Salvete omnes,

There are certainly different points of view on this idea of
negotiating, There have been times in history where one had to sit
down with their guerilla type enemies at the table eventually.
Britain with the Irish question in 1916 - 1921, the French with the
FLN in the 1950's or the American government with the North
Vietnamese in the 70's.

I have a few thoughts on this. First of all I wonder what is the
difference between a guerilla fighter and a terrorist? I know
guerillas usually hit military or political targets but sometimes
their leaders are not in control of various individual groups from
within and they sate their revenge on innocents sometimes. Also
terrorist types of reigimes like the nazis, certainly coined the
term terrorist for people like the Partisans or Maquis who we
considered heroes. There is a famous propaganda picture from the
nazis, a big poster of Churchill with a cigar in his mouth holding
the famous "Chicago Piano" or Thompson submachine gun and that of
course equated him to the American gangsters of the 20's and 30's.
Anway, I would appreciate it if some of our military memebers or
experts could shed light on the differences.

Having said that, one criteria I do use in deciding who to negotiate
or deal with is by their deeds and actions with regards to the
civilian population or innocents in other words. If just military or
occupational authorities are targeted perhaps they really do have
some gripes or issues to consider. On the other hand, if they behave
like those in London this week, bomb civilians and saw off peoples'
heads on the internet, then I have to ask myself, are these the
sorts of people I would like governing me? Will they carve my head
off for questioning the Qu'ran, hang a girl off the muzzel of a tank
for wearing a miniskirt, or cut off my hand for theft should I be
late filing taxes?

Regards,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus







--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Kirsteen Wright
<kirsteen.falconsfan@g...> wrote:

> On 7/10/05, raymond fuentes <praefectus2324@y...> wrote:
>
> > Ive heard a lot of folks speak of negotiating w/ the
> > fools who perpertratethese crimes.Ifthere is one thing
> > that history has shown us is that we cant yield.
>
> Funny I'd say the one thing history has taught me is that if you

don't

> get to the root of a problem like this (and how else do you that
> except negotiate) it never goes away.
>
> Flavia Lucilla Merula
> --
> Chaos, confusion, disorder - my work here is done

On 7/10/05, Quintus Lanius Paulinus (Michael Kelly) <mjk@...> wrote:

> Salvete omnes,
>
> There are certainly different points of view on this idea of
> negotiating, There have been times in history where one had to sit
> down with their guerilla type enemies at the table eventually.
> Britain with the Irish question in 1916 - 1921, the French with the
> FLN in the 1950's or the American government with the North
> Vietnamese in the 70's.

Yes - and if it's not done properly, look where it gets you. We're
still dealing with the 'Irish question'

> I have a few thoughts on this. First of all I wonder what is the
> difference between a guerilla fighter and a terrorist?

That's a subject I've often debated with friends. I don't think there
really is a moral answer, I think it depends which side you're on.
For instance, throughout my life Mandela has always been one of my
greatest heroes, yet to the South African regime he was a terrorist
who required 27 years incarceration.

In my youth I was a passionate Zionist and had many a late night
argument at Uni, Now, being a lot older and sickened by a lot of
things the Israeli government's done and had several friends leave
Israel totally disillusioned, I no longer feel it's nearly so clear
cut and in some cases am quite ashamed of my earlier views.

I know

> guerillas usually hit military or political targets but sometimes
> their leaders are not in control of various individual groups from
> within and they sate their revenge on innocents sometimes.

I can in absolutely no way condone the bombings or targeting of
civilians (Hell my 20yr old daughter is in London and I went through
agonies before I could find out she was safe) but, on a psychological
basis, I can understand the frustrations of people who feel they have
no recourse, no hope and how these frustrations can boil over. If
you're dealing with someone who is prepared to kill themselves to
achieve their aims then you're dealing with a passion and frustration
most of us find difficult to comprehend much less deal with.

then I have to ask myself, are these the

> sorts of people I would like governing me?

No absolutely not, but then there's a lot of people I wouldn't like
governing me. To be honest bush is one of them. Let's face it I'm not
even that happy about Blair - and I'm stuck with him.

Flavia Lucilla Merula
--
Chaos, confusion, disorder - my work here is done

G. Equitius Cato quirites S.P.D.

Salvete omnes.

As we are often given comparisons between Roman power and the "Pax
Romana", and the virtual empire of the U.S. and its corollatory "Pax
Americana", I've been thinking about the courses of action, diplomatic
and/or military, that are open to the U.S. as the sole superpower on
earth, and her allies.

In that oft-admired scenario, when Gaius Popilius Laenas drew the line
around King Antiochus IV of Syria, ordering him to cease his planned
agression against Egypt and return from whence he came or suffer the
wrath of the Senate and People of Rome, Laenas did so with the sure
and utter confidence that the Senate and People of Rome had made their
authority clear by force of arms. The whole (known) world understood
what Laenas meant, and it reacted accordingly. Antiochus went home.

The Romans were always willing to negotiate with anyone; but at the
heart of any negotiation stood the certainty that Rome would do what
she felt necessary to safeguard her future and preserve her economic
and political interests, no matter what the cost or whether or not it
would "hamper" their relationship with the other party. What was of
the utmost importance was not whether everyone "liked" Roman power,
but rather that they obeyed it, and operated with the understanding
that Rome would always act in her own interests. In that famous
quote, Rome's purpose in history was "to rule the world and make
mankind obey".

Does this sound familiar? Yet what the world once admired in Rome it
now reviles in the U.S.

I think that we should absolutely negotiate if it will save lives and
create a more viable board from whence we can, later, spring upon our
tormentors and annihilate them. Perhaps a more appropriate story from
Roman history is that of Gaius Iulius Caesar, who after being
kidnapped by pirates, told his amused captors that he demanded a
higher ransom, and that once free he would return and destroy them.
He did. He negotiated, gained his feedom, and then once in a position
to do so, crushed them utterly.

Some might draw back in horror, saying, "But Cato, you're a Christian
--- this is a terribly un-Christian way to think!" Yes, it is, and I
am sorry for it and I often ask God to teach me to respond in a more
Christian manner; it is not a "righteous" anger which fuels my
reaction to these animals, but an all-too-human anger.

So when we think about the use of military force, remember what gave
Laenas the strength to stand, alone, before the Syrian host; when we
think of negotiations think of Caesar, freed, returning to extirpate
his captors.

Valete,

Cato

Salve Flavia Lucilla Merula who said

"Funny I'd say the one thing history has taught me is that if you don't
get to the root of a problem like this (and how else do you that
except negotiate) it never goes away".

"The problem" is that the terrorist want to establish an Islamic world order that would require every man, woman and child, even non-believers to live under Muslim law.

A few Jews and a few Christians MIGHT survive as being "children of the Book" (Bible) as the Koran call them but anybody that worships the Gods of Rome or any other religion like it would be met with an executioner ax.

If you want to see into that world look how well the Sudan has been run for the last number of years as the Muslim section of the country has tried to impose Muslim law on the non-Muslin half of the country.

This new Islamofascist totalitarianism must be dealt with the way we dealt with Nazism and Communism. With Military, economic and moral strength as well as patience.

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus




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

Gaius Modius Athanasius Tiberio Galerio Paulino salutem dicit

When I was in Dubai there were several Christian Churches in operation, and
several Christian Churches are still functioning in the middle east. Islamic
fundamentalism is, as I see it, a reaction to Western politics. I believe
Western politics, and US arrogance should change. I know several Muslims who
are very good people. Only a minority of Muslims are fundamentalist, and
they make the rest of the Islamic community look bad.

How do you define moral strength? Christian fundamentalism? The Bush
administration?

Economic strength? What? Walmart financial terrorism? Trade deficit with
China?

Vale;

Gaius Modius Athanasius

In a message dated 7/10/2005 12:58:57 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
spqr753@... writes:

This new Islamofascist totalitarianism must be dealt with the way we dealt
with Nazism and Communism. With Military, economic and moral strength as well
as patience.

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus






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

A. Apollonius M. Flavio omnibusque sal.

> Ive heard a lot of folks speak of negotiating w/ the
> fools who perpertratethese crimes.Ifthere is one
> thing
> that history has shown us is that we cant yield.

I'm not sure who you've heard saying that, but I can
tell you that no one in any of the main British
political parties and no one I've talked to myself has
mentioned the idea of negotiating.

The police are looking for the bombers, with the full
assistance and cooperation of the police and
intelligence services of our European neighbours. When
they're identified they'll be put on trial. This is
the way the U.K. has always treated terrorists - as
criminals.

What Britain does not do is go to war with terrorists.
The IRA for many years claimed to be an "army" at war
with Britain. We said to them, "don't flatter
yourself. We're not at war with you. You're common
criminals and we'll treat you as such."

The vast majority of terrorists, including extremist
Islamic terrorists (and it's not yet certain that
that's what the London bombers were), are residents of
the countries they attack. The London bombers were
probably British citizens. Britain does not make war
on its own citizens. If these people want a war, we
will not give them the satisfaction.



___________________________________________________________
How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday
snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com

Salve A. Apolloni Corde,

I read ages ago that though Britain had abolished capital punishment
over 40 years ago, she still has it on the books for an
assassination of the Queen or King. I'm sure any terrorist group
would realize how detremental to their cause a hit on the monarch
would be but you never know. Is this provision still true as far as
you know?

Regards,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus






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

> A. Apollonius M. Flavio omnibusque sal.
>
> > Ive heard a lot of folks speak of negotiating w/ the
> > fools who perpertratethese crimes.Ifthere is one
> > thing
> > that history has shown us is that we cant yield.
>
> I'm not sure who you've heard saying that, but I can
> tell you that no one in any of the main British
> political parties and no one I've talked to myself has
> mentioned the idea of negotiating.
>
> The police are looking for the bombers, with the full
> assistance and cooperation of the police and
> intelligence services of our European neighbours. When
> they're identified they'll be put on trial. This is
> the way the U.K. has always treated terrorists - as
> criminals.
>
> What Britain does not do is go to war with terrorists.
> The IRA for many years claimed to be an "army" at war
> with Britain. We said to them, "don't flatter
> yourself. We're not at war with you. You're common
> criminals and we'll treat you as such."
>
> The vast majority of terrorists, including extremist
> Islamic terrorists (and it's not yet certain that
> that's what the London bombers were), are residents of
> the countries they attack. The London bombers were
> probably British citizens. Britain does not make war
> on its own citizens. If these people want a war, we
> will not give them the satisfaction.
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday
> snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com

A. Apollonius C. Equitio amico omnibusque sal.

> In that oft-admired scenario, when Gaius Popilius
> Laenas drew the line
> around King Antiochus IV of Syria, ordering him to
> cease his planned
> agression against Egypt and return from whence he
> came or suffer the
> wrath of the Senate and People of Rome, Laenas did
> so with the sure
> and utter confidence that the Senate and People of
> Rome had made their
> authority clear by force of arms. The whole (known)
> world understood
> what Laenas meant, and it reacted accordingly.
> Antiochus went home.

The problem with your analogy is that you're comparing
international diplomacy with international
law-enforcement. They're not the same.

Antiochus was the king of the Syrians. He claimed to
be the legitimate leader and representative of the
Syrian people, and to have the authority to act on
their behalf. Rome accepted his claim and recognized
his actions as the actions of the Syrian people. It's
in this context that Laenas, the legitimate
representative of the Roman people, threatened to make
war on the Syrian people.

Someone else mentioned Nazi Germany as a similar
analogy to the present situation. The same applies.
The German government which ordered the invasion of
Poland claimed to be the legitimate representative of
the German people, and Britain accepted that claim.
Therefore, when it judged the invasion of Poland
unacceptable, Britain declared war not on the members
of the German government but on the German people. The
whole German citizenry was held responsible for the
acts of its legitimate representatives.

The same principle applies in corporate law. When the
director of a company orders the illegal dumping of
toxic waste, for example, it is the company which is
held legally responsible, not just the director: the
director is the legitimate representative of the
company and he acts on its behalf.

Likewise, the Syrian soldiers who were about the cross
the border into Egypt, the German soldiers who marched
into Poland, and workers who rolled the barrels of
toxic waste into the river, these people are not
acting as individuals; they are acting as the
legitimate agents of the Syrian people, the German
people, the corporation. It is Syria, Germany, the
corporation which is called to account.

The Unabomber carried on a campaign of bombings
against various American targets, but the U.S.
government did not, as far as I know, declare war on
him. What's the difference between him and the London
and Madrid bombers? Is it merely that he didn't claim
to be acting on behalf of anyone else? Is that all
that makes the difference between war and
law-enforcement? Is all I have to do to get a country
to declare war on me is to plant a bomb somewhere and
claim that I did it on behalf of such-and-such a group
of people? Of course not. The crucial thing is whether
that country accepts the claim. If it does, then we're
into the realm of war; if not, we're talking about law
enforcement.

So, is Osama bin Laden anyone's legitimate
representative? Is the person who ordered the Madrid
and London bombings anyone's legitimate
representative? The people who hijacked the planes
which flew into the World Trade Centre, who planted
the bombs in the trains going to Atocha station or
King's Cross station, are they anyone's legitimate
agents? If so, then let's find out whose legitimate
representatives and agents these people are, and then
we'll know whom we're at war with. Osama bin Laden
claims to be acting on behalf of Muslims. Do we accept
him as the legitimate representative of all Muslims?
If so, we are at war with Muslims. The IRA used to
claim to represent Northern Irish Catholics and
republicans. Were they?

If we don't accept these claims - if we refuse to
regard these terrorists as anyone's representative but
their own - then we are not in the realm of warfare.
Then we're talking about law-enforcement. The U.S.
didn't go to war with the Unabomber. Britain didn't go
to war with the IRA. They treated them as criminals
and used normal methods of law-enforcement against
them.

So looking at the way Rome related to other states
using diplomacy and warfare is profoundly unhelpful.
What we're dealing with here is criminality and
law-enforcement, and we should be looking at Roman
analogies accordingly.

Here's an analogy:

"All this talk was suddenly interrupted by a fire
which broke out in the night in several places round
the Forum on the eve of the Quinquatrus. Seven shops
which were afterwards replaced by five were burning at
the same time, as well as the offices where the New
Banks now stand. Soon after, private buildings - the
Basilicae did not yet exist - the Lautumiae, the Fish
Market and the Hall of Vesta were alight. It was with
the utmost difficulty that the Temple of Vesta was
saved, mainly through the exertions of thirteen
slaves, who were afterwards manumitted at the public
cost. The fire raged all through the next day and
there was not the smallest doubt that it was the work
of incendiaries, for fires started simultaneously in
several different places. The senate accordingly
authorised the consul to give public notice that
whoever disclosed the names of those through whose
agency the conflagration had been started should, if
he were a freeman, receive a reward, if a slave, his
liberty. Tempted by the offer of a reward, a slave
belonging to the Capuan family of the Calavii, called
Manus, gave information to the effect that his
masters, together with five young Capuan nobles, whose
fathers had been beheaded by Q. Fulvius, had caused
the fire and were prepared to commit every description
of crime if they were not arrested. They and their
slaves were at once apprehended. At first they
endeavoured to throw suspicion upon the informer and
his statement. It was asserted that after being beaten
by his master, the day before he gave information, he
had run away and had made out of an occurrence which
was really accidental the foundation of a false
charge. When, however, the accused and accuser were
brought face to face and the slaves were examined
under torture, they all confessed. The masters as well
as the slaves who had been their accessories were all
executed. The informer was rewarded with his liberty
and 20,000 ases."
Livy 26.27, translation from McAdams.



___________________________________________________________
How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday
snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com

Salve,
yes, i agree with you. But I want ask you who did it ?
Vale
--
Sextus Lucilius Tutor
http://rimskyobcan.ic.cz


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

What of the nations that knowingly harbor cells and
training camps fully knowing what they are being
utilzed for? Isnt that collobaration & guilt as well?
--- Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
<a_apollonius_cordus@...> wrote:

> A. Apollonius C. Equitio amico omnibusque sal.
>
> > In that oft-admired scenario, when Gaius Popilius
> > Laenas drew the line
> > around King Antiochus IV of Syria, ordering him to
> > cease his planned
> > agression against Egypt and return from whence he
> > came or suffer the
> > wrath of the Senate and People of Rome, Laenas did
> > so with the sure
> > and utter confidence that the Senate and People of
> > Rome had made their
> > authority clear by force of arms. The whole

(known)

> > world understood
> > what Laenas meant, and it reacted accordingly.
> > Antiochus went home.
>
> The problem with your analogy is that you're

comparing

> international diplomacy with international
> law-enforcement. They're not the same.
>
> Antiochus was the king of the Syrians. He claimed to
> be the legitimate leader and representative of the
> Syrian people, and to have the authority to act on
> their behalf. Rome accepted his claim and recognized
> his actions as the actions of the Syrian people.

