Selected messages in Nova-Roma group. Feb 22-28, 2006

Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42103 From: Gregory Rose Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42104 From: S Ullerius Venator Piperbarbus Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: On the current debate...
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42105 From: Gregory Rose Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42106 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42107 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum; Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42108 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum; Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42109 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum; Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42110 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum; Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42111 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum; Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42112 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42113 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42114 From: iulius sabinus Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42115 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42116 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42117 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42118 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42119 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42120 From: iulius sabinus Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42121 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42122 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42123 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42124 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42125 From: iulius sabinus Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42126 From: Gaius Vipsanius Agrippa Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42127 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42128 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42129 From: Tim Gallagher Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum; Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42130 From: Tim Gallagher Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum; Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42131 From: iulius sabinus Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42132 From: Tim Gallagher Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum-
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42133 From: marcushoratius Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42134 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42135 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum; Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42136 From: S Ullerius Venator Piperbarbus Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Augurs augering
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42137 From: Stefanie Beer Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Betreff: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: A Consular Ultimatum; Accepting Vedius
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42138 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: Augurs augering
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42139 From: Domitius Constantinus Fuscus Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: The pointlessness of the legal debate on the Edictum
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42140 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42141 From: M. Lucretius Agricola Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: The pointlessness of the legal debate on the Edictum
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42142 From: P.M. Albucius Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: To end the debate on cos edictum !!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42143 From: pompeia_minucia_tiberia Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42144 From: Titus Marcius Felix Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Declaration For Candidacy To Run For Editor Commentariorum
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42145 From: darren_pile Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: 90 days for provisional citizens
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42146 From: CN•EQVIT•MARINVS (Gnaeus Equitius Mari Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: The pointlessness of the legal debate on the Edictum
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42147 From: CN•EQVIT•MARINVS (Gnaeus Equitius Mari Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: 90 days for provisional citizens
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42148 From: Timothy P. Gallagher Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42149 From: ivlia_vespasia Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Roman Knot Tying
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42150 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42151 From: Timothy P. Gallagher Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Ex Officio Tiberius Galerius Paulinus Praetor
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42152 From: darren_pile Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: 90 days for provisional citizens
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42153 From: kari piessa Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42154 From: Lucius Equitius Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: History behind the debate
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42155 From: gaiuspopilliuslaenas Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: History behind the debate
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42156 From: Q. Caecilius Metellus Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: Digest Number 2349
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42157 From: CN•EQVIT•MARINVS (Gnaeus Equitius Mari Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: History behind the debate
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42158 From: gaiuspopilliuslaenas Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: History behind the debate
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42159 From: Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: 90 days for provisional citizens
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42160 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: History behind the debate
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42161 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42162 From: rysullivan Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Maxentius palace found
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42163 From: CN•EQVIT•MARINVS (Gnaeus Equitius Mari Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: History behind the debate
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42164 From: Timothy P. Gallagher Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: A Senate vote is required
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42165 From: Flavius Vedius Germanicus Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: On the current issue
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42166 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: On the current issue
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42167 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: a.d. VII Kal. Mar.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42168 From: A. Tullia Scholastica Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: 90 days for provisional citizens
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42169 From: M. Lucretius Agricola Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42170 From: A. Tullia Scholastica Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42171 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Rome in the East
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42172 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42173 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42174 From: iulius sabinus Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: Rome in the East
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42175 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42176 From: Mage Allen Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Rome and the East
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42177 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Rome and the East
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42178 From: Lucius Aurelius Severus Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Shocked
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42179 From: Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42180 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Shocked
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42181 From: Lucius Aurelius Severus Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Shocked
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42182 From: A. Tullia Scholastica Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Rome and the East
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42183 From: Domitius Constantinus Fuscus Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Shocked
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42184 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Shocked
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42185 From: M Arminius Maior Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42186 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: 90 days for provisional citizens
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42187 From: M. Lucretius Agricola Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: 90 days for provisional citizens
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42188 From: Mage Allen Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Solar Cults
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42189 From: Gaius Vipsanius Agrippa Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Shocked
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42190 From: daylily218 Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Wahb-Allat
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42191 From: CN•EQVIT•MARINVS (Gnaeus Equitius Mari Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Wahb-Allat
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42192 From: Tita Artoria Marcella Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Wahb-Allat
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42193 From: Lucius Aurelius Severus Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Shocked
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42194 From: daylily218 Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Congratulations, CN EQUIT MARNIUS
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42195 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Shocked
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42196 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Rome in the East
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42197 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: a.d. VI Kal. Mar.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42198 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-25
Subject: Re: Rome in the East
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42199 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-25
Subject: Re: Rome in the East
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42200 From: Quintus Suetonius Paulinus (Michael Kell Date: 2006-02-25
Subject: Re: Rome in the East (Battle Of Carrahe)
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42201 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-25
Subject: Re: Rome in the East (Battle Of Carrahe)
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42202 From: Timothy P. Gallagher Date: 2006-02-25
Subject: Rome's six-hundred-year struggle for control of the ancient world
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42203 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: Rome in the East (Battle Of Carrahe)
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42204 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: a.d. IV Kal. Mar.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42205 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42206 From: Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42207 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42208 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42210 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42211 From: Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42212 From: marcushoratius Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42213 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42214 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42215 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42216 From: Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42217 From: Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42218 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42219 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42220 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42221 From: Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42222 From: Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42223 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42224 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42225 From: Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42226 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42227 From: pompeia_minucia_tiberia Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Apology
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42228 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42229 From: Maxima Valeria Messallina Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: Congratulations, CN EQUIT MARNIUS
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42230 From: Gnaeus Equitius Marinus Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: Congratulations, CN EQUIT MARNIUS
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42231 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42232 From: Maxima Valeria Messallina Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: Congratulations, CN EQUIT MARNIUS
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42233 From: Gnaeus Equitius Marinus Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: Congratulations, CN EQUIT MARNIUS
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42234 From: Quintus Suetonius Paulinus (Michael Kell Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Waiting For The Barbarians
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42235 From: daylily218 Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Hadrianus/Sol coins
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42236 From: Timothy P. Gallagher Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42237 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42238 From: Timothy P. Gallagher Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42239 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42240 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42241 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42242 From: A. Tullia Scholastica Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Apology
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42243 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42244 From: M. Lucretius Agricola Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: The brave marcher
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42245 From: Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Edictum Consulare Regarding Edictum dated Feb 18
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42246 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: a.d. III Kal. Mar.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42247 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: AEDILICIAN EDICT
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42248 From: CN•EQVIT•MARINVS (Gnaeus Equitius Mari Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Edictum Consulare Regarding Edictum dated Feb 18
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42249 From: Lucius Equitius Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: EQUIRRIA PRIMA -- THE SACRIFICES
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42250 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Edictum Consulare Regarding Edictum dated Feb 18
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42251 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Do ex-Boni drink wine from lead cups?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42252 From: Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Do ex-Boni drink wine from lead cups?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42253 From: Lucius Equitius Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: CAERIMONIA EQUIRRIAE
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42254 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42255 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42256 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: The sense of family that is needed in Nova Roma
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42257 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Edictum Consulare Regarding Edictum dated Feb 18-OH Yeah!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42258 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42259 From: gaiuspopilliuslaenas Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Edictum Consulare Regarding Edictum dated Feb 18
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42260 From: rysullivan Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Archaeology Links of Possible Interest
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42261 From: Gnaeus Cornelius Lentulus Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Edictum Consulare Regarding Edictum dated Feb 18
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42262 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Edictum Consulare Regarding Edictum dated Feb 18
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42263 From: Timothy P. Gallagher Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Thank you
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42264 From: gaiuspopilliuslaenas Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Auguries
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42265 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Edictum Consulare Regarding Edictum dated Feb 18
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42266 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Do ex-Boni drink wine from lead cups?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42267 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Do ex-Boni drink wine from lead cups?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42268 From: Gnaeus Cornelius Lentulus Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: The sense of family that is needed in Nova Roma
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42269 From: Patrick D. Owen Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: HEY, CORNELII!! MEMBERS OF THE GENS CORNELIA--READ THIS!!!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42270 From: darren_pile Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Augeries
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42271 From: Patrick D. Owen Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: ON AUGURIES-an article by M. Moravius Horatius Piscinus flamen Carm
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42272 From: wuffa2001 Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: HEY, CORNELII!! MEMBERS OF THE GENS CORNELIA--READ THIS!!!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42273 From: rocknrockabilly Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: A few religious questions
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42274 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: A few religious questions
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42275 From: M. Lucretius Agricola Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Archaeology Links of Possible Interest
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42276 From: Gnaeus Equitius Marinus Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Augeries
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42277 From: jcottrell01 Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Lonely in California (off topic??)
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42278 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-02-28
Subject: Re: A few religious questions
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42279 From: Gregory Rose Date: 2006-02-28
Subject: Re: Augeries



Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42103 From: Gregory Rose Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum
G. Iulius Scaurus M. Octavio Germanico SPD.

Salve, Germanice.

You wrote:

> Modianus has shown that he is willing to compromise.

I fear you do not have the sequence of events correct:

1. I convened the Collegium for February 25 to consider a decretum
condemning the consular edict and asserting the Collegium's
constututional authority to determine membership in the Collegium
Augurum.

