius Iovinus, Custos
Alexander Iulius Caesar Probus Macedonicus, Diribitor
Quintus Caecilius Metellus Postumianus, Diribitor
Caius Minucius Scaevola, Diribitor
Claudia Iulia, Diribitor

=====

Edictum Diribitorium Custodiumque de Suffragia Comitiorum Centuriatorum

I. Solum illa suffragia quae et post initium et ante terminum aetatis
suffragio ferantur a suffragatoribus centuriarum quibus per legem ferre
suffragium liceat computentur.

II. Si ferre suffragia suspendatur, illa suspensione lata non computentur.

III. Antequam primum notae suffragi per suffragium poneantur, alia quae
notis illis ferantur non computentur.

IV. Delegetur ferre suffragium civi alii Novae Romae a docendo magistratui
convocanti de conventione inter aetatem contionis ante suffragi aetatis.

Iussum ante diem quintum Kalendas Februarias Francisco Apulo Caesare et Caio
Popillio Laena consulibus.

Ex Officio

Censores Caeso Fabius Quintilianus Gnaeus Equitius Marinus salutem
plurimam quiritibus dicunt.

EDICTVM CENSORIVM DE ADLEGENDIS SENATORIBVS

I. E Paragrapho IV. A. 1. d. Constitutionis Novae Romae, censores
potestates Albi Senatori servandi habent.

I. According to Paragraph IV. A. 1. d. of the Constitution of Nova Roma,
the censores have the powers of maintaining the Album Senatorium.

II. E Paragrapho II, Legis Vediae Senatoriae, censoribus suo arbitratu
liceat aliquem aedilem curulem creatum vel gubernatorem provinciae
designatum munere suo sex menses ut minimum functum in Senatum legant.

II. According to Paragraph II of the Lex Vedia Senatoria, the censores
may, at their discretion, adlect to the Senate anyone elected curule
aedile or appointed governor of a province who has served at least six
months in those offices.

III. E Paragrapho I, Legis Arminiae Senatoriae, censoribus suo arbitratu
liceat aliquem aedilem plebis susceptum munus suum sex menses ut minimum
in Senatum legant.

III. According to Paragraph I of the Lex Arminia Senatoria, the censores
may, at their discretion, adlect to the Senate anyone elected aedilis
plebis six months after assuming office.

IV. Ergo nobis iure praecipuo praeditis cordi est horum Senatorum
novorum lectionem pronuntiare:

IV. Therefore it is our privilege and pleasure to announce the addition
of these new Senatores:

Manius Constantinus Serapio
(Propraetor a.d. III Id. Mar. MMDCCLVII-)
(Propraetor, 12 March 2004-)

Julilla Sempronia Magna
(Propraetrix a.d. VII Id. Feb. MMDCCLV-
(Propraetrix, 7 Feb. 2002-present)

Gaia Fabia Livia
(Propraetrix, a.d. IV Non. Iun. MMDCCLVII-)
(Propraetrix, 2 June 2004-present)

Pompeia Minucia-Tiberia Strabo
(Propraetrix, Non. Dec. MMDCCLIII ad a.d. III. Kal. Nov. MMDCCLV)
(Propraetrix, 5 Dec. 2000 to 30 Oct. 2002)

Emilia Curia Finnica
(Aedilis Plebis, Kal. Ian. MMDCCLVII ad pridie Kal. Ian. MMDCCLVIII)
(Aedilis Plebis, 1 Jan. 2004-31 Dec. 2004)

Praeter iura necessaria expleta eos aptos reddentia ut in Senatum
legantur, unusquisque eorum studium rarum Novae Romae exhibuit.

Each has, in addition to fulfilling the legal requirements making them
qualified for adlection into the Senate, demonstrated exceptional
dedication to Nova Roma.

Datum sub manibus nostris ante diem V Kal. FEBRVARIAS MMDCCLVIII a.u.c.

Given under our hands this 28th day of January 2005 CE


Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Gnaeus Equitius Marinus

Censores

As a man who has seen action I have often felt the
Geneva Convention is useless unless we are invaded by
England. Who else follows it? BTW- I LOVE THE BRITS!
--- gawne@... <gawne@...> wrote:

> Salve Quinte Lani, et salvete Quirites,
>
> "Quintus Lanius Paulinus (Michael Kelly)"

<mjk@...> writes:

>
> > I was trying to find out about international

conventions or laws with

> > regards with what to do if you are visiting a

foreign country which

> > suddenly declares war against your country or vice

versa.

