Ave!

On 10/31/05, Sensei Phil Perez <senseiphil@...> wrote:
> Salvete,
>
> There are 25 citizens on the Frappr right now and I must say from their photos that Nova Roma pretty damn attractive citizens ;-)
>
> Vires et honos,
> Marcus Cassius Philippus
>

Blush!

In felicitas - Venii

> Salve, M. Cassi Philippe, et salvete, omnes!
>
> Salvete,
>
> Paulinus and Cato never cease to amaze me with their knowledge bases. Guys,
> keep up the good work in educating us. Paulinus, what the heck (or who) was
> Sabidius/Sabidi in "I DO NOT LOVE THEE, DOCTOR FELL"? I don't think I'm
> cheating on our homework assignment here, I just thought you might know. My
> guess is that it was the infamous Dr. Fell, what say you?
>
> ATS: The only information I could find originally is that Sabidius was no
> friend of Martial‹but that guy is unlikely to have had many friends, given his
> acid tongue and pen. From what I could glean from Google, this Sabidius
> engaged in activities we cannot mention here, ones which were condemned at
> Rome, and was moreover greedy. As for Dr. Fell, there was one, in the 1600¹s,
> but the word Œfell¹ also has the significance of Œcruel, fierce¹ and Œdeadly,¹
> so the English title may be a word play.
>
>
> Valete,
> M.C. Philippus
>
> Vale, et valete,
>
>

A. Tullia Scholastica

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Quintus Suetonius Paulinus (Michael Kelly)
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 1:08 PM
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Pilate and Jesus
>
>
> Salve,
>
> Wow,thanks! I didn't know this poem much as I like Kipling. I'll
> post it for others to read and it is good for the Muse Library. You
> learn something new each day!
>
>
> Gallio's Song
> All day long to the judgment-seat
> The crazed Provincials drew--
> All day long at their ruler's feet
> Howled for the blood of the Jew.
> Insurrection with one accord
> Banded itself and woke:
> And Paul was about to open his mouth
> When Achaia's Deputy spoke
>
> "Whether the God descend from above
> Or the man ascend upon high,
> Whether this maker of tents be Jove
> Or a younger deity--
> I will be no judge between your gods
> And your godless bickerings,
> Lictor, drive them hence with rods--
> I care for none of these things!
>
> "Were it a question of lawful due
> Or a labourer's hire denied,
> Reason would I should bear with you
> And order it well to be tried
> But this is a question of words and names
> And I know the strife it brings,
> I will not pass upon any your claims.
> I care for none of these things.
>
> "One thing only I see most clear,
> As I pray you also see.
> Claudius Caesar hath set me here
> Rome's Deputy to be.
> It is Her peace that ye go to break
> Not mine, nor any king's,
> But, touching your clamour of 'conscience sake,'
> I care for none of these things!"
>
>
>
>
> -THE END-
> Rudyard Kipling's poem: Gallio's Song
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, walkyr@a... wrote:
>> >
>> > Salvete,
>> >
>> > I have always liked the statement Rudyard Kipling made about it in
> his poem
>> > "Gallio's Song"
>> >
>> > VRE (still aboard, running from Beta)
>> >
>> > "Faber est suae quisque fortunae."
>> >

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

Salve!

Well as the admin of the site I have removed it for you...

Perhaps we could post the link on the Nova Roma homepage? On the
Frappr site there's a special banner to link to the Nova Roma Frappr
Page...


Vale

Mercator

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, M•IVL•SEVERVS
<marcusiuliusseverus@l...> wrote:

>
> Salve,. Publius Minius Mercator, et salvete, omnes!
>
> I found quite appealing the Frappr resource, but, by my mistake, I got
> registered twice... How could we remove one of those entries?
>
> Vale optime,
>
> M•IVL•SEVERVS
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Check out the latest SMS services @ http://www.linuxmail.org
> This allows you to send and receive SMS through your mailbox.
>
> Powered by Outblaze
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

AVETE CIVES ROMANI!

Ludi Victoriae Sullae are going to end; I hope you had a good time
participating to the activities organized by Cohors Sullana.

In a few hours I'll post the final prayer to Dea Victoria.

But now, I'm honoured to share with you a brief historical research
about Ludi Victoriae Sullae I made a few years ago for Academia
Italica, and that I translated with the help of Pompeia Minucia
Tiberia for this event.
I hope you'll find it interesting.

L IUL SULLA
Aedilis Curulis
Rector Academiae Italicae



LUDI VICTORIAE SULLANAE


The Ludi (public games) constituted an essential part of the Roman
social life. The word Ludi, which can be superficially translated
as "games" or "festivals", constituted a central element of Roman
public life during the centuries. Proof of this rests in the fact
that Rome was born and certainly grew with the engagement in these
kinds of activities. Throughout the centuries, Rome faced many
changes to her social structure and political approach, and this is
translated even to Ludi structure. However the incredible good luck
of the Romans seemed to permeate her entire existance.

The centrality of Ludi in the social Roman life is attested to also
by the fact that the initial festivals were celebrated and presided
over by the king (Hermes 125, 1997, pag. 413), while subsequently,
during the republican age, they were celebrated by the appointed
magistrates (Aediles). The celebrations varied in presentation
style, influenced by contemporary social trends, and further varied
in their purpose. An exception was made for Ludi Apollinares, always
celebrated and organized by the Praetor Urbanus (F. Bernstein, Ludi
publici: Untersuchungen zur Entstehung und Entwicklung der
offentlichen Spiele im republikanischen Rom, Historia
Einzelschriften 119. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1998. Pp. 408;
W. W. Fowler, "Social life at Rome in the age of Cicero", McMillan &
Co., 1964, p. 295).

A further step, and an evolution of this social aspect of Roman
life, was initiated by Lucius Cornelius Sulla, and later on emulated
by Gaius Iulius Caesar: the importance of the celebration of Victory
upon the enemy was strongly emphasized by these men; above all when
that enemy, though conquered, could still count on the friendship of
another within the Pomerium. With this, the celebration of a Ludus
became a means of personal advertising for the celebrant; until
this time the Ludi had been traditionally held only as a celebration
of a deity and a motive of fun for the citizen, organized by the
State as opposed to a private citizen, seemingly with the Senatus
consultum as a prerequisite (F. Bernstein, see above).

The already rich tradition of Roman games was further embellished
during the last century of the Republic with these two new
appointments: the Ludi Victoriae Sullae from the year 81 b.C., and
the Ludi Victoriae Caesaris from the year 46 b.C.. With his Ludi
Victoriae Sulla wanted to celebrate the victory of its party upon
the last enemies of Marian party, and upon their allies the
Samnites....more particularily, the victory of Porta Collina,
November 1 of y. 82 b.C., just in front of the Homonymous Gate of
Rome.
In this manner the Dictator wanted to celebrate the Goddess Victory,
her mother, and did it with one thing that above all survived to him
after his withdrawal to private life. Ludi Victoriae later on were
celebrated each year from October 27 and acquired the adjective
Sullanae (they were also called L. V. Sullae), to differentiate them
from the homonymous L. V. Caesaris, and continued until November 1
(J. Carcopino, "Sulla, or the missed monarchy", p. 113, Longanesi,
Milan); other sources let these Ludi commence one day before,
October 26 (Cicero, Actio prima in Ver., 10).

Vell. Paterculus (Liber posterior, 27, 6) hands down this news, that
represents the first and most important historical font that
demonstrates the origin and the firts steps of the institution of
these Ludi:
"Felicitatem diei, quo Samnitium Telsinique pulsus est exercitus,
Sulla perpetua ludorum circensium honoravit memoria, qui sub eius
nomine Sullanae Victoriae celebrabantur".

The first Praetor who organized these Ludi, so important for Sulla's
will to celebrate his Victory and the restoration of the Republic as
he envisioned it, was Sestus Nonius Sufenas, remembered twenty years
later by his son Marcus, who dedicated a denarius to the first
edition of the Ludi and to his father, that "Ludos Victoriae Primus
Fecit" (Mommsen, Munzwesen, p. 265; Grueber, Roman Coins,. The, p.
470, table 47).

Sulla organized rich and luxurious games, inviting all the Romans
citizens to a banquet prepared along the roads of the Urbs (J.
Carcopino, "Sulla, or the missed monarchy", p. 116, Longanesi,
Milan). These games in fact, as per tradition, were dedicated by the
State to all the citizens, with a contribution, variable from year
to year, of the magistrate deputy to their organization
(W.W.Fowler, "Social life at Rome in the age of Cicero", McMillan &
Co ltd., 1964).

Of these games, one event has to be particularly remembered: The
Sacred Equestrian Race of the young, the so called "Troia". Here the
young offspring of Roman nobility used to confront themselves; the
two teams were led in the first edition by M. Porcius Cato Minor and
by M. Emilius Scaurus, son of M. Emilius Scaurus Princeps Senatus
and stepchild of Sulla, who had married Metella after his death.
Plutarch hands down this news (Plut., Cato Minor, 3), and then tells
the anecdote that at first Sulla, who was the organizer of these
games, chose Sextus Pompeius, youngest child of Pompeius Magnus, in
place of Cato as head of one of the two teams; but it happened that
he was not especially beloved by the other youngs, and he had to be
replaced with Cato.
The importance of this event of the Ludi Victoriae attests how the
benevolence of the youth was so important for the Dictator's
strategy, as he considered it the base of the future republican
political class, so injured during the years during the struggles
that commenced with the tribunate of Tiberius Graccus.

Their training appeared fundamental to a man that succeeded to be
extraordinarily farsighted (C. Lanzani, "L.C.S., dictator- story of
Rome in the years 82-78, 1936). The Lusus Troiae consisted in
equestrian activities based on the crash on horseback of three
groups of young sons of noble families (not necessarily, in the Ludi
Sullae, of Patrician families). They had some swords made of wood
that they used with ability, but it was not expected that anyone
would have injured any young opponent, because the purpose of this
race was a demonstration of bravery and skills with weapons and
horses.

These games belong to a very ancient heritage and handed down in
Rome, according to the tradition, from Ilium itself: Vergil tells us
how this Lusus Troiae, practiced by young Trojans, was learned by
the Latin youngsters first, and then by the Romans subsequently
(Verg., En., liber V, 558):

"Hunc morem cursus atque haec certamina primus
Ascanius, Longam muris cum cingeret Albam,
rettulit et priscos docuit celebrare Latinos,
quo puer ipse modo, secum quo Troia pubes;
Albani docuere suos; hinc maxima porro
accepit Roma et patrium servavit honorem;
Troiaque nunc pueri, Troianum dicitur agmen.
hac celebrata tenus sancto certamina patri".

Among the other games put into practice during Ludi Victoriae
Sullae, other professional activities are worth mentioning.
Gymnastic competitions were organized among real athletes; ever like
then during the history of Rome athletes had reached a similar
physical shape; these activities were a truly important part of his
games, bound to the passion that nourished toward Hellenic culture,
and meriting a careful physical preparation of the athletes. Clashes
between gladiators occurred, such fights were held in the Forum in
the first editions of the games, and during theIimperial period,
they were held in the ampitheatre As part of the first edition of
the Ludi it is believed by some that lions were brought to Rome for
the first time, with great scenic and popular success.
Finally, during the last day of the games, November 1st, chariot
racings were held with biga and quadriga in the Circus Maximus. This
was considered the most spectacular competition of the entire games.
All these competitions were surrounded by a banquet characterized
by its multiple courses and the large quantity of drinks.

It seems reasonable therefore that Sulla wanted to celebrate with
these Ludi his final victory over his main antagonist, Marius, and
he dedicated these Ludi to the Homonymous Goddess about a year
following the battle of Porta Collina (year 82 b.C.). Sulla wanted
to honour the Goddess in this fashion, and, indirectly, himself...
but only indirectly though, since the Dictator always wanted to
stick to the tradition that Ludi celebrations were dedicated to a
deity. Anyway it is impossible to deny the fact that he obtained
enormous benefits from their organization and celebration, and that
these Ludi represented a capable political maneuvre for the
celebration of his personality and political mission (Balsdon, J. P.
V. D, Life and Leisure in Ancient Romes, 1969, New York, McGraw-
Hill).

OSD C. Equitius Cato

Salvete omnes!

Hodie est Kalendis Novembribus; haec dies fastus est.

"The consuls for the next year were L. Furius Camillus and C. Maenius.
In order to bring more discredit upon Aemilius for his neglect of his
military duties the previous year, the senate insisted that no
expenditure of arms and men must be spared in order to reduce and
destroy Pedum. The new consuls were peremptorily ordered to lay aside
everything else and march at once. The state of affairs in Latium was
such that they would neither maintain peace nor undertake war. For war
their resources were utterly inadequate, and they were smarting too
keenly under the loss of their territory to think of peace. They
decided, therefore, on a middle course, namely, to confine themselves
to their towns, and if they were informed of any town being attacked,
to send assistance to it from the whole of Latium. The people of Tibur
and Praeneste, who were the nearest, reached Pedum, but the troops
from Aricium, Lanuvium, and Veliternae, in conjunction with the
Volscians of Antium, were suddenly attacked and routed by Maenius at
the river Astura. Camillus engaged the Tiburtines who were much the
strongest force, and, though with greater difficulty, achieved a
similar success. During the battle the townsmen made a sudden sortie,
but Camillus, directing a part of his army against them, not only
drove them back within their walls, but stormed and captured the town,
after routing the troops sent to their assistance, all in one day.
After this successful attack on one city, they decided to make a
greater and bolder effort and to lead their victorious army on to the
complete subjugation of Latium. They did not rest until, by capturing
or accepting the surrender of one city after another, they had
effected their purpose. Garrisons were placed in the captured towns,
after which they returned to Rome to enjoy a triumph which was by
universal consent accorded to them. An additional honour was paid to
the two consuls in the erection of their equestrian statues in the
Forum, a rare incident in that age.

Before the consular elections for the following year were held,
Camillus brought before the senate the question of the future
settlement of Latium. 'Senators,' he said, 'our military operations in
Latium have by the gracious favour of the gods and the bravery of our
troops been brought to successful close. The hostile armies were cut
down at Pedum and the Astura, all the Latin towns and the Volscian
Antium have either been stormed or have surrendered and are now held
by your garrisons. We are growing weary of their constant renewal of
hostilities, it is for you to consult as to the best means of binding
them to a perpetual peace. The immortal gods have made you so
completely masters of the situation that they have put it into your
hands to decide whether there shall be hence-forth a Latium or not. So
far, then, as the Latins are concerned, you can secure for yourselves
a lasting peace by either cruelty or kindness. Do you wish to adopt
ruthless measures against a people that have surrendered and been
defeated? It is open to you to wipe out the whole Latin nation and
create desolation and solitude in that country which has furnished you
with a splendid army of allies which you have employed in many great
wars. Or do you wish to follow the example of your ancestors and make
Rome greater by conferring her citizenship on those whom she has
defeated? The materials for her expansion to a glorious height are
here at hand. That is assuredly the most firmly-based empire, whose
subjects take a delight in rendering it their obedience. But whatever
decision you come to, you must make haste about it. You are keeping so
many peoples in suspense, with their minds distracted between hope and
fear, that you are bound to relieve yourselves as soon as possible
from your anxiety about them, and by exercising either punishment or
kindness to pre-occupy minds which a state of strained expectancy has
deprived of the power of thought. Our task has been to put you in a
position to take the whole question into consultation, your task is to
decree what is best for yourselves and for the republic.'" - Livy,
History of Rome 8.13


"In the last struggle, however, the Samnite Telesinus, like some
champion, whose lot it is to enter last of all into the lists and take
up the wearied conqueror, came nigh to have foiled and overthrown
Sylla before the gates of Rome. For Telesinus with his second,
Lamponius the Lucanian, having collected a large force, had been
hastening towards Praeneste, to relieve Marius from the siege; but
perceiving Sylla ahead of him, and Pompey behind, both hurrying up
against him, straitened thus before and behind, as a valiant and
experienced soldier, he arose by night, and marching directly with his
whole army, was within a little of making his way unexpectedly into
Rome itself. He lay that night before the city, at ten furlongs'
distance from the Colline gate, elated and full of hope at having thus
out-generalled so many eminent commanders. At break of day, being
charged by the noble youth of the city, among many others he overthrew
Appius Claudius, renowned for high birth and character. The city, as
is easy to imagine, was all in an uproar, the women shrieking and
running about, as if it had already been entered forcibly by assault,
till at last Balbus, sent forward by Sylla, was seen riding up with
seven hundred horse at full speed. Halting only long enough to wipe
the sweat from the horses, and then hastily bridling again, he at once
attacked the enemy. Presently Sylla himself appeared, and commanding
those who were foremost to take immediate refreshment, proceeded to
form in order for battle. Dolabella and Torquatus were extremely
earnest with him to desist awhile, and not with spent forces to hazard
the last hope, having before them in the field, not Carbo or Marius,
but two warlike nations bearing immortal hatred to Rome, the Samnites
and Lucanians, to grapple with. But he put them by, and commanded the
trumpets to sound a charge, when it was now about four o'clock in the
afternoon. In the conflict which followed, as sharp a one as ever was,
the right wing where Crassus was posted had clearly the advantage; the
left suffered and was in distress, when Sylla came to its succour,
mounted on a white courser, full of mettle and exceedingly swift,
which two of the enemy knowing him by, had their lances ready to throw
at him; he himself observed nothing, but his attendant behind him
giving the horse a touch, he was, unknown to himself, just so far
carried forward that the points, falling beside the horse's tail,
stuck in the ground. There is a story that he had a small golden image
of Apollo from Delphi, which he was always wont in battle to carry
about him in his bosom, and that he then kissed it with these words,
'O Apollo Pythius, who in so many battles hast raised to honour and
greatness the Fortunate Cornelius Sylla, wilt thou now cast him down,
bringing him before the gate of his country, to perish shamefully with
his fellow-citizens?' Thus, they say, addressing himself to the god,
he entreated some of his men, threatened some, and seized others with
his hand, till at length the left wing being wholly shattered, he was
forced, in the general rout, to betake himself to the camp, having
lost many of his friends and acquaintance. Many, likewise, of the city
spectators, who had come out, were killed or trodden under foot. So
that it was generally believed in the city that all was lost, and the
siege of Praeneste was all but raised; many fugitives from the battle
making their way thither, and urging Lucretius Ofella, who was
appointed to keep on the siege, to rise in all haste, for that Sylla
had perished, and Rome fallen into the hands of the enemy." -
Plutarch, Parallel Lives, "Sylla"