It's

> in this context that Laenas, the legitimate
> representative of the Roman people, threatened to

make

> war on the Syrian people.
>
> Someone else mentioned Nazi Germany as a similar
> analogy to the present situation. The same applies.
> The German government which ordered the invasion of
> Poland claimed to be the legitimate representative

of

> the German people, and Britain accepted that claim.
> Therefore, when it judged the invasion of Poland
> unacceptable, Britain declared war not on the

members

> of the German government but on the German people.

The

> whole German citizenry was held responsible for the
> acts of its legitimate representatives.
>
> The same principle applies in corporate law. When

the

> director of a company orders the illegal dumping of
> toxic waste, for example, it is the company which is
> held legally responsible, not just the director: the
> director is the legitimate representative of the
> company and he acts on its behalf.
>
> Likewise, the Syrian soldiers who were about the

cross

> the border into Egypt, the German soldiers who

marched

> into Poland, and workers who rolled the barrels of
> toxic waste into the river, these people are not
> acting as individuals; they are acting as the
> legitimate agents of the Syrian people, the German
> people, the corporation. It is Syria, Germany, the
> corporation which is called to account.
>
> The Unabomber carried on a campaign of bombings
> against various American targets, but the U.S.
> government did not, as far as I know, declare war on
> him. What's the difference between him and the

London

> and Madrid bombers? Is it merely that he didn't

claim

> to be acting on behalf of anyone else? Is that all
> that makes the difference between war and
> law-enforcement? Is all I have to do to get a

country

> to declare war on me is to plant a bomb somewhere

and

> claim that I did it on behalf of such-and-such a

group

> of people? Of course not. The crucial thing is

whether

> that country accepts the claim. If it does, then

we're

> into the realm of war; if not, we're talking about

law

> enforcement.
>
> So, is Osama bin Laden anyone's legitimate
> representative? Is the person who ordered the Madrid
> and London bombings anyone's legitimate
> representative? The people who hijacked the planes
> which flew into the World Trade Centre, who planted
> the bombs in the trains going to Atocha station or
> King's Cross station, are they anyone's legitimate
> agents? If so, then let's find out whose legitimate

=== Message Truncated ===


S P Q R

Fidelis Ad Mortem.

Marcvs Flavivs Fides
Roman Citizen



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

What of the nations that knowingly harbor cells and
training camps fully knowing what they are being
utilzed for? Isnt that collobaration & guilt as well?

S P Q R

Fidelis Ad Mortem.

Marcvs Flavivs Fides
Roman Citizen






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

When I notice someone on my patrol up to no good I get
rid of them. To give in or turn a blind eye only
increases their numbers emboldens them & I lo se my
post
--- Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <phorus@...>
wrote:

> Salve,
> yes, i agree with you. But I want ask you who did

it ?

> Vale
> --
> Sextus Lucilius Tutor
> http://rimskyobcan.ic.cz
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been

removed]

>
>
>

S P Q R

Fidelis Ad Mortem.

Marcvs Flavivs Fides
Roman Citizen





__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour:
http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html

Salvete omnes.

The United States, whether its leaders or people agree or like it,
is an imperial power. It is the inheritor of the mantle of the
British Empire. Before the British Empire the empire of Rome
bestrode the world. The US occupies a familiar role - policeman of
the world.

We can argue the rights and wrongs of the foreign policy of the US
and we can engage in specualtion as to whether it would be possible
to negotiate or whether indeed we even should consider negotiation.

Yesterdays terrorist can be todays world leaders, but today the
terrorists of the Middle East are just that - terrorists. Their time
for elevation to the pedestal of saviours of their nations or
religion has not yet come, and it may never come. For now they are
just common criminals.

We shouldn't have to negotiate with scum who blow people apart, but
our leaders may have to if it looks like the cost of continuing
the "war" on terrorism will cost Presidents elections and see
Senators thrown out into oblivion. Ultimately, even though it would
be folly to negotiate, public pressure will steer the ship. In this
day and age principle rarely has any direct correlation to politics.

The United Nations is a shambles and largely a disgrace. National
agendas take priority over principle. The administrative arm is
obviously tainted by corruption. We will see no bold moves to world
peace from that miserable collection of windbags.

Like it or not, and obviously many don't, this world really hasn't
progressed that far from the days of the Roman Emperors, Caesar,
Sulla and Marius. Motions condemning bombings will litter the floor
of assemblies from the (Dis)United Nations to parliaments; town
halls to parish councils. Everyone will have a view, especially when
the body count rises. Ultimately people can screetch and rail and
rant as much as they like. The only person who can effectively alter
the course that the US and thus the West takes sits in the White
House. Even though some European nations may not contribute forces
or help in the Middle East - or wherever his gaze falls next - the
policy of President Bush will steer us all for better or worse. As
to whether it worse, only history can judge.

Let us also not forget that in respect of the Middle East, these are
underveloped peoples who have been pillaged silly by their own
leaders in many countries for years. In the more affluent Gulf
states, the wealth and comfort of citizens has been assisted by the
importation of what would have been once called indentured servants.
From all over Asia, people work for minimum wages in conditions that
are hostile and threatnening. Religion has now been thrown into this
boiling pot of oil and for the impoverished of the Arab peoples the
appeal to jihad is like waving a candle to moths. They have nothing
to lose.

You cannot negotiate with religious extremists, especially those
that have taken a religion and twisted it into a version that
condones slaughtering their own fellow believers as long as the
cause is "just". This is not like the IRA bombing campaign, or
negotiations. They had an agenda (of sorts) of a "free and united"
Ireland. Today we face people whose mass followers (not the
individual educated terrorist) are by and large either illiterate or
locked into a belief structure that has more in common with
fanatical and dogmatic beliefs of the Inquisition, than a 21st
century view.

The fuse has been lit and nothing we (or even the US military) can
do will stamp it out. Maybe it was inevitable, maybe it could have
been avoided, but that is now irrelevant. There is no going back and
there can be no surrender to terrorism. It will, as usual, boil down
to them or us. They will not negotiate in good faith, as many
relatives of those who have lost their heads will testify, and we
must not capitulate in craven fear. No sane person wants war or to
suffer the threat of being blown to bits, and probably only myself
and the other citizens born and/or living in Britannia can fully
comprehend what that means to a way of life as we have lived with
this since 1968 (never mind the Blitz).

It would be a lot easier if all the Arab terrorists and supporters
formed a conventional army and rushed across the Straights of
Gibraltar to invade Hispania (which is targetted for inclusion in
the Muslim supra-state because large parts were once Muslim). At
least then we could just eradicate the lot and get it over with, but
that is unlikely to happen. More terrorist outrages are inevitable.
It doesn't also matter who gets elected as President next time, for
the only hope to avert more of the same is to give into their
demands and frankly I doubt that the people of Hispania and the
other countries slated for invasion by the mullahs would agree to
that policy.

Therefore now is the time to remain steadfast, vigilant and as
Cordus so rightly says to put these people where they deserve to be,
in a criminal court to be tried as low and common fellons.

Valete
Gnaeus Iulius Caesar


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

> What of the nations that knowingly harbor cells and
> training camps fully knowing what they are being
> utilzed for? Isnt that collobaration & guilt as well?
>
> S P Q R
>
> Fidelis Ad Mortem.
>
> Marcvs Flavivs Fides
> Roman Citizen
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

G. Equitius Cato A. Apollonio Cordo amico quiritibusque S.P.D.

Salve Corde et salvete omnes.

Corde, you wrote:

> The problem with your analogy is that you're comparing
> international diplomacy with international
> law-enforcement. They're not the same.

CATO: I understand the distinction. The incident with Gaius Caesar
is exactly the kind of process I'm talking about with regards to
negotiation; it has precise a mirror image in what is happening today,
and I believe our response should as well. Pirates, acting outside
any kind of "legitimate" government, capture and ransom a Roman
citizen. He negotiates (or his family does on his behalf), and when
restored to a position of authority returns and destroys them. I say
go ahead, negotiate with these terrorists if need be, and be willing
to give to them some of what they demand; but be ready --- and certain
--- so that when the opportunity to strike arises, we do so with swift
and terrible force, without hindrance or regret.

But let's look at the other --- the actions of Laenas in his
confrontation with Antiochus. I'm not sure that what Antiochus
represented (i.e., a "legitimate" government or not) was necessarily
important in this particular incident. What is important, and the
point I was making, is that a single man stood before an aggressor and
refused to yield; he had behind him the force and authority of Rome.
The reason Laenas' unwavering stance worked was that the world
recognized the authority behind Laenas and feared it, not because of
any questions of legitimacy or diplomacy but because it had proven
itself in its willingness to be unsheathed and unleashed upon the
enemies (either real or perceived, economic or political) of Rome.
Laenas could very well have been standing anywhere facing any
aggressor, and his response would have been the same: "Rome forbids
you to act upon your desire for conquest, because it is not in her
interest to allow you to do so." And he was obeyed --- not only (or
even necessarily) because Rome was a "legitimate" power, but because
Rome was a power.

Vale et valete,

Cato

In a message dated 7/10/2005 2:47:45 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
praefectus2324@... writes:
Two situation that stand clear in my mind are the
Byzantines paying the Huns to leave them alone

It was the East Romans who paid tribute. And it worked. The Huns abandoned
the Imperial territories and headed west. Later Justinian who likely started
the Empire we call Byzantine, instead gave the Hunnish tribe still in
Ilyria/Dalmatia, allied status, and made them part of the army he used to reunite the
Empire.

It has become fairly certain, in my opinion, that no appeasement is possible.
They wish to stay in the 13th century, where theocracy is the over riding
factor. A Democracy, Republic, Constitutional Monarchy makes this impossible in
the modern age.
The current fanatics are fighting to retain their lifestyle which is
important to their
personal salvation. However, if these handfuls were allowed to die of old
age, the problem would itself die. But by allowing these fanatics to instruct
others, younger then them, allows the belief to reassert itself. And this is
the root of the problem.

Which bring us to Iraq. In a gathering of current and ex newsmen at UCLA by
FACS last week that met concurrent with the summit, we discussed Iraq.
Clearly what we are doing is not going to yield any short term results. So we have
two options.
1. Increase our troop deployment to 300,000. This would allow us to get a
handle on things
and garrison effectively all areas of Iraq.
So where are we going to get the troops?
a. Restart the draft.
b. Hire mercenaries
c. Get foreigners to fight for us, and reward them with citizenship. (Don't
laugh, Max Boot of the office of strategic studies, who hates anything Roman
came up with that one.)

2. Pull back to Israel and let them fight it out. (Yes I know, horrible,
but the blood feuds
and family warfare will continue behind the scenes until someone with an Iron
Fist like Saddam puts an end to it.)
The US would warn all neighboring countries, that this was strictly an
internal affair, and to officially stay out. After both sides weakened themselves
with excessive bloodletting, we move back in to restore order, but this time we
would be ready with a post war plan, and not one extrempornized a week after
the war started.
That was part one of the discussion. Part two had to do with money.

It is costing the US a lot money for this operation to be carried out. (I'm
sure England, who has their own expense, wishes that they never committed to
this.)
Ironically we are in the same position that Britain was during the AWI. We
have a long logistic tail, and we are in a country that has diminishing returns
for political situation every year we are there.

Q. Fabius Maximus


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

In a message dated 7/10/2005 12:03:48 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
a_apollonius_cordus@... writes:
"All this talk was suddenly interrupted by a fire
which broke out in the night in several places round
the Forum on the eve of the Quinquatrus. Seven shops
which were afterwards replaced by five were burning at
the same time, as well as the offices where the New
Banks now stand. Soon after, private buildings - the
Basilicae did not yet exist - the Lautumiae, the Fish
Market and the Hall of Vesta were alight. It was with
the utmost difficulty that the Temple of Vesta was
saved, mainly through the exertions of thirteen
slaves, who were afterwards manumitted at the public
cost. The fire raged all through the next day and
there was not the smallest doubt that it was the work
of incendiaries, for fires started simultaneously in
several different places. The senate accordingly
authorised the consul to give public notice that
whoever disclosed the names of those through whose
agency the conflagration had been started should, if
he were a freeman, receive a reward, if a slave, his
liberty. Tempted by the offer of a reward, a slave
belonging to the Capuan family of the Calavii, called
Manus, gave information to the effect that his
masters, together with five young Capuan nobles, whose
fathers had been beheaded by Q. Fulvius, had caused
the fire and were prepared to commit every description
of crime if they were not arrested. They and their
slaves were at once apprehended. At first they
endeavoured to throw suspicion upon the informer and
his statement. It was asserted that after being beaten
by his master, the day before he gave information, he
had run away and had made out of an occurrence which
was really accidental the foundation of a false
charge. When, however, the accused and accuser were
brought face to face and the slaves were examined
under torture, they all confessed. The masters as well
as the slaves who had been their accessories were all
executed. The informer was rewarded with his liberty
and 20,000 ases."
Livy 26.27
Apollonius,
I forget about this one, you must have a very efficent search engine to
retrive this.
I have to thumb through my Loebs which takes forever.

Q. Fabius Maximus


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

Many thanks to Jamie for his phonecall yesterday, recorded on my
machine, looking to see whether London members are okay.

Thankfully we are all safe and well, here. Our thoughts are with those
who cannot say the same for themselves.

Keith Seddon
(Lucius Gellius Severus)

Salvete omnes

On this off-topic I would like to say something. Terrorism can't be
fought with a classical "war". In its own essence terrorism was an
act against certain and specific military and policial objetives. A
new step has been done with the attacks against the civilian people.
But there's always the same system to fight it; policial & political
resources.

On the current terrorist enviroment, radicals are attacking civilian
people, usually of the western world. New York, Washington , Madrid,
and now London, have been chosen because are the "centers" of the
political and financial governments of the western world, and
therefore seems to be the western lifestyle referents for this
terrorists. But also was Bali, or Casablanca, and some other cities
around the world attacked by this radicals. Why?

I don't believe in a religious problem. Religion can be produced as
an excuse, but it hides the true problems; economic and political.
The industrial nations still exerces the rol of the old-fashioned
countries that colonized the continents watched then as "middle-
aged" ones. Now they need no colonial gobernorship from the
metropoli, but just economical agents. And there are still
economical bounds that ties that "neo-colonies" to the old and some
new metropolis. A subordinating relationship, of course. On the
other hand, political problem is that some colonies who believed
they will be free are on their knees nowadays. I can remember the
Palestinian problem, not solved but even incresed by the policies of
U.K and France after the IWW. I can remember the Saharauis problem
with Spain involved on it. And many others. The governments of those
countries who tried not to be a puppet on the hands of the old or
new metropolis have been always in a precarious existence, so they
can't guarantee an order&law life conditions.

Politics, however, can be also an excuse for the economical problem.
Iraq is a clear example of that. The war against Saddam (Not against
terrorism) has not solved the problem, but opened a Pandora's box on
the Middle-East. Contrary to Viet-Nam, war lost in the military
fields but won on the economic ones (Now, Viet-Nam is a sort of
economical neo-colonie for the U.S.) Iraq is being one of the
greatest mistakes of the "new order".

So what the terrorists are fighting for? I would dare to say that
their fight is lost before hand, because as soon as a muslim or some
other citizen from a muslim country want's to migrate to Europe or
North America the reason to fight against these countries lies in
the economic lifestyle. They want to live as the citizens of the
metropoli, not as the subdits of the "neo-colonie". So this
terrorism attacks that lifestyle, not based on religious ideas but
the religion as an after-excuse. That's why they don't attack
military bases, government buildings or policial yards, but the
civilians, the people who live in the cities.

That's why a "war on terrorism" is an absurd. Is like fighting a
flie with atomic missiles. In Spain, we have been dealing with ETA
terrorism for 30 years now, and there has been no war on it, but
policial resources, courts to judge the terrorists and laws to do
it. Now that ETA has been weakened by this means, negotiating is the
final chapter to end that problem, but on political grounds and
always using policial means.

vale bene in pace deorum
L•DIDIVS•GEMINVS•SCEPTIVS

OSD G. Equitius Cato

Salvete omnnes!

Today is ante diem V Idus Quintilis; the day is Comitialis.