>
> Civilian citizens of hostile countries are covered

in the IV Geneva Convention

> (1949), based on the recommendations of the XV

International Conference of the

> Red Cross (1934). Unfortunately for many, many

people, the recommendations

> had not been adopted at the beginning of WW II. The

International Red Cross

> went to a lot of effort to get people to comply with

their recommendations,

> but they had no enforcement authority.
>
> To answer your question directly, there is no 'grace

period' for

> non-combatants to withdraw from a foreign country

once war is declared. They

> may become prisoners of war, or they may be

deported, or they may be held in

> specific geographic areas provided those places are

provided with adequate

> food and water.
>
> Vale,
>
> -- Marinus

=====
S P Q R

Fidelis Ad Mortem.

Marcvs Flavivs Fides
Roman Citizen





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
http://my.yahoo.com

Salve -

On Jan 28, 2005, at 8:52 PM, raymond fuentes wrote:
> I have often felt the Geneva Convention is useless unless we are
> invaded by England. Who else follows it?

Hey, I'm sure it would also be in effect if we were invaded by the
Swiss or the Dutch.

Vale
- Troianus

In a message dated 1/28/2005 6:18:03 PM Pacific Standard Time,
hermeticagnosis@... writes:

> I have often felt the Geneva Convention is useless unless we are
> invaded by England. Who else follows it?

Hey, I'm sure it would also be in effect if we were invaded by the
Swiss or the Dutch.
The Dutch would make you pay for your own cleaning supplies, though.

V. Ritulia Enodaria


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

They are useless...read the 3rd Genenva Convention and you will find it is not even applicable to modern conflicts....there's 2 sections in it that would have to be really stretched to fit the profile of terrorists...however there is the slight problem of meeting requirements such as follow rules of war, have identifiable symbol (ski masks do not count), carry arms in open, etc. So they are out of date (like the UN)...

raymond fuentes <praefectus2324@...> wrote:As a man who has seen action I have often felt the
Geneva Convention is useless unless we are invaded by
England. Who else follows it? BTW- I LOVE THE BRITS!
--- gawne@... <gawne@...> wrote:

> Salve Quinte Lani, et salvete Quirites,
>
> "Quintus Lanius Paulinus (Michael Kelly)"

<mjk@...> writes:

>
> > I was trying to find out about international

conventions or laws with

> > regards with what to do if you are visiting a

foreign country which

> > suddenly declares war against your country or vice

versa.

>
> Civilian citizens of hostile countries are covered

in the IV Geneva Convention

> (1949), based on the recommendations of the XV

International Conference of the

> Red Cross (1934). Unfortunately for many, many

people, the recommendations

> had not been adopted at the beginning of WW II. The

International Red Cross

> went to a lot of effort to get people to comply with

their recommendations,

> but they had no enforcement authority.
>
> To answer your question directly, there is no 'grace

period' for

> non-combatants to withdraw from a foreign country

once war is declared. They

> may become prisoners of war, or they may be

deported, or they may be held in

> specific geographic areas provided those places are

provided with adequate

> food and water.
>
> Vale,
>
> -- Marinus

=====
S P Q R

Fidelis Ad Mortem.

Marcvs Flavivs Fides
Roman Citizen





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
http://my.yahoo.com




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

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

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

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




---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'

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

Salve Cordus Amice!

So, in short ("the People cheer"): Yes, I've spotted a loophole.
Interesting. So while an argument can be made against it, that
argument isn't anywhere near incontrovertible.
Until this can be corrected, I suppose we should be extra attentive.
Thank you very much for lending your attention to my speculative
musings.

Vale bene
- S E M Troianus

On Jan 28, 2005, at 11:47 AM, A. Apollonius Cordus wrote:

>
> A. Apollónius Cordus Ser. Equitió Trojánó amícó
> omnibusque sal.
>
> To save space I'll paraphrase rather than quote.
>
> So your principal idea is that perhaps a tribúnus
> could legally call the concilium plébis to vote on an
> agenda including legislation of general import so long
> as the agenda also contained a vote to elect a new
> magistrate of the plébs. So there are two questions
> here - first, would such a call indeed be legal in the
> first place?; and second, if it were, would the
> resulting legislation be binding? And indeed a third
> question is implied - even if it were not legal to do
> so but the tribúnus managed to get away with it anyway
> without being vetoed, would the resulting legislation
> be binding?
>
> I'll take the second and third questions together,
> since they're related. It seems to me fairly obvious
> that a léx enacted by an assembly which has been
> properly and legally convened will necessarily be
> binding so long as it is within the legal competence
> of that assembly to make binding law on the subject.
> Let me unpack that: an assembly which has no legal
> competence to make law on a certain subject cannot
> make law on that subject even if it should somehow end
> up voting to do so; for instance, it would not be
> illegal for the pontifex máximus to summon the comitia
> cúriáta to vote on a proposal about resignation of
> citizenship, but since Nova Róma's constitution
> explicitly limits the legislative competence of the
> comitia cúriáta to the enactment of the léx dé imperió
> it cannot possibly be argued that the resulting vote
> would have any legal effect any more than if the
> sodálitás Músárum had voted on it. (This example would
> be less clear in the ancient republic because the
> limitation on the legislative competence of the
> comitia cúriáta was purely customary, though very
> strong.)
>
> So to answer the second question we need to know two
> things: first, would it be legal for a tribúnus plébis
> to call the concilium plébis for such an agenda in the
> first place? (this is, of course, question one, which
> we'll come back to later); and second, has the
> concilium plébis the competence to enact binding
> legislation on the populus at large on any subject?
> One could try to answer 'no' to the second on the
> grounds that an assembly cannot legally bind people
> who are not entitled to vote in it. This argument is
> obviously logically untenable, otherwise we would have
> to argue that no léx can ever be binding on a resident
> foreigner, nor on any legal minor. In addition to
> being logically unsustainable it is surely overwhelmed
> by the extremely clear statement of article III.C.1 of
> the constitution, especially when taken together with
> the fact that the concilium plébis enacted
> generally-binding legislation throughout most of the
> old republic.
>
> Now a detour to the third question: if a tribúnus
> managed (deliberately or accidentally) illegally to
> get a piece of general legislation onto the agenda of
> a meeting of the concilium plébis, and no one stopped
> the vote going ahead, would the resulting léx be valid
> and generally binding? My view is that it would. There
> is virtually no precedent in the history of the
> republic for a léx, once enacted, being ruled invalid.
> What precedents do exist date from the very late
> republic and derived from the fact that the senate had
> been given by a léx the power to overturn future légés
> on certain specific grounds to do with improper
> comitial procedure. Not only are these precedents so
> late in the republic that they ought to be treated
> with considerable suspicion, but, more importantly, we
> must observe that the overturning of légés was never
> done, even in the late republic, except by a body
> which had been given the clear power to do that by
> law. Since a léx cannot be declared invalid without
> being declared invalid by some specific person or
> body, and since no law in Nova Róma gives any person
> or body the power to do this, it is virtually
> impossible to come to any conclusion except that, if
> the concilium plébis were somehow to end up voting on
> legislation of general interest, the resulting léx
> would be valid and binding on everyone.
>
> So in a sense it's irrelevant whether what you're
> imagining would be legal or illegal - if it were to
> get as far as a vote, the resulting léx would be valid
> whether the call had been legal or not; and,
> contrarywise, it ought to be vetoed whether
> technically legal or not since it is clearl
> undesirable and contrary to the spirit of the law. But
> it's still worth looking at the question, because
> apart from anything else it will allow us to know
> whether a tribúnus who had done such a thing would be
> liable for prosecution. It'll be useful to quote again
> the relevant provisions of the léx Salicia:
>
> "The Tribuni Plebis shall always be allowed to call
> the Comitia Plebis Tributa to order when the issues at
> hand concern the internal operation of the Comitia
> Plebis Tributa themselves, or to elect the plebeian
> magistrates."
>
> and
>
> "In any other occasion, a Tribunus Plebis that wishes
> to present his proposals to the People shall..." [use
> the comitia populí tribúta].
>
> You're suggesting, I think, that the language of the
> first article quoted above allows a tribúnus to call
> the concilium plébis to vote on an agenda including
> general legislation as long as the agenda also
> includes the election of a magistrate of the plébs,
> since the call would then meet the criterion "the
> tribúní plébis shall always be allowed to call the
> comitia plébis tribúta to order... to elect plebeian
> magistrates". So the question is, is this "to"
> exclusive or inclusive: in other words, does it mean
> "to elect plebeian magistrates and to vote on other
> things in addition" or "to elect plebeian magistrates
> only"? As you say, the second interpretation is rather
> difficult in view of the well-established convention
> that the concilium plébis may legally be called to
> elect plebeian magistrates and to vote on proposals
> concerningt he concilium's own procedures. But the
> other interpretation has its own problems: it appears
> to conflict with the most natural reading of the
> second article quoted above, which seems to say that
> on any other occasion - that is, any occasion other
> than one when "the issues at hand concern the internal
> operation of the comitia" or when the goal is "to
> elect plebeian magistrates".
>
> One could perhaps argue that these two articles should
> be taken together to form a single legal fact
> something like, "on any occasion when the purpose of
> the meeting is to elect a magistrate or to vote on the
> concilium's own procedures, the tribúní plébis shall
> be entitled to call the concilium plébis; but when the
> purpose of the meeting is neither of these, the
> comitia tribúta shall be used instead". This composite
> rule would be compatible with the convention allowing
> a single agenda to combine both purposes, but would
> still rule out the interpretation you're suggesting.
> This is how I would be inclined to approach the issue,
> but I must admit that it isn't a significantly
> stronger argument that the opposite.
>
> If you want to continue with this, perhaps we'd better
> move it across to the Laws list before the natives get
> restless. :)
>
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!
> http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