"Sulla drove Carbo out of Italy, having defeated his army at Clusium,
Faventia, and Fidentia, and fought with the Samnites (the only Italian
nation that had not laid down its weapons yet) near the city of Rome
at the Porta Collina, and having restored the state, soiled his
beautiful victory with a greater cruelty than anyone had ever
displayed. In the Villa publica, he killed 8,000 people who had
already surrendered, set up a proscription list, filled the city and
all of Italy with slaughter, ordered the murder of all unarmed
Praenestines, and killed Marius, a man of senatorial rank, after
having broken his legs and arms, cutting off his ears and pulling out
his eyes." - Livy, Periochae 88.1-2

On this day in 86 B.C., the last battle in the wars between Marius and
Sulla was fought, outside the Colline Gate at Rome. Sulla having
already marched into the city, a group of Samnites and Marians led by
Pontius attacked at the Colline gate on the northeastern wall, and
fought all night before being routed. The Marian forces, led by Carbo,
had been continually harassed by Pompey and Metellus, allies of Sulla,
and almost all the Marian forces had either desterted or been forced
into submission. A few, though, cut their way through to join up with
a Samnite army. Their combined forces, estimated at 70,000 men, made a
determined attempt to disengage the younger Marius in Praeneste, but
it could not get through Sulla's armies. In a final attempt to save
the besieged, the Marian and Samnite forces made a sudden dash on
Rome. Sulla raced there in the nick of time. Dividing his force Sulla
doubled back to Rome with a mobile column, and offered battle under
its walls outside the Colline Gate. His own wing was almost
overpowered, but made a final rally, while Crassus carried all before
him on the right flank. The fight for Rome ended in the destruction of
the last Marian army. Losses on both sides were heavy; the battle was
swiftly followed by the extermination of the Samnite prisoners within
earshot of the senate house before Sulla addressed the senate (this
was the last serious action ever fought by Samnite forces). The
Samnites were slaugtered in the Villa Publica, that housed the five
year census. Their bodies were carelessly tossed into the Tiber River.


Valete bene!

Cato


SOURCES

Livy (http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/toc/modeng/public/Liv2His.html),
Sulla and the Battle of the Colline Gate
(http://www.unrv.com/empire/sullas-civil-war.php) and
(http://janusquirinus.org/essays/Apollo/Background/MS4.html) and
(http://heraklia.fws1.com/contemporaries/sulla/) and
(http://www.livius.org/li-ln/livy/periochae/periochae086.html)

Salvete omnes,

Cato, you are very correct that the Christian Faith is founded upon these documents that are compiled into what we call the New Testament. However, the Church was never intended to be a "place" or a "book" it was intended to be a living community of like minded people.

QSP correctly states:
...in America the Christian churches are 30-60% full. In Europe, 5 - 20%
full.

I'll go further, the Roman Catholic Diocese are closing churches in many once thriving parishes at an alarming rate. If this trend continues the Roman Catholic Church will be just as dead as the Dead Sea soon enough, at least in the West. Although there are many reasons for this, one of them is the autocratic nature of the Roman Catholic Church. This trend in my opinion (as I have repeatedly stated) started during the time of Constantine and worked well enough right up into modern times. Modern science, archeology, secular humanism, and many other factors such as easy access to information have eroded the base of the Roma Catholic Church substantially.

In my humble opinion, the editing and purging of these early Christian sects and their texts did more damage to the Christian movement than was previously thought up to recently. Why? Because "truth" cannot be hidden for ever and when it starts coming out people become angry over being kept in the dark.

If you will all permit, I will give you an analogy (parable???) from my martial arts practice. A couple of years ago a young man came into my Karate school. He said he wanted to watch a class, I said it would be OK. He told me he was a black belt in another Karate school about an hour away where the same "Style" was taught but through a different "Organization".

As the class progressed I noticed that he was getting visibly upset. I went over and asked him what the problem was. He answered quite bluntly that although he had been "taught" the same style. The difference in the depth of knowledge taught by the organization he was affiliated with compared to mine was staggering. How so? I asked. He then went on to explain to me that where my curriculum included over 50 Kata (Forms) all historically attributed to our tradition (style), the organization he was with only taught 10 of them and then only taught the choreography and never delved into the "meaning" behind each of the moves. He never even knew all those other Kata were a part of the same tradition.

My school and the organization I belong to, I told him, valued the richness of the entire spectrum of the existing Kata as well as the esoteric (i.e. pressure point striking/grappling applications) meanings behind the movements and we didn't believe in editing down the information in any way. We actually taught other versions of the same Kata as passed down by other traditions for comparative value.

His organization had edited down the quantity and changed the way they were taught (as the majority of karate organizations have) in order to accommodate younger and younger practitioners and their desire to perform their Karate Kata in tournaments for trophies rather than for the intrinsic value of the art in all its richness. It is also, obviously, much easier to teach Karate this way. Their "Leaders" decided this for whatever reason and since most of the organizations followed suit, the typical student had no idea what had occurred or what they were losing out on.

This student became infuriated over the fact that he had spent so much money, and spent so much time perfecting his art form without any real "understanding" of it and furthermore felt very cheated that most of the Kata taught by our tradition had been edited out of the curriculum of the organization he belonged to. He then informed me that he had been feeling rather bored for quite some time at the school he had been attending and that was what propelled him to even consider viewing any other. He had literally learned nothing new since he had earned his black belt rank years earlier.

See the implications here and how they relate to this topic? All these texts are now coming out as surely as "truth" always does and many people are questioning the religious education they received in their youth and unfortunately the organizations that taught them as well.

There is nothing wrong with studying and putting side by side "all" the texts of all the traditions of our Christian faith. No one is not better than any other. They should all be given the same respect and the richness of all the different traditions should be rejoiced, not knocked down as not authentic or "heretical". Jesus indeed did point his finger at the moon and most only saw the finger (and then proceeded to worship it)!!! No matter whatever else he may have been (this is a matter of belief) he was indeed also a human being and did make human judgments: no matter how you want to spin it. He showed prejudice towards certain people in Mathew 7:6:

Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

A very good piece of "human" advice but certainly contradictory to other statements made by him regarding prejudice. Indeed contradictions abound in all mystic traditions. Contradictions only to us, since we do not have the capacity to understand everything. However, the more we have to contemplate on the better our understanding level becomes. That was the contention of the Gnostic movement. It was however destroyed by the "Autocratic" movement that found favor with Constantine and those Church fathers who wanted to accumulate power unto themselves through their hierarchy.

History is written by the winners. However, don't forget that History is being written and will be written. The Christian Churches are at the crux of history right now with the mass exportation of Islam. Although Islam is even more autocratic than Christianity, it may overwhelm Christianity before it in itself perhaps undergoes its own "enlightenment". The last time Christianity and the roman Catholic Church underwent such a test was when Martin Luther posted his little note! I hope it fares better this time.

This remains to be seen, but Christianity needs an infusion of energy and I believe this energy is to finally acknowledge, study and respect all its rich traditions and texts no matter how contradictory they may seem. If Christianity does not, it will undoubtedly be judged the way it has judged. Could that be happening right now? Islam, after all could be considered as just another "sect" of Judaism just as "Christianity" can be. Islam is even more prejudicial of other traditions -ne? Do we really want to be judged by Islam?

Vires et honos,
Marcus Cassius Philippus

----- Original Message -----
From: gaiusequitiuscato
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 9:37 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Pilate and Jesus


OSD C. Equitius Cato

Salvete omnes.

Caesariensis, you wrote:

"Buddhists would say 'If you meet the Buddha on the Way, kill him' and
'A finger points at the moon, the fool looks at the finger'. That is,
whatever the origin, it is the philosophy that matters, not the
historicity."



Just a reminder that Jesus message was *not* simply love and
compassion and peace. Yes, all these things were parts of His
message, but *by-products* of His teaching.

"Thomas said to Him, 'Lord, we do not know where You are going, how do
we know the way?' Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth,
and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me. If you had
known Me, you would have known My Father also; from now on you know
Him, and have seen Him.' Philip said to Him, 'Lord, show us the
Father, and it is enough for us.' Jesus said to him, 'Have I been so
long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who
has seen Me has seen the Father; how can you say, "Show us the
Father"? Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father
is in Me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on My own
initiative, but the Father abiding in Me does His works.'" - John 14:5-10

He is not the "finger"; He does not point at anything --- except
Himself. Egotistical? Only if He is not Who He says He is. There is
simply too much emphasis on what we would *like* Him to be, rather
than on Who He *says* He is; people would like Him to be a great moral
philosopher, an inspirational teacher, a charismatic leader...and all
of these things are very nice, but they are human traits that can be
found in many figures of both history and myth. He emphatically
seperates Himself from any teaching that has already been taught and
centers the revelation of the truth on Himself. He speaks with the
authority of God Himself.

Whether or not you *believe* what He says is relatively unimportant.
He said it, and you can take it or leave it. But you cannot change
it. The endless discussion regarding the veracity of Biblical texts
is relatively unimportant in one crucial way as well: Christianity,
whether you accept it or not, is founded upon these documents, and it
derives its faith from them. It is a "done deal", so to speak. The
canon of Scripture will not change, and arguing that you do not
believe that such-and-such a book was written by such-and-such a
person, or even that the books are themselves "flawed" historically or
philosophically (from a non-Christian point of view) makes absolutely
no difference. Christians believe it. It is the Christian faith.

This does not, in any way, mean that rational discussion of the
historic development and impact of Christianity is irrelevant; only
that efforts to discredit the faith itself are meaningless. I only
write this because I am not comfortable with clothing Christianity in
a way that makes it more palatable to non-Christians in contradiction
to what the faith actually says, and to represent it as simply the
moral philosophy of a great teacher is precisely that.

Valete bene,

Cato





SPONSORED LINKS Ancient history Fall of the roman empire The fall of the roman empire
Roman empire


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.


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




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


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.12.6/152 - Release Date: 10/31/2005


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

Salve,

I made a mistake too. My zip code is 04469, but they didnt have it in
the database for some reason. The next closest ist 04473, which I
tried to write, but my finger slipped, and now it has me in some
place Ive never been to. Can you change it?

Vale,
D. Claudius Aquilius Germanicus

> Salve!
>
> Well as the admin of the site I have removed it for you...
>
> Perhaps we could post the link on the Nova Roma homepage? On the
> Frappr site there's a special banner to link to the Nova Roma Frappr
> Page...
>
>
> Vale
>
> Mercator
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, M•IVL•SEVERVS
> <marcusiuliusseverus@l...> wrote:
> >
> > Salve,. Publius Minius Mercator, et salvete, omnes!
> >
> > I found quite appealing the Frappr resource, but, by my mistake,

I got

> > registered twice... How could we remove one of those entries?
> >
> > Vale optime,
> >
> > M•IVL•SEVERVS
> >
> > --
> > _______________________________________________
> > Check out the latest SMS services @ http://www.linuxmail.org
> > This allows you to send and receive SMS through your mailbox.
> >
> > Powered by Outblaze
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>

SOLUTION OF THE LAST QUESTION.
Thank you all for your participation!! :-)

CN CORNELIUS LENTULUS QUIRITIBUS MULTAM SALUTEM:

Here follows the correct answer for the 6th and last
question of our Certamen. (The final classifications
are in an extra e-mail!)

THE SOLUTION #6

QUAESTIO N°6 – (1) How did the number of the
magistrates change with the Leges Corneliae which are
enacted under Sulla's dictatorship? (2) And what was
the whole Latin title of his dictatorship?

RESPONSUM N°6 – (1) Dictator Sulla has changed the
number of the Quaestors from 12 to 20. The number of
Praetores increased from 6 to 8. (2) Lucius Sulla's
dictatura had the following title: "Dictator Rei
Publicae Constituendae Causa".


The contest is done.


And now I invite you to see The Final Classification
for Certamen Historicum of Aedilis L. Iulius Sulla!



VALETE QVAM OPTIME!
Happy Ludi Victoriae Sullanae!


Cnaeus Cornelius Lentulus,
Scriba Ludorum - Aedilis Curulis L. Iulii Sullae
Accensus Consulis
Propraetor Pannoniae






___________________________________
Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB
http://mail.yahoo.it

FINAL CLASSIFICATION
for the Historical Contest
of the Ludi Victoriae Sullanae:

The winners are both
P. MEMMIUS ALBUCIUS and
CN. EQUITIUS MARINUS,
both with 11 pts!!!!!!
They are both the most studious historian of Nova Roma
with this contest! :-)
We wish to thank all the studious partecipants and
hope you have enjoyed the contest!


CN CORNELIUS LENTULUS QUIRITIBUS SPD:
Avete, in the name of Aed. Cur. L. Iulius Sulla!

Here follows The Final Classification for our Certamen
Historicum. It was a hard struggle: I 'd like to
appreciate all contestants. For a long time the first
was P. Memmius, and in the last question Censor Cn.
Marinus catched up with him: it's his merit.
And now I should announce the contest is ended in a
draw: the winners are P. Memmius Albucius and
Cn. Equitius Marinus together. They are together our
best historians :-)
CONGRATULATIONS!!!
The second best by this contest is T. Iulius Sabinus:
CONGRATULATIONS TOO!


THE FINAL CLASSIFICATION of the Sulla - contest:

1. P. Memmius Albucius 11 pts
1. Cn. Equitius Marinus 11 pts

2. T. Iulius Sabinus 10 pts

3. Livia Aurelia Procula 1pt

4. Sex. Apollonius Scipio 0 pt

We wish to thank all the studious partecipants!!!

(The rules of Certamen Historicum:
http://www.cohorssullana.grafosystem.ro/rules.htm)


VALETE QVAM OPTIME!
Happy Ludi Victoriae Sullanae!


Cnaeus Cornelius Lentulus,
Scriba Ludorum - Aedilis Curulis L. Iulii Sullae
Accensus Consulis
Propraetor Pannoniae






___________________________________
Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB
http://mail.yahoo.it

Salvete Quirites, et salve Gnae Corneli,

Gnaeus Cornelius Lentulus <cn_corn_lent@...> writes:

> The winners are both
> P. MEMMIUS ALBUCIUS and
> CN. EQUITIUS MARINUS

What an entirely fitting result, a plebeian magistrate and a patrician
magistrate. My congratulations to Tribune Memmius Albucius, and my thanks to
Gn. Cornelius Lentulus for his hard work and tireless patience throughout the
contest. My thanks also to Curule Aedile Iulius Sulla for hosting these
games. The Ludi Victoria were my favorite games when I was Curule Aedile,
and I'm pleased to see them being celebrated well.

Valete,

-- Marinus

CN•EQVIT•MARINVS

Severus Marino omnibusque sal.

I want to congratulate Censor Gnaeus Equitius Marinus for winning the
Historical Contest of the Ludi Victoriae Sullanae. Ad maiorem cohors
gloriam, Censor, amice!

My congratulations also for the other winner, P. Memmius Albucius.

Vale optime,

M•IVL•SEVERVS

SCRIBA•CENSORIS•GEM
MVSÆVS•COLLEGII•ERATOVS•SODALITATIS•MVSARVM
SOCIVS•CHORI•MVSARVM
PROVINCIA•MEXICO•NOVƕROMƕSPQR

--
_______________________________________________
Check out the latest SMS services @ http://www.linuxmail.org
This allows you to send and receive SMS through your mailbox.

Powered by Outblaze


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

Salvete omnes!

The historical association of the famous Dr Fell is here:
http://www.rhymes.org.uk/a32-i-do-not-like-thee-doctor-fell.htm

I thought the student was rather clever!

Sextus Pontius Pilatus Barbatus



_____

From: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of A. Tullia Scholastica
Sent: 01 November 2005 07:14
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Pilate and Jesus

> Salve, M. Cassi Philippe, et salvete, omnes!
>
> Salvete,
>
> Paulinus and Cato never cease to amaze me with their knowledge bases.