"The popular anger against Cassius did not last long. The
attractiveness of the Agrarian Law, though its author was removed, was
in itself sufficient to make the plebeians desire it, and their
eagerness for it was intensified by the unscrupulousness of the
senate, who cheated the soldiers out of their share of the spoil which
they had won that year from the Volscians and Aequi. Everything taken
from the enemy was sold by the consul Fabius and the amount realised
paid into the treasury. In spite of the hatred which this produced in
the plebs against the whole Fabian house, the patricians succeeded in
getting Caeso Fabius elected with L. Aemilius as consuls for the next
year. This still further embittered the plebeians, and domestic
disturbances brought on a foreign war. For the time civic quarrels
were suspended, patricians and plebeians were of one mind in resisting
the Aequi and Volscians, and a victorious action was fought under
Aemilius. The enemy lost more in the retreat than in the battle, so
hotly did the cavalry pursue their routed foe. In the same year the
temple of Castor was dedicated on the 15th of July. It had been vowed
by the Dictator Postumius in the Latin war; his son was appointed
"duumvir" for its dedication. In this year, too, the minds of the
plebeians were much exercised by the attractions which the Agrarian
Law held out for them, and the tribunes made their office more popular
by constantly dwelling on this popular measure. The patricians,
believing that there was enough and more than enough madness in the
multitude as it was, viewed with horror these bribes and incentives to
recklessness. The consuls led the way in offering a most determined
resistance, and the senate won the day. Nor was the victory only a
momentary one, for they elected as consuls for the following year M.
Fabius, the brother of Caeso, and L. Valerius, who was an object of
special hatred on the part of the plebs through his prosecution of Sp.
Cassius. The contest with the tribunes went on through the year; the
Law remained a dead letter, and the tribunes, with their fruitless
promises, turned out to be idle boasters. The Fabian house gained an
immense reputation through the three successive consulships of its
members, all of whom had been uniformly successful in their resistance
to the tribunes. The office remained like a safe investment, for some
time in the family. War now began with Veii, and the Volscians rose
again. The people possessed more than sufficient strength for their
foreign wars, but they wasted it in domestic strife. The universal
anxiety was aggravated by supernatural portents, menacing almost daily
City and country alike. The soothsayers, who were consulted by the
State and by private persons, declared that the divine wrath was due
to nothing else but the profanation of sacred functions. These alarms
resulted in the punishment of Oppia, a Vestal virgin who was convicted
of unchastity." - Livy, History of Rome 2.42

Valete bene!

Cato

Salvete omnes,

Personally I think it is very good to have these discussions off and
on on modern events; especially catastrophic ones that may affect us
all eventually.
Rome is the focus on this list but ever since I was a youngster,
whining about memorizing important dates in the past, biographies,
rises and falls etc. the answer I got from our teachers was that it
IS very important to study history so that we learn the mistakes
from the past and apply them whilst tackling modern day problems.

The posts on this dreadful situation in London this week have been
very good, informative and we just got an exceptional one from
A.Apollonus Cordus the other day which brought up a fresh, different
way of assessing terrorism which I have not seen discussed before.
So long as personal attacks do not inflame things I see no reason to
curb such topics.

Regards,

QLP

Salvete omnes,

I have several of Bernard Lewis' books which I read and found very
informative. Take a look at this article of interest:




"For centuries, Islam (Submission in English) and the Muslims
(Submitters), were leaders of the world as far as freedom,
democracy, and civilization are concerned. Between the 7th and 12th
centuries, Islam was the center of a brilliant civilization and of a
great scientific, philosophic, and artistic culture. The Islamic
world was an open society based on the laws of the Quran that
advocated tolerance of other cultures and beliefs. It interacted
with the Greek East and Latin West and supplied both with great
resources that constituted the fundamentals of today's advances in
every aspect of modern science. After prophet Muhammad's death and
as the time passed, the Muslims gradually drifted away from the laws
of the Quran in favor of the man made laws derived from the books of
Hadiths (Sayings) and Sunna (actions) that were falsely attributed
to the prophet Muhammad. Within few hundred years from building that
great empire, the freedom, democracy, tolerance, and civilization
were gradually lost as the man-made laws took over from the perfect
laws of God in the Quran. It is from that time when the Muslim
masses deserted the Quran that they have been defeated continuously,
in every country, every war, every battle and every conflict and
until our present time. The so called "Muslim" countries are the
poorest, most humiliated, most oppressed and least advanced among
the whole world. They are losing in every battle, in Palestine, in
Iraq, in Chechneya, in Afghanistan, in Kashmir, in Europe, in
practically everywhere. The Muslims will have to return back to the
Quran to have any victory in this life, or God will substitute
others in their place, as He promised."
The real problem with Islam is the "Submitters" refuse to come into
the 21st century. They see all social and scientific progress as
undermining their traditional faith and hold on power. It's this
rejection of reason in favor of blind revelation and rejection of
personal liberty that will doom Islamic nations to continued
failure. Submission to a medieval religion interpreted by deranged
holy men is not the answer. Be careful of their claims of freedom
and democracy, they are on Islamic terms and only for Muslims.

The only way to halt Muslim defeat after defeat is to recognize the
right not to be a Muslim

Bernard Lewis on Understanding Islam

The mention of his name is usually accompanied by descriptives such
as "the distinguished," "the eminent," or "the renowned." Frequently
he is simply called "the doyen of Middle Eastern studies." All such
honorifics are amply deserved. Going back many years, Bernard Lewis,
Professor Emeritus of Near Eastern studies at Princeton, has been a
personal friend and, more than anyone else, my guru on matters
Islamic. His new book is What Went Wrong? Western Impact and Middle
Eastern Response (Oxford University Press). It is a mix of lectures
and essays from the 1990s, and a font of wisdom on which to draw in
order to put the world after September 11 into perspective. I don't
say Lewis is right about everything, and I know there are scholars
who criticize him for over–generalizing, but that is the kind of
criticism to be expected from academics who specialize in
specializing. Lewis, whose command of his subject nobody can
challenge, specializes in making careful and accessible arguments.
His exercise of that gift and calling is on magisterial display in
What Went Wrong?

For instance, Lewis writes that, during the period that we call
medieval, most Muslims viewed Christendom in terms of the Byzantine
Empire, "which gradually became smaller and weaker until its final
disappearance with the Turkish conquest of Constantinople in
1453." "[In the Muslim view] the remoter lands of Europe were seen
in much the same light as the remoter lands of Africa—as an outer
darkness of barbarism and unbelief from which there was nothing to
learn and little even to be imported, except slaves and raw
materials. For both the northern and the southern barbarians, their
best hope was to be incorporated in the empire of the caliphs, and
thus attain the benefits of religion and civilization. For the first
thousand years or so after the advent of Islam, this seemed not
unlikely, and Muslims made repeated attempts to accomplish it."

We understandably view history in terms of the rise of the West, and
seen from today's circumstance, that makes sense. But that is not
how, for a very long time, Muslims viewed it. From its beginnings,
Islam was on a millennium–long roll. Advancing from Arabia, Muslim
armies conquered Syria, Palestine, Egypt, and North Africa, all of
which had been part of Christendom. They then went on to conquer
Spain, Portugal, and Sicily, and to invade deep into France. In 846,
Arab forces sacked Ostia and Rome. Only then did Christendom begin
to organize a counterattack, leading up to what we call the Crusades
aimed at recovering the Holy Land. In many tellings of the story,
the Crusades were the horrible thing that Christians did to Muslims,
and there is no doubt that horrible things were done on all sides.
What is frequently overlooked in those tellings, however, is that
the Crusades were a response to Muslim aggression and, very
important, that they failed. The Christians were repelled. The
Muslims won, reinforcing their sense of invincibility against the
infidels.

The Tables Turn
The Christian powers had occasional successes, such as the great
naval battle of Lepanto, in the Gulf of Patras in Greece, in 1571.
Pope Pius V attributed the victory to the intercession of the
Blessed Virgin and in gratitude made October 7 the feast of the
Rosary. While Lepanto was a crushing defeat for Muslim forces, they
viewed it as a setback at the margins of world affairs. Lewis
describes Lepanto as "a great shot in the arm in the West, a minor
ripple in the East." Islam was still on a roll. By the eighteenth
century, however, the tables were beginning to turn. On numerous
fronts—science, politics, economics, military prowess—Christendom
increasingly had the initiative. Western travelers began to
penetrate Muslim lands, and "experts" of various sorts sold their
services to Muslim states. "For Muslims," writes Lewis, "first in
Turkey and later elsewhere, this brought a shocking new idea—that
one might learn from the previously despised infidel." Here entered
for the first time the problem of how to keep Western influence in
check. For a while, the Greek Christians, who deeply resented their
treatment by the Catholic West, were a help to Ottoman rule. As the
patriarch of Constantinople is supposed to have said, "Rather the
turban of the Turk than the tiara of the Pope."

By the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, some Muslims
realized that they were falling behind. A few leaders even began to
send students to the West in order to learn about the new things—
especially military things—to be found there. This raised the
religious and legal question as to whether it was permissible to
imitate the infidels. "The answer of the religious authorities,"
writes Lewis, "was that it is permissible to imitate the infidels in
order to more effectively fight against them." Modernization,
understood as catching up, could be endorsed with careful
qualifications. Westernization, understood as cultural imitation,
was something else. The West was always Christendom, and therefore
the enemy of the true faith. More progressive Muslim leaders looked
for the secret to success in those aspects of the West that were
most different from their own experience and, Lewis adds, "not
tainted by Christianity." This is why there was great sympathy for
the French Revolution, which projected itself in the East as anti–
Christian. But under the Empire and the Restoration, France lost its
appeal. "For the whole of the nineteenth and most of the twentieth
century the search for the hidden talisman concentrated on two
aspects of the West—economics and politics, or to put it
differently, wealth and power."

The Christian "taint" made cultural influence forbidden, with the
consequence that Islam also gained little economically. According to
the World Bank, Lewis notes, the whole of the Arab world, with about
300 million people, exports less to the rest of the world than does
Finland with its five million people. Apart from oil, of course, and
its effective exploitation is in Western hands. Unlike the rising
powers of Asia—such as Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, et al., most of
which started from a lower economic base than the Middle East—Muslim
countries have not caught on to the rudiments of investment, capital
formation, job creation, and productivity. "The difference between
Middle Eastern and Western approaches," Lewis writes, "can be seen
even in their distinctive form of corruption, from which neither
society is exempt. In the West, one makes money in the market, and
uses it to buy or influence power. In the East, one seizes power,
and uses it to make money. Morally there is no difference between
the two, but their impact on the economy and on the polity is very
different." I'm not sure he's quite right about there being no moral
difference. Money influencing power can be corruption, but it is not
an evil of the same magnitude as perpetuating grinding poverty or
ruling by a system that is aptly described as tyranny tempered by
assassination.

The differences between the West and the Near East are evident,
Lewis emphasizes, in different attitudes toward women, science, and
music. Islam, like most non–Christian societies, permits polygamy
and concubinage, and Western visitors to Muslim lands have
traditionally evidenced a predictable interest in the harem system
and have spoken with ill–concealed envy of what they take to be the
rights of Muslim men. "Muslim visitors to Europe," on the other
hand, "speak with astonishment, often with horror, of the immodesty
and frowardness of Western women, of the incredible freedom and
absurd deference accorded them, and of the lack of manly jealousy of
males confronted with the immorality and promiscuity in which their
womenfolk indulge."

There were three groups of people who did not benefit from the
general Muslim principle of legal and religious equality—
unbelievers, slaves, and women. Lewis does not depict dhimmitude—the
system under which non–Muslims, mainly Christians and Jews, live in
Muslim societies—in terms as severe as those employed by Bat Ye'or,
whose work has been discussed at length in these pages. Yes, he
suggests, the infidels were definitely second– or third–class
citizens, but for the most part their lot was tolerable, so long as
they did not challenge Muslim dominance. Slavery in the Middle East,
he also says, was not so harsh as slavery in the Caribbean or North
America. Actually, slavery was not officially abolished in some
Mideast countries until the 1960s, and still flourishes today in,
for instance, Sudan.

Dhimmi: An Overview
Dhimmitude Past and Present: An Invented or Real History?
Keeping women in what is thought to be their place is deeply
entrenched in Arab societies. "Westerners tend naturally to assume
that the emancipation of women is part of liberalization, and that
women will consequently fare better in liberal than in autocratic
regimes. Such an assumption would be false, and often the reverse is
true." Some notoriously oppressive regimes have advanced the legal
emancipation of women, while in somewhat more open societies, such
as Egypt, the weight of tradition has successfully prevented such
change. For radical Islamists, such as the former Taliban in
Afghanistan, the confinement of women to their traditional roles is
at the top of their agenda. "The emancipation of women," Lewis
writes, "more than any other single issue, is the touchstone of
difference between modernization and Westernization." Modernization
is the adoption of technologies, especially those of warfare and
propaganda. But the emancipation of women is Westernization. "It
must be kept from entering the body of Islam, and where it has
already entered, it must be ruthlessly excised."

Muhammad His Own Constantine
There are odd twists and turns here. For instance, in the military,
civil service, and often in everyday street wear, men have adopted
Western styles of clothing. Even the diplomats of the Islamic
Republic of Iran wear Western suits, "with only the missing necktie
to symbolize their rejection of Western culture and its symbols."
Why the rejection of the necktie? "Perhaps because of its vaguely
cruciform shape," Lewis suggests. In the final analysis, it all does
come back to religion and what Muslims continue to view as
Christendom. In its view of the right ordering of the world, Islam
has nothing remotely comparable to the Christian understanding of
sovereignties in tension, as evident in Christ's words about
rendering what is due to Caesar and to God. Lewis emphasizes that
Christianity, until its legal toleration and later establishment in
the fourth century, had the experience of three hundred years
struggling against authority. "Christianity was a persecuted
religion—different from, sometimes opposed to, and often oppressed
by the state authority."

The contrast with Islam could not be more dramatic. Lewis puts it
nicely: "Muhammad was, so to speak, his own Constantine. . . . At no
time did [Islam] create any institution corresponding to, or even
remotely resembling, the Church in Christendom." There have been and
are, to be sure, conflicts between religious and political
authorities. But, unlike the case of the Church in the West, there
is no institutionalizing of a claim to a distinct sovereignty in
tension with the sovereignty of the state. Put differently,
the "Constantinianism" of Islam is radically monistic. And again,
far from having gone through a long period of struggling and
persecution, Islam understood itself from the very beginning to be a
force of all–encompassing conquest, and the success of its first
millennium powerfully reinforced that self–understanding.

Muhammad achieved victory and triumph in his own lifetime. He
conquered his promised land, and created his own state, of which he
himself was the supreme sovereign. As such, he promulgated laws,
dispensed justice, levied taxes, raised armies, made war, and made
peace. In a word, he ruled, and the story of his decisions and
actions as ruler is sanctified in Muslim scripture and amplified in
Muslim tradition. . . . The state was the church and the church was
the state, and God was head of both, with the Prophet as his
representative on earth. In the words of an ancient and much cited
tradition: "Islam, the ruler, and the people are like the tent, the
pole, the ropes and the pegs. The tent is Islam, the pole is the
ruler, the ropes and pegs are the people. None can thrive without
the others."
Lewis continues: "Such terms as clergy or ecclesiastic cannot
properly be applied to Muslim men of religion. These were in time,
and in defiance of early tradition and precept, professionalized,
and thus became a clergy in a sociological sense. They did not
become a clergy in the theological sense. Islam recognizes no
ordination, no sacraments, no priestly mediation between the
believer and God. The so–called clergyman is perceived as a teacher,
a guide, a scholar in theology and law, but not as a priest."
Nonetheless, and perhaps inevitably, something like a church and a
clergy has emerged, at least functionally. In the Ottoman Empire,
for instance, the government appointed a Chief Mufti who exercised
ecclesiastical jurisdiction, so to speak, over a city. "One sees it
even more dramatically," Lewis writes, "in the ayatollahs of Iran, a
title dating from quite modern times and unknown to classical
Islamic history. If the rulers of the Islamic Republic but knew it,
what they are doing is Christianizing Islam in an institutional
sense, though not of course in any religious sense. They have
already endowed Iran with the functional equivalents of a
pontificate, a college of cardinals, a bench of bishops, and,
especially, an inquisition, all previously alien to Islam." Because
the implied distinction of sovereignties has no secure basis in
Islamic thought, this is a very fragile innovation and is subject to
challenge by monistic purists.

Making Laws, Making Music
In Islam, the law is already given. At least theoretically, there is
no place for debate or legislation. All that is required is
submission (submission being, of course, the meaning of the
word "Islam"). In the first account we have of a Muslim visiting the
British House of Commons in the eighteenth century, the writer
expresses his astonishment at the sorry fate of a people who, unlike
the Muslims, did not have a divinely revealed law, "and were
therefore reduced to the pitiable expedient of enacting their own
laws." The monism of Islam, Lewis suggests, is also evident in its
aversion to polyphonic music. In polyphony, voices and instruments—
whether in duets, trios, or full orchestra—are "following different
routes in a common purpose." "Different performers play together,
from different scores, producing a result that is greater than the
sum of its parts."

Lewis has an extended excursus on this musical dimension of "the
difference" between East and West, and, whether or not one finds his
explanation entirely convincing, there is no denying that Western
music is not well received in the Middle East. "To this very day the
Middle East—with the exception of some Westernized enclaves—remains
a blank on the itinerary of the great international virtuosos as
they go on their world tours." They are celebrated almost everywhere—
even in Japan, China, and India—except in the Middle East. Maybe
polyphony is the key, or maybe it is part of a more general aversion
to Western culture, "tainted" as it is by Christianity. The
Christian West is curious about, and eager to welcome, other
cultural traditions. Witness the magnificent Islamic holdings in any
Western museum or library of note. Throughout the huge swath of the
world dominated by Islam, there are no comparable holdings of
Western art, music, or literature, never mind of philosophy or
theology. It would seem that the Arab world in particular really is,
in the phrase of David Pryce–Jones, a "closed circle."