I constantly have run-ins w/ UN types as a cop and
served under UN colors in Bosnia...the UN is worse
than useless. A lot of them are NYC scofflaws.
--- julius_cornelianus@...
<julius_cornelianus@...> wrote:

> They are useless...read the 3rd Genenva Convention

and you will find it is not even applicable to modern
conflicts....there's 2 sections in it that would have
to be really stretched to fit the profile of
terrorists...however there is the slight problem of
meeting requirements such as follow rules of war, have
identifiable symbol (ski masks do not count), carry
arms in open, etc. So they are out of date (like the
UN)...

>
> raymond fuentes <praefectus2324@...> wrote:As

a man who has seen action I have often felt the

> Geneva Convention is useless unless we are invaded

by

> England. Who else follows it? BTW- I LOVE THE BRITS!
> --- gawne@... <gawne@...> wrote:
> > Salve Quinte Lani, et salvete Quirites,
> >
> > "Quintus Lanius Paulinus (Michael Kelly)"
> <mjk@...> writes:
> >
> > > I was trying to find out about international
> conventions or laws with
> > > regards with what to do if you are visiting a
> foreign country which
> > > suddenly declares war against your country or

vice

> versa.
> >
> > Civilian citizens of hostile countries are covered
> in the IV Geneva Convention
> > (1949), based on the recommendations of the XV
> International Conference of the
> > Red Cross (1934). Unfortunately for many, many
> people, the recommendations
> > had not been adopted at the beginning of WW II.

The

> International Red Cross
> > went to a lot of effort to get people to comply

with

> their recommendations,
> > but they had no enforcement authority.
> >
> > To answer your question directly, there is no

'grace

> period' for
> > non-combatants to withdraw from a foreign country
> once war is declared. They
> > may become prisoners of war, or they may be
> deported, or they may be held in
> > specific geographic areas provided those places

are

> provided with adequate
> > food and water.
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > -- Marinus
>
>
> =====
> S P Q R
>
> Fidelis Ad Mortem.
>
> Marcvs Flavivs Fides
> Roman Citizen
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
> http://my.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the

Yahoo! Terms of Service.

>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------

=== Message Truncated ===


=====
S P Q R

Fidelis Ad Mortem.

Marcvs Flavivs Fides
Roman Citizen





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250

Gaius Modius Athanasius

Ex Officio

Per section IV of Edictum Censoris CFQ XXI De Nomibus I, Gaius Modius
Athanasius, Pontifex, hereby confer upon Quintus Caecilius Metellus Postumianus the
cognomen of Pius.

Cross posted to the Censors, and the acting magister aranearius to update
his listing in the Album Gentium.

Valete;

Gaius Modius Athanasius
Pontifex




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

Q. Caecilius Metellus Postumianus Pius Quiritibus salutem dicit.

Salvete Quirites.

For some time, I have thought that there was a mission to Nova Roma. It was
my thought that the purpose for our being here was the restoration of the
Pax Deorum, restoring practice of the Religio Romana, honoring the Gods.
Perhaps it is the case that my age has caught me, and the I have been so
naïve as to be ignorant of what has gone on.

Last year, my hope for Nova Roma waned. But, I still thought I could do
something to get Nova Roma back to the path of honoring the Gods. And so,
even starting at one of the lowest points, I stood for office, to which you
elected me. Then, I applied for pontifex, to which I was refused. I take
this as a statement from the Gods.

The events of late have shown me that there is no hope left for Nova Roma,
that the Gods are the least important thing here. And I refuse to stand on
the side which chooses that path. Accordingly, I tender my resignation.

Effective as of this day, a.d. IV Kal. Feb. MMDCCLVIII, I, Quintus Caecilius
Metellus Postumianus Pius, step down from my posts as Censorial Scribe,
Legate, and Lictor. Similarly, I resign my position as Diribitor, effective
the moment another is elected to serve in my place.

I apologize to all those who put their faith in me by electing me to the
post of Diribitor, or by appointing me to various posts in the past. In
taking every post I have taken in Nova Roma, service to the Gods has been my
primary goal, and my foremost thought. But I cannot force that goal on
anyone. I can not, nor will I even try. It is a goal which is to be
personal, happening to be shared between groups of people. Here, that goal
is not.