Guys,

> keep up the good work in educating us. Paulinus, what the heck (or who)

was

> Sabidius/Sabidi in "I DO NOT LOVE THEE, DOCTOR FELL"? I don't think I'm
> cheating on our homework assignment here, I just thought you might know.

My

> guess is that it was the infamous Dr. Fell, what say you?
>
> ATS: The only information I could find originally is that Sabidius was no
> friend of Martial�but that guy is unlikely to have had many friends, given

his

> acid tongue and pen. From what I could glean from Google, this Sabidius
> engaged in activities we cannot mention here, ones which were condemned at
> Rome, and was moreover greedy. As for Dr. Fell, there was one, in the

1600�s,

> but the word �fell� also has the significance of �cruel, fierce� and

�deadly,�

> so the English title may be a word play.
>
>
> Valete,
> M.C. Philippus
>
> Vale, et valete,
>
>

A. Tullia Scholastica

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Quintus Suetonius Paulinus (Michael Kelly)
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 1:08 PM
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Pilate and Jesus
>
>
> Salve,
>
> Wow,thanks! I didn't know this poem much as I like Kipling. I'll
> post it for others to read and it is good for the Muse Library. You
> learn something new each day!
>
>
> Gallio's Song
> All day long to the judgment-seat
> The crazed Provincials drew--
> All day long at their ruler's feet
> Howled for the blood of the Jew.
> Insurrection with one accord
> Banded itself and woke:
> And Paul was about to open his mouth
> When Achaia's Deputy spoke
>
> "Whether the God descend from above
> Or the man ascend upon high,
> Whether this maker of tents be Jove
> Or a younger deity--
> I will be no judge between your gods
> And your godless bickerings,
> Lictor, drive them hence with rods--
> I care for none of these things!
>
> "Were it a question of lawful due
> Or a labourer's hire denied,
> Reason would I should bear with you
> And order it well to be tried
> But this is a question of words and names
> And I know the strife it brings,
> I will not pass upon any your claims.
> I care for none of these things.
>
> "One thing only I see most clear,
> As I pray you also see.
> Claudius Caesar hath set me here
> Rome's Deputy to be.
> It is Her peace that ye go to break
> Not mine, nor any king's,
> But, touching your clamour of 'conscience sake,'
> I care for none of these things!"
>
>
>
>
> -THE END-
> Rudyard Kipling's poem: Gallio's Song
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, walkyr@a... wrote:
>> >
>> > Salvete,
>> >
>> > I have always liked the statement Rudyard Kipling made about it in
> his poem
>> > "Gallio's Song"
>> >
>> > VRE (still aboard, running from Beta)
>> >
>> > "Faber est suae quisque fortunae."
>> >

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




_____

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]

Salvete,

Wonderful! Thank you both. It's amazing the things you pick up from a
beginner's Latin class. I guess my translation "Fell" a little short ;-)

Valete,
Marcus Cassius Philippus

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Bird" <p.bird@...>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 1:39 PM
Subject: RE: [Nova-Roma] Re: Pilate and Jesus


Salvete omnes!

The historical association of the famous Dr Fell is here:
http://www.rhymes.org.uk/a32-i-do-not-like-thee-doctor-fell.htm

I thought the student was rather clever!

Sextus Pontius Pilatus Barbatus



_____

From: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of A. Tullia Scholastica
Sent: 01 November 2005 07:14
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Pilate and Jesus



> Salve, M. Cassi Philippe, et salvete, omnes!
>
> Salvete,
>
> Paulinus and Cato never cease to amaze me with their knowledge bases.
Guys,
> keep up the good work in educating us. Paulinus, what the heck (or who)
was
> Sabidius/Sabidi in "I DO NOT LOVE THEE, DOCTOR FELL"? I don't think I'm
> cheating on our homework assignment here, I just thought you might know.
My
> guess is that it was the infamous Dr. Fell, what say you?
>
> ATS: The only information I could find originally is that Sabidius was no
> friend of Martial his
> acid tongue and pen. From what I could glean from Google, this Sabidius
> engaged in activities we cannot mention here, ones which were condemned at
> Rome, and was moreover greedy. As for Dr. Fell, there was one, in the
1600¹s,
> but the word Ofell¹ also has the significance of Ocruel, fierce¹ and
Odeadly,¹
> so the English title may be a word play.
>
>
> Valete,
> M.C. Philippus
>
> Vale, et valete,
>
>
A. Tullia Scholastica


> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Quintus Suetonius Paulinus (Michael Kelly)
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 1:08 PM
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Pilate and Jesus
>
>
> Salve,
>
> Wow,thanks! I didn't know this poem much as I like Kipling. I'll
> post it for others to read and it is good for the Muse Library. You
> learn something new each day!
>
>
> Gallio's Song
> All day long to the judgment-seat
> The crazed Provincials drew--
> All day long at their ruler's feet
> Howled for the blood of the Jew.
> Insurrection with one accord
> Banded itself and woke:
> And Paul was about to open his mouth
> When Achaia's Deputy spoke
>
> "Whether the God descend from above
> Or the man ascend upon high,
> Whether this maker of tents be Jove
> Or a younger deity--
> I will be no judge between your gods
> And your godless bickerings,
> Lictor, drive them hence with rods--
> I care for none of these things!
>
> "Were it a question of lawful due
> Or a labourer's hire denied,
> Reason would I should bear with you
> And order it well to be tried
> But this is a question of words and names
> And I know the strife it brings,
> I will not pass upon any your claims.
> I care for none of these things.
>
> "One thing only I see most clear,
> As I pray you also see.
> Claudius Caesar hath set me here
> Rome's Deputy to be.
> It is Her peace that ye go to break
> Not mine, nor any king's,
> But, touching your clamour of 'conscience sake,'
> I care for none of these things!"
>
>
>
>
> -THE END-
> Rudyard Kipling's poem: Gallio's Song
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, walkyr@a... wrote:
>> >
>> > Salvete,
>> >
>> > I have always liked the statement Rudyard Kipling made about it in
> his poem
>> > "Gallio's Song"
>> >
>> > VRE (still aboard, running from Beta)
>> >
>> > "Faber est suae quisque fortunae."
>> >



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




_____

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]





Yahoo! Groups Links








--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.12.6/152 - Release Date: 10/31/2005

On 10/31/05, Sensei Phil Perez
<senseiphil@...> wrote:

> Salvete,
>
> There are 25 citizens on the Frappr right now and
> I must say from their photos that Nova Roma pretty
> damn attractive citizens ;-)

Yes, it's so nice seeing all the citizens, some of
whom are so nicely togate.

(Too bad others chose their ten year old high school
yearbook photo. :P)


Aula Iulia Caeca




__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com

P. Memmius Albucius Gn. Cornelio Lentulo Marino omnibusque s.d.

Thanks a lot first to you, Lentule, for having organised this
passionnating contest, and to Curule Aedile Iulius Sulla for having
hosted them.

As Censor Marinus has underlined it, this pretty symbolic tie result
has surely pleasant to our Gods, and to our both orders, patrician
and plebeian.

Even if, as a tribune of the plebs, I cannot agree with dictator
Sulla for having decreased the tribunician powers while leading to
death hundreds of roman citizens, I must thank him for the nice hours
that we had these last days, 2087 years after his famous lex
Valeria/Cornelia.

Please all the others skilled candidates be honoured for their
entering in this contest.

Valete omnes,

P. Memmius Albucius

Salve Censor Marine,

I am a little confused on part of this edictum:

I thought applying through the mater and pater familias to join a
gens has been dispensed with and they are not identified anymore in
the album gentium from what I see.
Perhaps I missed something but I thought I'd check it out with you.

Regards,

Quintus Suetonius Paulinus



--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "CN•EQVIT•MARINVS \(Gnaeus
Equitius Marinus\)" <gawne@c...> wrote:

>
> EDICTVM CENSORIVM DE INCREMENTO FAMILIARVM
>
> I. E Lege Equitia Familiari/de Familia, omni patri matrifamiliasve
> cuiusvis nominis cognominis gentiles novos in familiam suam ut

solet

> asciscere licet.
>
> I. In keeping with the Lex Equitia Familiaris/de Familia, every
> paterfamilias and materfamilias, whatever his or her nomen and

cognomen,

> may admit new members to his, her, or their familia in the usual

ways.

>
> II. A. Licet hominibus qui nondum civitatem petivere familiam

exstantem

> coniungere sicut liberi patris matrisfamiliasve.
>
> B. Omnis civis familiam exstantem sicut liber patris
> matrisfamiliasve arrogatione vel adoptione coniungat.
>
> II. A. A person who is not already a citizen may join an existing
> familia as the child of the paterfamilias and materfamilias.
>
> B. A person who is already a citizen may join an existing

familia

> as the child of the paterfamilias and materfamilias by adoption.
>
> III. A. Is qui familiam exstantem e paragrapho II.A. coniungat

methodo

> solito civitatis petendae utatur.
>
> B. Qui familiam exstantem e paragrapho II. B. methodo

articuli XI

> Legis Equitiae Familiaris/de Familia utatur.
>
> III. A. A person who joins an existing familia under II.A does so

using

> the normal method of applying for citizenship.
>
> B. A person who joins an existing familia under II.B does so

using

> the method set out in the lex Equitia de familia article XI.
>
> IV. A. 1. Is qui familiam exstantem e paragrapho II. A. nomen
> cognomenque patrisfamilias novi accipito.
> 2. Si paterfamilias novus ei absit, nomen cognomenque
> matrisfamilias accipito.
> 3. Si maximus natu sit, praenomen patris quoque accipito

ut solet.

>
> B. Is qui familiam exstantem e paragrapho II. B. coniungat

nomen

> novum ex articulo XI. e. Legis Equitiae Familiaris amplificatae

edicto

> XXIV censoris senioris Caesonis Fabi Quintiliani de nominibus
> adoptatorum accipiat.
>
> IV. A. A person who joins an existing familia under II.A takes the

nomen

> and cognomen of his new paterfamilias. If he has no new

paterfamilias,

> he takes the nomen and cognomen of his new materfamilias. If he

will be

> the eldest child he should normally take the same praenomen as

well.

>
> B. A person who joins an existing familia under II.B takes a

new name as

> stated in the lex Equitia familiaris article XI.e and as

supplemented by

> the edictum censoris senioris Caesonis Fabii Quintiliani XXIV de
> nominibus adoptatorum.
>
> V. Hoc edictum ilico valet.
>
> V. This edict takes effect immediately.
>
> Datum sub manibus nostris pridie Kal. Nov. MMDCCLVIII
>
> Given under our hands 31 October 2758 a.u.c.
>
> Caeso Fabius Buteo Quintilianus
> Gnaeus Equitius Marinus
>
> Censores, Novae Romae
>

This is something I got down 'in case', so it might not be a direct answer to
yours. I find Chritianity has misinterpreted 'Pistis' from 'Trust' to
'[factual]Belief'. It reminds me of Stalin's revision to remove Trotscy from the
Russian Revolution and the change from Communism meaning belief in the ideals
(which were not in themselves bad) to belief in the Leader (who was!) often
completely against the ideals. I got co-opted into a group called Palestinian
Christians. Many evangelists who go out there are surprised to find there are
any such. Where do think it started? Anyway, there is a Palestinian Orthodox
Church in its own right. Of them all, I feel the Orthodox despite being far too
political (and in Moscow pro-nazi) has retained the best of religion as
experience, becoming 'the Christ' rather than the extremes of 'believing twelve
impossible things before breakfast' or happy-clappy singalong with a touch of
voodoo hysterics! But the more you look at Christian origins in context the
weirder they become.
It took centuries for the churches to decide Jesus was superhuman and they
still aren't agreed on the exact manner of it, whether the man 'Jesus' is the
same as 'The Christ' and if not how not and so on. The oldest churches in the
world class him as entirely divine, not human at all. Jehovah's Witnesses have
even revived the once majority Western view of more than Man but less than God,
the First Creation, which seems much the same as the Dead Sea Scrolls and others
of an Eternal Messiah, later the Primordial Man Adam Kadmon. Then you can
interpret that in any number of ways.
That sounds all very well looking back from after Christianity but it makes no
sense at all looking forward from the Roman world. It ought to be the other way
round. Most Christian converts were not Jews. Even a lot of Jews could see
'Sons of God' like David and Solomon (and the title was common to them and other
Jewish kings, Christians did not invent it) as maybe not 'God' but what other
religions called gods, more than human.
Pagans had no difficulties at all. Eastern and Hellenistic kings were
routinely gods, all the halfway decent emperors became gods after death. For the
average Plebs, the difference between a dead emperor worshipped as a god and a
living one representing or incarnating the Spirit of Rome was for the educated
to work out. This is why Christians (but by no means all) consider showing the
Emperor respect to be an act of pagan worship.
With that background, the real argument ought to come from the case that he
***Iwasn't*** God. It's even in Acts that Paul and Bar-Nabus had to tell the
crowd in Ephesus that they were ***Inot*** gods. And there's speculation: If
Nabus is Nabi meaning Prophet, who was this Prophet that Barnabus was son of?
Why don't we get his personal name instead?
Celsus writing against Christians picked up on just this point: if they must
worship a man as a god why such an unpromising one when there's so many already?
He may have missed a point there, the one Gnostics and Eastern religions picked
up; of course Jesus was God, ***Iaren't we all?*** God isn't some special being
like a great king or hero from remote antiquity, "Inasmuch as you have done it
to them, you have done it to me".
The point of Christianity as religion, not as a set of pseudo-historical
beliefs, may have been that in this New Age (Pisces had just dawned and they
knew their astrology as well as later ages) when Emperors ascend to the throne
and divinity instead of being born to it from divine families, the symbol of
hidden human divinity (the Buddha-nature) is this ordinary Jew who's a King of
the Spirit but in life just an ordinary bloke. His wonders are healing and
provision and he tells others they can do the same. He's not Herakles or Orpheus
showing how different he is from ordinary mortals.
The Mystery Schools taught that kind of initiation. Early Christianity did
have inner initiate circles. But there's plenty of evidence that the old
Mysteries had become a bit like Universtities awarding honorary degrees to
anybody likely to give a donation. It wouldn't be too surprising if prophesies
came later for the end of Pisces, about now. But that's quite different from
putting any credence in them! You can take any prophecy from anywhere and divide
it into two kinds: one is so obscure it can mean anything you want it to, the
other is so generalised it is universally true. 'There will be war, famine,
disease...' There usually are! They commonly all come together and cause each
other!
I think the Gnostics were on to something. There certainly responsible for
muddying the waters of historical record because it didn't matter much to them.
Buddhists are like that. The Teaching matters, not the Teacher and whether the
Buddha did or did not deliver this sermon, who cares? The important thing is
whether the sermon makes sense. One Gnostic gospel instead of the Last Supper
has what is probably the earliest Christian liturgy known with Jesus standing in
the middle while the Apostle dance round him to a call-&-answer chant! Did
he? No very likely! But then he didn't get carried around in a jewelled litter
wearing a triple-decker wedding cake of a crown either!
The interesting thing is that the more you look into it, the less sense the
early arguments make in the way they have been described later. My brother got
into an Evangelical church for a whie, the Elim Four Square. I went once
(wearing a pentagram for safety!) and found it intensely saddening. Everything
the preacher said sounded pretty good. He obviously did not know that any of it
would have been entirely familiar to any 1st century educated pagan. I think it
is Celsus again who said that the unique thing about Christianity is its claim
to be unique. It became unique only by discreditting everything else.
Even our sad history against Jews is a good case. For centuries we have
treated Jews as outcasts that Muslims never did while quoting Jewish prophets
and reading Jewish scriptures in our churches! Yet nobody sees the paradox. It
was death by Inquisition to see it. And Protestants were no better. The
cleverest thing was to use the term 'God' as a personal name. It is good
Orwellian stuff making it difficult, if not impossible to rank other gods with
'God' but at the same time reduces the Unknowable to manageable proportions like
them.

Caesariensis

>>>>>

Salve,

How true, we need your learned input on the NR Christian mailing list myfriend.
We are definitely on the same page on this topic. Although I dobelieve that the
message of Y'shua was Divinely inspired, I do not believe anyof the "dogma"
attached to his "divinity" or any of the"virginal birth" stuff. Too Mithrotic! I
too have known since thelate 1960's that it was pretty much all religious PR.
The early 'gentile'Christians were way too eager to proselytize to the Hellenic
and then theRoman populace. The exaggerations and outright myths were staggering
to saythe least, but not all that unique for that part of the world at that
time.That's why they appeared so quickly as compared to other myths like say
theArthurian ones. The Jesuits I studied with in the late 1960's were just
aslearned as you are and did not hold anything back in their teaching. It iscool
to hear someone else also acknowledge these obvious facts. I too hold theGnostic
gospel of Thomas to be much more
authentic than any of the canonical ones for the simple reason that itpreceded
them by decades and was not "altered" in any form over thecenturies because it
was buried!