2. Shortly thereafter I amended the call to include consideration of
a decretum which would reinstate Fl. Vedius Germanicus as a member of
the Collegium Augurum.

3. What I got in response to this was a demand that I withdraw the
first proposed decretum, amend the second, and have the second passed
by the Collegium five minutes into the day on which the Collegium was
to convene, coupled by threats of tribunician intercessio from the
Consul and a Tribune if the Collegium adopted any decretum which did
not accord with the Consul's demand.

If this is compromise, I'd hate like hell to see the Consul intransigent.

Vale.

Scaurus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42104 From: S Ullerius Venator Piperbarbus Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: On the current debate...
Valetudo quod fortuna omnes;

I'm not a deep, legal mind, and I do count myself as a friend of F.
Vedius. Correspondance with him is the reason I joined Nova Roma in
the first place.

I should just like to know whether he did, in fact, ask to once again
take up the duties of Augur.
If he did so, and I missed the message, someone direct me to it.

From going over the archives of this, and the predecessor list, plus
the hard copy I have of the entire Nova Rome website of August 1998;
it does seem to me that his status as an Augur was a lifetime
appointment under the Constitution as it existed at the time.

I also ask this, is Augury actually a Public religious function, as
the task is de facto practiced in Nova Roma?

If the answer is yes, then the Citizebship requirement of holding the
ofice does seem to appertain, and the Vedian seat in the College
became empty when he resigned the first time.

If no, then this whole discussion is moot in my understanding, as F.
Vedius never stopped being an Augur, only in being an active member of
the College.

mea sententia

=========================================
In amicitia quod fides -
Stephanus Ullerius Venator Piperbarbus
Civis et Patrician
--
May the Holy Powers smile on our efforts.
May the Spirits of our family lines nod in approval.
May we be of Worth to our fellow Nova Romans.

http://anheathenreader.blogspot.com/
http://www.catamount-grange-hearth.org/
http://www.cafepress.com/catamountgrange
"Skaldic Pebble" now ready.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42105 From: Gregory Rose Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum
G. Iulius Scaurus M. Octavio Germanico SPD.

Salve, Germanice.

You wrote:

> I wonder - did you or any other Pontifices issue any "ultimatums" of
> your own? Did anyone demand that he withdraw the edict or get your
> official stamp of public disapproval?

I have issued no ultimata whatsoever to the Consul, nor has any
ultimatum to the Consul appeared in any of the discussion on the
Collegium list. I am not privy to private communications, so I do not
know what may have been exchanged privately by and with the Consul if
it were done privately.

Vale.

Scaurus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42106 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum
> 3. What I got in response to this was a demand that I withdraw the
> first proposed decretum,

A very natural and understandable demand considering that this decretum
was nothing more than an attack on him. "I parry your blow! My friend
will also parry your blow!" is no threat.

> amend the second, and have the second passed by the Collegium five minutes
> into the day on which the Collegium was to convene,

Consul Modianus is under no obligation to withdraw his edict at all. By
making that offer, he is allowing the Collegium Pontificum to regain some
of its dignity by doing themselves what they should have done years ago.

I don't know why he asked that this be done by a particular date - perhaps
the Consul would be willing to extend that date a bit so that voting
could be done in the standard manner.

> coupled by threats of tribunician intercessio from the
> Consul and a Tribune if the Collegium adopted any decretum which did
> not accord with the Consul's demand.

So there are decrees and counter-decrees. You have proposed one condemning
the Consuls action, he intends to have an ally neutralize it - I do not
see how a veto of an attack decretum is any less worthy a tactic than
the attack decretum itself.

Vale, Octavius.

--
hucke@...
http://www.graveyards.com

"The day will come when our silence will be more powerful than the
voices you are throttling today." -- August Spies, 1887
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42107 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum; Accepting Vedius Germanicus
M.Hortensia Quiritibus spd:
what is supremely sad is that the founder of Nova Roma,
Pontifex Maximus Cassius Julianus, says the other founder of Nova
Roma, Vedius Germanicus, has been and always will be an augur. This is
according to the tradition of Roma Antiqua: 'Once an augur always an
augur.'
The CP does not need to do anything. Vedius Germanicus was
an augur even before there was a CP!
Politicizing and making wearysome legal arguments over
something so basic and positive is just a waste. Our great Consul. G.
Buteo Modianus along with the wonderful support of Consul Pompeia
Strabo, is making the Religio real & active. Nova Roma need augurs.
Let the Religio prosper.

bene valete in pacem deorum
Marca Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebis
cultrix deorum
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42108 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum; Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Salve Maior.

None of which has any relevance to abrogating powers to oneself that
one doesn't have. However laudable the end result may seem is no
justification for just tossing the Constitution to one side because it
was inconvienent to follow its dictates.

What I find sad is that the Consul vandalised the Constitution to get
his own way.

Vale
Caesar

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> M.Hortensia Quiritibus spd:
> what is supremely sad is that the founder of Nova Roma,
> Pontifex Maximus Cassius Julianus, says the other founder of Nova
> Roma, Vedius Germanicus, has been and always will be an augur. This
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42109 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum; Accepting Vedius Germanicus
> What I find sad is that the Consul vandalised the Constitution to
> get his own way.

It's odd how no one who had a hand in writing or amending the
Constitution seems to agree with you. You'd think they'd be the
loudest voices of outrage, if it were truly being vandalized.

Vale, Octavius.

--
hucke@...
http://www.graveyards.com

"The day will come when our silence will be more powerful than the
voices you are throttling today." -- August Spies, 1887
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42110 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum; Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Salve Octavi

Once the Constitution is written it is written Octavius. As
interesting as what so-and-so thought or meant to write into the
Constitution maybe, it is utterly irrelevant. Our law/Constitution
once passed stands or fails on its content, not on what someone later
recalled thinking as he was typing it out. Besides the Constitution
clearly says that non-citizens cannot hold religious office.

The Constitution is clear. Logic is clear. Vedius lost his title of
Augur the moment he resigned. Had he never resigned he would have
been an Augur for life. Similar prohibitions exist in the "secular"
offices of Nova Roma, so for instance we can't have a non-citizen
Consul. The evidence is stacked against you all on this, the
Constitution is clear. Resignation = not an Augur. Not anything. A
non-citizen.

The underlying reasons for this abrogation of power by the Consul is
simply a mixture of politics and personality issues. So silence by
the people who framed it, or loud protestations from them that meant
something different are irrelevant. They wrote it - it passed - now
it has to be applied as it reads, and it reads that non-citizens
cannot hold religious office.

Vale
Caesar

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Matt Hucke <hucke@...> wrote:
>
>
> > What I find sad is that the Consul vandalised the Constitution to
> > get his own way.
>
> It's odd how no one who had a hand in writing or amending the
> Constitution seems to agree with you. You'd think they'd be the
> loudest voices of outrage, if it were truly being vandalized.
>
> Vale, Octavius.
>
> --
> hucke@...
> http://www.graveyards.com
>
> "The day will come when our silence will be more powerful than the
> voices you are throttling today." -- August Spies, 1887
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42111 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum; Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Salve Gnae Iuli,

> Once the Constitution is written it is written Octavius.

Yes.

> As interesting as what so-and-so thought or meant to write into the
> Constitution maybe, it is utterly irrelevant.

It's relevant only to establish that this is not such a clear violation
of the Constitution as to provoke outrage from the authors. You wish
people to believe that the Constitution is being ignored; I then
point to the lack of outrage from the authors (and from the Tribunes)
as evidence that your opinion is not universal, nor is it shared by
certain others who are familiar with that document and who probably
feel somewhat protective of it.

> Besides the Constitution clearly says that non-citizens cannot
> hold religious office.

It also clearly said that appointment as an augur was "for life".

These statements are contradictory. They are both part of the
Constitution.

> The Constitution is clear. Logic is clear.

The Constitution is not clear. The Constitution is contradictory.
Modianus has chosen an interpretation that allows - no, *compels* -
him to take this action.

The Collegium Pontificum should have recognized Vedius's title,
a long time ago. It is to the shame of that institution that this
has not happened, and to the credit of the Consul that he is willing
to take up the slack, at the personal cost of incurring the wrath
of those whose sloth has been made apparent.

> Vedius lost his title of Augur the moment he resigned.

At the moment he resigned the "for life, with no exceptions" was
active. When he returned in 1999 his title of Augur should have
been recognized (not "reinstated"). This error has now been
corrected.

> Similar prohibitions exist in the "secular" offices of Nova Roma,
> so for instance we can't have a non-citizen Consul.

Nowhere is it stated that a Consul's appointment is "for life";
furthermore, the current Constitution explicitly states that
"an office becomes vacant if the magistrate resigns or dies",
or that he may be removed by Comitia or Censores. The situations
are not at all parallel - the language is very different.

> The evidence is stacked against you all on this, the
> Constitution is clear.

The Constitution is self-contradictory. We can fix that later.

> The underlying reasons for this abrogation of power by the Consul is
> simply a mixture of politics and personality issues.

That's also the reason for the opposition to this action - almost all of
it has come from people who already have grudges against the Consul or
against Augur Vedius.