The conclusion of What Went Wrong? is grim. After its millennium–
long roll of conquest and great cultural achievement, the Muslim
world fell further and further behind. Its consolidation in the
Ottoman Empire fell apart after choosing the wrong side in the First
World War, and the subsequent hegemony of the British and French,
and now of the Americans, has left Islam seething with
resentments. "Worst of all is the political result," says
Lewis. "The long quest for freedom has left a string of shabby
tyrannies, ranging from traditional autocracies to new–style
dictatorships, modern only in their apparatus of repression and
indoctrination." The question asked by Muslims is "Who did this to
us?" rather than "What did we do wrong?" A few people, however, are
beginning to ask the second question, Lewis writes, and in that
there is a glimmer of hope. But it is only a glimmer. Lewis
concludes with this:

If the peoples of the Middle East continue on their present path,
the suicide bomber may become a metaphor for the whole region, and
there will be no escape from a downward spiral of hate and spite,
rage and self–pity, poverty and oppression, culminating sooner or
later in yet another alien domination; perhaps from a new Europe
reverting to old ways, perhaps from a resurgent Russia, perhaps from
some new, expanding superpower in the East. If they can abandon
grievance and victimhood, settle their differences, and join their
talents, energies, and resources in a common creative endeavor, they
can once again make the Middle East, in modern times as it was in
antiquity and in the Middle Ages, a major center of civilization.
For the time being, the choice is their own.
If. . . . It seems a wan hope, but hope we must. The better part of
wisdom, it would seem, is to hope for the best and prepare for the
worst.

QLP

G. Equitius Cato Q. Lanio Paulino quiritibusque S.P.D.

Salve et salvete.

Excellent article, Lanius Paulinus; Lewis is an extraordinary writer
and historian. His recent book, "What Went Wrong?", is an excellent,
concise yet comprehensive overview of the fundamental issues facing
Islam in the 21st century.

Vale et valete,

Cato

Salvete,

My name is Marcus Cassius Philippus. I am the current Legatus of the
Regio of Maine in Nova Britannia. Although I am new to this mailing
list, and my first posting here, I have been a citizen of Nova
Britannia for a few years now and cherish it greatly. My greetings to
all Nova Romans. I wish to relate to all of you my remembrances of
this year's Roman Market Days Festival held at Wells Harbor Park in
Wells, Maine this past weekend (July 9th & 10th).

This past weekend was an exhilarating one in Maine. The Roman Market
Days Festival got off to a late start on Saturday due to the remains
of tropical storm "CINDY", but once it got started it far surpassed
everyone's expectations. This was the second time this event has been
held at the Wells Harbor Park and I believe next year's festival will
be even better. We received plenty of press coverage and I await the
photos that will be appearing in this week's edition. Those of you
(and or) units that appear in photos (and or) print copy will be
notified by me to get your e-mail and or snail mail addresses so you
can get a copy of them either electronically or by mail.

In attendance (please excuse me if I don't mention everyone - my
memory is not as good as it should be) were:

Nova Roma & Nova Britannia Civilian Authorities: Provincial Sacerdos
& Pontifex Maximus, Senator, co-founder of Nova Roma and Proconsul
Marcus Cassius Julianus (Will Bradford) and his lovely wife, co-
founder of Nova Roma and senator Patricia Cassia (Patricia Bradford),
Proconsul and Senator Marcus Minucius-Tiberius Audens (James Mathews)
and his lovely wife Margaret, Legate of Vermont Regio Senator Decius
Iunius Palladius Invictus with a couple of fellow toga wearing
patricians from his Regio, Nova Roma's official Latin Translator
Flavia Tullia (Nancy Bowles).

Legio XXIV members: Centurio and Praefectus Gallio Velius Marsallasan
(George Metz) his most trusted legionnaire Quintius (Quinton).

Legio III Cyrenaica members: Centurio Patricius Attacottus
Vallavantinius (Mike Heenan), his lovely wife Theodora (Marie
Heenan), Miles Randi, Miles Marcus Cassius Philippus (Phil Perez -
me), my lovely wife Kathy and two wonderful daughters, Miles Andy
Volpe - Higgins Armour Museum's own "Roman Dude", Auxiliary Rich
Croteau and his huge barbarian auxiliary son as well as another huge
barbarian auxiliary.

Legio XXX was also represented by a member and we even had a token
Celt who the Legionnaires took turns abusing.

Ludus Magnus Gladiatorial Group: Primus Pilus and Thracian / Murmillo
Maximus Mercurius Gladius (John Ebel - who beat the tar out of me in
the sand arena), his gladiators - Greek Hoplomachus Gaius,
Provocateur Lupus Britanicus (Mike Catellier), Secutor Petronius and
his net wielding father Retiarius Aulus Scipio Barbatus as a SCA
equestrian member who joined the fun in several bouts and the Ludus
Magnus's own gorgeous gladiatrixes who shall remain unnamed here to
protect their modesty (for now :-), unfortunately there was no
wardrobe malfunction (this time).

Equestrians: Armorer Lawrence and a lovely wench Heidi of LaWrens
Nest, Pompeii AD 62 author Rebecca East and her husband and
Ceramicist Vegetia and her husband Dino.

The Legions performed their field drills flawlessly. Gallio's
Ballista was absolutely breathtaking. Its bolts went about 100 yards
from my estimation with deadly accuracy. Rich Croteau narrowly beat
me at the Pilus throw winning a much coveted golden coronet (Lorica
Hamata I believe has the advantage over Lorica Segmentata at this
skill) I will borrow a Lorica Segmentata for this competition next
year Rich - I want that Coronet badly ;-)

Ludus Magnus's Games chilled everyone's blood. Especially the death
match between Maximus and the his Killer Retiarius Barbatus. The
bloody mess they made of themselves caused many in the audience to
gasp and some ladies to faint. Maximus was forced to deal with a
drunken Legionnaire (me) that continuously harassed and heckled his
Ludus from the audience by a challenge match that ended in a coming
together of all the gladiators and legionnaires in a seldom seen
scene of comradery between the two.

Proconsul Auden's booming politician's voice was heard by all
throughout the entire weekend. He answered all the barbarian/tourist
questions diplomatically, no matter how silly they were, as well as
introducing all the major presentations with great dignitas. We were
indeed honored to have such a professional magistrate attend our
festival.

Last but not least, my wife Kathy (who will be taking a Roman name
shortly - I hope :-) hosted and prepared a wonderful feast for the
Toga/Tunic Party at Villa Philippus. This feast is an annual event
held at my home to honor all the re-enactors, some of which travel
quite far to attend our little festival in Maine. Rich & Randi
entertained everyone with their hilarious renditions of Monty
Python's "Life of Bryan" and Mel Brook's "History of the World Part
I". No Toga party could be complete without it. Many a hearty toast
with unwatered wine was had for the wonderful future of Nova Roma,
Nova Britannia and Re-enactment events like this one.

VIVAT ROMA, VIVAT NOVA BRITANNIA

Vires et Honos,
Marcus Cassius Philippus
www.northerncrane.net
Miles, Legio III Cyrennaica - Ordinari, Ludus Magnus - Legatus, Regio
Maine - Provincia Nova Britannia - Nova Roma

Salvete, Quirites!

I have only a question. How can I read the messages before november 2002 sent to this mailinglist? I hope they aren't deleted... I'm afraid of...

Please, help me!


Cn. Cornelius Lentulus
Propraetor Pannoniae
Accensus - Consulis Fr. Apuli Caesaris
Scriba - Aedilis L. Iulii Sullae
Undecimvir ad Diploma Sodalitatis Latinitatis Retractandum




---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger: chiamate gratuite in tutto il mondo

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

SALVE MARCE CASSI ET SALVETE !

I salute you all, amici. I'm sure it was a nice meeting. In the past time it was something normaly for your province to upload some photos to the NR Pinacotheca. Nothing new from 2003.

VALE ET VALETE,
IVL SABINVS

senseiphil1954 <senseiphil@...> wrote:
Salvete,

My name is Marcus Cassius Philippus. I am the current Legatus of the
Regio of Maine in Nova Britannia. Although I am new to this mailing
list, and my first posting here, I have been a citizen of Nova
Britannia for a few years now and cherish it greatly. My greetings to
all Nova Romans. I wish to relate to all of you my remembrances of
this year's Roman Market Days Festival held at Wells Harbor Park in
Wells, Maine this past weekend (July 9th & 10th).

This past weekend was an exhilarating one in Maine. The Roman Market
Days Festival got off to a late start on Saturday due to the remains
of tropical storm "CINDY", but once it got started it far surpassed
everyone's expectations. This was the second time this event has been
held at the Wells Harbor Park and I believe next year's festival will
be even better. We received plenty of press coverage and I await the
photos that will be appearing in this week's edition. Those of you
(and or) units that appear in photos (and or) print copy will be
notified by me to get your e-mail and or snail mail addresses so you
can get a copy of them either electronically or by mail.

In attendance (please excuse me if I don't mention everyone - my
memory is not as good as it should be) were:

Nova Roma & Nova Britannia Civilian Authorities: Provincial Sacerdos
& Pontifex Maximus, Senator, co-founder of Nova Roma and Proconsul
Marcus Cassius Julianus (Will Bradford) and his lovely wife, co-
founder of Nova Roma and senator Patricia Cassia (Patricia Bradford),
Proconsul and Senator Marcus Minucius-Tiberius Audens (James Mathews)
and his lovely wife Margaret, Legate of Vermont Regio Senator Decius
Iunius Palladius Invictus with a couple of fellow toga wearing
patricians from his Regio, Nova Roma's official Latin Translator
Flavia Tullia (Nancy Bowles).

Legio XXIV members: Centurio and Praefectus Gallio Velius Marsallasan
(George Metz) his most trusted legionnaire Quintius (Quinton).

Legio III Cyrenaica members: Centurio Patricius Attacottus
Vallavantinius (Mike Heenan), his lovely wife Theodora (Marie
Heenan), Miles Randi, Miles Marcus Cassius Philippus (Phil Perez -
me), my lovely wife Kathy and two wonderful daughters, Miles Andy
Volpe - Higgins Armour Museum's own "Roman Dude", Auxiliary Rich
Croteau and his huge barbarian auxiliary son as well as another huge
barbarian auxiliary.

Legio XXX was also represented by a member and we even had a token
Celt who the Legionnaires took turns abusing.

Ludus Magnus Gladiatorial Group: Primus Pilus and Thracian / Murmillo
Maximus Mercurius Gladius (John Ebel - who beat the tar out of me in
the sand arena), his gladiators - Greek Hoplomachus Gaius,
Provocateur Lupus Britanicus (Mike Catellier), Secutor Petronius and
his net wielding father Retiarius Aulus Scipio Barbatus as a SCA
equestrian member who joined the fun in several bouts and the Ludus
Magnus's own gorgeous gladiatrixes who shall remain unnamed here to
protect their modesty (for now :-), unfortunately there was no
wardrobe malfunction (this time).

Equestrians: Armorer Lawrence and a lovely wench Heidi of LaWrens
Nest, Pompeii AD 62 author Rebecca East and her husband and
Ceramicist Vegetia and her husband Dino.

The Legions performed their field drills flawlessly. Gallio's
Ballista was absolutely breathtaking. Its bolts went about 100 yards
from my estimation with deadly accuracy. Rich Croteau narrowly beat
me at the Pilus throw winning a much coveted golden coronet (Lorica
Hamata I believe has the advantage over Lorica Segmentata at this
skill) I will borrow a Lorica Segmentata for this competition next
year Rich - I want that Coronet badly ;-)

Ludus Magnus's Games chilled everyone's blood. Especially the death
match between Maximus and the his Killer Retiarius Barbatus. The
bloody mess they made of themselves caused many in the audience to
gasp and some ladies to faint. Maximus was forced to deal with a
drunken Legionnaire (me) that continuously harassed and heckled his
Ludus from the audience by a challenge match that ended in a coming
together of all the gladiators and legionnaires in a seldom seen
scene of comradery between the two.

Proconsul Auden's booming politician's voice was heard by all
throughout the entire weekend. He answered all the barbarian/tourist
questions diplomatically, no matter how silly they were, as well as
introducing all the major presentations with great dignitas. We were
indeed honored to have such a professional magistrate attend our
festival.

Last but not least, my wife Kathy (who will be taking a Roman name
shortly - I hope :-) hosted and prepared a wonderful feast for the
Toga/Tunic Party at Villa Philippus. This feast is an annual event
held at my home to honor all the re-enactors, some of which travel
quite far to attend our little festival in Maine. Rich & Randi
entertained everyone with their hilarious renditions of Monty
Python's "Life of Bryan" and Mel Brook's "History of the World Part
I". No Toga party could be complete without it. Many a hearty toast
with unwatered wine was had for the wonderful future of Nova Roma,
Nova Britannia and Re-enactment events like this one.

VIVAT ROMA, VIVAT NOVA BRITANNIA

Vires et Honos,
Marcus Cassius Philippus
www.northerncrane.net
Miles, Legio III Cyrennaica - Ordinari, Ludus Magnus - Legatus, Regio
Maine - Provincia Nova Britannia - Nova Roma







---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


Visit your group "Nova-Roma" on the web.

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.


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






"Every individual is the arhitect of his own fortune" - Appius Claudius





---------------------------------
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions - No fees. Bid on great items.

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

SALVE CORNELI LENTULE !

Look to the link :

http://www.novaroma.org/forum/mainlist/

OPTIME VALE,
IVL SABINVS


Gnaeus Cornelius Lentulus <cn_corn_lent@...> wrote:
Salvete, Quirites!

I have only a question. How can I read the messages before november 2002 sent to this mailinglist? I hope they aren't deleted... I'm afraid of...

Please, help me!


Cn. Cornelius Lentulus
Propraetor Pannoniae
Accensus - Consulis Fr. Apuli Caesaris
Scriba - Aedilis L. Iulii Sullae
Undecimvir ad Diploma Sodalitatis Latinitatis Retractandum




---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger: chiamate gratuite in tutto il mondo

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



---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


Visit your group "Nova-Roma" on the web.

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.


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






"Every individual is the arhitect of his own fortune" - Appius Claudius




__________________________________________________
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]

Salvete,

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

> Salvete omnes.
>
> The United States, whether its leaders or people agree or like it,
> is an imperial power. It is the inheritor of the mantle of the
> British Empire. Before the British Empire the empire of Rome
> bestrode the world. The US occupies a familiar role - policeman of
> the world.

First, like it or not, anyone who DOES NOT believe this is purely
sheltered and should get out and about more...

The question is are there any real differences in the Roman Empire,
the British Empire, and the United States Empire? We have to be
careful when we discuss the differences between law enforement and
military roles, especially with the Roman Empire and many times with
the British Empire. In a vast spectrum of "terroristic" type events,
law enforcement and military actions were one in the same.

From a military point of view, many factions encountered by the Romans
and Brits were "terrorists," engaged in the same type of guerilla
tactics as we find today. Does the absence of a specified law
enforcement unit, but the presence of a military one, automatically
make it an event of war.

What would have been the difference if the Roman and British Empire
had access to the Internet, C4 and CNN?

Do we consider the Brigantes, the Caldoneans, the Carvetii, the
Coritani, the Cornovii, the Deceangi, the Gangani, the Parisii, the
Picts, and the Segonti of ancient Brittania legitimate "nations" which
the Roman Army had to conquer, or just terroristic factions in "the
way of progress" that had to be dealt with for rebelling or resisting?

The answer to these questions...in my opinion...is a fundamental
difference between the first two empires and the third. In the case of
the Roman and British Empires, their primary goal was raw, honest
Imperialism. They expanded their empires with one sole goal in mind,
and that was to sieze ground, plant their flag, and expand their
territory. It had nothing to do with any form of global police. If the
US was in line with this, there would be a new Iraqi American
Territory with Old Glory flying high on every flag pole. This is not
the case.

I guess, in a way, history readily accepts the fact that one country
goes to war with another country to seize land and pillage their
resources, however, it doesn't always sell well if you are going in
with the sole purpose of raiding resources.

The US supposedly took out Saddam Hussein for his atrocities against
the people of Iraq. And there is no doubt that Saddam was a first-
class, evil scumbag. However, if removal from office was the prime
motive, then maybe we and the other civilized nations of the world
should have done it long before now. I recently move from Houston,
where I knew several people who worked for Halliburton. They have a 10-
year contract with the US Government to "manage" oil resources in
Iraq. So much for evil atrocities.

It all boils down to the basic principle of war, when you invade...for
any reason...there will be pockets of resistance and it generally
isn't pretty. Same as it was in Gaul, same as it was in Northern
Ireland, same as it was in the American Colonies, and same as it is
Iraq. The resistance factions just have more technology, more
effective weaponry, and and a better means of communication delivery
for their defiant actions. If you are involved in or support the
invasion, what ever the invasion is, be prepared for the resistance
aftermath. You cannot justify it by saying "we are good and they are
bad."