Vires et honos,
Marcus Cassius Philippus




"God created man and man created God. So is it in the world. Men make
gods and they worship their creations. If would be fitting for the gods to
worship men" - Gospel of Thomas, Logion 85:1-4



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

SALVE MARINE CENSOR

My personal congratulations to you and Tribunus Albucius; it is not
the first time that you win a Cultural Award, if I'm not wrong.

I thank you for your kind words, but I have to admit that these Ludi
had this good success only thanks to the exceptional work and
dedition of the members of my Cohors, that honoured Ludi Victoriae
as they deserve.


BENE VALE
L IUL SULLA
Aedilis Curulis

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "CN•EQVIT•MARINVS \(Gnaeus
Equitius Marinus\)" <gawne@c...> wrote:

>
> Salvete Quirites, et salve Gnae Corneli,
>
> Gnaeus Cornelius Lentulus <cn_corn_lent@y...> writes:
>
> > The winners are both
> > P. MEMMIUS ALBUCIUS and
> > CN. EQUITIUS MARINUS
>
> What an entirely fitting result, a plebeian magistrate and a

patrician

> magistrate. My congratulations to Tribune Memmius Albucius, and

my thanks to

> Gn. Cornelius Lentulus for his hard work and tireless patience

throughout the

> contest. My thanks also to Curule Aedile Iulius Sulla for hosting

these

> games. The Ludi Victoria were my favorite games when I was Curule

Aedile,

> and I'm pleased to see them being celebrated well.
>
> Valete,
>
> -- Marinus
>
> CN•EQVIT•MARINVS
>

L IUL SULLA AEDILIS CURULIS QUIRITIBUS S.D.

I want to celebrate the end of Ludi Victoriae Sullae with a
beautiful latin prayer created for my Cohors by Cn Cornelius
Lentulus.


SACRIFICIVM VICTORIAE

INVOCATIO
Dea Victoria,
uti Lucio Cornelio Sullae Felici quem sentio dicere
perpetuam victoriam tribuisti,
quodque melius fiet renascenti
Populo Novo Romano Quiritibus:
ita tibi sacrum fiat vini libandi.

PRECATIO
Te precamur quaesumus veneramur obtestamur,
uti imperium maiestatemque Populi Novi Romani
Quiritium
in hoc mundo hodierno denuo auxis,
utique semper Latinum nomen tuearis,
incolumitatem sempiternamque victoriam ac valetudinem
Populo Novo Romano Quiritibus tribuas,
faveasque Populo Novo Romano Quiritibus,
Remque Publicam Populi Novi Romani Quiritium
salvam servassis,
utique sies volens propitia
Populo Novo Romano Quiritibus,
consulibus, praetoribus,
aedili curuli Lucio Iulio Sullae,
magistratibus, pontificum collegio,
senatui Populi Romani Quiritium,
mihi, domo, familiae,
et uti huius sacrifici acceptrix sies vini libandi!

VOTVM
Quarum rerum ergo macte his thuris granis
sacrificandis esto fito volens propitia
Populo Novo Romano Quiritibus,
consulibus, praetoribus,
aedili curuli Lucio Iulio Sullae,
magistratibus, pontificum collegio,
senatui Populi Romani Quiritium,
mihi, domo, familiae.

SACRIFICIVM
After these words the incense and a glass of wine are
sacrificied to Godess Victoria by Gn. Cornelius
Lentulus.


Thank you for your participation to these Ludi, Cives Romani.

----- Message Forwarded on Tue, 01 Nov 2005 22:07:56 GMT -----
From: George Harvey
To: GnosticThought@...
Subject: "The Gnostic Gospels" Introduction
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 12:18:34 -0000


"The Gnostic Gospels" by Elaine Pagels

Introduction:

Monoimus, a Gnostic teacher said "Abandon the search for God and the
creation and other matters of a similar sort. Look for him by taking
yourself as the starting point. Learn who it is within you who makes
everything his own and says, `My God, my mind, my thought, my soul,
my body.' Learn the sources of sorrow, joy, hateÂ… If you carefully
investigate these matters you will find him in yourself."



"God created man and man created God. So is it in the world. Men make
gods and they worship their creations. If would be fitting for the gods to
worship men" - Gospel of Thomas, Logion 85:1-4



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

I suggest 'Vicars of Christ' by Peter de Rosa, an exposé of the assorted madmen
and tyrants who've occupied the Papacy and other posts. Catholicism became
autocratic from a thousand years ago but not completely until 1870. But Rome
was never Head Honcho except by forging the Donation of Constantine. The
Emperor was titular head, after him the Western Emperors and in their own
country, French kings.Henry VIII did nothing new! Even dissenters buy into a
wholly false history invented by and for Rome ignoring the continuous genuine
Roman tradition in the East. Even St. Thomas More found it hard to credit that
the Pope could ever overrule a Church Council and that's more than 300 years
before he declared himself infallibly infallible and essentially above
scripture and tradition.





Salvete omnes,

Cato, you are very correct that the Christian Faith is founded upon
thesedocuments that are compiled into what we call the New Testament. However,
theChurch was never intended to be a "place" or a "book" itwas intended to be a
living community of like minded people.

QSP correctly states:
..in America the Christian churches are 30-60% full. In Europe, 5 - 20%
full.


"God created man and man created God. So is it in the world. Men make
gods and they worship their creations. If would be fitting for the gods to
worship men" - Gospel of Thomas, Logion 85:1-4



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

Salve Quinte Suetoni,

Quintus Suetonius Paulinus (Michael Kelly) wrote:

> Salve Censor Marine,
>
> I am a little confused on part of this edictum:
>
> I thought applying through the mater and pater familias to join a
> gens has been dispensed with and they are not identified anymore in
> the album gentium from what I see.
> Perhaps I missed something but I thought I'd check it out with you.

All new citizens must apply to the Censors (or the Rogators if no
Censors are in office). However, people wishing to be members of
currently existing familiae need the permission of the p/mater of that
family in order to take its name.

For example, if someone wants to be a Iulia Caesaris, they need the
permission of Gn. Iulius Caesar, since he's the paterfamilias of that
family.

Does that clear the matter up?

Vale,

-- Marinus

SALVETE OMNES !

Ludi Victoriae Sullanae Results :

http://www.cohorssullana.grafosystem.ro/results.htm

We want to thanks to all participants to the Ludi.
It was a great honour for us.

OPTIME VALE,
Cohors Sullana.




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





---------------------------------
Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

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

Salve Censor Marine,

Thanks for your quick response and that clears everything up!

Regards,

Quintus Suetonius Paulinus



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

>
> Salve Quinte Suetoni,
>
> Quintus Suetonius Paulinus (Michael Kelly) wrote:
>
> > Salve Censor Marine,
> >
> > I am a little confused on part of this edictum:
> >
> > I thought applying through the mater and pater familias to join a
> > gens has been dispensed with and they are not identified anymore

in

> > the album gentium from what I see.
> > Perhaps I missed something but I thought I'd check it out with

you.

>
> All new citizens must apply to the Censors (or the Rogators if no
> Censors are in office). However, people wishing to be members of
> currently existing familiae need the permission of the p/mater of

that

> family in order to take its name.
>
> For example, if someone wants to be a Iulia Caesaris, they need the
> permission of Gn. Iulius Caesar, since he's the paterfamilias of

that

> family.
>
> Does that clear the matter up?
>
> Vale,
>
> -- Marinus
>

Salve Censor Marine,

Thanks for your quick response and that clears everything up!

Regards,

Quintus Suetonius Paulinus



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

>
> Salve Quinte Suetoni,
>
> Quintus Suetonius Paulinus (Michael Kelly) wrote:
>
> > Salve Censor Marine,
> >
> > I am a little confused on part of this edictum:
> >
> > I thought applying through the mater and pater familias to join a
> > gens has been dispensed with and they are not identified anymore

in

> > the album gentium from what I see.
> > Perhaps I missed something but I thought I'd check it out with

you.

>
> All new citizens must apply to the Censors (or the Rogators if no
> Censors are in office). However, people wishing to be members of
> currently existing familiae need the permission of the p/mater of

that

> family in order to take its name.
>
> For example, if someone wants to be a Iulia Caesaris, they need the
> permission of Gn. Iulius Caesar, since he's the paterfamilias of

that

> family.
>
> Does that clear the matter up?
>
> Vale,
>
> -- Marinus
>

Salve & Amen Brother Caesariensis,

Again you hit the nail on the head. Jesus was a non-conformist and ironically his message has been twisted into one of either totally conformity or be condemned as a heretic by very well meaning people I'm sure, they all got stuck worshiping the finger! His message was quite simple really: Don't hurt anyone else, treat everyone like you'd like to be treated and be aware that you are not the center of the universe, something else is and you better be aware of that simple truth and bow down to it and to It alone. It was a natural progression from the simple nature worship of Neolithic man to the sophisticated understanding of modern man.

The way of the Christ is the way of the heart. The way of the Buddha is the way of the mind and the way of Lao Tsu (Daoism) is the way of Nature (the body). These three messengers from God have been heard but never quite understood because of the institutionalization and politicization of their message which actually killed their living message into nothing but dead dogma.

Vires et honos,
Marcus Cassius Philippus

----- Original Message -----
From: me-in-@...
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 4:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Pilate and Jesus


This is something I got down 'in case', so it might not be a direct answer to
yours. I find Chritianity has misinterpreted 'Pistis' from 'Trust' to
'[factual]Belief'. It reminds me of Stalin's revision to remove Trotscy from the
Russian Revolution and the change from Communism meaning belief in the ideals
(which were not in themselves bad) to belief in the Leader (who was!) often
completely against the ideals. I got co-opted into a group called Palestinian
Christians. Many evangelists who go out there are surprised to find there are
any such. Where do think it started? Anyway, there is a Palestinian Orthodox
Church in its own right. Of them all, I feel the Orthodox despite being far too
political (and in Moscow pro-nazi) has retained the best of religion as
experience, becoming 'the Christ' rather than the extremes of 'believing twelve
impossible things before breakfast' or happy-clappy singalong with a touch of
voodoo hysterics! But the more you look at Christian origins in context the
weirder they become.
It took centuries for the churches to decide Jesus was superhuman and they
still aren't agreed on the exact manner of it, whether the man 'Jesus' is the
same as 'The Christ' and if not how not and so on. The oldest churches in the
world class him as entirely divine, not human at all. Jehovah's Witnesses have
even revived the once majority Western view of more than Man but less than God,
the First Creation, which seems much the same as the Dead Sea Scrolls and others
of an Eternal Messiah, later the Primordial Man Adam Kadmon. Then you can
interpret that in any number of ways.
That sounds all very well looking back from after Christianity but it makes no
sense at all looking forward from the Roman world. It ought to be the other way
round. Most Christian converts were not Jews. Even a lot of Jews could see
'Sons of God' like David and Solomon (and the title was common to them and other
Jewish kings, Christians did not invent it) as maybe not 'God' but what other
religions called gods, more than human.
Pagans had no difficulties at all. Eastern and Hellenistic kings were
routinely gods, all the halfway decent emperors became gods after death. For the
average Plebs, the difference between a dead emperor worshipped as a god and a
living one representing or incarnating the Spirit of Rome was for the educated
to work out. This is why Christians (but by no means all) consider showing the
Emperor respect to be an act of pagan worship.
With that background, the real argument ought to come from the case that he
***Iwasn't*** God. It's even in Acts that Paul and Bar-Nabus had to tell the
crowd in Ephesus that they were ***Inot*** gods. And there's speculation: If
Nabus is Nabi meaning Prophet, who was this Prophet that Barnabus was son of?
Why don't we get his personal name instead?
Celsus writing against Christians picked up on just this point: if they must
worship a man as a god why such an unpromising one when there's so many already?
He may have missed a point there, the one Gnostics and Eastern religions picked
up; of course Jesus was God, ***Iaren't we all?*** God isn't some special being
like a great king or hero from remote antiquity, "Inasmuch as you have done it
to them, you have done it to me".
The point of Christianity as religion, not as a set of pseudo-historical
beliefs, may have been that in this New Age (Pisces had just dawned and they
knew their astrology as well as later ages) when Emperors ascend to the throne
and divinity instead of being born to it from divine families, the symbol of
hidden human divinity (the Buddha-nature) is this ordinary Jew who's a King of
the Spirit but in life just an ordinary bloke. His wonders are healing and
provision and he tells others they can do the same. He's not Herakles or Orpheus
showing how different he is from ordinary mortals.
The Mystery Schools taught that kind of initiation. Early Christianity did
have inner initiate circles. But there's plenty of evidence that the old
Mysteries had become a bit like Universtities awarding honorary degrees to
anybody likely to give a donation. It wouldn't be too surprising if prophesies
came later for the end of Pisces, about now. But that's quite different from
putting any credence in them! You can take any prophecy from anywhere and divide
it into two kinds: one is so obscure it can mean anything you want it to, the
other is so generalised it is universally true. 'There will be war, famine,
disease...' There usually are! They commonly all come together and cause each
other!
I think the Gnostics were on to something. There certainly responsible for
muddying the waters of historical record because it didn't matter much to them.
Buddhists are like that. The Teaching matters, not the Teacher and whether the
Buddha did or did not deliver this sermon, who cares? The important thing is
whether the sermon makes sense. One Gnostic gospel instead of the Last Supper
has what is probably the earliest Christian liturgy known with Jesus standing in
the middle while the Apostle dance round him to a call-&-answer chant! Did
he? No very likely! But then he didn't get carried around in a jewelled litter
wearing a triple-decker wedding cake of a crown either!
The interesting thing is that the more you look into it, the less sense the
early arguments make in the way they have been described later. My brother got
into an Evangelical church for a whie, the Elim Four Square. I went once
(wearing a pentagram for safety!) and found it intensely saddening. Everything
the preacher said sounded pretty good. He obviously did not know that any of it
would have been entirely familiar to any 1st century educated pagan. I think it
is Celsus again who said that the unique thing about Christianity is its claim
to be unique. It became unique only by discreditting everything else.
Even our sad history against Jews is a good case. For centuries we have
treated Jews as outcasts that Muslims never did while quoting Jewish prophets
and reading Jewish scriptures in our churches! Yet nobody sees the paradox. It
was death by Inquisition to see it. And Protestants were no better. The
cleverest thing was to use the term 'God' as a personal name. It is good
Orwellian stuff making it difficult, if not impossible to rank other gods with
'God' but at the same time reduces the Unknowable to manageable proportions like
them.

Caesariensis



>>>>>

Salve,

How true, we need your learned input on the NR Christian mailing list myfriend.
We are definitely on the same page on this topic. Although I dobelieve that the
message of Y'shua was Divinely inspired, I do not believe anyof the "dogma"
attached to his "divinity" or any of the"virginal birth" stuff. Too Mithrotic! I
too have known since thelate 1960's that it was pretty much all religious PR.
The early 'gentile'Christians were way too eager to proselytize to the Hellenic
and then theRoman populace. The exaggerations and outright myths were staggering
to saythe least, but not all that unique for that part of the world at that
time.That's why they appeared so quickly as compared to other myths like say
theArthurian ones. The Jesuits I studied with in the late 1960's were just
aslearned as you are and did not hold anything back in their teaching. It iscool
to hear someone else also acknowledge these obvious facts. I too hold theGnostic
gospel of Thomas to be much more
authentic than any of the canonical ones for the simple reason that itpreceded
them by decades and was not "altered" in any form over thecenturies because it
was buried!

Vires et honos,
Marcus Cassius Philippus




"God created man and man created God. So is it in the world. Men make
gods and they worship their creations. If would be fitting for the gods to
worship men" - Gospel of Thomas, Logion 85:1-4



[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.


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




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


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.12.7/155 - Release Date: 11/1/2005


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

Salve Censor Marine,

Perhaps I have misunderstood this as well in my own dealings here; I applied under the gens Licinia, but as there were neither pater- or materfamilias noted in the Album Gentium I did not think to inquire in that direction.

As a hypothetical, what would be the result if a person is approved under a particular name and gens, but for some unknown reason is disallowed membrship *in* that gens by a pater- and/or materfamilias? Or, if there is no net effect at all, what is the point of giving the 'family heads' a say in the matter of who is in the family and who is not? (Or, am I missing the point entirely, with the result being that the hyopthetical disallowed 'new arrival' is simply regarded as 'illegitimate' by the family as a whole? Hmmmm...)

These are just thoughts that struck me in the course of my catching up on mail-- perhaps these are questions that have been asked before, unknown to me.

Vale,

G Licinius Crassus



Gnaeus Equitius Marinus <gawne@...> wrote:
Salve Quinte Suetoni,

Quintus Suetonius Paulinus (Michael Kelly) wrote:

> Salve Censor Marine,
>
> I am a little confused on part of this edictum:
>
> I thought applying through the mater and pater familias to join a
> gens has been dispensed with and they are not identified anymore in
> the album gentium from what I see.
> Perhaps I missed something but I thought I'd check it out with you.

All new citizens must apply to the Censors (or the Rogators if no
Censors are in office). However, people wishing to be members of
currently existing familiae need the permission of the p/mater of that
family in order to take its name.