> it reads, and it reads that non-citizens cannot hold religious office.

It reads that augurship is for life, no exceptions!

Flavius Vedius Germanicus is, was, always will be, an Augur.

Vale, Octavius.

--
hucke@...
http://www.graveyards.com

"The day will come when our silence will be more powerful than the
voices you are throttling today." -- August Spies, 1887
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42112 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Salve All
What has rules or order come to when a Consul can annex portions of another
Provincia with no repercussions!! This is what one of the Consul has done
to Canada Occidentalis!! What's next when there is no checks or balances!!
Any multi-year serving magistrate can be free of repercussions for years as
they hold successive offices!! The way it looks, once in power you do what
you like as long as you have high magisterial friends to say it's OK...
Vale
Quintus Sertorius
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42113 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum
C. Equitius Cato M. Hortensiae Maiori quiritibusque S.P.D.

Salve et salvete.

Marca Hortensia, what is sad is that you put the words of the Pontifex
Maximus above the law. "Our great consul" is attempting to violate
the supreme law of the Republic, and you, an elected magistrate,
instead of defending that document keep returning to a basis of
argument which is totally irrelevant. The Pontifex Maximus is
certainly welcome to his opinion, but an appointment to the College of
Augurs require COLLEGIAL action. That is the law.

I, a Curule Aedile, could declare that you are the Queen of Numidia
--- but I, with all the imperium and potestas of my office, cannot
simply make that a fact because I say so --- even if you would make a
wonderful Queen of Numidia.

"Making the Religio real and active"? By violating the lex
constitutiva, the leges sacrae, and threatening the College of
Pontiffs? An interesting take on ways to support and defend the religio.

Vale et valete,

Cato



--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> M.Hortensia Quiritibus spd:
> what is supremely sad is that the founder of Nova Roma,
> Pontifex Maximus Cassius Julianus, says the other founder of Nova
> Roma, Vedius Germanicus, has been and always will be an augur. This is
> according to the tradition of Roma Antiqua: 'Once an augur always an
> augur.'
> The CP does not need to do anything. Vedius Germanicus was
> an augur even before there was a CP!
> Politicizing and making wearysome legal arguments over
> something so basic and positive is just a waste. Our great Consul. G.
> Buteo Modianus along with the wonderful support of Consul Pompeia
> Strabo, is making the Religio real & active. Nova Roma need augurs.
> Let the Religio prosper.
>
> bene valete in pacem deorum
> Marca Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebis
> cultrix deorum
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42114 From: iulius sabinus Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
SALVE QUINTE SERTORI !

What are you talking about hon. Sertorius ? Sorry, but I don't understand your message. What annexation ?

VALE BENE,
IVL SABINVS

Nathan Guiboche <nate@...> wrote:
Salve All
What has rules or order come to when a Consul can annex portions of another
Provincia with no repercussions!! This is what one of the Consul has done
to Canada Occidentalis!! What's next when there is no checks or balances!!
Any multi-year serving magistrate can be free of repercussions for years as
they hold successive offices!! The way it looks, once in power you do what
you like as long as you have high magisterial friends to say it's OK...
Vale
Quintus Sertorius


SPONSORED LINKS
Roman empire Ancient history Citizenship test Fall of the roman empire The 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.


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







NOVA ROMANI !
Add the new logo and link for the Magna Mater Project support page to your websites.
http://www.dacia-novaroma.org/draft.htm

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





---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42115 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Salve
An edictum was recently presented that stated the boundiers of Canada
Orientalis, and it included portions of Canada Occidentalis.. This same
tactic was tried by the same person while I was Propreator of Canada
Occidentalis, but came to nothing when I opposed it.... But today times are
different....
Vale
Quintus Sertorius

----- Original Message -----
From: "iulius sabinus" <iulius_sabinus@...>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 7:50 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!


> SALVE QUINTE SERTORI !
>
> What are you talking about hon. Sertorius ? Sorry, but I don't understand
> your message. What annexation ?
>
> VALE BENE,
> IVL SABINVS
>
> Nathan Guiboche <nate@...> wrote:
> Salve All
> What has rules or order come to when a Consul can annex portions of
> another
> Provincia with no repercussions!! This is what one of the Consul has done
> to Canada Occidentalis!! What's next when there is no checks or
> balances!!
> Any multi-year serving magistrate can be free of repercussions for years
> as
> they hold successive offices!! The way it looks, once in power you do
> what
> you like as long as you have high magisterial friends to say it's OK...
> Vale
> Quintus Sertorius
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
> Roman empire Ancient history Citizenship test Fall of the
> roman empire The 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.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> NOVA ROMANI !
> Add the new logo and link for the Magna Mater Project support page to
> your websites.
> http://www.dacia-novaroma.org/draft.htm
>
> "Every individual is the arhitect of his own fortune" - Appius Claudius
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Mail
> Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42116 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
> SALVE QUINTE SERTORI !
>
> What are you talking about hon. Sertorius ? Sorry, but I don't understand your message. What annexation ?
>
> VALE BENE,
> IVL SABINVS

Just a bit of squabbling over some uninhabited islands. The two
governors of Canada differ on where the borders should be drawn.

This isn't relevant to our Featured Debate here - it doesn't
even involve the same Consul. It's just the trotting out for
public display of another long-standing grudge...

Vale, O.

--
hucke@...
http://www.graveyards.com

"The day will come when our silence will be more powerful than the
voices you are throttling today." -- August Spies, 1887
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42117 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Salve Sir
What if the island was England.. The borders have been set on the NR web
site, but not followed. As for relevance in the current debate, I believe
following the laws of NR should be important...
Vale
Quintus Sertorius

----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Hucke" <hucke@...>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 8:01 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!


>
>> SALVE QUINTE SERTORI !
>>
>> What are you talking about hon. Sertorius ? Sorry, but I don't
>> understand your message. What annexation ?
>>
>> VALE BENE,
>> IVL SABINVS
>
> Just a bit of squabbling over some uninhabited islands. The two
> governors of Canada differ on where the borders should be drawn.
>
> This isn't relevant to our Featured Debate here - it doesn't
> even involve the same Consul. It's just the trotting out for
> public display of another long-standing grudge...
>
> Vale, O.
>
> --
> hucke@...
> http://www.graveyards.com
>
> "The day will come when our silence will be more powerful than the
> voices you are throttling today." -- August Spies, 1887
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42118 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
> What if the island was England..

I suppose the English would then have an opinion on the subject. What
do the citizens of the disputed territory say about this matter?

> The borders have been set on the NR web site, but not followed.

Are you speaking of the maps that Marcus Arminius Maior drew? Those
are excellent work, but they've never been voted into law. Or have
you found something written that gives you this territory?

> As for relevance in the current debate, I believe
> following the laws of NR should be important...

Indeed it is, and Consul Fabius has done so admirably. If you
have a dispute with Consul Minucia, you can take it up with the
Senate.

Vale, M. Octavius Germanicus.

--
hucke@...
http://www.graveyards.com

"The day will come when our silence will be more powerful than the
voices you are throttling today." -- August Spies, 1887
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42119 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
M. Hortensia Catoni Quritibusque spd;
Eheu Cato, before there was a Constitution there was Cassius
Julianus and Vedius Germanicus the founders and Pontifex Maximus and
augur of Nova Roma.

What is sad is your worship of laws that that were written after
Vedius Germanicus became augur. I worship the gods. Politics and old
grudges are clouding what is important.

I wish to continue to worship them in real life. So does our Consul
Gaius Buteo Modianus. He performs real life activities for Nova Roma
and the religio.

He has my admiration. He has the admiration of all the cultores
deorum, the devotees of the gods who try to make the religio a real
life activity & not an empty title.
bene vale in pacem deorum
Marca Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebis
producer "Vox Romana" podcast
cultrix deorum



> Marca Hortensia, what is sad is that you put the words of the
Pontifex
> Maximus above the law. "Our great consul" is attempting to violate
> the supreme law of the Republic, and you, an elected magistrate,
> instead of defending that document keep returning to a basis of
> argument which is totally irrelevant. The Pontifex Maximus is
> certainly welcome to his opinion, but an appointment to the
College of
> Augurs require COLLEGIAL action. That is the law.
>
> >
> Vale et valete,
>
> Cato
>
>
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42120 From: iulius sabinus Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
SALVE QUINTE ARTORI !

O,...I understand. I'm sure the governors will be able to resolve that. As a former military I understand your concern about the tactical importance of that "No man's land", if I can use this WWI term.

VALE BENE,
IVL SABINVS

Nathan Guiboche <nate@...> wrote:
Salve Sir
What if the island was England.. The borders have been set on the NR web
site, but not followed. As for relevance in the current debate, I believe
following the laws of NR should be important...
Vale
Quintus Sertorius

----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Hucke" <hucke@...>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 8:01 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!