I intend to retain my position as a Fetial. As I hope is apparent, service
to the Gods is what is important to me. I intend to continue there.

Lastly, I have to say that this is an utter disgrace. The Religio should
have been more important than everything else. Instead, it has been placed,
intentionally, at the bottom of the totem pole. May the Gods have mercy on
us all.

Valete,

Quintus Caecilius Metellus Postumianus Pius

M. Hortensia Maior. Q.Caecilio Metello Postumanio spd;
Salve,
though we have been at odds may times I hope you will not resign,
did you not swear an oath to the gods?

Now if anyone should be glum it is I. I am 'nefas' and have lost my
priesthood to Magna Mater, but you know what Metelle, I love the gods
and they love me, so I am filled with optimism and joy and look
foward to all sorts of projects, dinners for the Megalesia to
celebrate Magna Mater, recruiting if and when I am at grad school,
doing public rituals to honour the gods, study, what a wonderful time
we live in to be able to do such things!

Metelle, I am older than you, maybe not wiser but I well pass on one
peace of advice; persevere....my duties sometimes aggravate me, the
tribs are not a harmonious place but remember our oath, I won't break
my, don't break yours. Remember there is no State Religion without
the State.
bene vale in pace deorum
M. Hortensia Maior TRP
Propraetrix Hiberniae
caput Officina Iuriis
et Investigatio CFQ

This is hard news. I hope you will reflect and reconsider. I do not
speak about my feelings for the gods because I am unaccustomed to
speak openly about religion (an old but longstanding aversion to
airing my personal beliefs) but I heartily believe in the gods of
Roma and do everything I can to learn what I can through reading and
learning from those whose education on the Religio far surpasses my
own poor skills.

I suspect that there are many more like me who believe in the gods of
Rome yet do not often speak out. Whatever you decide is the path the
gods have chosen for you, but I hope it will give you solace to hear
from me and others of the primacy of the gods in our lives.

vale bene,

Julilla Sempronia Magna

I'm trying to stay with this because I found the original question provocative. I would not have a clue what to do in that situation. Now I'm confused. What exactly are NYC scofflaws?
Servia

----- Original Message -----
From: raymond fuentes
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2005 9:50 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Re: [Nova-Roma] Off Topic Question


I constantly have run-ins w/ UN types as a cop and
served under UN colors in Bosnia...the UN is worse
than useless. A lot of them are NYC scofflaws.
--- julius_cornelianus@...
<julius_cornelianus@...> wrote:
> They are useless...read the 3rd Genenva Convention
and you will find it is not even applicable to modern
conflicts....there's 2 sections in it that would have
to be really stretched to fit the profile of
terrorists...however there is the slight problem of
meeting requirements such as follow rules of war, have
identifiable symbol (ski masks do not count), carry
arms in open, etc. So they are out of date (like the
UN)...
>
> raymond fuentes <praefectus2324@...> wrote:As
a man who has seen action I have often felt the
> Geneva Convention is useless unless we are invaded
by
> England. Who else follows it? BTW- I LOVE THE BRITS!
> --- gawne@... <gawne@...> wrote:
> > Salve Quinte Lani, et salvete Quirites,
> >
> > "Quintus Lanius Paulinus (Michael Kelly)"
> <mjk@...> writes:
> >
> > > I was trying to find out about international
> conventions or laws with
> > > regards with what to do if you are visiting a
> foreign country which
> > > suddenly declares war against your country or
vice
> versa.
> >
> > Civilian citizens of hostile countries are covered
> in the IV Geneva Convention
> > (1949), based on the recommendations of the XV
> International Conference of the
> > Red Cross (1934). Unfortunately for many, many
> people, the recommendations
> > had not been adopted at the beginning of WW II.
The
> International Red Cross
> > went to a lot of effort to get people to comply
with
> their recommendations,
> > but they had no enforcement authority.
> >
> > To answer your question directly, there is no
'grace
> period' for
> > non-combatants to withdraw from a foreign country
> once war is declared. They
> > may become prisoners of war, or they may be
> deported, or they may be held in
> > specific geographic areas provided those places
are
> provided with adequate
> > food and water.
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > -- Marinus
>
>
> =====
> S P Q R
>
> Fidelis Ad Mortem.
>
> Marcvs Flavivs Fides
> Roman Citizen
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
> http://my.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
=== Message Truncated ===


=====
S P Q R

Fidelis Ad Mortem.

Marcvs Flavivs Fides
Roman Citizen





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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]