For example, if someone wants to be a Iulia Caesaris, they need the
permission of Gn. Iulius Caesar, since he's the paterfamilias of that
family.

Does that clear the matter up?

Vale,

-- Marinus


SPONSORED LINKS
Ancient history Fall of the roman empire The fall of the roman empire Roman empire

---------------------------------
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.


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




---------------------------------
Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

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

Salve Gai Licini, et salvete quirites,

Gaius Licinius Crassus wrote:

> As a hypothetical, what would be the result if a person is
> approved under a particular name and gens, but for some unknown
> reason is disallowed membrship *in* that gens by a pater- and/or
> materfamilias?

It can't happen. A p/mater can prevent someone from joining a specific
family (defined by the combination of nomen and cognomen) but can't
prevent anyone from creating a new family name in an existing gens.

For the sake of explanation, let's consider the imaginary gens
Nebulosia, and the familia Nebulosia Magna with paterfamilias Spurius
Nebulosius Magnus. Suppose an applicant for citizenship wants to take
the name Quintus Nebulosius Magnus. That applicant would have to get
the permission of Sp. Nebulosius Magnus to do so. If Sp. Nebulosius
Magnus disapproves the application, then the applicant can't become Q.
Nebulosius Magnus. However, the applicant can still create a new family
name within gens Nebulosia. So he can apply to be Q. Nebulosius Tremens
and that fits within the rules established by current law.

Does that make it clearer now?

Vale, et valete quirites,

-- Marinus

Salve omnes,

I generally try to refrain from entering into religious discussions, but the thought struck me that one small, but important, point was left out of the post this is in reply to. Examine the sentence:

>> His message was quite simple really: Don't hurt anyone else, treat everyone like you'd like to be treated and be aware that you are not the center of the universe, something else is and you better be aware of that simple truth and bow down to it and to It alone. <<

In itself this raises no problem, but the obvious omission is:



...bow down to it and to It alone or else.



Why would anyone WANT to believe they are not the center of the universe, or number 1, or what have you, unless there is some compelling reason NOT to? If the answer to this is "well, there is eternal damnation awaiting the unbeliever", or something to that effect, what compelling force is there besides negative propaganda?



Looking at this, as well as most religions in general, it is my opinion that what it all boils down to is whose propaganda do you choose to believe? How does one go about *choosing* a religion, or even a particualar sect within a religion? How does one go about deciding if they want to be Methodist, or Episcopalian, or Catholic, or New Rising Sun Baptist AME? Or for that matter, how does one choose to be a Shi'ite or Sunni Muslim? Roman Catholic or Greek Orthodox..or Russian Orthodox? What makes a man grow up Catholic and convert to Judaism, or vice versa?



I realize that there are those among you who will take offense at my comments and defend your faith to the nth degree, and that's fine with me- at least you're taking a stand on something you consider worthwhile! But, in the end, my commentary is not intended to sow discord, but to raise troublesome- yet important- questions about the nature of religion itself. Perhaps this is not the proper forum for this, granted, but it's the only one I have to work with at the moment! I invite and welcome all comments in reply, either to the Forum in general or to me personally.



Valete,



G Licinius Crassus


Sensei Phil Perez <senseiphil@...> wrote:
Salve & Amen Brother Caesariensis,

Again you hit the nail on the head. Jesus was a non-conformist and ironically his message has been twisted into one of either totally conformity or be condemned as a heretic by very well meaning people I'm sure, they all got stuck worshiping the finger! It was a natural progression from the simple nature worship of Neolithic man to the sophisticated understanding of modern man.

The way of the Christ is the way of the heart. The way of the Buddha is the way of the mind and the way of Lao Tsu (Daoism) is the way of Nature (the body). These three messengers from God have been heard but never quite understood because of the institutionalization and politicization of their message which actually killed their living message into nothing but dead dogma.

Vires et honos,
Marcus Cassius Philippus

----- Original Message -----
From: me-in-@...
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 4:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Pilate and Jesus


This is something I got down 'in case', so it might not be a direct answer to
yours. I find Chritianity has misinterpreted 'Pistis' from 'Trust' to
'[factual]Belief'. It reminds me of Stalin's revision to remove Trotscy from the
Russian Revolution and the change from Communism meaning belief in the ideals
(which were not in themselves bad) to belief in the Leader (who was!) often
completely against the ideals. I got co-opted into a group called Palestinian
Christians. Many evangelists who go out there are surprised to find there are
any such. Where do think it started? Anyway, there is a Palestinian Orthodox
Church in its own right. Of them all, I feel the Orthodox despite being far too
political (and in Moscow pro-nazi) has retained the best of religion as
experience, becoming 'the Christ' rather than the extremes of 'believing twelve
impossible things before breakfast' or happy-clappy singalong with a touch of
voodoo hysterics! But the more you look at Christian origins in context the
weirder they become.
It took centuries for the churches to decide Jesus was superhuman and they
still aren't agreed on the exact manner of it, whether the man 'Jesus' is the
same as 'The Christ' and if not how not and so on. The oldest churches in the
world class him as entirely divine, not human at all. Jehovah's Witnesses have
even revived the once majority Western view of more than Man but less than God,
the First Creation, which seems much the same as the Dead Sea Scrolls and others
of an Eternal Messiah, later the Primordial Man Adam Kadmon. Then you can
interpret that in any number of ways.
That sounds all very well looking back from after Christianity but it makes no
sense at all looking forward from the Roman world. It ought to be the other way
round. Most Christian converts were not Jews. Even a lot of Jews could see
'Sons of God' like David and Solomon (and the title was common to them and other
Jewish kings, Christians did not invent it) as maybe not 'God' but what other
religions called gods, more than human.
Pagans had no difficulties at all. Eastern and Hellenistic kings were
routinely gods, all the halfway decent emperors became gods after death. For the
average Plebs, the difference between a dead emperor worshipped as a god and a
living one representing or incarnating the Spirit of Rome was for the educated
to work out. This is why Christians (but by no means all) consider showing the
Emperor respect to be an act of pagan worship.
With that background, the real argument ought to come from the case that he
***Iwasn't*** God. It's even in Acts that Paul and Bar-Nabus had to tell the
crowd in Ephesus that they were ***Inot*** gods. And there's speculation: If
Nabus is Nabi meaning Prophet, who was this Prophet that Barnabus was son of?
Why don't we get his personal name instead?
Celsus writing against Christians picked up on just this point: if they must
worship a man as a god why such an unpromising one when there's so many already?
He may have missed a point there, the one Gnostics and Eastern religions picked
up; of course Jesus was God, ***Iaren't we all?*** God isn't some special being
like a great king or hero from remote antiquity, "Inasmuch as you have done it
to them, you have done it to me".
The point of Christianity as religion, not as a set of pseudo-historical
beliefs, may have been that in this New Age (Pisces had just dawned and they
knew their astrology as well as later ages) when Emperors ascend to the throne
and divinity instead of being born to it from divine families, the symbol of
hidden human divinity (the Buddha-nature) is this ordinary Jew who's a King of
the Spirit but in life just an ordinary bloke. His wonders are healing and
provision and he tells others they can do the same. He's not Herakles or Orpheus
showing how different he is from ordinary mortals.
The Mystery Schools taught that kind of initiation. Early Christianity did
have inner initiate circles. But there's plenty of evidence that the old
Mysteries had become a bit like Universtities awarding honorary degrees to
anybody likely to give a donation. It wouldn't be too surprising if prophesies
came later for the end of Pisces, about now. But that's quite different from
putting any credence in them! You can take any prophecy from anywhere and divide
it into two kinds: one is so obscure it can mean anything you want it to, the
other is so generalised it is universally true. 'There will be war, famine,
disease...' There usually are! They commonly all come together and cause each
other!
I think the Gnostics were on to something. There certainly responsible for
muddying the waters of historical record because it didn't matter much to them.
Buddhists are like that. The Teaching matters, not the Teacher and whether the
Buddha did or did not deliver this sermon, who cares? The important thing is
whether the sermon makes sense. One Gnostic gospel instead of the Last Supper
has what is probably the earliest Christian liturgy known with Jesus standing in
the middle while the Apostle dance round him to a call-&-answer chant! Did
he? No very likely! But then he didn't get carried around in a jewelled litter
wearing a triple-decker wedding cake of a crown either!
The interesting thing is that the more you look into it, the less sense the
early arguments make in the way they have been described later. My brother got
into an Evangelical church for a whie, the Elim Four Square. I went once
(wearing a pentagram for safety!) and found it intensely saddening. Everything
the preacher said sounded pretty good. He obviously did not know that any of it
would have been entirely familiar to any 1st century educated pagan. I think it
is Celsus again who said that the unique thing about Christianity is its claim
to be unique. It became unique only by discreditting everything else.
Even our sad history against Jews is a good case. For centuries we have
treated Jews as outcasts that Muslims never did while quoting Jewish prophets
and reading Jewish scriptures in our churches! Yet nobody sees the paradox. It
was death by Inquisition to see it. And Protestants were no better. The
cleverest thing was to use the term 'God' as a personal name. It is good
Orwellian stuff making it difficult, if not impossible to rank other gods with
'God' but at the same time reduces the Unknowable to manageable proportions like
them.

Caesariensis



>>>>>

Salve,

How true, we need your learned input on the NR Christian mailing list myfriend.
We are definitely on the same page on this topic. Although I dobelieve that the
message of Y'shua was Divinely inspired, I do not believe anyof the "dogma"
attached to his "divinity" or any of the"virginal birth" stuff. Too Mithrotic! I
too have known since thelate 1960's that it was pretty much all religious PR.
The early 'gentile'Christians were way too eager to proselytize to the Hellenic
and then theRoman populace. The exaggerations and outright myths were staggering
to saythe least, but not all that unique for that part of the world at that
time.That's why they appeared so quickly as compared to other myths like say
theArthurian ones. The Jesuits I studied with in the late 1960's were just
aslearned as you are and did not hold anything back in their teaching. It iscool
to hear someone else also acknowledge these obvious facts. I too hold theGnostic
gospel of Thomas to be much more
authentic than any of the canonical ones for the simple reason that itpreceded
them by decades and was not "altered" in any form over thecenturies because it
was buried!

Vires et honos,
Marcus Cassius Philippus




"God created man and man created God. So is it in the world. Men make
gods and they worship their creations. If would be fitting for the gods to
worship men" - Gospel of Thomas, Logion 85:1-4



[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.


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




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


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.12.7/155 - Release Date: 11/1/2005


[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.


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




---------------------------------
Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

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

Salve Crassus,

Your opinion is as valid as any other's. I believe that God still sends messages to us in ways that we can understand, and many times the messengers are not really even aware of the message they are sending. The answer to your question can be found in "Groundhog Day" of all places. Salvation is not found through dogma, propaganda, ritual, worship, fear of punishment or any such nonsense. Fear of punishment may keep men from doing evil but it will not by itself give them access to the light of enlightenment. True salvation is simply found through love! At least in my humble opinion. Sister Teresa was worth one hundred pontiffs. It makes no difference what you call God as long as you call on God through love.

Vires et honos,
Marcus Cassius Philippus

----- Original Message -----
From: Gaius Licinius Crassus
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 10:30 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Pilate and Jesus- the latest link in an endless thread!


Salve omnes,

I generally try to refrain from entering into religious discussions, but the thought struck me that one small, but important, point was left out of the post this is in reply to. Examine the sentence:

>> His message was quite simple really: Don't hurt anyone else, treat everyone like you'd like to be treated and be aware that you are not the center of the universe, something else is and you better be aware of that simple truth and bow down to it and to It alone. <<



In itself this raises no problem, but the obvious omission is:



...bow down to it and to It alone or else.



Why would anyone WANT to believe they are not the center of the universe, or number 1, or what have you, unless there is some compelling reason NOT to? If the answer to this is "well, there is eternal damnation awaiting the unbeliever", or something to that effect, what compelling force is there besides negative propaganda?



Looking at this, as well as most religions in general, it is my opinion that what it all boils down to is whose propaganda do you choose to believe? How does one go about *choosing* a religion, or even a particualar sect within a religion? How does one go about deciding if they want to be Methodist, or Episcopalian, or Catholic, or New Rising Sun Baptist AME? Or for that matter, how does one choose to be a Shi'ite or Sunni Muslim? Roman Catholic or Greek Orthodox..or Russian Orthodox? What makes a man grow up Catholic and convert to Judaism, or vice versa?



I realize that there are those among you who will take offense at my comments and defend your faith to the nth degree, and that's fine with me- at least you're taking a stand on something you consider worthwhile! But, in the end, my commentary is not intended to sow discord, but to raise troublesome- yet important- questions about the nature of religion itself. Perhaps this is not the proper forum for this, granted, but it's the only one I have to work with at the moment! I invite and welcome all comments in reply, either to the Forum in general or to me personally.



Valete,



G Licinius Crassus


Sensei Phil Perez <senseiphil@...> wrote:
Salve & Amen Brother Caesariensis,

Again you hit the nail on the head. Jesus was a non-conformist and ironically his message has been twisted into one of either totally conformity or be condemned as a heretic by very well meaning people I'm sure, they all got stuck worshiping the finger! It was a natural progression from the simple nature worship of Neolithic man to the sophisticated understanding of modern man.

The way of the Christ is the way of the heart. The way of the Buddha is the way of the mind and the way of Lao Tsu (Daoism) is the way of Nature (the body). These three messengers from God have been heard but never quite understood because of the institutionalization and politicization of their message which actually killed their living message into nothing but dead dogma.

Vires et honos,
Marcus Cassius Philippus

----- Original Message -----
From: me-in-@...
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 4:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Pilate and Jesus


This is something I got down 'in case', so it might not be a direct answer to
yours. I find Chritianity has misinterpreted 'Pistis' from 'Trust' to
'[factual]Belief'. It reminds me of Stalin's revision to remove Trotscy from the
Russian Revolution and the change from Communism meaning belief in the ideals
(which were not in themselves bad) to belief in the Leader (who was!) often
completely against the ideals. I got co-opted into a group called Palestinian
Christians. Many evangelists who go out there are surprised to find there are
any such. Where do think it started? Anyway, there is a Palestinian Orthodox
Church in its own right. Of them all, I feel the Orthodox despite being far too
political (and in Moscow pro-nazi) has retained the best of religion as
experience, becoming 'the Christ' rather than the extremes of 'believing twelve
impossible things before breakfast' or happy-clappy singalong with a touch of
voodoo hysterics! But the more you look at Christian origins in context the
weirder they become.
It took centuries for the churches to decide Jesus was superhuman and they
still aren't agreed on the exact manner of it, whether the man 'Jesus' is the
same as 'The Christ' and if not how not and so on. The oldest churches in the
world class him as entirely divine, not human at all. Jehovah's Witnesses have
even revived the once majority Western view of more than Man but less than God,
the First Creation, which seems much the same as the Dead Sea Scrolls and others
of an Eternal Messiah, later the Primordial Man Adam Kadmon. Then you can
interpret that in any number of ways.
That sounds all very well looking back from after Christianity but it makes no
sense at all looking forward from the Roman world. It ought to be the other way
round. Most Christian converts were not Jews. Even a lot of Jews could see
'Sons of God' like David and Solomon (and the title was common to them and other
Jewish kings, Christians did not invent it) as maybe not 'God' but what other
religions called gods, more than human.
Pagans had no difficulties at all. Eastern and Hellenistic kings were
routinely gods, all the halfway decent emperors became gods after death. For the
average Plebs, the difference between a dead emperor worshipped as a god and a
living one representing or incarnating the Spirit of Rome was for the educated
to work out. This is why Christians (but by no means all) consider showing the
Emperor respect to be an act of pagan worship.
With that background, the real argument ought to come from the case that he
***Iwasn't*** God. It's even in Acts that Paul and Bar-Nabus had to tell the
crowd in Ephesus that they were ***Inot*** gods. And there's speculation: If
Nabus is Nabi meaning Prophet, who was this Prophet that Barnabus was son of?
Why don't we get his personal name instead?
Celsus writing against Christians picked up on just this point: if they must
worship a man as a god why such an unpromising one when there's so many already?
He may have missed a point there, the one Gnostics and Eastern religions picked
up; of course Jesus was God, ***Iaren't we all?*** God isn't some special being
like a great king or hero from remote antiquity, "Inasmuch as you have done it
to them, you have done it to me".
The point of Christianity as religion, not as a set of pseudo-historical
beliefs, may have been that in this New Age (Pisces had just dawned and they
knew their astrology as well as later ages) when Emperors ascend to the throne
and divinity instead of being born to it from divine families, the symbol of
hidden human divinity (the Buddha-nature) is this ordinary Jew who's a King of
the Spirit but in life just an ordinary bloke. His wonders are healing and
provision and he tells others they can do the same. He's not Herakles or Orpheus
showing how different he is from ordinary mortals.
The Mystery Schools taught that kind of initiation. Early Christianity did
have inner initiate circles. But there's plenty of evidence that the old
Mysteries had become a bit like Universtities awarding honorary degrees to
anybody likely to give a donation. It wouldn't be too surprising if prophesies
came later for the end of Pisces, about now. But that's quite different from
putting any credence in them! You can take any prophecy from anywhere and divide
it into two kinds: one is so obscure it can mean anything you want it to, the
other is so generalised it is universally true. 'There will be war, famine,
disease...' There usually are! They commonly all come together and cause each
other!
I think the Gnostics were on to something. There certainly responsible for
muddying the waters of historical record because it didn't matter much to them.
Buddhists are like that. The Teaching matters, not the Teacher and whether the
Buddha did or did not deliver this sermon, who cares? The important thing is
whether the sermon makes sense. One Gnostic gospel instead of the Last Supper
has what is probably the earliest Christian liturgy known with Jesus standing in
the middle while the Apostle dance round him to a call-&-answer chant! Did
he? No very likely! But then he didn't get carried around in a jewelled litter
wearing a triple-decker wedding cake of a crown either!
The interesting thing is that the more you look into it, the less sense the
early arguments make in the way they have been described later. My brother got
into an Evangelical church for a whie, the Elim Four Square. I went once
(wearing a pentagram for safety!) and found it intensely saddening. Everything
the preacher said sounded pretty good. He obviously did not know that any of it
would have been entirely familiar to any 1st century educated pagan. I think it
is Celsus again who said that the unique thing about Christianity is its claim
to be unique. It became unique only by discreditting everything else.
Even our sad history against Jews is a good case. For centuries we have
treated Jews as outcasts that Muslims never did while quoting Jewish prophets
and reading Jewish scriptures in our churches! Yet nobody sees the paradox. It
was death by Inquisition to see it. And Protestants were no better. The
cleverest thing was to use the term 'God' as a personal name. It is good
Orwellian stuff making it difficult, if not impossible to rank other gods with
'God' but at the same time reduces the Unknowable to manageable proportions like
them.