>
>> SALVE QUINTE SERTORI !
>>
>> What are you talking about hon. Sertorius ? Sorry, but I don't
>> understand your message. What annexation ?
>>
>> VALE BENE,
>> IVL SABINVS
>
> Just a bit of squabbling over some uninhabited islands. The two
> governors of Canada differ on where the borders should be drawn.
>
> This isn't relevant to our Featured Debate here - it doesn't
> even involve the same Consul. It's just the trotting out for
> public display of another long-standing grudge...
>
> Vale, O.
>
> --
> hucke@...
> http://www.graveyards.com
>
> "The day will come when our silence will be more powerful than the
> voices you are throttling today." -- August Spies, 1887
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>


SPONSORED LINKS
Roman empire Ancient history Citizenship test Fall of the roman empire The 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.


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







NOVA ROMANI !
Add the new logo and link for the Magna Mater Project support page to your websites.
http://www.dacia-novaroma.org/draft.htm

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





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

What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42121 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Salve Sir
I ask you, what are the true borders of our Provincias then!?!.. Do they
change with every Edictum?. Maybe who ever issues the first one each year!!
That sounds good... You suggest a true mess!! That's what we need, every
Procincia must now propose more laws!!.. Preposterous..
Vale
Quintus Sertorius

----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Hucke" <hucke@...>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 8:25 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!


>
>> What if the island was England..
>
> I suppose the English would then have an opinion on the subject. What
> do the citizens of the disputed territory say about this matter?
>
>> The borders have been set on the NR web site, but not followed.
>
> Are you speaking of the maps that Marcus Arminius Maior drew? Those
> are excellent work, but they've never been voted into law. Or have
> you found something written that gives you this territory?
>
>> As for relevance in the current debate, I believe
>> following the laws of NR should be important...
>
> Indeed it is, and Consul Fabius has done so admirably. If you
> have a dispute with Consul Minucia, you can take it up with the
> Senate.
>
> Vale, M. Octavius Germanicus.
>
> --
> hucke@...
> http://www.graveyards.com
>
> "The day will come when our silence will be more powerful than the
> voices you are throttling today." -- August Spies, 1887
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42122 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
> I ask you, what are the true borders of our Provincias then!?!.. Do they
> change with every Edictum?. Maybe who ever issues the first one each year!!
> That sounds good... You suggest a true mess!! That's what we need, every
> Procincia must now propose more laws!!.. Preposterous..

Perhaps, as you're interested in the subject, you could research any past
Senatus Consulta on this issue, pointing out any contradictions or errors
contained within, then present it to the officers of the Senate so that it
may be voted on and established as law. Such a Senatus Consulta would
override any contrary opinions held by individual governors.

Vale, Octavius.

--
hucke@...
http://www.graveyards.com

"The day will come when our silence will be more powerful than the
voices you are throttling today." -- August Spies, 1887
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42123 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Salve
Yes this is my hope.. BUT... I must differ as to the tactical importance
of those particular islands!! Wouldn't want to dig in there.... It's the
principle of the thing, and what has been recently going on in NR.. This
Imperium will make us look unaccountable as a micro nation...
Vale
Quintus Sertorius

----- Original Message -----
From: "iulius sabinus" <iulius_sabinus@...>
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 8:29 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] A Consul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!


> SALVE QUINTE ARTORI !
>
> O,...I understand. I'm sure the governors will be able to resolve that.
> As a former military I understand your concern about the tactical
> importance of that "No man's land", if I can use this WWI term.
>
> VALE BENE,
> IVL SABINVS
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42124 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Salve Sir
I will move in this direction.. I must also say that I admire your
doggedness in this issue, and all the work you have done for all of us in
NR.... But, you are still legally wrong.... Everything seems to be at
logger heads...
Vale
Quintus Sertorius

----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Hucke" <hucke@...>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 8:44 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!


>
>> I ask you, what are the true borders of our Provincias then!?!.. Do they
>> change with every Edictum?. Maybe who ever issues the first one each
>> year!!
>> That sounds good... You suggest a true mess!! That's what we need,
>> every
>> Procincia must now propose more laws!!.. Preposterous..
>
> Perhaps, as you're interested in the subject, you could research any past
> Senatus Consulta on this issue, pointing out any contradictions or errors
> contained within, then present it to the officers of the Senate so that it
> may be voted on and established as law. Such a Senatus Consulta would
> override any contrary opinions held by individual governors.
>
> Vale, Octavius.
>
> --
> hucke@...
> http://www.graveyards.com
>
> "The day will come when our silence will be more powerful than the
> voices you are throttling today." -- August Spies, 1887
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42125 From: iulius sabinus Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
SALVE ET SALVETE !

Maior <rory12001@...> wrote: M. Hortensia Catoni Quritibusque spd;
Eheu Cato, before there was a Constitution there was Cassius
Julianus and Vedius Germanicus the founders and Pontifex Maximus and
augur of Nova Roma. >>>

This is a hard task, indeed. It is necessary for the founders to be a good example for all. It isn't easy, and I can understand that in the our human being nature light.

What is sad is your worship of laws that that were written after
Vedius Germanicus became augur. I worship the gods. Politics and old
grudges are clouding what is important.>>>
This is the Cato's way. I respect his tenaciousness. And more then that, and you know very well, he is one from the rare peoples with who, to a debates point, can be in a totally opposition and to another in a totally agreement, without resentments. That it means a man of honour.

I wish to continue to worship them in real life. So does our Consul
Gaius Buteo Modianus. He performs real life activities for Nova Roma
and the religio.>>>

This is important. Succes.

He has my admiration. He has the admiration of all the cultores
deorum, the devotees of the gods who try to make the religio a real
life activity & not an empty title.>>>

These are your words " Politics and old grudges are clouding what is important ". It's exactly what our Consul had done with his edictum.

VALETE,
IVL SABINVS










NOVA ROMANI !
Add the new logo and link for the Magna Mater Project support page to your websites.
http://www.dacia-novaroma.org/draft.htm

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





---------------------------------
Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get pricing, reviews, & more on new and used cars.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42126 From: Gaius Vipsanius Agrippa Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Just a small correction. The islands in question may not have a large population but they are inhabited, although many people would find the temperature (-8 F or -22 C for the afternoon) unbearable. To many people in Western Canada though, the only unbearable part of the country is Toronto.

Gaius Vipsanius Agrippa



Matt Hucke <hucke@...> wrote:

> SALVE QUINTE SERTORI !
>
> What are you talking about hon. Sertorius ? Sorry, but I don't understand your message. What annexation ?
>
> VALE BENE,
> IVL SABINVS

Just a bit of squabbling over some uninhabited islands. The two
governors of Canada differ on where the borders should be drawn.

This isn't relevant to our Featured Debate here - it doesn't
even involve the same Consul. It's just the trotting out for
public display of another long-standing grudge...

Vale, O.

--
hucke@...
http://www.graveyards.com

"The day will come when our silence will be more powerful than the
voices you are throttling today." -- August Spies, 1887


SPONSORED LINKS
Roman empire Ancient history Citizenship test Fall of the roman empire The 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.


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





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42127 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Salve Brother!!
Being myself aboriginal (and those areas in question having a predominate
indigenous population), I must admit that when it was said those were
"uninhabited islands", I felt the same way we were all made to feel...
Inferior...
Vale
Quintus Sertorius

From: "Gaius Vipsanius Agrippa" <canadaoccidentalis@...>
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
> Just a small correction. The islands in question may not have a large
> population but they are inhabited, although many people would find the
> temperature (-8 F or -22 C for the afternoon) unbearable. To many people
> in Western Canada though, the only unbearable part of the country is
> Toronto.
> Gaius Vipsanius Agrippa
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42128 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
M. Hortensia T. Iulio Sabino spd;
H: Well the Pontifex Maximus is a wonderful example & he shows
his devotion by his behavior. He says it is right and natural for
Vedius Germanicus to be accepted as augur.
>
> This is a hard task, indeed. It is necessary for the founders to
be a good example for all. It isn't easy, and I can understand that
in the our human being nature light.
>
: the problem is that Cato's way = the right way. There is room for
good people to disagree. I did read on another board that he intends
to sue Consul Buteo Modianus over this. I hope I am wrong. I have
never done such a thing in Nova Roma.


This is the Cato's way. I respect his tenaciousness., without
resentments. That it means a man of honour.
>

H: yes, Cinncinatus does not want there to be an augur, other than
himself. You read how he owns the lists. The Pontifex Maximus had to
create a new CP list. Consul Buteo Modianus is doing this for all of
us; the cultores deorum and the state.
> This is important. Succes.
>
H: you are a new citizen. How do you know what is going on? I have
been a citizen now for 3 years. The CP was considered a joke & did
nothing to advance the religio. Now Consul Buteo Modianus is
creating activities working with the Pontifex Maximus.

For a long time I was at odds with Consul Buteo Modianus myself!
But then we made a truce & talked. I really have come to know and
respect him for his dedication and selflessness. Have you done these
things?
bene vale in pacem deorum
M. Hortensia Maior


S: These are your words " Politics and old grudges are clouding what
is important ". It's exactly what our Consul had done with his
edictum.
>
> VALETE,
> IVL SABINVS
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> NOVA ROMANI !
> Add the new logo and link for the Magna Mater Project support
page to your websites.
> http://www.dacia-novaroma.org/draft.htm
>
> "Every individual is the arhitect of his own fortune" - Appius
Claudius
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get pricing, reviews, &
more on new and used cars.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42129 From: Tim Gallagher Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum; Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Salve Marcus Octavius Germanicus

"It's odd how no one who had a hand in writing or amending the
Constitution seems to agree with you."