If you were a young teenager and some foreign government walked in one
day and told your family that you had to pack their crap and move
somewhere else, where you were not particularly wanted, and you had no
say in it, and you could never return to the land of your ancestors,
and the business your great-great-great-great grandfather established
was now null and void. Would you be upset and do unacceptable things
in the eyes of the general public? Ask Yassar Arafat, the US did just
that to him and his family in 1948 with the creation of Israel.

Do that to me, and I would probably be just like he was. I'm not
saying is is right or wrong. It is just the reality of it all.

DO NOT get confused and suggest or allude that I support terrorism in
any form or fashion. I DO NOT! I just feel that with every action,
there is a reaction. If you can't handle the heat, get your
politicians out of the kitchen. LOL. Stupid policy decisions are why
we are all suffering from this current situation with these fanatic
crudballs.

There is a reason we never hear about terroristic attacks in Barbados
and Madagascar and West Papua...it's because, THEY DON'T CARE about
involving themselves in the inner political affairs of Middle East
nations.

Remember the Prime Directive of Star Fleet Command on Star Trek...

don't get involved in the inner political fights and civil wars of
other civilizations...or something like that.

Valete,
Triarius

Salve;

Sounds like a wonderful event. I hope to one year be in a position to
attend.

Vale;

Gaius Modius Athanasius

In a message dated 7/11/2005 11:22:30 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
senseiphil@... writes:

My name is Marcus Cassius Philippus. I am the current Legatus of the
Regio of Maine in Nova Britannia. Although I am new to this mailing
list, and my first posting here, I have been a citizen of Nova
Britannia for a few years now and cherish it greatly. My greetings to
all Nova Romans. I wish to relate to all of you my remembrances of
this year's Roman Market Days Festival held at Wells Harbor Park in
Wells, Maine this past weekend (July 9th & 10th).





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

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

> Salvete,
>
> > Remember the Prime Directive of Star Fleet Command on Star Trek...
>
> don't get involved in the inner political fights and civil wars of
> other civilizations...or something like that.
>
> Valete,
> Triarius

Salve Triari et omnes,

Actually I have always maintained that the British Empire was much
closer to the Roman Empire with respect to administration and function.
Britain first sent explorers, followed by traders, made alliances to
help people beset by others, sent in troops and finally took over when
they figured rightly or wrongly that those people couldn't govern
themselves. There were governors, viceroys and an English civil
service in each country bolstered by troops. In those days, Latin was
compulsory for a university and perhaps a high school diploma needed
by senior civil servants so how much closer can you get than that?

America certainly became an economic power spreading her ideas and
culture, has given military aid etc but she lacks the criteria
mentined above to qualify as a Roman type empire the way I see it.
LOL, ironically, last year I saw a guerilla leader from FARC in
Colombia on TV, saying America will be slammed and have another
Vietnam if they send troops to combat the narcotraficantes; similarily
a few hours later a furious Hamas rep was being interviewed denouncing
the satan, America. What was the thing in common with the two
interviews? There were a few cans of Coca Cola resting on each table!

I am glad to be reminded of Star Trek's prime directive being an old
sci-fi buff. Lately in my country we have been keeping our nose clean
and being sickeningly politically correct with minorities here to the
point where terrorists could have an open field day. This is a long
story and off topic for now but I would therefore add Mr. Spock's
comment at this point - " The needs of the many must outweigh the
needs of the few."

Regards,

QLP

A. Apollonius Q. Lanio amico omnibusque sal.

> I read ages ago that though Britain had abolished
> capital punishment
> over 40 years ago, she still has it on the books for
> an
> assassination of the Queen or King. I'm sure any
> terrorist group
> would realize how detremental to their cause a hit
> on the monarch
> would be but you never know. Is this provision still
> true as far as
> you know?

I'm afraid I'm not sure. It wouldn't surprise me -
Britain has a lot of old law on the books which is
never used, including a blasphemy law! They're never
used, so no one really bothers to formally repeal
them. A rather Roman approach to legislation!

My instinct, though I'm by no means an expert, is that
few terrorist organizations would try to assassinate
the Queen. She's very well protected and for the
amount of time, money, and effort it would take to
make an attempt they could cause far more harm and
confusion by attacking transport, tourist sites,
financial institutions, and so on.



___________________________________________________________
How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday
snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com

A. Apollonius Sex. Lucilio omnibusque sal.

> yes, i agree with you. But I want ask you who did
> it ?

At the moment we don't know. Many experts have said
that it shows some similarities to attacks by Al
Qaeda-type groups, but the police and the government
haven't confirmed anything as far as I know.



___________________________________________________________
How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday
snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com

A. Apollonius M. Flavio omnibusque sal.

> What of the nations that knowingly harbor cells and
> training camps fully knowing what they are being
> utilzed for? Isnt that collobaration & guilt as
> well?

That is, of course, a difficult question. Since it
concerns the relationships between states, the proper
tools are the tools of international diplomacy:
negotiation, ultimatum, sanctions, the threat of war,
and ultimately war itself. But of course these things
are very difficult to prove. I think perhaps, though,
we overestimate the importance of countries harbouring
terrorists: the majority of terrorists are home-grown.



___________________________________________________________
How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday
snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com

G. Equitius Cato quirites S.P.D.

Salvete omnes.

The "imperialism" ascribed to the U.S. certainly does exist, and as
has been pointed out, is of a fundamentally different nature than the
previous two examples (Rome and Great Britain), in that U.S.
imperialism is economic and political rather than simply territorial.

However, I note again that Mr. Bush, in his speeches before, during,
and since the war in Iraq, has sounded a note almost identical to that
of ancient Rome: we will not allow anyone to interfere with our
interests, be they political or economic --- and we will strike down
anyone who we believe is in a position to attempt to do so, or try to
make it impossible for them to do so. Often, this note has been
couched in terms of protecting "our way of life", a note that rang
again in London as Mr. Blair spoke about the horrendous attacks there.

This note poses a question with which every country upon whom enormous
power and influence has fallen has had to deal: is a particular "way
of life" better, in an objective sense, than another?

It is easy to contrast in simple physical ways: Rome gave (or was
instrumental in spreading) to the ancient world aqueducts, hosptials,
roads, baths, education, etc. (see the Monty Python clip for an
exhaustive list); Rome was governing an empire of immense
sophistication and intellect while some countries were still huddling
around bonfires and scratching for grubs and berries. An action taken
in Rome echoed through the known world; a decision made by Rome
resounded from every remote corner in which the Roman eagle had
unfurled her wings and held sway by the authority of the Senate and
People; when Rome stirred and spoke, the world trembled and waited.
Did this make Rome "better"? The Romans certainly believed so.


The United States has become the repository of the overwhelming
majority of the world's military, intellectual and economic power;
when you couple the U.S. with its staunchest allies, it is without
question the single greatest accumulation of power that the world has
ever witnessed, in every concievable way, in the entire scope of human
history. Does this make the "way of life" enshrined in the U.S. and
her allies "better"? I certainly believe so.

I believe that there comes a point at which you *must* acknowledge
that one particular way of doing things is inherently superior to
another, different way; it does not mean that anyone who does that
particular thing in that different way is inherently "evil" (a pointed
contrast to the way the terrorists believe), but merely that they are
not realizing the full potential and benefit of being part of the
modern world.

Is it wrong to allow the bushmen to stop shooting at animals for food
and give them access to the world's markets? Is it wrong to allow the
most primitive tribes in South America access to modern clothing and
healthcare and technology? Ask THEM: they don't seem to mind. True,
ancient ways of doing things are passing away gradually, but this is
natural in the course of human experience and development. It is pure
arrogance to claim that we are trying to "help" people by acting as if
they have been preserved in amber --- needing (or simply desiring)
none of the benefits of modern medical or economic development --- and
attempt to "save" them from the modern world.

Bear this in mind: a group of Islamic clerics from Iran were recently
hosted in California; they were amazed by the freedoms allowed Muslims
in the U.S. to worship, dress, and express themselves as Muslims.
They had been previously of the mind that the Muslims in the U.S. were
reviled --- as the U.S. is in much of the Arab world. What a
difference liberty and freedom make.

Just as, in the ancient world, Rome became the Mother of Cities ---
allowing an unheard of variety of religious and philosophical and
political elements to co-exist peacefully --- so the U.S. has become a
beacon of hope and focus of yearning for countless millions. It is a
way of life that certainly is worth protecting.

Valete bene,

Cato

I am sorry to have missed it. Hopefully I can attend the next one.

Lucius Cassius Pontonius

-Ponte out-

Michael Ponte: The Love Machine

"Someone asked me yesterday if Dracula met Saruman and there was a fight,
who would win. I just looked at this man. What an idiotic thing to say. I
mean, really, it was half-witted." -Christopher Lee

Ponte Central: http://www.mponte.com/

----- Original Message -----
From: "senseiphil1954" <senseiphil@...>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 11:14 AM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Maine Roman Market Days 2005


> Salvete,
>
> My name is Marcus Cassius Philippus. I am the current Legatus of the
> Regio of Maine in Nova Britannia. Although I am new to this mailing
> list, and my first posting here, I have been a citizen of Nova
> Britannia for a few years now and cherish it greatly. My greetings to
> all Nova Romans. I wish to relate to all of you my remembrances of
> this year's Roman Market Days Festival held at Wells Harbor Park in
> Wells, Maine this past weekend (July 9th & 10th).
>
> This past weekend was an exhilarating one in Maine. The Roman Market
> Days Festival got off to a late start on Saturday due to the remains
> of tropical storm "CINDY", but once it got started it far surpassed
> everyone's expectations. This was the second time this event has been
> held at the Wells Harbor Park and I believe next year's festival will
> be even better. We received plenty of press coverage and I await the
> photos that will be appearing in this week's edition. Those of you
> (and or) units that appear in photos (and or) print copy will be
> notified by me to get your e-mail and or snail mail addresses so you
> can get a copy of them either electronically or by mail.
>
> In attendance (please excuse me if I don't mention everyone - my
> memory is not as good as it should be) were:
>
> Nova Roma & Nova Britannia Civilian Authorities: Provincial Sacerdos
> & Pontifex Maximus, Senator, co-founder of Nova Roma and Proconsul
> Marcus Cassius Julianus (Will Bradford) and his lovely wife, co-
> founder of Nova Roma and senator Patricia Cassia (Patricia Bradford),
> Proconsul and Senator Marcus Minucius-Tiberius Audens (James Mathews)
> and his lovely wife Margaret, Legate of Vermont Regio Senator Decius
> Iunius Palladius Invictus with a couple of fellow toga wearing
> patricians from his Regio, Nova Roma's official Latin Translator
> Flavia Tullia (Nancy Bowles).
>
> Legio XXIV members: Centurio and Praefectus Gallio Velius Marsallasan
> (George Metz) his most trusted legionnaire Quintius (Quinton).
>
> Legio III Cyrenaica members: Centurio Patricius Attacottus
> Vallavantinius (Mike Heenan), his lovely wife Theodora (Marie
> Heenan), Miles Randi, Miles Marcus Cassius Philippus (Phil Perez -
> me), my lovely wife Kathy and two wonderful daughters, Miles Andy
> Volpe - Higgins Armour Museum's own "Roman Dude", Auxiliary Rich
> Croteau and his huge barbarian auxiliary son as well as another huge
> barbarian auxiliary.
>
> Legio XXX was also represented by a member and we even had a token
> Celt who the Legionnaires took turns abusing.
>
> Ludus Magnus Gladiatorial Group: Primus Pilus and Thracian / Murmillo
> Maximus Mercurius Gladius (John Ebel - who beat the tar out of me in
> the sand arena), his gladiators - Greek Hoplomachus Gaius,
> Provocateur Lupus Britanicus (Mike Catellier), Secutor Petronius and
> his net wielding father Retiarius Aulus Scipio Barbatus as a SCA
> equestrian member who joined the fun in several bouts and the Ludus
> Magnus's own gorgeous gladiatrixes who shall remain unnamed here to
> protect their modesty (for now :-), unfortunately there was no
> wardrobe malfunction (this time).
>
> Equestrians: Armorer Lawrence and a lovely wench Heidi of LaWrens
> Nest, Pompeii AD 62 author Rebecca East and her husband and
> Ceramicist Vegetia and her husband Dino.
>
> The Legions performed their field drills flawlessly. Gallio's
> Ballista was absolutely breathtaking. Its bolts went about 100 yards
> from my estimation with deadly accuracy. Rich Croteau narrowly beat
> me at the Pilus throw winning a much coveted golden coronet (Lorica
> Hamata I believe has the advantage over Lorica Segmentata at this
> skill) I will borrow a Lorica Segmentata for this competition next
> year Rich - I want that Coronet badly ;-)
>
> Ludus Magnus's Games chilled everyone's blood. Especially the death
> match between Maximus and the his Killer Retiarius Barbatus. The
> bloody mess they made of themselves caused many in the audience to
> gasp and some ladies to faint. Maximus was forced to deal with a
> drunken Legionnaire (me) that continuously harassed and heckled his
> Ludus from the audience by a challenge match that ended in a coming
> together of all the gladiators and legionnaires in a seldom seen
> scene of comradery between the two.
>
> Proconsul Auden's booming politician's voice was heard by all
> throughout the entire weekend. He answered all the barbarian/tourist
> questions diplomatically, no matter how silly they were, as well as
> introducing all the major presentations with great dignitas. We were
> indeed honored to have such a professional magistrate attend our
> festival.
>
> Last but not least, my wife Kathy (who will be taking a Roman name
> shortly - I hope :-) hosted and prepared a wonderful feast for the
> Toga/Tunic Party at Villa Philippus. This feast is an annual event
> held at my home to honor all the re-enactors, some of which travel
> quite far to attend our little festival in Maine. Rich & Randi
> entertained everyone with their hilarious renditions of Monty
> Python's "Life of Bryan" and Mel Brook's "History of the World Part
> I". No Toga party could be complete without it. Many a hearty toast
> with unwatered wine was had for the wonderful future of Nova Roma,
> Nova Britannia and Re-enactment events like this one.
>
> VIVAT ROMA, VIVAT NOVA BRITANNIA
>
> Vires et Honos,
> Marcus Cassius Philippus
> www.northerncrane.net
> Miles, Legio III Cyrennaica - Ordinari, Ludus Magnus - Legatus, Regio
> Maine - Provincia Nova Britannia - Nova Roma
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

A. Apollonius C. Equitio amico omnibusque sal.

> CATO: I understand the distinction. The incident
> with Gaius Caesar
> is exactly the kind of process I'm talking about
> with regards to
> negotiation; it has precise a mirror image in what
> is happening today,
> and I believe our response should as well. Pirates,
> acting outside
> any kind of "legitimate" government, capture and
> ransom a Roman
> citizen. He negotiates (or his family does on his
> behalf), and when
> restored to a position of authority returns and
> destroys them. I say
> go ahead, negotiate with these terrorists if need
> be, and be willing
> to give to them some of what they demand; but be
> ready --- and certain
> --- so that when the opportunity to strike arises,
> we do so with swift
> and terrible force, without hindrance or regret.

I don't see how the incident with Caesar has any
bearing on the sort of situation we in Britain are in
today. Caesar (much as he liked to pretend otherwise)
was not the Roman state. He was captured in his
capacity as a private individual. When he took his
revenge on them he was, it is true, in office as a
representative of the Roman people, but he was not
commanded or authorized by the Roman people to attack
the pirates who had captured him - he just abused
public military resources to pursue a private
vendetta. What can we possibly want to emulate about
this episode? The fact that he was ruthless? Well, he
was also treacherous, self-centred, vain, and so on.
The fact that Caesar behaved in a certain way is not
remotely indicative of the diplomatic behaviour of the
Roman republic.

> But let's look at the other --- the actions of
> Laenas in his
> confrontation with Antiochus. I'm not sure that
> what Antiochus
> represented (i.e., a "legitimate" government or not)
> was necessarily
> important in this particular incident. What is
> important, and the
> point I was making, is that a single man stood
> before an aggressor and
> refused to yield; he had behind him the force and
> authority of Rome.
> The reason Laenas' unwavering stance worked was that
> the world
> recognized the authority behind Laenas and feared
> it, not because of
> any questions of legitimacy or diplomacy but because
> it had proven
> itself in its willingness to be unsheathed and
> unleashed upon the
> enemies (either real or perceived, economic or
> political) of Rome.
> Laenas could very well have been standing anywhere
> facing any
> aggressor, and his response would have been the
> same: "Rome forbids
> you to act upon your desire for conquest, because it
> is not in her
> interest to allow you to do so." And he was obeyed
> --- not only (or
> even necessarily) because Rome was a "legitimate"
> power, but because
> Rome was a power.

So your point is solely that Rome was powerful and
could order people about? Well, no one will disagree
with you! But what lessons for the modern world are
you trying to draw from this fact? That it's handy to
be powerful? Again, I doubt you'll find any naysayers.
That a powerful state should not be shy to order other
states around? Well, fine, but where does that get us?
I would be delighted if the U.S. were to draw a big
ring around the British Isles and forbid terrorists to
attack it.