Caesariensis



>>>>>

Salve,

How true, we need your learned input on the NR Christian mailing list myfriend.
We are definitely on the same page on this topic. Although I dobelieve that the
message of Y'shua was Divinely inspired, I do not believe anyof the "dogma"
attached to his "divinity" or any of the"virginal birth" stuff. Too Mithrotic! I
too have known since thelate 1960's that it was pretty much all religious PR.
The early 'gentile'Christians were way too eager to proselytize to the Hellenic
and then theRoman populace. The exaggerations and outright myths were staggering
to saythe least, but not all that unique for that part of the world at that
time.That's why they appeared so quickly as compared to other myths like say
theArthurian ones. The Jesuits I studied with in the late 1960's were just
aslearned as you are and did not hold anything back in their teaching. It iscool
to hear someone else also acknowledge these obvious facts. I too hold theGnostic
gospel of Thomas to be much more
authentic than any of the canonical ones for the simple reason that itpreceded
them by decades and was not "altered" in any form over thecenturies because it
was buried!

Vires et honos,
Marcus Cassius Philippus




"God created man and man created God. So is it in the world. Men make
gods and they worship their creations. If would be fitting for the gods to
worship men" - Gospel of Thomas, Logion 85:1-4



[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.


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




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


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.12.7/155 - Release Date: 11/1/2005


[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.


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




---------------------------------
Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

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






SPONSORED LINKS Ancient history Fall of the roman empire The fall of the roman empire
Roman empire


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.


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




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


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.12.7/155 - Release Date: 11/1/2005


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

Q. Metellus Quiritibus salutem.

I am happy to report that today Juno yet again received a libation, in
place of the sacrifice she would usually receive on the Kalends of each
month. Oddly enough, it had been cloudy, cold, and rainy until I made
the offering, after which it began to clear up gradually, and within the
hour it was quite a bit warmer, and there now isn't a cloud to be seen!
I think, and hope, someone up there is happy today!

As always, text available upon request.

May the Gods protect, and look kindly upon, us all!

Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus
Pontifex

The question still remains, though- and please forgive my new-guy ignorance!- what of the pater/materfamilias not being noted? How does one know who is whom just by looking at the list as it presently stands? In my case, I am the third XX Licinius Crassus in the gens Licinia- am I to assume we are all more or less 'independent operators' within the gens? Or have I goofed and not recognized one of my namesakes as the de facto Head of Household? Would I be again required to change my name if I were to be denied aceptance as a Licinius Crassus?

I thank you for your time and indulgence--

Vale,

G Licinius Crassus



Gnaeus Equitius Marinus <gawne@...> wrote:
Salve Gai Licini, et salvete quirites,

Gaius Licinius Crassus wrote:

> As a hypothetical, what would be the result if a person is
> approved under a particular name and gens, but for some unknown
> reason is disallowed membrship *in* that gens by a pater- and/or
> materfamilias?

It can't happen. A p/mater can prevent someone from joining a specific
family (defined by the combination of nomen and cognomen) but can't
prevent anyone from creating a new family name in an existing gens.

For the sake of explanation, let's consider the imaginary gens
Nebulosia, and the familia Nebulosia Magna with paterfamilias Spurius
Nebulosius Magnus. Suppose an applicant for citizenship wants to take
the name Quintus Nebulosius Magnus. That applicant would have to get
the permission of Sp. Nebulosius Magnus to do so. If Sp. Nebulosius
Magnus disapproves the application, then the applicant can't become Q.
Nebulosius Magnus. However, the applicant can still create a new family
name within gens Nebulosia. So he can apply to be Q. Nebulosius Tremens
and that fits within the rules established by current law.

Does that make it clearer now?

Vale, et valete quirites,

-- Marinus


---------------------------------
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.


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




---------------------------------
Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

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

Thank you Metellus,

We humans need as many blessings as we can get.

Bene vale,
Marcus Cassius Philippus

----- Original Message -----
From: Q. Caecilius Metellus
To: nova-roma@yahoogroups.com ; religioromana@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 10:54 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Libatio Iunoni


Q. Metellus Quiritibus salutem.

I am happy to report that today Juno yet again received a libation, in
place of the sacrifice she would usually receive on the Kalends of each
month. Oddly enough, it had been cloudy, cold, and rainy until I made
the offering, after which it began to clear up gradually, and within the
hour it was quite a bit warmer, and there now isn't a cloud to be seen!
I think, and hope, someone up there is happy today!

As always, text available upon request.

May the Gods protect, and look kindly upon, us all!

Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus
Pontifex



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.


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




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


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.12.7/155 - Release Date: 11/1/2005


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

Salve Gai Licini,

Gaius Licinius Crassus wrote:

> The question still remains, though- and please forgive my
> new-guy ignorance!- what of the pater/materfamilias not being
> noted?

We know in the Censors office. In the case of the Licinia Crassa the
person with approval authority is A. Licinius Crassus, citizen 3930.

> How does one know who is whom just by looking at the list as
> it presently stands?

Unfortunately there's no way to tell. This is one of several website
problems that we hope our new webmaster will have time to address.

Vale,

-- Marinus

Salve Crassus,

There are indeed many paths to salvation. We need not stay with the one we were brought up with but of course there are those who believe that the faith we were brought up with was the one we are destined to be in. Our own internal compass should lead us on our own spiritual path. Pilate was right: Veritas quid est veritas? My truth may not be yours and yours may not be mine. Your own heart will answer your own question. What is important is that you sincerely search for the truth you feel in your heart to be true to you.

Nova Roma is dedicated to bringing back the old Gods and their virtues. I value this effort sincerely, the more spiritual searching that takes place in this material world the better off everyone will be. (As long as it is not poured down everyone's throat without consent). These truths are as valid to those sincerely seeking their truth as mine are to me and yours are to you. If they find peace through it, they have found their own salvation. What is not cool is to deny your own truths to yourself and many of us do exactly that. Then again, many of us just take in all the religious propaganda unquestioningly and become Kool Aid drinkers fit to be taken in by future David Koresh's and Jim Jones.

There is an old Buddhist story that comes to mind here ( I submitted it earlier to the NR Christian ML): http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NR_Christians/ come join in on the discussion, there is nothing to fear among friends.

A monk traveling on the mountain path (journey of enlightenment) saw others on different paths and yelled to them, "You are all on the wrong path, this path that I am on is the only one that will lead to the top of the mountain." On arriving at the top of the mountain he looked around and found all the others already there resting. "How did you all get here before me?" he asked. They responded by telling him that while he was busy giving directions to them all, they were busy climbing on their own paths.

Vires et honos,
Marcus Cassius Philippus

----- Original Message -----
From: Gaius Licinius Crassus
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 10:30 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Pilate and Jesus- the latest link in an endless thread!


Salve omnes,

I generally try to refrain from entering into religious discussions, but the thought struck me that one small, but important, point was left out of the post this is in reply to. Examine the sentence:

>> His message was quite simple really: Don't hurt anyone else, treat everyone like you'd like to be treated and be aware that you are not the center of the universe, something else is and you better be aware of that simple truth and bow down to it and to It alone. <<



In itself this raises no problem, but the obvious omission is:



...bow down to it and to It alone or else.



Why would anyone WANT to believe they are not the center of the universe, or number 1, or what have you, unless there is some compelling reason NOT to? If the answer to this is "well, there is eternal damnation awaiting the unbeliever", or something to that effect, what compelling force is there besides negative propaganda?



Looking at this, as well as most religions in general, it is my opinion that what it all boils down to is whose propaganda do you choose to believe? How does one go about *choosing* a religion, or even a particualar sect within a religion? How does one go about deciding if they want to be Methodist, or Episcopalian, or Catholic, or New Rising Sun Baptist AME? Or for that matter, how does one choose to be a Shi'ite or Sunni Muslim? Roman Catholic or Greek Orthodox..or Russian Orthodox? What makes a man grow up Catholic and convert to Judaism, or vice versa?



I realize that there are those among you who will take offense at my comments and defend your faith to the nth degree, and that's fine with me- at least you're taking a stand on something you consider worthwhile! But, in the end, my commentary is not intended to sow discord, but to raise troublesome- yet important- questions about the nature of religion itself. Perhaps this is not the proper forum for this, granted, but it's the only one I have to work with at the moment! I invite and welcome all comments in reply, either to the Forum in general or to me personally.



Valete,



G Licinius Crassus


Sensei Phil Perez <senseiphil@...> wrote:
Salve & Amen Brother Caesariensis,

Again you hit the nail on the head. Jesus was a non-conformist and ironically his message has been twisted into one of either totally conformity or be condemned as a heretic by very well meaning people I'm sure, they all got stuck worshiping the finger! It was a natural progression from the simple nature worship of Neolithic man to the sophisticated understanding of modern man.

The way of the Christ is the way of the heart. The way of the Buddha is the way of the mind and the way of Lao Tsu (Daoism) is the way of Nature (the body). These three messengers from God have been heard but never quite understood because of the institutionalization and politicization of their message which actually killed their living message into nothing but dead dogma.

Vires et honos,
Marcus Cassius Philippus

----- Original Message -----
From: me-in-@...
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 4:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Pilate and Jesus


This is something I got down 'in case', so it might not be a direct answer to
yours. I find Chritianity has misinterpreted 'Pistis' from 'Trust' to
'[factual]Belief'. It reminds me of Stalin's revision to remove Trotscy from the
Russian Revolution and the change from Communism meaning belief in the ideals
(which were not in themselves bad) to belief in the Leader (who was!) often
completely against the ideals. I got co-opted into a group called Palestinian
Christians. Many evangelists who go out there are surprised to find there are
any such. Where do think it started? Anyway, there is a Palestinian Orthodox
Church in its own right. Of them all, I feel the Orthodox despite being far too
political (and in Moscow pro-nazi) has retained the best of religion as
experience, becoming 'the Christ' rather than the extremes of 'believing twelve
impossible things before breakfast' or happy-clappy singalong with a touch of
voodoo hysterics! But the more you look at Christian origins in context the
weirder they become.
It took centuries for the churches to decide Jesus was superhuman and they
still aren't agreed on the exact manner of it, whether the man 'Jesus' is the
same as 'The Christ' and if not how not and so on. The oldest churches in the
world class him as entirely divine, not human at all. Jehovah's Witnesses have
even revived the once majority Western view of more than Man but less than God,
the First Creation, which seems much the same as the Dead Sea Scrolls and others
of an Eternal Messiah, later the Primordial Man Adam Kadmon. Then you can
interpret that in any number of ways.
That sounds all very well looking back from after Christianity but it makes no
sense at all looking forward from the Roman world. It ought to be the other way
round. Most Christian converts were not Jews. Even a lot of Jews could see
'Sons of God' like David and Solomon (and the title was common to them and other
Jewish kings, Christians did not invent it) as maybe not 'God' but what other
religions called gods, more than human.
Pagans had no difficulties at all. Eastern and Hellenistic kings were
routinely gods, all the halfway decent emperors became gods after death. For the
average Plebs, the difference between a dead emperor worshipped as a god and a
living one representing or incarnating the Spirit of Rome was for the educated
to work out. This is why Christians (but by no means all) consider showing the
Emperor respect to be an act of pagan worship.
With that background, the real argument ought to come from the case that he
***Iwasn't*** God. It's even in Acts that Paul and Bar-Nabus had to tell the
crowd in Ephesus that they were ***Inot*** gods. And there's speculation: If
Nabus is Nabi meaning Prophet, who was this Prophet that Barnabus was son of?
Why don't we get his personal name instead?
Celsus writing against Christians picked up on just this point: if they must
worship a man as a god why such an unpromising one when there's so many already?
He may have missed a point there, the one Gnostics and Eastern religions picked
up; of course Jesus was God, ***Iaren't we all?*** God isn't some special being
like a great king or hero from remote antiquity, "Inasmuch as you have done it
to them, you have done it to me".
The point of Christianity as religion, not as a set of pseudo-historical
beliefs, may have been that in this New Age (Pisces had just dawned and they
knew their astrology as well as later ages) when Emperors ascend to the throne
and divinity instead of being born to it from divine families, the symbol of
hidden human divinity (the Buddha-nature) is this ordinary Jew who's a King of
the Spirit but in life just an ordinary bloke. His wonders are healing and
provision and he tells others they can do the same. He's not Herakles or Orpheus
showing how different he is from ordinary mortals.
The Mystery Schools taught that kind of initiation. Early Christianity did
have inner initiate circles. But there's plenty of evidence that the old
Mysteries had become a bit like Universtities awarding honorary degrees to
anybody likely to give a donation. It wouldn't be too surprising if prophesies
came later for the end of Pisces, about now. But that's quite different from
putting any credence in them! You can take any prophecy from anywhere and divide
it into two kinds: one is so obscure it can mean anything you want it to, the
other is so generalised it is universally true. 'There will be war, famine,
disease...' There usually are! They commonly all come together and cause each
other!
I think the Gnostics were on to something. There certainly responsible for
muddying the waters of historical record because it didn't matter much to them.
Buddhists are like that. The Teaching matters, not the Teacher and whether the
Buddha did or did not deliver this sermon, who cares? The important thing is
whether the sermon makes sense. One Gnostic gospel instead of the Last Supper
has what is probably the earliest Christian liturgy known with Jesus standing in
the middle while the Apostle dance round him to a call-&-answer chant! Did
he? No very likely! But then he didn't get carried around in a jewelled litter
wearing a triple-decker wedding cake of a crown either!
The interesting thing is that the more you look into it, the less sense the
early arguments make in the way they have been described later. My brother got
into an Evangelical church for a whie, the Elim Four Square. I went once
(wearing a pentagram for safety!) and found it intensely saddening. Everything
the preacher said sounded pretty good. He obviously did not know that any of it
would have been entirely familiar to any 1st century educated pagan. I think it
is Celsus again who said that the unique thing about Christianity is its claim
to be unique. It became unique only by discreditting everything else.
Even our sad history against Jews is a good case. For centuries we have
treated Jews as outcasts that Muslims never did while quoting Jewish prophets
and reading Jewish scriptures in our churches! Yet nobody sees the paradox. It
was death by Inquisition to see it. And Protestants were no better. The
cleverest thing was to use the term 'God' as a personal name. It is good
Orwellian stuff making it difficult, if not impossible to rank other gods with
'God' but at the same time reduces the Unknowable to manageable proportions like
them.

Caesariensis



>>>>>

Salve,

How true, we need your learned input on the NR Christian mailing list myfriend.
We are definitely on the same page on this topic. Although I dobelieve that the
message of Y'shua was Divinely inspired, I do not believe anyof the "dogma"
attached to his "divinity" or any of the"virginal birth" stuff. Too Mithrotic! I
too have known since thelate 1960's that it was pretty much all religious PR.
The early 'gentile'Christians were way too eager to proselytize to the Hellenic
and then theRoman populace. The exaggerations and outright myths were staggering
to saythe least, but not all that unique for that part of the world at that
time.That's why they appeared so quickly as compared to other myths like say
theArthurian ones. The Jesuits I studied with in the late 1960's were just
aslearned as you are and did not hold anything back in their teaching. It iscool
to hear someone else also acknowledge these obvious facts. I too hold theGnostic
gospel of Thomas to be much more
authentic than any of the canonical ones for the simple reason that itpreceded
them by decades and was not "altered" in any form over thecenturies because it
was buried!