I did write the amendment that has been used improperly in this matter and I do
agree with them.

"You'd think they'd be the loudest voices of outrage,
if it were truly being vandalized".

I have been and I will continue to be one of he loudest voices of outrage,
that the constitution has "truly being vandalized".

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus






----- Original Message -----
From: Matt Hucke<mailto:hucke@...>
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 7:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: A Consular Ultimatum; Accepting Vedius Germanicus



> What I find sad is that the Consul vandalised the Constitution to
> get his own way.

It's odd how no one who had a hand in writing or amending the
Constitution seems to agree with you. You'd think they'd be the
loudest voices of outrage, if it were truly being vandalized.

Vale, Octavius.

--
hucke@...
http://www.graveyards.com<http://www.graveyards.com/>

"The day will come when our silence will be more powerful than the
voices you are throttling today." -- August Spies, 1887


SPONSORED LINKS Roman empire<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Roman+empire&w1=Roman+empire&w2=Ancient+history&w3=Citizenship+test&w4=Fall+of+the+roman+empire&w5=The+roman+empire&c=5&s=113&.sig=V_ohQEPlKSUophzoyeKo7A> Ancient history<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Ancient+history&w1=Roman+empire&w2=Ancient+history&w3=Citizenship+test&w4=Fall+of+the+roman+empire&w5=The+roman+empire&c=5&s=113&.sig=qUOMYbt4Zn7Yl_BI9eyvCA> Citizenship test<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Citizenship+test&w1=Roman+empire&w2=Ancient+history&w3=Citizenship+test&w4=Fall+of+the+roman+empire&w5=The+roman+empire&c=5&s=113&.sig=i89al2nzLhouXVUtOu-wDQ>
Fall of the roman empire<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Fall+of+the+roman+empire&w1=Roman+empire&w2=Ancient+history&w3=Citizenship+test&w4=Fall+of+the+roman+empire&w5=The+roman+empire&c=5&s=113&.sig=cvvUbwFz4SII0tNReHlQkw> The roman empire<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=The+roman+empire&w1=Roman+empire&w2=Ancient+history&w3=Citizenship+test&w4=Fall+of+the+roman+empire&w5=The+roman+empire&c=5&s=113&.sig=o0D-t5cCQCdxurytCXSC7Q>


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

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

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

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


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



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42130 From: Tim Gallagher Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum; Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Salve Marca Hortensia Maior

As always you miss the point.

The Pontifex Maximus Cassius Julianus could say anything about Vedius Germanicus but his saying it does not in and of its self mean its true.

The Constitution was established as the Supreme law of Nova Roma NOTHING and NOBODY outranks it.

The constitution of Nova Roma is the source of the power to make Augurs, priests or to elect magistrates.

If the Senate and people of Rome change by legal means the terms of that this grant of power by
increasing a term of office or decreasing it or adding a requirement then the terms are changed.

Five years ago in order to be a priest you were not required to be a taxpayer does that mean any priest appointed before the adoption of this tax requirement is exempt? No it means they pay the tax or the cease being a priest. The requirement to remain an Augur was citizenship.
When it was resigned, the Augurship was resigned.

He was but is not now an Augur unless the CP acts to make him one.

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus



----- Original Message -----
From: Maior<mailto:rory12001@...>
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 6:30 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: A Consular Ultimatum; Accepting Vedius Germanicus


M.Hortensia Quiritibus spd:
what is supremely sad is that the founder of Nova Roma,
Pontifex Maximus Cassius Julianus, says the other founder of Nova
Roma, Vedius Germanicus, has been and always will be an augur. This is
according to the tradition of Roma Antiqua: 'Once an augur always an
augur.'
The CP does not need to do anything. Vedius Germanicus was
an augur even before there was a CP!
Politicizing and making wearysome legal arguments over
something so basic and positive is just a waste. Our great Consul. G.
Buteo Modianus along with the wonderful support of Consul Pompeia
Strabo, is making the Religio real & active. Nova Roma need augurs.
Let the Religio prosper.

bene valete in pacem deorum
Marca Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebis
cultrix deorum






SPONSORED LINKS Roman empire<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Roman+empire&w1=Roman+empire&w2=Ancient+history&w3=Citizenship+test&w4=Fall+of+the+roman+empire&w5=The+roman+empire&c=5&s=113&.sig=V_ohQEPlKSUophzoyeKo7A> Ancient history<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Ancient+history&w1=Roman+empire&w2=Ancient+history&w3=Citizenship+test&w4=Fall+of+the+roman+empire&w5=The+roman+empire&c=5&s=113&.sig=qUOMYbt4Zn7Yl_BI9eyvCA> Citizenship test<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Citizenship+test&w1=Roman+empire&w2=Ancient+history&w3=Citizenship+test&w4=Fall+of+the+roman+empire&w5=The+roman+empire&c=5&s=113&.sig=i89al2nzLhouXVUtOu-wDQ>
Fall of the roman empire<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Fall+of+the+roman+empire&w1=Roman+empire&w2=Ancient+history&w3=Citizenship+test&w4=Fall+of+the+roman+empire&w5=The+roman+empire&c=5&s=113&.sig=cvvUbwFz4SII0tNReHlQkw> The roman empire<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=The+roman+empire&w1=Roman+empire&w2=Ancient+history&w3=Citizenship+test&w4=Fall+of+the+roman+empire&w5=The+roman+empire&c=5&s=113&.sig=o0D-t5cCQCdxurytCXSC7Q>


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

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

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

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


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



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42131 From: iulius sabinus Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
SALVE HORTENSIA MAIOR !

Maior <rory12001@...> wrote: M. Hortensia T. Iulio Sabino spd;
H: Well the Pontifex Maximus is a wonderful example & he shows
his devotion by his behavior. He says it is right and natural for
Vedius Germanicus to be accepted as augur.>>>
How you saw, I didn't discuss about the Vedius Germanicus augur status. My concern is only about the reinstatment way. If the Pontifex Maximus says that before the Consul edictum, I'm sure all it was ok.
: the problem is that Cato's way = the right way. There is room for
good people to disagree. I did read on another board that he intends
to sue Consul Buteo Modianus over this. I hope I am wrong. I have
never done such a thing in Nova Roma.>>>

I guess he has his reasons. As a magistrate he wasn't treating all the time with the necessary respect.

H: yes, Cinncinatus does not want there to be an augur, other than
himself. You read how he owns the lists. The Pontifex Maximus had to
create a new CP list. Consul Buteo Modianus is doing this for all of
us; the cultores deorum and the state.>>>

Is very sad for me to hear about all of that. But the laws are laws, even if to step over, maybe, for all of us is a good thing.


H: you are a new citizen. How do you know what is going on? I have
been a citizen now for 3 years. The CP was considered a joke & did
nothing to advance the religio. Now Consul Buteo Modianus is
creating activities working with the Pontifex Maximus.>>>

Yes, I'm a new citizen. But I read and I know a lot. More then you can imagine. Is not a secret. And is a valid truh for everyone. If in life you do what you like the results will come quickly and without a great effort. Add here the inspiration...
For me the CP is not a joke. You know me from the last year.

For a long time I was at odds with Consul Buteo Modianus myself!
But then we made a truce & talked. I really have come to know and
respect him for his dedication and selflessness. Have you done these
things?>>>

I'm not at odds with nobody. I don't like to be at odds with somebody. It isn't my way of life. Sometime, different opinions ? It's normal.
Frankly ? I respect Consul Modianus because he try. All of us have the duty to try. What is our life if we don't try ? The only problem is that I have a different opinion about this subject. This is my vision. And I try to belive is a good vision. Exactly from this reason : I'm new. I haven't any conections with personal conflicts from the past. I take the things, if I can say so, to the first hand.
You know, we have a common passion. I learned from this passion that only the present has a realy value. All the rest is samsara.

VALE BENE,
IVL SABINVS





.


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







NOVA ROMANI !
Add the new logo and link for the Magna Mater Project support page to your websites.
http://www.dacia-novaroma.org/draft.htm

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





---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42132 From: Tim Gallagher Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum-
Salve


"What is sad is your worship of laws that that were written after
Vedius Germanicus became augur. I worship the gods. Politics and old
grudges are clouding what is important."

What is sad is your inability to understand that the Romans worshiped both
the law and the gods.