I'm just not sure who you're trying to persuade, and
of what. If you're trying to persuade your fellow
Americans to support a policy of using the threat of
American force to put a stop to terrorism, I have no
objection at all. But I suspect you'll find that such
a policy won't be as effective against terrorists as
it was against Antiochus. Antiochus knew very well
that if he invaded Egypt the Romans would come and
find him and defeat him. The terrorists who attacked
London know equally well that the U.S. would have a
hard job finding them since it doesn't know who they are!





___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

A. Apollonius Q. Maximo omnibusque sal.

> Apollonius,
> I forget about this one, you must have a very
> efficent search engine to
> retrive this.
> I have to thumb through my Loebs which takes
> forever.

I happened to have re-read Livy 21-30 recently, and I
remembered the episode involving an arson attack on
the new tabernae. So I plugged "new tabernae burned"
into google and one of the first ten results was "many
of the shops of the money-changers in the Forum were
burned down AUC 543". That gave me the date - 210 B.C.
- and then I used the very useful Attalus website:

http://www.attalus.org/

... which gives the major events of each year between
320 and 61 B.C. with links to the primary sources.And
hey presto, it led me to the right bit of Livy in the
complete (though not top-quality) translation at:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/txt/ah/Livy/





___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

Salve Romans

FYI

Here is a bibliography on Empires past and present

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus


********************************************************************
Bibliography

Past Empires
Abernethy, David B. (2000) The Dynamics of Global Dominance: European Overseas Empires, 1415-1980 (Yale University Press)

Badian, Ernst (1967) Roman Imperialism in the Late Republic (South African University Press)

Black, Jeremy (2004) The British Seaborne Empire (Yale University Press)

Boxer, Charles R. (1965) The Dutch Seaborne Empire 1600-1800 (Knopf)

Boxer, Charles R. (1969) The Portuguese Seaborne Empire 1415-1825 (Hutchinson)

Brunschwig, Henri (1966) French Colonialism (Praeger)

Cain, Peter and Tony Hopkins (2001) British Imperialism, 1688-2000 (Longman)

Ferguson, Niall (2003) Empire: The Rise and Demise of the British World Order and the Lessons for Global Power (Basic Books)

Fromkin, David (2001) A Peace to End All Peace: The Fall of the Ottoman Empire and the Creation of the Modern Middle East (Owl Books)

Garnsey, P.D.S and Whittaker, C.R. (eds.) (1978) Imperialism in the Ancient World (Cambridge University Press)

Gibbon, Edward, and Hugh Redwald Trevor-Roper (1993) Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire/Volumes 1, 2, & 3 (Knopf)

Hobsbawm, Eric J. (1989) The Age of Empire 1875-1914 (Vintage)

Hochschild, Adam (1999) King Leopold's Ghost (Houghton Mifflin)

Isaac, Benjamin (1997) The Limits of Empire: The Roman Army in the East (Clarendon Press)

James, Lawrence (1997) The Rise and Fall of the British Empire (St. Martin's Press)

Lieven, Dominic (2000) Empire: The Russian Empire and Its Rivals (Yale University Press)

Luttwak, Edward N. (1976) The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire (Johns Hopkins University Press)

Parry, J.H. (1966) The Spanish Seaborne Empire (University of California Press)

Parry, J.H. (1940) The Spanish Theory of Empire in the Sixteenth Century (Cambridge University Press)

Porter, Bernard (1996) Lion's Share: Short History of British Imperialism 1850-1995 (ADDIS)

Schama, Simon (2002) The Fate of Empire 1776-2000 (Miramax)

Smith, Woodruff (1976) The German Colonial Empire (University of North Carolina Press)

Stern, Fritz (1977) Blood and Iron: Bismarck, Bleichroder and the Building of the German Empire (Random House)

Ste. Croix, G.E.M. de (1972) The Origins of the Peloponnesian War (Cornell University Press)

Thorton, Archibald Paton (1985) The Imperial Idea and Its Enemies: A Study in British Power (Palgrave Macmillan)

Yacono, X. (1973) La colonisation francaise (Presses Universitaires de France)



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


Theory and Comparative Empires
Alcock, Susan E. et al (2001) Empires (Cambridge University Press)
Doyle, Michael W. (1986) Empires (Cornell University Press)

Duverger, Maurice (ed.) (1980) Le concept d'empire (Presses Universitaires de France)

Hobson, John A. (1902) Imperialism: A Study (James Pott and Co.)

Hopkins, A.G. (ed.) (2002) Globalization in World History (Norton)

Howe, Stephen (2002) Empire: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford University Press)

Lenin, V.I. (1916) Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism (International)

Motyl, Alexander J. (2001) Imperial Ends: The Decay, Collapse and Revival of Empires (Columbia University Press)

Osterhammel, Jurgen and Shelley L. Frisch (Translator) (1997) Colonialism: A Theoretical Overview (Markus Weiner)

Said, Edward W. (1978) Orientalism (Pantheon)

Said, Edward W. (1993) Culture and Imperialism (Knopf)



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


US Empire?
Bacevich, Andrew J. (2002) American Empire: The Realities and Consequences of US Diplomacy (Harvard University Press)
Blum, William (2000) Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower (Common Courage)

Chomsky, Noam (2003) Hegemony or Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance (Metropolitan Books)

Ferguson, Niall (2004) Colossus: The Price of America's Empire(The Penguin Press)

Garrison, Jim (2004) America as Empire: Global Leader or Rogue Power? (Berrett-Koehler Publishers)

Hardt, Michael and Toni Negri (2001) Empire (Harvard University Press)

Ikenberry, G. John (ed.) (2002) America Unrivaled: The Future of the Balance of Power (Cornell University Press)

Johnson, Chalmers A. (2000) Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire (Owl Books)

Johnson, Chalmers A. (2004) The Sorrows of Empire (Metropolitan Books)

Khalidi, Rashid (2004) Resurrecting Empire (Beacon Press)

Kupchan, Charles (2002) The End of the American Era: US Foreign Policy and the Geopolitics of the Twenty-first Century (Knopf)

Magdoff, Harry (1969) The Age of Imperialism: The Economics of US Foreign Policy (Monthly Review Press)

Mahajan, Rahul (2003) Full Spectrum Dominance: US Power in Iraq and Beyond (Seven Stories Press)

Mann, Michael (2003) Incoherent Empire (Verso)

Mead, Walter Russell (1988) Mortal Splendor: The American Empire in Transition (Houghton Mifflin)

Mearsheimer, John (2003) The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (WW Norton)

Nye, Joseph S. (2004) Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics (Public Affairs)

Panich, Leo and Colin Leys (2003) The New Imperial Challenge (Monthly Review Press)

Richter, Daniel K. (2001) Facing East from Indian Country: A Native History of Early America (Harvard University Press)

Roy, Arundhati (2004) An Ordinary Person's Guide to Empire (South End Press)

Smith, Neil (2003) American Empire: Roosevelt's Geographer and the Prelude to Globalization (University of California Press)

Van Alstyne, Richard W. (1960) The Rising American Empire (Norton)

Wallerstein, Immanuel (2003) The Decline of American Power (New Press)

Williams, William Appleman (1969) The Roots of the Modern American Empire (Random House)

Williams, William Appleman (1959) The Tragedy of American Diplomacy (World)

Wood, Ellen Meiksins (2003) Empire of Capital (Verso Books)

Zimmerman, Warren (2002) First Great Triumph: How Five Americans Made Their Country a World Power (Farrar Straus & Giroux)



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


US Unilateralism
Bennis, Phyllis and Noam Chomsky (2002) Before and After: US Foreign Policy and the September 11th Crisis (Olive Branch Press)

Boren, David, Edward J. Perkins and William Crowe (2000) Preparing America's Foreign Policy for the 21st Century (University of Oklahoma Press)

Daalder, Ivo H. and James M. Lindsay (2003) America Unbound: The Bush Revolution in Foreign Policy (Brookings Institution)

Feffer, John, Barbara Ehrenreich and Michael T. Klare (2003) Power Trip: US Unilateralism and Global Strategy After September 11 (Seven Stories Press)

Foot, Rosemary, S. Neil MacFarlane and Michael Mastanduno (eds.) (2003) US Hegemony and International Organizations: The United States and Multilateral Institutions (Oxford University Press)

Haas, Richard (1998) The Reluctant Sheriff: The United States After the Cold War (Council on Foreign Relations Press)

Kagan, Robert (2003) Of Paradise and Power: America and Europe in the New World Order (Knopf)

Nye, Joseph S. (2002) The Paradox of American Power: Why the World's Only Superpower Can't Go It Alone (Oxford University Press)



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


US Interventions
Boot, Max (2003) The Savage Wars of Peace: Small Wars and the Rise of American Power (Basic Books)
Blum, William (1995) Killing Hope: U. S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II (Common Courage)

Chomsky, Noam (2000) Rogue States: The Rule of Force in World Affairs (South End Press)

Furedi, Frank (1994) The New Ideology of Imperialism: Renewing the Moral Imperative (Pluto Press)

Haas, Richard (1994) Intervention: The Use of American Military Force in the Post-Cold War World (Carnegie Endowment for International Peace)

Ignatieff, Michael (2003) Empire Lite: Nation-Building in Bosnia, Kosovo and Afghanistan (Vintage)

Kolko, Gabriel (2002) Another Century of War (New Press)

Kolko, Gabriel (1988) Confronting the Third World: United States Foreign Policy, 1945-1980 (Pantheon Books)

Mahajan, Rahul (2002) The New Crusade: America's War on Terrorism (Monthly Review Press)



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


Humanitarian Intervention
Barnett, Michael (2002) Eyewitness to a Genocide: The United Nations and Rwanda (Ithaca: Cornell University Press)
Chatterjee, Deen K. & Don E. Scheid, eds. (2003) Ethics and Foreign Intervention (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)

Chesterman, Simon (2003) Just War or Just Peace?: Humanitarian Intervention and International Law (Oxford Press)

Daalder, Ivo H., and Michael E. O'Hanlon (2000) Winning Ugly: NATO's War to Save Kosovo (Washington, DC: Brookings)

Des Forges, Alison (1999) Leave None to Tell the Story: Genocide in Rwanda (New York: Human Rights Watch)

Finnemore, Martha (2003) The Purpose of Intervention: Changing Beliefs about the Use of Force (Ithaca:Cornell University Press)

Glennon, Michael J. (2001) Limits of Law, Prerogatives of Power: Interventionism After Kosovo (New York: Palgrave)

Hoffmann, Stanley, [Johansen, Robert C. and Sterba, James P.] (1997) The Ethics and Politics of Humanitarian Intervention (University of Notre Dame Press)

Holzgrefe, J. L. and Keohane, Robert O.[Editors] (2003) Humanitarian Intervention : Ethical, Legal and Political Dilemmas (Cambridge University Press)

International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (2001) The Responsibility to Protect

Jokic, Aleksandar and Wilkins, Burleigh [Editors] (2003) Humanitarian Intervention As a Moral and Philosophical Issue (Broadview Press)

Kuperman, Alan J. (2001) The Limits of Humanitarian Intervention: Genocide in Rwanda (The Brookings Institution)

Mamdani, Mahmood (2001) When Victims Become Killers: Colonialism, Nativism, and the Genocide in Rwanda (Princeton: Princeton University Press)

Minear, Larry, Eliasson, Jan (Introduction) and Dr. Hammock, John (2002) The Humanitarian Enterprise: Dilemmas and Discoveries (Kumarian Press)

Power, Samantha (2002) A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide (New York: Basic Books)

Schnabel, Albrecht, and Ramesh Thakur, eds. (2000) Kosovo and the Challenge of Humanitarian Intervention: Selective Indignation, Collective Action, and International Citizenship (Tokyo: United Nations University Press)

Weiss, Thomas G. (2000) Humanitarian Challenges And Intervention (Westview Press)

Weissman, Fabrice [Medecins Sans Frontieres] (2004) In the Shadow of "Just Wars:" Violence, Politics, and Humanitarian Action (Cornell University Press)

Welsh, Jennifer M. (2004) Humanitarian Intervention and International Relations (Oxford: Oxford University Press)

Wheeler, Nicholas J. (2003) Saving Strangers: Humanitarian Intervention in International Society (Oxford University Press)


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

A. Apollonius L. Vitellio omnibusque sal.

> ... In the case of
> the Roman and British Empires, their primary goal
> was raw, honest
> Imperialism. They expanded their empires with one
> sole goal in mind,
> and that was to sieze ground, plant their flag, and
> expand their
> territory.

Actually this isn't a very accurate description of
Roman imperialism. Throughout the republican period
Rome had many opportunities to conquer terroritory and
chose not to do so. In fact the Roman really didn't
become interested in direct rule over land outside
Italy until the late republic. They acquired Spain not
because they wanted it but because they couldn't
afford to let the Carthaginians have it; the same had
been true earlier of Sicily and Sardinia. They fought
three Macedonian wars: after the first, though they
could have ruled Macedonia directly, they withdrew.
After the second, they dismantled the monarchy,
partitioned the state into four federated cantons, and
again withdrew. Only after the third Macedonian war
did they finally decide to rule the territory
directly.

There were times when the Romans did deliberately set
out to conquer and hold territory, more often in the
imperial period than in the republican; but even on
these occasions it was not usually as an end in itself
but for larger strategic reasons: to secure a more
defensible border, for example, or to stop rebels
receiving support from abroad.

There's been plenty of scholarly debate about the
extent and nature of Roman imperialism since Harris
published his book of that title in (I think) the 70s,
but I think most historians would agree that at no
time during the republic was the "sole goal" of Roman
imperialism to "expand their territory".



___________________________________________________________
How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday
snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com

Hello to all.

I live in NY - but I liked the gens name Romulus though so I sent them
an app for citizenship several weeks ago to the province that uses it
and have heard NOTHING.

Did I screw up by applying to an Asian province? Should I just keep
waiting OR apply to the MEDIATLANTIC? (does it matter?)

Not afraid to say - "HELP"

Thanks and hope to be a NEW ROMAN soon...
Regards,
(Name "picked") Marcus Romulus Rosamus

Salve Romans

"America is a large friendly dog in a small room. Every time it wags its tail it knocks over a chair."-- Arnold Toynbee

Cato: "The "imperialism" ascribed to the U.S. certainly does exist, and as has been pointed out, is of a fundamentally different nature than the previous two examples (Rome and Great Britain), in that U.S. imperialism is economic and political rather than simply territorial."

TGP: I thought that Roman expansion was for the most part, especially in the early years, ( centuries ) as defensive. Is this not the case?

Is not American "Imperialism" mostly cultural and economic? The US has not acquired any land by conquest since the 19th century.

Cato: However, I note again that Mr. Bush, in his speeches before, during, and since the war in Iraq, has sounded a note almost identical to that of ancient Rome: we will not allow anyone to interfere with our interests, be they political or economic --- and we will strike down anyone who we believe is in a position to attempt to do so, or try to make it impossible for them to do so. Often, this note has been couched in terms of protecting "our way of life", a note that rang
again in London as Mr. Blair spoke about the horrendous attacks there.

TGP: You are exactly right if our interests include, and they do , "our way of life". Most citizens of the West could give a rats-as_ as to our neighbors religion. Most of us simply want to live and let live.

Not true of the Islamofasists you go our way or we send you to Allah.

I agree with the rest of what you wrote!

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus

PS

THE LIST
*******************************************
What Have The Romans Ever Done For Us

Reg: They've bled us white, the bastards. They've taken everything we had, not just from us, from our fathers and from our fathers' fathers.

Stan: And from our fathers' fathers' fathers.

Reg: Yes.

Stan: And from our fathers' fathers' fathers' fathers.

Reg: All right, Stan. Don't labour the point. And what have they ever given us in return? (he pauses smugly)

Xerxes: The aqueduct?

Reg: What?

Xerxes: The aqueduct.

Reg: Oh yeah, yeah they gave us that. Yeah. That's true.

Masked Commando: And the sanitation!

Stan: Oh yes ... sanitation, Reg, you remember what the city used to be like.

Reg: All right, I'll grant you that the aqueduct and the sanitation are two things that the Romans have done ...

Matthias: And the roads ...

Reg: (sharply) Well yes obviously the roads ... the roads go without saying. But apart from the aqueduct, the sanitation and the roads ...

Another Masked Commando: Irrigation ...

Other Masked Voices: Medicine ... Education ... Health

Reg: Yes ... all right, fair enough ...

Commando Nearer The Front: And the wine ...

General Audience: Oh yes! True!

Francis: Yeah. That's something we'd really miss if the Romans left, Reg.

Masked Commando At Back: Public baths!

Stan: And it's safe to walk in the streets at night now.

Francis: Yes, they certainly know how to keep order ... (general nodding) ... let's face it, they're the only ones who could in a place like this. (more general murmurs of agreement)

Reg: All right ... all right ... but apart from better sanitation and medicine and education and irrigation and public health and roads and a freshwater system and baths and public order ... what have the Romans done for us?