Vires et honos,
Marcus Cassius Philippus




"God created man and man created God. So is it in the world. Men make
gods and they worship their creations. If would be fitting for the gods to
worship men" - Gospel of Thomas, Logion 85:1-4



[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.


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




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


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.12.7/155 - Release Date: 11/1/2005


[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.


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




---------------------------------
Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

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






SPONSORED LINKS Ancient history Fall of the roman empire The fall of the roman empire
Roman empire


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.


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




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


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.12.7/155 - Release Date: 11/1/2005


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

>

A. Tullia Scholastica quiritibus, sociis, peregrinisque omnibus, praesertim
G. Licinio Crasso S.P.D.

> Salve Censor Marine,
>
> Perhaps I have misunderstood this as well in my own dealings here; I applied
> under the gens Licinia, but as there were neither pater- or materfamilias
> noted in the Album Gentium I did not think to inquire in that direction.
>
> ATS: Perhaps some of your confusion stems from the fact that Nova Roma
> had an ahistoric system in which each and every gens DID have a pater or
> materfamilias who approved all new members of that gens. This was changed by
> a law, and took effect, I believe, this January. It may be that not all
> elements of the Album Gentium have been brought into conformity with this, or
> with the matter of deities associated with gentes instead of familiae.
>
>
> As a hypothetical, what would be the result if a person is approved under a
> particular name and gens, but for some unknown reason is disallowed membrship
> *in* that gens by a pater- and/or materfamilias? Or, if there is no net effect
> at all, what is the point of giving the 'family heads' a say in the matter of
> who is in the family and who is not? (Or, am I missing the point entirely,
> with the result being that the hyopthetical disallowed 'new arrival' is simply
> regarded as 'illegitimate' by the family as a whole? Hmmmm...)
>
> ATS: Until this law took effect, that was precisely the situation‹and not
> aided by the fact that several patres and matres were effectively AWOL, thus
> creating problems, indeed insurmountable ones, for those wishing to join these
> particular gentes. Under the present system, the only difficulty is in
> joining an existing family, which, as Censor Marinus has noted, is marked by
> the same nomen and cognomen among all of its members. If you go to the Album
> Civium or the Album Gentium and see more than one person with a given nomen
> and cognomen, that is an existing family, and one would need permission to
> join it. However, not all familiae have multiple members, and not all which
> do have the same names, for things were different in the beginning and even
> later, so that only more recent familiae have these clues.
>
> A new arrival couldn¹t be regarded as illegitimate, for we in the censor¹s
> office would refuse the nomen-cognomen combination of an existing familia
> unless the head of household gave permission to join his or her familia.
>
> Incidentally, in the past certain gentes restricted membership on
> geographic or religious grounds, or perhaps others as well, such as political
> ones, for we have political factions here.
>
> These are just thoughts that struck me in the course of my catching up on
> mail-- perhaps these are questions that have been asked before, unknown to me.
>
> ATS: I don¹t think they have, partly because the system is new, partly
> because many members of the ML are not citizens, and partly because some
> aren¹t inclined to ask in public, at least; some have difficulties with
> English, which is not their native tongue, while others simply are of a
> different disposition.
>
>
>
> Vale,
>
> G Licinius Crassus
>
> Vale, et valete,
>
>

A. Tullia Scholastica
Scriba Censoris

>
> Gnaeus Equitius Marinus <gawne@...> wrote:
> Salve Quinte Suetoni,
>
> Quintus Suetonius Paulinus (Michael Kelly) wrote:
>
>> > Salve Censor Marine,
>> >
>> > I am a little confused on part of this edictum:
>> >
>> > I thought applying through the mater and pater familias to join a
>> > gens has been dispensed with and they are not identified anymore in
>> > the album gentium from what I see.
>> > Perhaps I missed something but I thought I'd check it out with you.
>
> All new citizens must apply to the Censors (or the Rogators if no
> Censors are in office). However, people wishing to be members of
> currently existing familiae need the permission of the p/mater of that
> family in order to take its name.
>
> For example, if someone wants to be a Iulia Caesaris, they need the
> permission of Gn. Iulius Caesar, since he's the paterfamilias of that
> family.
>
> Does that clear the matter up?
>
> Vale,
>
> -- Marinus
>

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

As far as I know, Jews dont prostelize. Ill leave it
at that. Religious discussions tend to get ugly & Ive
already been scolded enough this anum.
--- Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
<g_licinius_crassus@...> wrote:

> Salve omnes,
>
> I generally try to refrain from entering into

religious discussions, but the thought struck me that
one small, but important, point was left out of the
post this is in reply to. Examine the sentence:

>
> >> His message was quite simple really: Don't hurt

anyone else, treat everyone like you'd like to be
treated and be aware that you are not the center of
the universe, something else is and you better be
aware of that simple truth and bow down to it and to
It alone. <<

>
>
>
> In itself this raises no problem, but the obvious

omission is:

>
>
>
> ...bow down to it and to It alone or else.
>
>
>
> Why would anyone WANT to believe they are not the

center of the universe, or number 1, or what have you,
unless there is some compelling reason NOT to? If the
answer to this is "well, there is eternal damnation
awaiting the unbeliever", or something to that effect,
what compelling force is there besides negative
propaganda?

>
>
>
> Looking at this, as well as most religions in

general, it is my opinion that what it all boils down
to is whose propaganda do you choose to believe? How
does one go about *choosing* a religion, or even a
particualar sect within a religion? How does one go
about deciding if they want to be Methodist, or
Episcopalian, or Catholic, or New Rising Sun Baptist
AME? Or for that matter, how does one choose to be a
Shi'ite or Sunni Muslim? Roman Catholic or Greek
Orthodox..or Russian Orthodox? What makes a man grow
up Catholic and convert to Judaism, or vice versa?

>
>
>
> I realize that there are those among you who will

take offense at my comments and defend your faith to
the nth degree, and that's fine with me- at least
you're taking a stand on something you consider
worthwhile! But, in the end, my commentary is not
intended to sow discord, but to raise troublesome- yet
important- questions about the nature of religion
itself. Perhaps this is not the proper forum for this,
granted, but it's the only one I have to work with at
the moment! I invite and welcome all comments in
reply, either to the Forum in general or to me
personally.

>
>
>
> Valete,
>
>
>
> G Licinius Crassus
>
>
> Sensei Phil Perez <senseiphil@...>

wrote:

> Salve & Amen Brother Caesariensis,
>
> Again you hit the nail on the head. Jesus was a

non-conformist and ironically his message has been
twisted into one of either totally conformity or be
condemned as a heretic by very well meaning people I'm
sure, they all got stuck worshiping the finger! It
was a natural progression from the simple nature
worship of Neolithic man to the sophisticated
understanding of modern man.

>
> The way of the Christ is the way of the heart. The

way of the Buddha is the way of the mind and the way
of Lao Tsu (Daoism) is the way of Nature (the body).
These three messengers from God have been heard but
never quite understood because of the
institutionalization and politicization of their
message which actually killed their living message
into nothing but dead dogma.

>
> Vires et honos,
> Marcus Cassius Philippus
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: me-in-@...
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 4:53 PM
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Pilate and Jesus
>
>
> This is something I got down 'in case', so it

might not be a direct answer to

> yours. I find Chritianity has misinterpreted

'Pistis' from 'Trust' to

> '[factual]Belief'. It reminds me of Stalin's

revision to remove Trotscy from the

> Russian Revolution and the change from Communism

meaning belief in the ideals

> (which were not in themselves bad) to belief in

the Leader (who was!) often

> completely against the ideals. I got co-opted into

a group called Palestinian

> Christians. Many evangelists who go out there are

surprised to find there are

> any such. Where do think it started? Anyway, there

is a Palestinian Orthodox

> Church in its own right. Of them all, I feel the

Orthodox despite being far too

> political (and in Mo

=== Message Truncated ===


S P Q R

Fidelis Ad Mortem.

Marcvs Flavivs Fides
Roman Citizen





__________________________________
Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.
http://farechase.yahoo.com

M.Hortensia M. Fideo spd;
Jews actually did make proselytes during Roman times, it was
the advent of Christianity that officially put an end it that. I
believe it was by Imperial fiat.
Today modern Jews accept conversions; we don't actively go out
out looking for them .
vale
M. Hortensia Major

>
> As far as I know, Jews dont prostelize. Ill leave it
> at that.

Salvete, omnes -

On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 06:36:56AM -0000, Maior wrote:
> M.Hortensia M. Fideo spd;
> Jews actually did make proselytes during Roman times, it was
> the advent of Christianity that officially put an end it that. I
> believe it was by Imperial fiat.
> Today modern Jews accept conversions; we don't actively go out
> out looking for them .

...and, in fact, a number of sects within Judaism actively discourage
converts; some have a "3 rejections before acceptance" requirement.
They do have a point: in Judaism, a Gentile only has to obey some small
number of commandments (7?) in order to be considered one of the
righteous, while a Jew has to obey 260-some (women have it easy; they're
_born_ to the higher status.) Now that's what I'd call a full kit of
obligations.

If I ever needed yet another reason to avoid /shul/... :)


Valete,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Quam bene vivas refert, non quam diu.
The important thing isn't how long you live, but how well you live.
-- Seneca Philosophus, "Epistulae"

Valetudo quod Fortuna Omnes,

From my personal records (a printout of the Nova Roma website of 24
July 1998, being the day after I became a Cives), a listing of the
Active Gentes and their members:

Patricians --

Aelia: C Aelius Ericus (Pater), Cn Aelius Rusticus
Ambrosia: L Ambrosius Neptunian (Pater)
Antonia: G Antonius Scaenicus (Pater)
Aurelia: M Aurelius (Pater)
Cassia: Cassius Iulianus (Pater), Patricia Cassia
Claudia: F Claudia Juliana (Mater), L Claudius Brittanicus
Cordia: N Cordius Paulus (Pater)
Cornelia: L Cornelius Sulla (Pater)
Drusia: G Drusus Domitianus (Pater)
Equitia: L Equitius Cincinnatus (Pater), M Equitius, Lentulus, Irene
Afrianan Lentula, Pr Equitius Accipiter
Flavia: Ti Flavius Saturninus (Pater)
Germanica: Ag Germanica Ursula (Mater)
Gladia: M Gladius Saevus (Pater), Fl Gladia Xrisanthi
Hadriania: Mg Hadrianus Ingmarius Cogitatus Thuleus (Pater)
Iulia: G Iulius Iulianus (Pater)
Iunia: D Iunius Palladius (Pater), L Iunia Cypria, T Iunius
Leonina: D Leonina Beatrix (Mater)
Luciania: Da Lucianus Dexippus (Pater)
Maria: Ag Maria Glauca (Mater), S Maria Athenia, L Maria Fimbria
Nigeria: I Niger Montis (Pater)
Octavia: M Octavius Germanicus (Pater)
Planincolia: L Planincolius Davidius Germanicus (Pater)
Poppaea: Q Poppaeus Sabinus (Pater)
Portia: Ti Portius Sarno (Pater)
Silvania: Am Silvanius Virbius (Pater), Cl Silvanius Firmus, Sa
Silvania Panthea, Silvania Flora, Silvania Rhea
Terentia: M Terentius Varro (Pater)
Titia: Hy Titus Gladius (Pater), Titia Irisia
Vedia: F Vedius Germanicus (Pater), Priscilla Vedia
Vellia: Ga Vellius Marcallas (Pater), Au Vellius Natalis, Se Vellius Germanicus

Plebians --

Anncina: Pr Anncina Olivia (Mater), Se Anncina Octavia
Aquilia: M Aquilia (Pater)
Avitabilia: Drusilla Lydia Avitabilia (Mater)
Caecilia Metella: Q Caecilius Metellus (Pater)
Claudia Lucentia: Q Claudia Lucentia Aprica (Mater), M Claudius
Lucentius Pavo, P Claudius Lucentius Severus, T Claudius Lucentius
Sanguineus
Claudia Secunda: Cluadia Secunda Casarophea (Mater)
Hyeania: Sc Hyeanus Africanus (Pater), Fe Hyeanus Huntericus, Mcs
Hyeanus Vindictus, No Hyeanus Maximus, Opt Hyeanus Primus
Labiena: T Labienus Fortunatus (Pater)
Libertania: Trt Libertania Regina (Mater)
Lupinia: G Lupinius Festus (Pater)
Magius: S Magius Igngena (Pater)
Messalina: O Messalina Poppaea (Mater)
Olivaria: G Olivarius Mezentius (Pater)
Pulchria: Pulchrea Dea (Mater)
Septimia: C Septimus Moguntius (Pater)
Sergia: L Sergius Australicus (Pater)
Servia: M Servius Germanicus (Pater)
Sestia: Al Sestius Americanus (Pater)
Tullia: Av Tullis Q f Calladius Praedans (Pater), G Tullius Tiro
Ulleria: St Ullerius Venator (Pater)
Valeria: M Valerius Corvinus (Pater)
Victoria: La Victoria Julia (Mater)

So many gone...
But many remain!

Valete - Venator

Salve omnes,

Earlier this evening I was informed of the approving
authority of my chosen gens of Licinia, and
subsequently I requested approval per the current
'standing orders' regarding joining specific gentes.

The reply I recieved was... ta daaaa...

.....You are approved. Welcome to our gens, Gaivs!

Andreas Licinivs Crassus

Now that I'm 'legal'... back to my test preparations!

I didn't want to make a 'big show' about this, but I
did want to illustrate that the system does work!


Valete,

G Licinius Crassus






__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com

M. Lucretius Agricola Quinto Caecilio Metello Pio Postumiano
Pontifici S.P.D


Many thanks for performing this important ritual on our behalf, and
for posting the notice.




--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Q. Caecilius Metellus"
<postumianus@g...> wrote:

>
> Q. Metellus Quiritibus salutem.
>
> I am happy to report that today Juno yet again received a libation, in
> place of the sacrifice she would usually receive on the Kalends of each
> month. Oddly enough, it had been cloudy, cold, and rainy until I made
> the offering, after which it began to clear up gradually, and within

the

> hour it was quite a bit warmer, and there now isn't a cloud to be seen!
> I think, and hope, someone up there is happy today!
>
> As always, text available upon request.
>
> May the Gods protect, and look kindly upon, us all!
>
> Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus
> Pontifex
>

Salvete omnes,

The initial discussion Of Constantine 1st last week and whether or
not his impact on Rome contributed to her fall really stimulated my
interest in what factors were at play. Here are some interesting
ideas from Steven Dutch - Rome And After - Natural Applied Sciences -
Univesity Of Wisconsin.

He covers some past, contemporary and an alternative view that
should spark some discussion:

Hypotheses for the collapse of Rome

Lack of innovation: The best indicator of Rome's intellectual
stagnation is its total lack of interest in geography. For an empire
whose survival would depend on accurate intelligence, the Romans did
almost no exploration outside their borders. A European empire that
intends to endure should draw its borders not along the Rhine and
Danube, creating a long front to defend, but along the Vistula and
Dneister, creating a much shorter frontier from the Baltic to the
Black Sea. The Romans never explored Ireland or Scotland, never went
into the Baltic, or to Scandinavia. The Canary Islands were
discovered in Roman times (the name comes from Latin Canis, meaning
dog, from the wild dogs there), a Roman legion marched across the
Sahara, there were Roman trading posts in India and even one mission
to China. And that's all; the sum total of Roman exploration in a
thousand years. When Marco Polo went to China, his account
electrified Europe; the Romans who went to China left us nothing.
The Romans absorbed the Etruscans and Carthaginians, and their
languages persisted for a long time, but despite the importance of
grammar and rhetoric in ancient learning not one Roman writer left
any description of these languages, or indeed any others.

Slavery: Cheap manual labor may have hindered the development of
machines, but the real destructive effect was the attitude that any
services could be bought, and therefore elite Romans need not bother
with practical matters. A similar attitude prevails today in the
Persian Gulf, where outside experts are often viewed as hired
servants. Slavery was not just a matter of status; oarsmen and
miners were often free men, while even white-collar workers in Rome
were often slaves. The reason slavery was hated and feared was not
necessarily the hard or lowly work it entailed, but the loss of
freedom. The real crippling effect was not so much slavery as the
static concept of wealth in the ancient world. Wealth was seen as
precious metals, slaves, livestock, and especially land, not
productivity. Romans who did make money in technology used the money
to buy land and social status, not improved productivity.

Religious cultism and mysticism have been cited as contributing to
the decline of Rome, but are probably symptoms as much as causes.
The emphasis on ever more subtle cult doctrines is an outlet for
intellectual energies that have no productive outlets in an
intellectually stagnant world, and people retreat to cultism and
mysticism when the real world offers no hope.

Lead poisoning has been cited as a factor, not from lead water pipes
but from lead-based ceramic glazes.

Edward Gibbon and Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire

The most famous and influential work on the fall of Rome was Decline
and Fall of the Roman Empire, published in 1782. Author Edward
Gibbon suggested four reasons for the fall of Rome:

Immoderate greatness: growth of a bureaucracy and the military. The
Empire simply got too unwieldly and cumbersome.
Wealth and luxury: the popular stereotype, although it has some
validity.
The barbarian invasions: were these a cause or a symptom, or both?
The barbarian invasions certainly drove the final nails in the
coffin of Rome, but the barbarians could hardly have invaded if Rome
maintained its military effectiveness.