Legum servi sumus ut liberi esse possimus -

We are slaves of the law so that we may be able to be free. (Cicero)

"And if a state has no law, is it not for that reason to be reckoned no state at all"?
M. Tullius Cicero

Dura lex, sed lex - The law is harsh, but it is the law

We must therefore reckon law among the very best things. M. Tullius Cicero

Libertas inaestimabilis res est - Liberty is a thing beyond all price. (Corpus Iuris Civilis)

"Accipere quam facere praestat injuriam - It is better to suffer an injustice than to do an injustice"

Cedant arma togae - Let arms yield to the toga. (Let violence give place to law)

In gremio legis - In the protection of the law


Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42133 From: marcushoratius Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum
Salve Pontifex Scaure

And so now you deem it acceptable to post partial messages from
within the Collegium Pontificum? It would be very enlightening to
the rest of Nova Roma if you were to post more of those private
discussions.

Pontifex Fabius Buteo Modianus made no ultimatum to the Collegium.
He offered a compromise as a possible solution by which to end this
needless strife. He offered for the Collegium to issue a decretum,
rather than have the edictum consularis be the instrument by which
Augur Vedius Germanicus will be justly recognized in the office he
holds and thereby reinstated in his rightful place within the
Collegium Augurum.

The time frame that he gave is not a deadline that he set. At 12:04
AM Feb. 24 the time will have expired for the Tribuni Plebis to
register their agreement or disagreement with the intercessio issued
by Tribunus Agrippa. Three of the Tribuni Plebis have already
voiced their disagrement to the intercessio of Tribunus Agrippa, and
thus the intercessio will be nullified. The edictum consularis will
go into effect at that time.

The fact is that the laws were reviewed by those who are responsible
for reviewing the laws in this matter. Two Consules, one Praetor,
and three of the Tribuni Plebis have agreed not only that the Consul
is within his authority to issue the edictum consularis, but that
the law requires him to correct what was an administrative error
that wrongly denied Vedius Germanicus his office of Augur.

Now that the time is approaching for justice to be served, three
pontifices hope to subvert the law by posing to issue a decretum
that would usurp authority they do not have. Let us be clear, for
this dispute that you wish bring out from the privacy of the
Collegium Pontificum is not between the magistrates of Nova Roma and
the Collegium Pontificum. Rather it is by a faction of pontifices
against their fellow colleagues inside the Collegium and against a
majority of the higher magistrates of Nova Roma.

The Pontifices are divided. Pontifex Maximus Cassius Julianus is
joined with Pontifex Modianus and are opposed by Pontifices Scaurus,
Fabius Maximus, and Equitius Cincinnatus. The others have not yet
voiced their opinions. The Augures are divided. We have an augur
who refuses to recognize his colleagues, and does not so much as
speak to them except to issue insults and make false claims against
the legitimacy of their offices. This same augur refused to
subscribe a member of the Collegium Pontificum to its list, and
improperly unsubscribed a colleague augur from the list used by the
Collegium Augurum. Posturing, insulting, spreading falsehoods,
abusing authority, doing all that they can in a vain attempt to
usurp control over the institutions of the religio Romana in Nova
Roma and to exclude any who would oppose them.

"Threatened" is what you claim? An offer of compromise is a threat
to you? A statement of fact is a threat to you? A word of advice
on what could happen if you and your two colleagues persist in the
course you have chosen, this is a threat to you? The real threat
here, Pontifex Scaure, is the one of misconduct by you and your two
colleagues, and the threat that you three pose is to the religio
Romana in Nova Roma. In another 24 hours or so you and your two
colleagues will have the choice to yield to the authority of the
Consules and Tribuni Plebis as they return Augur Vedius Germanicus
to his rightful place in the Collegium Augurum, joined once more
with Pontifex Maximus Cassius Julianus in the Collegium Pontificum,
the cofounders of the religio Romana in Nova Roma. What you call a
threat, Pontifex Scaure, I call a Restoration.

Vale

M Moravius Piscinus Horatianus

Flamen Carmentalis
Tribunus Plebis
Procurator Lacus Magni
Sacerdos Lacus Magni
Scriba Aedile TIS: Magna Mater Project
Caput Generis Doctrinae Religionis Romanae, Academia Thules




--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gregory Rose" <gregory.rose@...>
wrote:
>
> G. Iulius Scaurus M. Octavio Germanico SPD.
>
> Salve, Germanice.
>
> You wrote:
>
> > An "ultimatum"? An ultimatum is a demand backed by a threat.
What
> > has he threatened you with?
>
> I quote directly from the postng by Tribune and Flamen Carmentalis
M.
> Moravius Piscinus to the Collegium in support of the Consul's
> ultimatum:
>
> "Pontifex Fabius Buteo raises a rather ugly spectre of a
tribunician
> intercessio of the Collegium's decreta. Tribunicia potestes does
have
> that ability and there is always this possibility. I agree that it
> would be a rather dangerous precedent for the Collegium to evoke an
> intercessio by its actions, since we cannot know who may be among
the
> Tribuni Plebis in the future. I do not have a vote inside the
> Collegium on its decreta, but I certainly can exercise influence
over
> what reaction the Tribuni Plebis would have to them."
>
> The threat which has been made is a tribunician veto of any
decretum
> adopted by the Collegium which does not conform to the consul's
> wishes. If the consul wishes to provoke a constitutional crisis,
that
> his is privilege, but it is disingenuous to suggest that anything
> short of an ultimatum has been presented to the Collegium.
>
> Explain to me how the Collegium Pontificum can legally violate the
> time constraints of the Decretum de Ratione Pontificum Collegii?
Why
> is this so urgent a matter that the Consul demands that the
Collegium
> act in contravention of the law? The difference between meeting
the
> consul's demand and following the law is ten days. Is the forum
going
> to implode if the Collegium follows the law and acts by March 6?
Or
> is it the ego of the Consul which is likely to implode if we follow
> the procedures established in law to resolve this matter?
>
> Vale.
>
> Scaurus
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42134 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-22
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
M. Hortensia Paulino Sabinoque Quiritibus spd;

please let's remember we are talking about real human
beings. I just talked with F. Vedius Germanicus and it is very
difficult for him. He said to me 'how would you like to see your
name hundreds of times on the ML?"

He's a real human being who founded Nova Roma, not just a name on
the Main List. Please for those of us who are cultores deorum, for
those of us who love Nova Roma, let's remember Consul G. Buteo
Modianus is a wonderful guy who's doing his best to make Nova Roma
real and Fl. Vedius Germanicus is the Founder who should be accepted
by us all & with thanks.
bene vale in pacem deorum
Marca Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebis


>
> Salve
>
>
> "What is sad is your worship of laws that that were written after
> Vedius Germanicus became augur. I worship the gods. Politics and
old
> grudges are clouding what is important."
>
> What is sad is your inability to understand that the Romans
worshiped both
> the law and the gods.
>
>
> Legum servi sumus ut liberi esse possimus -
>
> We are slaves of the law so that we may be able to be free.
(Cicero)
>
> "And if a state has no law, is it not for that reason to be
reckoned no state at all"?
> M. Tullius Cicero
>
> Dura lex, sed lex - The law is harsh, but it is the law
>
> We must therefore reckon law among the very best things. M.
Tullius Cicero
>
> Libertas inaestimabilis res est - Liberty is a thing beyond all
price. (Corpus Iuris Civilis)
>
> "Accipere quam facere praestat injuriam - It is better to suffer
an injustice than to do an injustice"
>
> Cedant arma togae - Let arms yield to the toga. (Let violence give
place to law)
>
> In gremio legis - In the protection of the law
>
>
> Vale
>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42135 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum; Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Salve Octavi.

>It's relevant only to establish that this is not such a clear
violation of the Constitution as to provoke outrage from the authors<

GIC: The Constitution once written is the Constitution. It cannot be
interpreted, let alone by reference to the thoughts or intentions
that someone claims they had when they drafted it. That would be
interesting material to review only for the purpose of comparing
what they claim was their intention with the end result, and then
only for the purpose of debriefing them on errors, omissions etc. In
other words it can be a learning exercise for the drafter(s).

GIC: The Constitution must stand on its own two feet, and regardless
of who drafted it and even if they videotaped a running commentary
as they typed it, the printed word is all that matters, the end
result. If you adopt any other course of action you lay the res
publica open to surreptitious attempts to re-word and re-define it
without reference to the due process. I could foresee the Tabularium
having to accommodate a raft of emails from people months even years
later, trying to explain what they meant when they assisted in the
drafting process. This would be too prone to abuse and an utterly
impractical idea.

GIC: The best protection for the people is for to study JUST the
printed word, not what is subsequently appended in invisible ink or
an insertion as an after thought to provide an escape route from a
unconstitutional position.

>You wish people to believe that the Constitution is being ignored;
I then point to the lack of outrage from the authors (and from the
Tribunes) as evidence that your opinion is not universal, nor is it
shared by certain others who are familiar with that document and who
probably feel somewhat protective of it.<

GIC: Totally irrelevant I am afraid. You must know, as you are in
Modianus's command tent that this was all debated with the Tribunes
prior to public release. Of course you know, don't you. So the lack
of response is due to the Senior Consul pressuring the Tribunes to
validate this edict with a "YES" or "NO" answer before they had the
chance to evaluate the contrary views. Nicely done.