Xerxes: Brought peace!

Reg: (very angry, he's not having a good meeting at all) What!? Oh ... (scornfully) Peace, yes ... shut up!

[From Monty Python's Life Of Brian]


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

Salve,
thank you very much for reply. Yes, its hard question. Who knows, maybe did
it somebody else.
Vale
Sextus Lucilius Tutor


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

Salve,

Islamofacist is correct. the government that the extremists desire is not particularly Muslim nor condoned in the Qu'ran.

As someone living in an Islamic state, it is even more horrifing to see just how twisted the Islamists are making things.

Funny thing is, most of them do have recourse, many of them come form places under Sharia law...but are being swayed by Imams and Mullas with thier own agendas.

There is no easy answer to this, and it is not like there can be a Muslim dyasporia.

Vale,

Gaia Ivlia Felix
Asia Occidentalis
(Qatar)

----- Original Message -----
From: Timothy P. Gallagher
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2005 8:58 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] No negotiating.


Salve Flavia Lucilla Merula who said

"Funny I'd say the one thing history has taught me is that if you don't
get to the root of a problem like this (and how else do you that
except negotiate) it never goes away".

"The problem" is that the terrorist want to establish an Islamic world order that would require every man, woman and child, even non-believers to live under Muslim law.

A few Jews and a few Christians MIGHT survive as being "children of the Book" (Bible) as the Koran call them but anybody that worships the Gods of Rome or any other religion like it would be met with an executioner ax.

If you want to see into that world look how well the Sudan has been run for the last number of years as the Muslim section of the country has tried to impose Muslim law on the non-Muslin half of the country.

This new Islamofascist totalitarianism must be dealt with the way we dealt with Nazism and Communism. With Military, economic and moral strength as well as patience.

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus




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



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

a.. Visit your group "Nova-Roma" on the web.

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

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


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



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

Salvete Omnes,

I, Gnaeus Equitius Marinus, as a member of the Comitia Curiata, bear
witness to the adoption of Gaius Modius Athanasius by Caeso Fabius
Buteo Quintilianus. I recognize that he will now be known as Gaius
Fabius Buteo Modianus.

Congratulations to Gaius Fabius and to his adoptive father. May they
live in harmony all their days, and may the Gods and Goddesses of Rome
smile upon their domus.

Valete,

Gn. Equitius Marinus
Lictor, Comitia Curiata

Salvete Omnes,

I, Quintus Servilius Priscus Fidenas, as a member of the Comitia Curiata, bear
witness to the adoption of Gaius Modius Athanasius by Caeso Fabius
Buteo Quintilianus. I recognize that he will now be known as Gaius
Fabius Buteo Modianus.

Quintus Servilius Priscus Fidenas
Lictor Curiatas
Propraetor, America Medioccidentalis Superior Province

In a message dated 7/11/2005 11:29:59 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
a_apollonius_cordus@... writes:
but I think most historians would agree that at no
time during the republic was the "sole goal" of Roman
imperialism to "expand their territory".
Correct. Because they were a slave driven economy, the Roman Republic would
expand only when forced to. Also in comment to an earlier writer, Germania is
a poor choice. It was started under the Principate. Caesar's harassing
expedition into there, could not be considered to be the start of Rome's interest
in Germania.

Q. Fabius Maximus


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

Valetudo quod fortuna,

I, Stephanus Ullerius Venator Piperbarbus, as a member of the Comitia
Curiata, bear witness to the adoption of Gaius Modius Athanasius by
Caeso Fabius Buteo Quintilianus. I recognize that he will now be known
as Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus.

May That Which Is Holy send him and his new family blessings of
health, wealth and good luck.

=========================================
In amicitia quod fides -
Stephanus Ullerius Venator Piperbarbus
Civis, Patrician, Paterfamilias et Lictor

Religio Septentrionalis - Poet

"A room without a book is like a body without a soul. "
- Marcus Tullius Cicero

http://anheathenreader.blogspot.com/

Salve, Marce, et salvete, quirites, socii, peregrinique omnes!

> Hello to all.
>
> I live in NY - but I liked the gens name Romulus though so I sent them
> an app for citizenship several weeks ago to the province that uses it
> and have heard NOTHING.

One sends one's citizenship application to the censor's office via the
website, not to any province.

>
> Did I screw up by applying to an Asian province? Should I just keep
> waiting OR apply to the MEDIATLANTIC? (does it matter?)

Again, you would not apply to a province, including the one in which you
(and I) live, Mediatlantica.

>
> Not afraid to say - "HELP"
>
> Thanks and hope to be a NEW ROMAN soon...
> Regards,
> (Name "picked") Marcus Romulus Rosamus

"Marcus" will work very well as a praenomen, but "Romulus" isn't likely
to be acceptable, and "Rosamus" is (at best) a verb in (pre)classical Latin,
meaning 'we are dripping wet,' which points to its unsuitability as a name.
The form you finally sent to the censor's office, 'Rozamus,' doesn't exist
at all. Both must be changed to something more suitable before citizenship
can be offered.

Vale, et valete,

Flavia Tullia Scholastica
Classicist
Scriba Censoris Gnaei Equiti Marini

>
>
>
>

Sextus Pilatus Barbatus A Apolloni Cordo omnibusque salutem dicit

Thanks for those sites, Corde! The Attalus one is particularly useful to me
in many ways, so I'm delighted you came across it! And, since I have large
chunks of Livy XXX to prepare this summer, a good variety of translations is
always a help.

Thanks!

Sextus Pilatus Barbatus.



_____

From: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of A. Apollonius Cordus
Sent: 11 July 2005 19:17
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: No negotiating (finding Livy)



A. Apollonius Q. Maximo omnibusque sal.

> Apollonius,
> I forget about this one, you must have a very
> efficent search engine to
> retrive this.
> I have to thumb through my Loebs which takes
> forever.

I happened to have re-read Livy 21-30 recently, and I
remembered the episode involving an arson attack on
the new tabernae. So I plugged "new tabernae burned"
into google and one of the first ten results was "many
of the shops of the money-changers in the Forum were
burned down AUC 543". That gave me the date - 210 B.C.
- and then I used the very useful Attalus website:

http://www.attalus.org/

... which gives the major events of each year between
320 and 61 B.C. with links to the primary sources.And
hey presto, it led me to the right bit of Livy in the
complete (though not top-quality) translation at:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/txt/ah/Livy/





___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with
voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com



_____

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



* Visit your group "Nova-Roma
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma> " on the web.

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

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.



_____



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

S Pilatus Barbatus illustrissimae Flaviae Tulliae Scholasticae omnibusque
civibus sociisque atque Marco salutem dicit .



I too had some ideas of what name I would like originally, but when I
submitted them to the Censores I discovered that they were not really
acceptable. So I had a rethink. Obviously I wanted a name that would not be
random but would reflect myself in some way. Thus I chose "Sextus" as a
praenomen, as it is a variant of "Xystus", an early pope whom I much admired
(it must be said that most of my interest in Latin and in Rome was sparked
off in my callow youth through the Catholic Church). My nomen "Pilatus" had
a twofold benefit. [1] It is a gens in Britannia, so was appropriate, but it
also reflected my interest in the quasi-history of Pontius Pilate (according
the the apocryphal gospels, which are a wealth of interesting information)
who, if tradition can be believed, ended up a martyr to his Christian
beliefs. I was always intrigued by his question to Jesus: "Quid veritas?"
(Unless the interview was conducted in Greek, one might assume that Jesus,
too, was conversant with Latin) and felt that a brash, hard-hearted Roman
governor would hardly pose such a question unless he were himself a man of
thought. As for the cognomen "Barbatus", well, that's merely practical: I
have a beard!!

So, Marce, have a good think and choose names that are acceptable to the
Censors' Office but which reflect you personally as well. It should be fun!

Vale et valete, omnes!

Sextus Pilatus Barbatus





_____

From: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Flavia Scholastica
Sent: 12 July 2005 07:08
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Waiting



Salve, Marce, et salvete, quirites, socii, peregrinique omnes!

> Hello to all.
>
> I live in NY - but I liked the gens name Romulus though so I sent them
> an app for citizenship several weeks ago to the province that uses it
> and have heard NOTHING.

One sends one's citizenship application to the censor's office via the
website, not to any province.

>
> Did I screw up by applying to an Asian province? Should I just keep
> waiting OR apply to the MEDIATLANTIC? (does it matter?)

Again, you would not apply to a province, including the one in which you
(and I) live, Mediatlantica.

>
> Not afraid to say - "HELP"
>
> Thanks and hope to be a NEW ROMAN soon...
> Regards,
> (Name "picked") Marcus Romulus Rosamus

"Marcus" will work very well as a praenomen, but "Romulus" isn't likely
to be acceptable, and "Rosamus" is (at best) a verb in (pre)classical Latin,
meaning 'we are dripping wet,' which points to its unsuitability as a name.
The form you finally sent to the censor's office, 'Rozamus,' doesn't exist
at all. Both must be changed to something more suitable before citizenship
can be offered.

Vale, et valete,

Flavia Tullia Scholastica
Classicist
Scriba Censoris Gnaei Equiti Marini

>
>
>
>

_____

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



* Visit your group "Nova-Roma
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma> " on the web.

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

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.



_____



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

Salve Gaius Modius Athanasius ( Thanks for the opportunity for some good debates and conversation)


GMA: "When I was in Dubai there were several Christian Churches in operation, and
several Christian Churches are still functioning in the middle east."


TGP I would bet most of the "Christian Churches are still functioning in the middle east" are located in Israel.

There may be a Christian church or two in the middle east and that's' nice but according to the CIA fact book on Saudi Arabia 100% yes 100% of the population is Muslim so I doubt that the leading nation of Islam has had much experience in ruling people that are non-Muslims. Well at least not for the last few centuries.

I doubt that the Vatican-City State could claim that all who live there are Roman Catholic.


GMA: Islamic fundamentalism is, as I see it, a reaction to Western politics.

TGP You mean like freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom to peaceable assemble or to petition your government for a redress of grievances or to vote? Like the freedom to go to school and study something other than the people across the way are Bad and need to be killed?

Or is it they don't like the fact we support the right of the State of Israel to exist, with defendable borders and at peace with her neighbors. Or is it that don't like us PAYING for the oil we use and they would prefer that we just take it?

If Americans are only after oil Canada and Mexico are a lot closer and neither has much in the way of a military. Come to think of it Venezuela is not that far away either.

GMA: "I believe Western politics, and US arrogance should change. I know several Muslims who
are very good people. Only a minority of Muslims are fundamentalist, and they make the rest of the Islamic community look bad.

TGP I said in a post that while not all Muslims are terrorist MOST terrorist are Muslims.

GMA "How do you define moral strength?

TGP "The world is very different now. For man holds in his mortal hands the power to abolish all forms of human poverty and all forms of human life. And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe--the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God.

We dare not forget today that we are the heirs of that first revolution. Let the word go forth from this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans--born in this century, tempered by war, disciplined by a hard and bitter peace, proud of our ancient heritage--and unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing of those human rights to which this Nation has always been committed, and to which we are committed today at home and around the world.

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty." JFK January 20, 1961

TGP Last time I checked the US had a monopoly on the "Bomb" from 1945-1949 and did not conquer any county or demand any territory from anybody.


GMA "Christian fundamentalism? "

TGP I am a Roman Catholic so you would have to ask someone else about "Christian fundamentalism"

GMA "The Bush administration?"

TGP: The Bush administration was in office for a whopping NINE MONTHS before September 11, 2001 George really must have pissed somebody off to get that kind of reaction after just NINE MONTHS. G. W. Bush is a hell of a lot better than a guy with a law degree who doesn't even know what the definition of "IS" is.

GMA Economic strength? What? Walmart financial terrorism? Trade deficit with China?

Last time I checked the US economy was the largest in the world at 11.6 TRILLION dollars in GDP. It is the economic engine that keeps the world in the 21st century and not in the 9th. Not one "Muslim" nation is in the top ten. You will find three Muslim nations in the top twenty-five and one more in the top thirty-five and about four more in the top 50.

The US economy is over 2 and 1/2 times larger than the worlds second largest economy, Japans

Total GDP 2004
(millions of
Ranking Economy US dollars)
1 United States 11,667,515
2 Japan 4,623,398
3 Germany 2,714,418
4 United Kingdom 2,140,898
5 France 2,002,582 a
6 Italy 1,672,302
7 China 1,649,329
8 Spain 991,442
9 Canada 979,764
10 India 691,876
20 Turkey 301,950
22 Indonesia 257,641
23 Saudi Arabia 250,557
34 Iran, Islamic Rep. 162,709
44 Pakistan 96,115
47 Algeria 84,649
48 Egypt, Arab Rep. 75,148
51 United Arab Emirates 70,960


TGP The only successful political revolution in the last 230 years or so was and is the American Revolution.

The American revolution was a "revolution of sober expectations" as Martin Diamond has said.

James Madison said, "We base all our experiments on the capacity of mankind for self-government."

All of the American revolutionaries died in their bed's. Every revolution after , starting with the French revolution were revolutions that attempted to establish some type of utopia.

The only way you can establish a utopia and maintain it is with force. Do you know what you need to establish a utopia? A utopia that consists of ONE person because the moment you have two people involved whose view are you going to pick? Whose utopia? Winston Smith's or Big brother's ?

The French, Russian, German, Chinese revolution all ended with most of the revolutionaries being executed by their "comrades" and led directly to the death of 10's of millions of human beings because they either owned too much land or were not revolutionary enough for the powers that be. They also died because terror was the one and only tool available to keep themselves in power.

If the Islamofascist ever come power the results will be catastrophic for the people living under their rule. They will look a lot like these other utopia states that have already been placed on the ash heap of history.

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus




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

In a message dated 7/12/2005 2:07:37 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
spqr753@... writes:
If Americans are only after oil Canada and Mexico are a lot closer and
neither has much in the way of a military. Come to think of it Venezuela is not that
far away either.
Umm, it has to do with volume of oil seized, not location.

Q. Fabius Maximus


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

In a message dated 7/12/2005 2:07:37 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
spqr753@... writes:
TGP: The Bush administration was in office for a whopping NINE MONTHS before
September 11, 2001 George really must have pissed somebody off to get that
kind of reaction after just NINE MONTHS. G. W. Bush is a hell of a lot better
than a guy with a law degree who doesn't even know what the definition of
"IS" is.
Frankly, I don't believe that 9/11 would have happened, if Reagan, Bush Sr.,
Clinton, or even Gerald Ford was in office. Read the after action report.
Notice what's classified and what's not.
The saboteurs had a lot of cooperation obviously, from the inept agencies,
since the signs were there, but nobody seemed to be able put them together.

And this leads a directly to the ostrich head in the sand approach of the
current administration when it came to terrorism. I swear Bush's reaction when
he was briefed about Muslim fundy threats was: "Gee, my daddy knows all those
guys. They would never do anything to me!"

Q. Fabius Maximus


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

It is not really about grabbing oil, U.S. prices have skyrocketed post Iraq invasion. It is about controlling the price of oil. And that does not mean lowering it.

Iraqi oil had been under embargo for a long time, when and if Iraqi oil gets out on the market, it would force a drop in the prices of both U.S. and Saudi oil... competition does that,

Now that is not the sole reason for what is occuring in Iraq, but it is damn handy for certain parties.

G. Ivlia Felix

----- Original Message -----
From: QFabiusMaxmi@...
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 1:15 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] No negotiating. and somewhat off topic


In a message dated 7/12/2005 2:07:37 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
spqr753@... writes:
If Americans are only after oil Canada and Mexico are a lot closer and
neither has much in the way of a military. Come to think of it Venezuela is not that
far away either.
Umm, it has to do with volume of oil seized, not location.

Q. Fabius Maximus


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



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

a.. Visit your group "Nova-Roma" on the web.

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

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


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



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

Salvete Omnes,
July 2th in Rome at Colosseum an interesting event will start. The
exposition ""Il Rito segreto. Misteri in Magna Grecia e a Roma"
(Secret Rituals. Misteries in Magna Grecia and at Rome) will be a
travel in the misterious cults of the Ancient World different from
the official religion. It will show all the aspects about the
private and public italic and greek cults with statues, stones,
video expositions, etc.
I think it could be a forced stop for all the nova roman visitin
Rome during the next 6 months.