The spread of Christianity: Gibbon's most controversial claim. The
fact that very few people mention this cause is a dead giveaway that
most people who compare America with ancient Rome have never read
Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.
Gibbon had his own cultural biases that affected his work. Most
later historians believe he took far too rosy a view of conditions
in the second century A.D, when his narrative starts. Gibbon picked
that period, the high point of Roman expansion and a period marked
by a succession of capable Emperors, as the peak from which Rome
fell. Actually, many of the economic and social institutions that
contributed to the decline of Rome were already in place by that
time. Once he conceived of the concept of a Decline, he pushed it
too far. In particular, in his view, the eastern or Byzantine
Empire, which lasted almost a thousand years after the collapse in
the West, continued to decline throughout that period. If the West
declined, one can only imagine how low Gibbon thought the East sank
by the time it was conquered by the Turks in 1453.

Gibbon was raised Anglican, converted to Catholicism, then was
packed off to school in Switzerland by his furious father, where he
absorbed the ideas of both John Calvin and the French philosopher
Voltaire. His concept of Christianity was intensely rationalistic.
He despised mysticism, which tended to be a prominent feature of
Eastern Christianity, and he despised the solitary monasticism of
the East, as opposed to the pragmatic, technological and productive
monasticism of the West. The Byzantine style of politics tended to
emphasize subtlety, craftiness, and indirect dealings, just the sort
of thing that would be most repugnant to a hard-core rationalist
like Gibbon. (It's no accident that we refer to complex and
secretive politics as "Byzantine".) To Gibbon, the fact that the
eastern Empire gave rise to Eastern mystical Christianity and
Byzantine politics was indisputable proof of its continuing decay,
and the further it evolved in that direction, the deeper its decay
in Gibbon's view. Gibbon gives us a clear object lesson in the need
to beware facts that reinforce our prejudices. Nevertheless, despite
its shortcomings, Gibbon's work has endured as few works of history
have.

An Alternative View of the Fall of Rome



Americans often idealize ancient Rome. We are impressed by its
monuments, and many of our buildings imitate them. Rome is the first
ancient state that looks like a modern nation-state on the scale of
the U.S. Latin was used as the intellectual language of Europe until
recent times. It was used in the Catholic Church until the 1960's
(and still is for official documents) and is used in law (a clumsy
medieval Latin, not Classical Latin.) Many "religious" films about
the life of Christ are actually films about Rome with a pious
veneer. Ben Hur, for example, spends much of its time on the
brutalities of Roman slavery, a Roman sea battle, the splendor and
corruption of Rome itself, and climaxes with a Roman chariot race,
while giving an occasional nod to concurrent events in the life of
Christ.

A reality check is due: Rome was a stagnant, corrupt, brutal and
petty society. Two suggested antidotes to the romantic view of Rome:
Robert Graves' I, Claudius and H.G. Wells' Outline of History.
Graves' novel, a fictional account of the life of the Emperor
Claudius, nonetheless paints a graphic picture of the pettiness and
brutality of the Roman elite, with frequent examples of the casual
murder of people because they might someday prove an inconvenience.
A historical example typical of Roman petty spitefulness is that
after defeating Hannibal, the Romans pursued him for over twenty
years. Every treaty they concluded with another state included a
clause requiring the surrender of Hannibal to the Romans if he ever
sought asylum. Hannibal was finally cornered twenty years later in
Asia Minor (modern Turkey) and committed suicide to avoid capture.
He was not alone. Most leaders who opposed Rome effectively on the
battlefield were eventually captured, taken to Rome, then executed
as part of the victory celebrations. The final destruction of
Carthage, by then no conceivable threat to Rome, is yet another
example of petty vengeance. Wells, an old-time British socialist,
needs to be read with some caution, but he ruthlessly strips away
the romantic and noble image of Rome. Wells points out that not once
did the local populace ever rise up to oppose the barbarian
invaders, a clear sign they saw nothing worth defending in Roman
society.

The pivotal and fatal decision Rome made can be illustrated by
comparison with the early U.S., which faced the same choice and made
a different decision. In 1787, the United States was governed by a
weak union under the Articles of Confederation, soon to be
supplanted by the Constitution. The one great act of this weak
government was the Northwest Ordinance, which provided for division
of new territories into additional States. The concept of admission
of new States was incorporated into the Constitution. Hence there is
no distinction whatever between original States and later States. A
citizen of Wisconsin (admitted 1848) is no different from a citizen
of Delaware (first of the original 13 colonies to ratify the
Constitution in 1787) or Hawaii (admitted 1959; except Hawaiians are
a lot warmer in the winter).

Rome in 200 B.C. faced the same choice and made a radically
different decision. Rome acquired Spain from Carthage after the
Second Punic War, and faced the same question as faced by the early
U.S., what to do with the new lands? Instead of admitting the new
lands into the then-republic on an equal basis, Rome decided to
exploit the new territories as sources of revenue and slaves. Roman
citizenship was reserved for Romans. The result was almost non-stop
guerrilla war in Spain for over 300 years. Rome traditionally had
raised armies for no longer than a year, a workable solution when
Rome had only to defend Italy, but troops could scarcely be trained
and sent to Spain before they would have to return .To fight its
wars in such a distant place, Rome abandoned its traditional citizen
army for a permanent standing army. Conscripted soldiers frequently
become dispossessed while serving in Spain; their farms fell into
debt and were confiscated by the wealthy. Up until this time, Rome
had been making erratic but nevertheless real progress toward
equality. The Roman electoral system was badly gerrymandered to keep
power in the hands of the wealthy; nevertheless, when civil unrest
grew serious enough, real reforms and concessions were made. This
progress stopped and reversed. Power and wealth re-concentrated in
the hands of the upper class. For the next 170 years, Rome
experienced increasing civil unrest, ever-bloodier conflicts and
civil wars, a military coup by Julius Caesar, then dictatorship
under the Emperors.

In What If?, a collection of essays on alternative military history,
Lewis Lapham pictures a successful Roman conquest of Germany as
leading to a more moderate and civilized Europe. But that would have
happened only if Rome had enough leaders capable of treating
conquered lands in an enlightened manner. And Rome simply did not
have enough of them. In Hannibal's day there was a prominent family
called the Scipios who embodied all the virtues we like to think of
as Roman. One of the Scipios defeated rebels in Spain and
temporarily pacified it with benign and just policies, but as soon
as he left, Rome went back to business as usual. Roman policy toward
Carthage was largely driven by the orator Cato, who ended every
speech with "Carthage must be destroyed." Cato was about as petty
and mean-spirited a character as history affords, and it was his
spirit, not that of the Scipios, that triumphed in Rome. Two
centuries later, Publius Varus attempted to invade Germany, in
Lapham's words:

Choosing to regard Germanic tribes as easily acquired slaves rather
than as laboriously recruited allies, he forced upon them a heavy
burden of taxation in the belief that they would come to love him as
a wise father.

Conclusion: Like a baby born with AIDS, the Roman Empire was
infected at birth with what eventually killed it.

QSP - One thing a like about the HBO series Roma, is that the series
really reflects this alternative view!


Regards,

Quintus Suetonius Paulinus

Salvete omnes!

As mentioned, who would have thought Ponti Barbati name change
inquiry and peoples comments would spark such an interesting and
long thread on history, religion and current politics of 1st century
Judea.

You can certainly be sure whether you liked or disliked this whole
thread, that the name Pilatius will be burned in our minds for quite
some time to come! I have said all I can and know on this thread
regarding Pontius Pilate, his character and times but I want to
leave citizen Pontius Barbatus with my parting quote from Oscar
Wilde that I say is my favourite:

" The only thing more horrifying than being talked about is "not"
being talked about at all!"

LOL, isn't that quote illustrative for you family name now?

Regards,

Quintus Suetonius Paulinus

The River's Tale

(Ancient British History)

TWENTY bridges from Tower to Kew -
Wanted to know what the River knew,
Twenty Bridges or twenty-two,
For they were young, and the Thames was old
And this is the tale that River told:-

"I walk my beat before London Town,
Five hours up and seven down.
Up I go till I end my run
At Tide-end-town, which is Teddington.
Down I come with the mud in my hands
And plaster it over the Maplin Sands.
But I'd have you know that these waters of mine
Were once a branch of the River Rhine,
When hundreds of miles to the East I went
And England was joined to the Continent.

"I remember the bat-winged lizard-birds,
The Age of Ice and the mammoth herds,
And the giant tigers that stalked them down
Through Regent's Park into Camden Town.
And I remember like yesterday
The earliest Cockney who came my way,
When he pushed through the forest that lined the Strand,
With paint on his face and a club in his hand.
He was death to feather and fin and fur.
He trapped my beavers at Westminster.
He netted my salmon, he hunted my deer,
He killed my heron off Lambeth Pier.
He fought his neighbour with axes and swords,
Flint or bronze, at my upper fords,
While down at Greenwich, for slaves and tin,
The tall Phoenician ships stole in,
And North Sea war-boats, painted and gay,
Flashed like dragon-flies, Erith way;
And Norseman and Negro and Gaul and Greek
Drank with the Britons in Barking Creek,
And life was gay, and the world was new,
And I was a mile across at Kew!
But the Roman came with a heavy hand,
And bridged and roaded and ruled the land,
And the Roman left and the Danes blew in -
And that's where your history-books begin!"


A Pict Song

(This time he shows Rome in a negative perspective)
Rome never looks where she treads.
Always her heavy hooves fall
On our stomachs, our hearts or our heads;
And Rome never heeds when we bawl.
Her sentries pass on -- that is all,
And we gather behind them in hordes,
And plot to reconquer the Wall,
With only our tongues for our swords.

We are the Little Folk -- we!
Too little to love or to hate.
Leave us alone and you'll see
How we can drag down the State!
We are the worm in the wood!
We are the rot at the root!
We are the taint in the blood!
We are the thorn in the foot!

Mistletoe killing an oak --
Rats gnawing cables in two --
Moths making holes in a cloak --
How they must love what they do!
Yes -- and we Little Folk too,
We are busy as they --
Working our works out of view --
Watch, and you'll see it some day!

No indeed! We are not strong,
But we know Peoples that are.
Yes, and we'll guide them along
To smash and destroy you in War!
We shall be slaves just the same?
Yes, we have always been slaves,
But you -- you will die of the shame,
And then we shall dance on your graves!

We are the Little Folk, we, etc.

-- Rudyard Kipling

You should also check out this very long poem " The Lays Of Ancient
Rome" by Macauly, popular in schools years ago:

http://www.jerrypournelle.com/reports/jerryp/lays.html

Regards,

QSP

http://www.jerrypournelle.com/reports/jerryp/lays.html

Emblazoned on the standards that the Roman legions held aloft as they
marched out of the Italian Peninsula to conquer much of what was then
called the known world was the abbreviation SPQR. Signifying Senatus
Populusque Romanus— Latin for The Roman Senate and the People— SPQR
summed up how the ancient Romans regarded their city-state. An
alternate translation for SPQR— Senatus Populusque Romae (The Senate
and People of Rome)— expressed the same sentiment.

It was from the members of the Roman Senate (made up of the city's
patres, meaning "fathers," from which the term "patrician" comes) and
populus (the people, consisting of plebes and proletarians) through
their assemblies—the Centuriate Assembly (Comitia Centuriata), the
Tribal Assembly (Comitia Populi Tributa) and the Council of the
People (Concilium Plebis)—that political authority emanated.

On several occasions, though, certain ambitious politicians sought to
subvert the Roman Republic by undermining the SPQR formula via fair
means and foul. Among the most memorable of these power-hungry
individuals was Lucius Sergius Catilina (108 B.C.–62 B.C.). Known in
English as Catiline, he sought election to consul (the equivalent of
a modern-day chief executive) by resorting to what one historian
called "blatant and excessive bribery."

Try as he might, however, Catiline could not overcome opposition from
senators, led by Marcus Tullius Cicero (106 BC-43 BC). According to
one account, Catiline plotted with his underlings to assassinate
Cicero. Alerted to the plot, Cicero assembled his fellow senators who
then set aside the election and foiled Catiline's bid to replace
Roman democracy with one-man rule.

It was Cicero's biting oratory that rallied patrician, plebeian and
proletarian opinion against Catiline. The senator's speech in defense
of the Republic is still remembered, especially its opening line: Quo
usque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra? Quam diu etiam
furor iste tuus nos eludet? (When, O Catiline, do you intend to cease
abusing our patience? How long is that madness of yours still to mock
us?) ...


Senatus Populusque Philippinensis By Dan Mariano
http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/storypage.aspx?StoryId=18017

Salve Romans

Quintus Suetonius Paulinus gives us much to think about.

The following list of 210 reasons for the decline and fall of Rome
has been collected over the years and is given in alphabetical order
and not by rank. Source: A. Demandt, Der Fall Roms (1984) 695

I once read that Classical civilization fell because of a lack of
imagination and I believe this to be true. That lack of interest I
believe extends to many fields outside of the one Quintus Suetonius
Paulinus talked about, geography. Many of the 210 reasons
contributed in various ways and at different times. Some of may
agree with some and not others but they all give room for thought.
It would be interesting to develop a companion list of the 210
reasons for Rome's rise

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus

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

210 Reasons for Rome's Fall

Abolition of gods

Abolition of rights

Absence of character

Absolutism

Agrarian question

Agrarian slavery

Anarchy

Anti-Germanism

Apathy

Aristocracy

Asceticism

Attack of the Germans

Attack of the Huns

Attack of riding nomads

Backwardness in science

Bankruptcy

Barbarization

Bastardization

Blockage of land by large landholders

Blood poisoning

Bolshevization

Bread and circuses

Bureaucracy

Byzantinism

Capillarite sociale

Capitalism

Capitals, change of

Caste system

Celibacy

Centralization

Childlessness

Christianity

Citizenship, granting of

Civil war

Climatic deterioration

Communism

Complacency

Concatenation of misfortunes

Conservatism

Corruption

Cosmopolitanism

Crisis of legitimacy

Culinary excess

Cultural neurosis

Decentralization

Decline of Nordic character

Decline of the cities

Decline of the Italian population

Deforestation

Degeneration

Degeneration of the intellect

Demoralization

Depletion of mineral resources

Despotism

Destruction of environment

Destruction of peasantry

Destruction of political process

Destruction of Roman influence

Devastation

Differences in wealth

Disarmament

Disillusion with stated

Division of empire

Division of labor

Earthquakes

Egoism

Egoism of the state

Emancipation of slaves

Enervation

Epidemics

Equal rights, granting of

Eradication of the best

Escapism

Ethnic dissolution

Excessive aging of population

Excessive civilization

Excessive culture

Excessive foreign infiltration

Excessive freedom

Excessive urbanization

Expansion

Exploitation

Fear of life

Female emancipation

Feudalization

Fiscalism

Gladiatorial system

Gluttony

Gout

Hedonism

Hellenization

Heresy

Homosexuality

Hothouse culture

Hubris

Hypothermia

Immoderate greatness

Imperialism

Impotence

Impoverishment

Imprudent policy toward buffer states

Inadequate educational system

Indifference

Individualism

Indoctrination

Inertia

Inflation

Intellectualism

Integration, weakness of

Irrationality

Jewish influence

Lack of leadership

Lack of male dignity

Lack of military recruits

Lack of orderly imperial succession

Lack of qualified workers

Lack of rainfall

Lack of religiousness

Lack of seriousness

Large landed properties

Lead poisoning

Lethargy

Leveling, cultural

Leveling, social

Loss of army discipline

Loss of authority

Loss of energy

Loss of instincts

Loss of population

Luxury

Malaria

Marriages if convenience

Mercenary system

Mercury damage

Militarism

Monetary economy

Monetary greed

Money, shortage of

Moral decline

Moral idealism

Moral materialism

Mystery religions

Nationalism of Rome's subjects

Negative selection

Orientalization

Outflow of gold

Over refinement

Pacifism

Paralysis of will

Paralyzation

Parasitism

Particularism

Pauperism

Plagues

Pleasure seeking

Plutocracy

Polytheism

Population pressure

Precociousness

Professional army

Proletarization

Prosperity

Prostitution

Psychoses

Public baths

Racial degeneration

Racial discrimination

Racial suicide

Rationalism

Refusal of military service

Religious struggles and schisms

Rentier mentality

Resignation

Restriction to profession

Restriction to the land

Rhetoric

Rise of uneducated masses

Romantic attitudes to peace

Ruin of middle class

Rule of the world

Semieducation

Sensuality

Servility

Sexuality

Shamelessness

Shifting of trade routes

Slavery

Slavic attacks

Socialism (of the state)

Soil erosion

Soil exhaustion

Spiritual barbarism

Stagnation

Stoicism

Stress

Structural weakness

Superstition

Taxation, pressure of

Terrorism

Tiredness of life

Totalitarianism

Treason

Tristesse

Two-front war

Underdevelopment

Useless eaters

Usurpation of all powers by the state

Vain gloriousness

Villa economy

Vulgarization