GIC: Now, as to the lack of "outrage", the connection between the
Senior Consul, one of the Tribunes in his corner, one of the
Plebeian Aediles and even the new citizen who just "happened" today
to post a supportive message in his favour on this forum is a
rather "cosy" one. They all belong to an organization that I believe
was co-founded by the Senior Consul towards the end of last year, a
poor-man's version of Nova Roma. One where I believe the Senior
Consul appointed himself Pontifex Maximus, no?

GIC: Now none of this is of course illegal under Nova Roman law, but
certainly it could be said to be ethically "fraught"
or "challenging". I have always thought that divided loyalties of
this sort were dubious at best, and wondered what would possess a
man to stand for the Consulship of Nova Roma when he was busy
setting up an alternative model. Oh well, I suppose there must have
been some sort of reason, but it would seem to me that he must be
spreading his time very thin on one or both organizations.

GIC: So when you ask me about the lack of "outrage" from certain
quarters, well of course there isn't any outrage Octavi as they all
appear to be rowing in the same boat. Now, far be it from me to, and
I wouldn't want anyone to think that I would, suggest that this
exercise in abrogation of power was some sort of "fix" coordinated
from within an organization external to Nova Roma, but it is, to me
at least, "fraught" (to say the least) given the relationships
between some of the main participants. Very unwise. Could be said to
look "bad" Octavi. A Tribune, protector of the people, so closely
involved with the Senior Consul. Yes, I think that looks bad.

> It also clearly said that appointment as an augur was "for life".
>
> These statements are contradictory. They are both part of the
> Constitution.
>

GIC: I think you know my position on that Octavi. Common sense
dictates that non-citizens don't hold offices and lo, the
Constitution says just that. Augurs hold office for life but when
they surrender their citizenship they surrender their offices. It
really is that simple.

> The Constitution is not clear. The Constitution is contradictory.
> Modianus has chosen an interpretation that allows - no, *compels* -
> him to take this action.

GIC: Why is the Senior Consul compelled to do anything? What is the
urgency? I see none, other than his desire to ram this one home
and "win" a point or two.

> The Collegium Pontificum should have recognized Vedius's title,
> a long time ago. It is to the shame of that institution that this
> has not happened, and to the credit of the Consul that he is
> willing to take up the slack, at the personal cost of incurring
> the wrath of those whose sloth has been made apparent.

GIC: That is just your opinion Octavi. The Collegium Pontificum
decides these matters, as you clearly recognize when you say they
should have just rubber stamped this prevailing view.

GIC: Ahhh, but hang on a minute, you say above that the Constitution
is contradictory on whether one looses a title as Augur when one
quits NR. So if there is doubt (not in my mind but you obviously
you say there is an inconsistency) as to the meaning, wasn't it
rather arrogant of you all to decide that your view was correct?
Wouldn't the statesman's approach to have been to tread carefully
and calmly?

GIC: Well the Senior Consul in your words was compelled to take
action. So even though he knew there was this apparent contradiction
(there isn't really you know, except when you try to make the two
sections read as you want to), off he went rushing around issuing
edicts on a constitutionally unsound subject. Rather rash no, given
the doubt as to meaning? Of course I expect you to say "no, not
rash" for if you said otherwise it would behove him to withdraw his
edict.

> > Vedius lost his title of Augur the moment he resigned.
>
> At the moment he resigned the "for life, with no exceptions" was
> active. When he returned in 1999 his title of Augur should have
> been recognized (not "reinstated"). This error has now been
> corrected.

GIC: Yes, and what of the section above that Octavi, that ALWAYS
read that non-citizens cannot hold a religious office in NR? Did
someone take the magic eraser to that and forget that bit?

> > Similar prohibitions exist in the "secular" offices of Nova Roma,
> > so for instance we can't have a non-citizen Consul.
>
> Nowhere is it stated that a Consul's appointment is "for life";
> furthermore, the current Constitution explicitly states that
> "an office becomes vacant if the magistrate resigns or dies",
> or that he may be removed by Comitia or Censores. The situations
> are not at all parallel - the language is very different.

GIC: What happens to his/her offices when he/she resigns from NR?
Come now Octavi, when was the last Consul elected who was a non-
citizen?

> > The evidence is stacked against you all on this, the
> > Constitution is clear.
>
> The Constitution is self-contradictory. We can fix that later.

GIC: A better course, if you believe that (I don't), was to fix it
first and not have the Senior Consul running around abrogating
unconstitutional powers. That would have been far more sensible.

> > The underlying reasons for this abrogation of power by the
Consul is
> > simply a mixture of politics and personality issues.
>
> That's also the reason for the opposition to this action - almost
all of it has come from people who already have grudges against the
Consul or against Augur Vedius.

GIC: Nonsense. As far as I am concerned the Senior Consul is welcome
to enjoy his term in office and gather as many titles, plaudits and
praise as he needs. All that is required of him, and any other
magistrate, under the Constitution, is to fulfill his oath to it and
not dismantle and damage it by ill-conceived and obviously, from
what you said about him suffering from an attack of compulsion, rash
actions.

> > it reads, and it reads that non-citizens cannot hold religious
office.
>
> It reads that augurship is for life, no exceptions!

GIC: No it says that non-citizens cannot hold religious offices, so
that is an exception isn't it? It must be you said there was a
contradiction and it needed fixing.

> Flavius Vedius Germanicus is, was, always will be, an Augur.

GIC: If the Collegium Pontificum wills it.

Vale
Caesar


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Matt Hucke <hucke@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Gnae Iuli,
>
> > Once the Constitution is written it is written Octavius.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42136 From: S Ullerius Venator Piperbarbus Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Augurs augering
Valetudo quod fortuna omnes;

This is a little poem which occurred to me:

Augur's duty, is to auger
Beyond the veil, which separates
The mind of man, and his intent
From what the Gods, may bless, let be

If Auguring, is augering
Then hand and heart, must steady be
To take what eye, does discover
And ferret out, some true meaning

If Augur's eye, does auger well
Then good or ill, is puzzled out
And words will come, of sight well seen
And guide the way, for People's good

When Augur has, augered omen
To interpret, is also clear
What it does mean, and does portend
If bad we're warned, if good we're cheered

So Auguring, is boring task
As an auger, is boring tool
But no result, of either is
Of little use, or tedious

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

Religio Septentrionalis - Poet

http://anheathenreader.blogspot.com/
http://www.catamount-grange-hearth.org/
http://www.cafepress.com/catamountgrange
"Skaldic Pebble" now ready.
--
May the Holy Powers smile on our efforts.
May the Spirits of our family lines nod in approval.
May we be of Worth to our fellow Nova Romans.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42137 From: Stefanie Beer Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Betreff: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: A Consular Ultimatum; Accepting Vedius
Salve Octavi,
I know that your posting is directed to Gnaeus Iulius Caesar, but since it
is posted on the ML for all to read, I´d like to comment.
You wrote answering Gnaeus Iuluius Caesar:

> The underlying reasons for this abrogation of power by the Consul is
> simply a mixture of politics and personality issues.

That's also the reason for the opposition to this action - almost all of
it has come from people who already have grudges against the Consul or
against Augur Vedius.

I wanted simply to make clear to you (and everybody else who might be
interested) that I hold no grudges whatsoever against the Consul, against
Vedius or against anybody else in Nova Roma, and that I do not speak up
because somebody I´m allied to does - I simply am not allied to any party
(my time as a citizen is probably to short for that, yet.) or any person.
But when I read the Constitution and the leges in the tabularium the
argumentation AGAINST this consular edict is a lot more convincing to me
than the arguments brought forth FOR it. In my personal, legally untrained
opinion I think that with issuing it the senior consul abused his power. And
should there be a trial once he has lost his consular immunity I would like
to see him convicted.

Vale,
L.Flavia Lectrix


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42138 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: Augurs augering
A. Apollonius Stephano Ullerio omnibusque sal.

Thanks for that poem, Venator - it brought a welcome
smile to me. :)





___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42139 From: Domitius Constantinus Fuscus Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: The pointlessness of the legal debate on the Edictum
Salve cives

I think, we can even close the legal debate on the consular edictum.
It's days now that it goes on, and

a) if the Consuls, the praetor and the 3 tribunes are in good faith, more
days of debate will not make them change their mind. They have their (wrong)
interpretation of the law and they will stick to it if they think they are
right, and if there was any doubt they would had changed their mind already.

b) if, as it seem more and more probable, this is an act ina broader
political agenda and a push of a minority of the CP to impose its will
almost manu militari on the majority of the Collegium, then no legal
argument, for how profound, well based and rethorically expressed will ever
make them change their mind, because it's not of law we are talking about,
but of a politics and who has the sheer power to enforce it.

I think, it would be much better for everyone involved to stop discussing
and repeating over and over their practically pointless points and just act.
For the majority of the Collegium Pontificum to enact the harsher measure
they have to defend the authority of the Collegium, and expose themself to
the tribunician veto, knowing they will be severely beaten.