Valete
Fr. Apulus Ceasar
Senito Consul

+++++++++++++++++



IN MOSTRA A ROMA LE SUGGESTIONI DEI CULTI MISTERICI NEL MONDO ANTICO
Promossa dal Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali e dalla
Soprintendenza archeologica di Roma, si inaugura venerdì 22 luglio
al Colosseo la mostra "Il Rito segreto. Misteri in Magna Grecia e a
Roma".
Matteo Colombo
Come ogni anno, a partire dal 2000 con la rassegna "Sangue Arena",
il Colosseo ospita dal mese di luglio una mostra che accompagna i
visitatori del monumento per i sei mesi successivi. Nella sede
simbolo principe dell'antichità, continua così una tradizione
feconda che nell'ambito di una programmazione espositiva incentrata
sulla comunicazione degli aspetti fondanti la cultura antica,
intende andare oltre il mero apprezzamento dei capolavori dell'arte
o la ricomposizione scientifica di contesti archeologici con i loro
materiali.
Preceduta dalla conferenza stampa di presentazione che si terrà a
Palazzo Altemps mercoledì 20 luglio alle 11.30, il giorno 22 sarà
aperta al pubblico "Il Rito segreto. Misteri in Magna Grecia e a
Roma", mostra interamente dedicata ai culti misterici nel mondo
antico, un tema mai approfondito nell'ambito di una esposizione
archeologica ed inedito anche nell'idea di allestimento.
Ideata dalla Soprintendenza archeologica di Roma e curata da Angelo
Bottini, l'esposizione documenta i fenomeni di religiosità al di
fuori dall'orizzonte del culto ufficiale, diffusi in Magna Grecia e
nell'Italia romana. I Riti orfici e dionisiaci, i misteri eleusini,
le pratiche oracolari ed altri ancora, tutti fortemente
caratterizzati dall'elemento "iniziatico" e dal segreto
dell'"indicibile" che vincolava i partecipanti. Nonostante le
diversità che caratterizzavano questi riti, dai diversi luoghi dove
venivano officiati (santuari o mura domestiche) ai modi e alle
tecniche d'esecuzione (processi di purificazione, cortei,
fiaccolate, danze e canti, letture di testi), essi sono l'evidente
manifestazione del continuo bisogno del singolo individuo, anche
nell'antichità, di ricercare il significato dell'esistenza e della
salvezza.
Oltre settanta opere tra cui grandi statue, busti, altari,
affreschi, vasi greci, rilievi ed idoli, provenienti dalle
Soprintendenze dell'Italia centrale e meridionale, arricchiscono le
architetture del II ordine del Colosseo con la loro rinata presenza,
sottolineata da un allestimento di grande impatto emotivo grazie al
sapiente utilizzo della luce, del suono e delle proiezioni. Si viene
così a creare un percorso narrativo di forte attrazione che vuole
avvicinare il grande pubblico ad un tema del mondo antico
affascinante, poco conosciuto e nei suoi contenuti certamente ancora
di grande attualità per l'interesse che da sempre il culto dei riti
misterici ha suscitato nell'animo umano.
Il percorso della mostra si apre con diverse sculture in marmo che
documentano il favore delle pratiche oracolari in Grecia e in
Italia, fra le quali la celebre Fanciulla d'Anzio (da Palazzo
Massimo), da alcuni identificata come Pizia, di cui viene tuttavia
confermata una nuova interpretazione.
Una selezione di immagini dalla Grecia classica alla Roma imperiale
illustrano esaurientemente i riti dionisiaci attraverso Menadi in
altari, plutei, frammenti di crateri ed affreschi individuati nel
patrimonio romano (Museo Nazionale Romano e Musei Capitolini) e
campano (Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Napoli e Soprintendenza
archeologica di Pompei).
Il percorso continua con la presentazione dei misteri eleusini,
attraverso la celebre Urna Lovatelli del Museo Nazionale Romano,
testimonianze vascolari e importanti rilievi. Demetra e Kore, le dee
onorate in questi misteri, sono rappresentate da una nutrita serie
di testimonianze provenienti dalla Calabria, da Locri in particolare
(pinakes, teste e statue fittili, ecc.). Il tracciato della mostra
prosegue dall'Italia greca al Lazio, con le pregevoli testimonianze
dal santuario di Aricia (i busti e le statue fittili delle Grandi
Dee), conservate nel Museo delle Terme e attraverso quelle del culto
di Cerere a Roma.
Un'ultima articolata sezione è infine dedicata ai culti misterici di
provenienza orientale diffusi in tutto il mondo romano, favoriti
anche dagli imperatori in chiave politico-ideologica e strutturati a
Roma in vere e proprie correnti religiose indipendenti: i culti di
Cibele e Attis dall'Asia Minore, di Iside dall'Egitto e quello
proveniente dalla Persia del dio Mitra che chiude il percorso
espositivo della mostra.
L'allestimento della mostra è stato affidato a Mao Benedetti e Sveva
Di Martino e prevede la disposizione delle opere dentro l'ambulacro
più interno del II ordine dell'Anfiteatro Flavio, protette dagli
elementi di chiusura dei grandi fornici volti a creare camere
di "buio" sonoro (la cura del suono è stata affidata a Gianandrea
Gazzola), che ricreano la suggestione del rito segreto separando e
in un certo senso proteggendo, dai rumori e dalla luce presenti
nell'ambulacro esterno. Quest'ultimo spazio, destinato ad accogliere
i visitatori, è invece dedicato allo sviluppo del nastro narrativo
degli apparati didascalici e alla proiezione di sequenze filmiche
montate da Stefano Scialotti sulle risonanze della cultura misterica
nella contemporaneità, secondo una chiave di lettura proposta
dall'antropologo Vincenzo Padiglione.


IL RITO SEGRETO. MISTERI IN MAGNA GRECIA E A ROMA
22 luglio 2005 - 8 gennaio 2006
Roma, Colosseo

OSD G. Equitius Cato

Salvete omnes!

I almost forgot: today is the anniversary of the birthday of Gaius
Iulius Caesar (100 B.C.).

Happy birthday to you,
Happy birthday to you,
Happy birthday, imperialistic, narcissistic, egomanaiacal, egocentric,
aider-and-abetter-in-the-destruction-of-the-Republic Gaius Caesar,
Happy birthday to you!

Higgledy-piggledy
Child of the Iulians
Grew up to be one of
Rome's greatest foes;
Crossing the Rubicon
Militaristically
Headed the City down
A path of woes.

Valete bene!

Cato

M IVL PERVSIANVS PRAET QVIRITIBVS SPD

as known, off-topic discussion are, if not welcomed, allowed in this Forum. Facts that happen in our macro-world may and are discussed here (according to the Edictum about the moderation of this ml at http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/edicts/praetor-2004-02-04.html ) as we are also citizens of our respective macro-nations and member of an internation community.

It seems to me that, after the horrible fact happened in London this past weekend, the righteous expression of grief and sorrow from the citizens of NR, now many email are just using what happened to express his own political ideas about modern imperialism, trying to put here and there words like "Rome" to justify the post. Sometimes not even doing that! Not even considering that many of us are just fed up with such a argumentation, which was expressed in the past so many times.

While this is only a general warning to the Forum, I warmly do advice to drop these kind of topics and keep what you have to say about in private posts. Further emails (and sanctions where applicable) might be communicated directly to the interested people.

thank you


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi, antispam, antivirus, POP3

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

Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Tiberio Galerio Paulino salutem dicit

As you might have suspected I don't agree with you. I have been to Saudi
Arabia, and will admit that they are not supportive of a Non-Islamic presence
within their Kingdom. However, I have been to Dubai, and have actually stood
within the walls of a Church there -- during the first Gulf War -- so I know
they exist (I've been to U.A.E. four times). A simple websearch will give
you the following listings for Churches in the United Arab Emirites:

_http://www.arabicbible.com/directories/churches/dubai.htm_
(http://www.arabicbible.com/directories/churches/dubai.htm)
_http://www.indexuae.com/Top/Religion/Christianity_
(http://www.indexuae.com/Top/Religion/Christianity)

Also there are other Churches that operate within the Middle East; Syrian
Orthodox Church, Coptic Orthodox Church, etc... These Churches are not
exclusive to Israel either.

Regarding US politics. I'm not so sure things are as rosy as you make it
seem when you state, "You mean like freedom of speech, freedom of religion,
freedom to peaceable assemble or to petition your government for a redress of
grievances or to vote?" A very minor example of our arrogance was witnessed
by me first hand when I was in the military. I was on the USS Dwight D.
Eisenhower, an aircraft carrier that -- at the time -- was in the Mediterranean
Sea. While we were there we would fly planes over Libya's airspace, into
Libya itself. The Captain of the ship would announce that we were doing this on
the 1MC (speaker system), as if he was proud of this accomplishment. When I
asked around as to why we were doing this the response was, "Just to fuck
with Libya." I think this sums up US foreign policy. If we have no respect for
the sovereignty of others, then others will not have the respect for our
sovereignty.

Regarding our economy. If you cannot see the majority of manufacturing jobs
slip away to China, then I am not going to be able to convince you in an
e-mail. The US is slowly moving towards a service economy. You also have to
factor in the success of US corporations. Were does Walmart, for example,
obtain the majority of its goods? Not from US manufacturers. They might be
doing well financially, and contributing to the substantial US GNP, but they are
doing so not because they are contributing to local economies, but because
they are purchasing very cheap goods from foreign suppliers and selling them
cheap in the US. US citizens are getting a "good deal" but at what price?

Your comment about MOST terrorists are Muslims is illusionary at most.
Years ago someone might have said, "Most terrorists are Irish," and someone would
believe that. That status of the Middle East is not good. There are a lot
of problems there, and the US is not going to cure the problem by engaging in
arrogant politics, and in force take overs of foreign counties. Yes, there
needs to be a change before the situation gets worse. But investing in
conflict after conflict is only going to see the death toll higher, and
frustration prevail.

Vale;

Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
(formerly Gaius Modius Athanasius)


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

Let us not forget that the world is using much larger amounts of oil now
than it did 20 years ago. China is developing rapidly as a manufacturing
country, and with that expansion comes a great need for oil -- which it doesn't
have.

The next major war that engages the world will not be to "contain an
ideology (like communism)," but back to basics -- over resources.

Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus

In a message dated 7/12/2005 5:30:31 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
vxgbhd@... writes:

It is not really about grabbing oil, U.S. prices have skyrocketed post Iraq
invasion. It is about controlling the price of oil. And that does not mean
lowering it.

Iraqi oil had been under embargo for a long time, when and if Iraqi oil gets
out on the market, it would force a drop in the prices of both U.S. and
Saudi oil... competition does that,

Now that is not the sole reason for what is occuring in Iraq, but it is damn
handy for certain parties.

G. Ivlia Felix





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

Vos saluto,

I'll stay a while in our NR chat.

If someone likes to be there too just do so.


Bene vale
Conservatus
__________________________________________________________
Mit WEB.DE FreePhone mit hoechster Qualitaet ab 0 Ct./Min.
weltweit telefonieren! http://freephone.web.de/?mc=021201

Citizens of Nova Roma;

I have been reminded by Senator Palladius that in my AAR for the subject event, I have forgotten to mention one rather important visitor. Young Connor, the son of Senator Palladius visited the Market Days and remained alert to all the more interesting items and scenes around him. The most facinating of these aspects to young Connor seemed to be the beard worn by the ProConsul as his eyes were riveted on it all through our brief but very interesting aquaintance. I look forward to meeting Connor again, just as soon as he learns to communicate verbally, due to my inability at present to understand his gestures. Welcome Connor, and we hope to see you again next year!!!

Respectfully, and With Great Pleasure;

Marcus Minucius-Tiberius Audens -- ProConsul -- Nova Britannia -- Nova Roma

I, Patricia Cassia, as a member of the Comitia Curiata, bear witness
to the adoption of Gaius Modius Athanasius by Caeso Fabius Buteo
Quintilianus. I recognize that he will now be known as Gaius Fabius
Buteo Modianus.

Salve,

I love the little ditty's, but I feel your much too hard on Caesar :)
Militaristically it would Sulla who marched on Rome first and we can't say Cato is not responsible in a small way. He could have let Pompey marry his niece! lol
We know Pompey wasn't the smartest guy, but he did have a lot of power and that power was Caesars once Pompey engaged and married Julia. And Caesar was very clever.

Vale
Metelliana

gaiusequitiuscato <mlcinnyc@...> wrote:
OSD G. Equitius Cato

Salvete omnes!

I almost forgot: today is the anniversary of the birthday of Gaius
Iulius Caesar (100 B.C.).

Happy birthday to you,
Happy birthday to you,
Happy birthday, imperialistic, narcissistic, egomanaiacal, egocentric,
aider-and-abetter-in-the-destruction-of-the-Republic Gaius Caesar,
Happy birthday to you!

Higgledy-piggledy
Child of the Iulians
Grew up to be one of
Rome's greatest foes;
Crossing the Rubicon
Militaristically
Headed the City down
A path of woes.

Valete bene!

Cato




---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


Visit your group "Nova-Roma" on the web.

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.


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





---------------------------------
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions - No fees. Bid on great items.

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

G. Equitius Cato Metellianae S.P.D.

Salve Metelliana!

OK, OK, I'll try to be nicer...how's this:

Higgledy-piggledy
Young Gaius Iulius
Brilliant tactician
and Rome's brightest son;
Drove men to murder when
Anti-senatorially
He brought his armed men
'Cross the great Rubicon.

Is that any better? :-)

Vale,

Cato

P.S. - you sort of have to run together the "anti-senatorially", but
hey them's the breaks. GEC



--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, JOEY NICOLE KING <metelliana@y...>
wrote:

> Salve,
>
> I love the little ditty's, but I feel your much too hard on Caesar :)
> Militaristically it would Sulla who marched on Rome first and we

can't say Cato is not responsible in a small way. He could have let
Pompey marry his niece! lol

> We know Pompey wasn't the smartest guy, but he did have a lot of

power and that power was Caesars once Pompey engaged and married
Julia. And Caesar was very clever.

>
> Vale
> Metelliana

Salve Cato

I believe you got it!! :-)

Metelliana

gaiusequitiuscato <mlcinnyc@...> wrote:
G. Equitius Cato Metellianae S.P.D.

Salve Metelliana!

OK, OK, I'll try to be nicer...how's this:

Higgledy-piggledy
Young Gaius Iulius
Brilliant tactician
and Rome's brightest son;
Drove men to murder when
Anti-senatorially
He brought his armed men
'Cross the great Rubicon.

Is that any better? :-)

Vale,

Cato

P.S. - you sort of have to run together the "anti-senatorially", but
hey them's the breaks. GEC



--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, JOEY NICOLE KING <metelliana@y...>
wrote:

> Salve,
>
> I love the little ditty's, but I feel your much too hard on Caesar :)
> Militaristically it would Sulla who marched on Rome first and we

can't say Cato is not responsible in a small way. He could have let
Pompey marry his niece! lol

> We know Pompey wasn't the smartest guy, but he did have a lot of

power and that power was Caesars once Pompey engaged and married
Julia. And Caesar was very clever.

>
> Vale
> Metelliana

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


Visit your group "Nova-Roma" on the web.

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.


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




---------------------------------
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions - No fees. Bid on great items.

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

SALVETE !

Higgledy - piggledy
Caesar's bravery
given to Cato
the possibility
to offer us
that short "poetry".

VALETE,
IVL SABINVS


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

> OSD G. Equitius Cato
>
> Salvete omnes!
>
> I almost forgot: today is the anniversary of the birthday of Gaius
> Iulius Caesar (100 B.C.).
>
> Happy birthday to you,
> Happy birthday to you,
> Happy birthday, imperialistic, narcissistic, egomanaiacal,

egocentric,

> aider-and-abetter-in-the-destruction-of-the-Republic Gaius Caesar,
> Happy birthday to you!
>
> Higgledy-piggledy
> Child of the Iulians
> Grew up to be one of
> Rome's greatest foes;
> Crossing the Rubicon
> Militaristically
> Headed the City down
> A path of woes.
>
> Valete bene!
>
> Cato

Salve Marce Iuli,

I am sure that these conversations on the bombings and world events
will drop off over the next several days as new ideas and topics are
introduced, just as they always do.

Meanwhile all I can suggest is, to the back alley with the lot of
you!

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BackAlley/?yguid=115252440

All those who wish can carry on the off topic conversations there
and that what she's there for!

Regards,

QLP










--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Marcus Iulius <m_iulius@y...>
wrote:

> M IVL PERVSIANVS PRAET QVIRITIBVS SPD
>
> as known, off-topic discussion are, if not welcomed, allowed in

this Forum. Facts that happen in our macro-world may and are
discussed here (according to the Edictum about the moderation of
this ml at http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/edicts/praetor-2004-02-
04.html ) as we are also citizens of our respective macro-nations
and member of an internation community.

>
> It seems to me that, after the horrible fact happened in London

this past weekend, the righteous expression of grief and sorrow from
the citizens of NR, now many email are just using what happened to
express his own political ideas about modern imperialism, trying to
put here and there words like "Rome" to justify the post. Sometimes
not even doing that! Not even considering that many of us are just
fed up with such a argumentation, which was expressed in the past so
many times.

>
> While this is only a general warning to the Forum, I warmly do

advice to drop these kind of topics and keep what you have to say
about in private posts. Further emails (and sanctions where
applicable) might be communicated directly to the interested people.

>
> thank you
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi, antispam, antivirus, POP3
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]