Why? because, at least, everyone would know exactly and officially where we
stand. We stand in a moment where the civil authorities have expressely
avocated to themself religious powers (the Consul insisted and actually
proudly defended the choise of the RE-INSTATE wording of his edictum,
practically by adfirming that Vedius was not an augur and he's putting him
back to the place bu consular authority) and where the civil magistratures
have avocated to themselves, it seems, the right of judging over religious
matters (the tribunes possibly vetoing the pontificial decree).

While the Censores, who should in theory judge on the way we are following
roman costumes, rather than expressing their point of view on this total
revolvement of the mores, sit idly by, probably siding, quietly, with one of
the parties (guess who).

You may like it or not, but at least stopping discussing and acting we'd
have this situation becoming official, rather than keeping it in the
ambiguity of a simple legal dispute.

Oh, on a side matter, the provincial boundaries should be decided by the
Senate in its role of administering the state properties, not by a Consul.

Valete,

DCF


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42140 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
A. Apollonius M. Hortensiae omnibusque sal.

> Eheu Cato, before there was a Constitution
> there was Cassius
> Julianus and Vedius Germanicus the founders and
> Pontifex Maximus and
> augur of Nova Roma.

We must be very careful with this sort of statement.
As you know, I agree with you about what the law
*ought* to be, but the question we must concentrate on
for now is what the law is. Your statement above seems
to point in the direction of an argument that M.
Cassius and Flavius Vedius should be regarded as
outside or above the law. This would be a profoundly
un-Roman sentiment, and I'm sure it would be one which
they themselves would reject.

Remember that one of the founding consules of the old
republic was deprived of his citizenship by a vote of
the people: he submitted to their decision with a good
grace. Remember that one of his fellow founders and
successors as consul, P. Publicola, was accused by the
people of seeking to dominate and rule over the state
because he failed to elect a new colleague and because
he lived upon the Velia: he immediately held
elections; in the dead of night he demolished his
house and moved to the foot of the hill; and he
proposed laws guaranteeing the right of provocatio and
threatening grave punishments to anyone who should try
to be king.

Such were the founders of the old republic, and such
was their desire to refute any suggestion that they
were above or outside the law. We would do a grave
injustice to our founding consules if we were to think
that they would want to be treated any differently.





___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42141 From: M. Lucretius Agricola Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: The pointlessness of the legal debate on the Edictum
M. Lucretius Agricola D. Constantino Fusco Omnibusque S.P.D.

I agree, amice, that arguments have been fully made. It is time for us
to trust our legal apparatus.

I disagree with your assesment. I think the Consul surveyed our crazy
quilt of laws and looking at the whole, made a step to set things
right. I see it as leadership. You, my friend, are trained in the law,
and I am not. Perhaps that difference in background accounts for our
difference in perspective. Still, I think you will agree, and this is
not to denigrate the hard work of those who drafted them, that the
*whole* of our law is rather like a tapestry woven by madmen. It is
hard to see a straight line or a clear picture.

Perhaps you predict that bad will come of this situation, but I am
sure that you *hope* that I am correct when I predict that good will
come of it.


Now turning to OTHER BUSINESS...

ahem...

Per decision of the Senate, final art for our new sestertius has been
delivered to the mint. Dies shall shortly be made. The minting will
*include* a rather limited number of PROOF COINS. These will be
specially minted and handled and they will be inside plastic capsules
for protection.

Yes, Friends and Fellow Citizens, it is happening.


Optime vale et valete



--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Domitius Constantinus Fuscus"
<dom.con.fus@...> wrote:
>
> Salve cives
>
> I think, we can even close the legal debate on the consular edictum.
> It's days now that it goes on, and
>
> a) if the Consuls, the praetor and the 3 tribunes are in good faith,
more
> days of debate will not make them change their mind. They have their
(wrong)
> interpretation of the law and they will stick to it if they think
they are
> right, and if there was any doubt they would had changed their mind
already.
>
> b) if, as it seem more and more probable, this is an act ina broader
> political agenda and a push of a minority of the CP to impose its will
> almost manu militari on the majority of the Collegium, then no legal
> argument, for how profound, well based and rethorically expressed
will ever
> make them change their mind, because it's not of law we are talking
about,
> but of a politics and who has the sheer power to enforce it.
>
> I think, it would be much better for everyone involved to stop
discussing
> and repeating over and over their practically pointless points and
just act.
> For the majority of the Collegium Pontificum to enact the harsher
measure
> they have to defend the authority of the Collegium, and expose
themself to
> the tribunician veto, knowing they will be severely beaten.
>
> Why? because, at least, everyone would know exactly and officially
where we
> stand. We stand in a moment where the civil authorities have expressely
> avocated to themself religious powers (the Consul insisted and actually
> proudly defended the choise of the RE-INSTATE wording of his edictum,
> practically by adfirming that Vedius was not an augur and he's
putting him
> back to the place bu consular authority) and where the civil
magistratures
> have avocated to themselves, it seems, the right of judging over
religious
> matters (the tribunes possibly vetoing the pontificial decree).
>
> While the Censores, who should in theory judge on the way we are
following
> roman costumes, rather than expressing their point of view on this total
> revolvement of the mores, sit idly by, probably siding, quietly,
with one of
> the parties (guess who).
>
> You may like it or not, but at least stopping discussing and acting we'd
> have this situation becoming official, rather than keeping it in the
> ambiguity of a simple legal dispute.
>
> Oh, on a side matter, the provincial boundaries should be decided by the
> Senate in its role of administering the state properties, not by a
Consul.
>
> Valete,
>
> DCF
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42142 From: P.M. Albucius Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: To end the debate on cos edictum !!
--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Domitius Constantinus Fuscus"
<dom.con.fus@...> wrote:

> I think, we can even close the legal debate on the consular edictum.

I agree. I propose of all us, and specially our constitutonal
magistrates to check the following points :

1/ The debate is not on our Pater patriae Fl. Vedius Germanicus.
Without him, we would not be debating here ;

2/ Two constitutional powers have had the matter in their hands : the
censorate, when Hon. P.P. Germanicus came back in NR, and the
Collegium Pontificum ;

3/ The censorate's decision on P.P. Germanicus has not been
contested ;

4/ Collegium Pontificum (CP) is the sole constitutional power
authorized to state on augurs ;

5/ Either there is still a (past) decision on our P.P. as an augur,
or not. If not, we have 2 cases : either the CP considers, in view of
the past censorate's decision, that Hon. Germanicus never stopped
being an augur, or not.

6/ Anyway, in the last two cases, the CP must, as every
constitutional power, to have its decisions published, for the
information of all and so that they may be enforced ;

7/ So let the CP meet, under the rules that It has defined, and let
him (re-issue) a decretum ;

8/ The internal problems occurred inside the CP is only the matter of
It ;

9/ Pontifex maximus has the responsability to have the CP work ;

10/ No other constitutional power may act on behalf of an other
constitutional power : if we accept that just once, our whole system
will immediatly loose its whole legitimacy (why not a praetor, for
exemple, to authorize himself to edict here on behalf of the CP ?!)
and gives legitimacy to any contestation position ;

11/ The fact that some of our high magistrates have several functions
or dignity, including for example religious ones, is irrelevant :
each function must be served in the limits assigned to it by our
constitution and our laws : a flamine must not act as a tribune in
his religious duties, nor a consul as a pontifex in his civil office,
etc. ;

12/ Once the CP takes/remind Its decision, the problem is over.

So please *all* of our high magistrates and religious officers make
all together a little step, for the safe of the Res publica. Think to
roman values, Quirites. And act.

Gratias, ac valete.


P. Memmius Albucius
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42143 From: pompeia_minucia_tiberia Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
---Salve Marcus Octavius et Salvete Omnes:

I relinquished any claim over these lands a couple of weeks ago via
edictum, a day or so after I took note that this was a problem.
There is no dispute, other than that which Quintus Sertorius has
chosen to facticate. And I don't know either, what this has to do
with the discussion.

I do not need Baffin Island or Resolution Island as part of my
provincia. Glad to have them if need be, but such is not essential,
and hardly worth a dispute, for sure.

We will likely defer this matter for a Senate decision, for the
benefit of future propraetores.

Valete
Pompeia Minucia Strabo
Propraetrix et Consul



In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Matt Hucke <hucke@...> wrote:
>
>
> > SALVE QUINTE SERTORI !
> >
> > What are you talking about hon. Sertorius ? Sorry, but I don't
understand your message. What annexation ?
> >
> > VALE BENE,
> > IVL SABINVS
>
> Just a bit of squabbling over some uninhabited islands. The two
> governors of Canada differ on where the borders should be drawn.
>
> This isn't relevant to our Featured Debate here - it doesn't
> even involve the same Consul. It's just the trotting out for
> public display of another long-standing grudge...
>
> Vale, O.
>
> --
> hucke@...
> http://www.graveyards.com
>
> "The day will come when our silence will be more powerful than the
> voices you are throttling today." -- August Spies, 1887
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42144 From: Titus Marcius Felix Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Declaration For Candidacy To Run For Editor Commentariorum
TITVS MARCIVS FELIX OMNIBVS S.P.D.

I hereby declare my candidacy for Editor Commentariorum of Nova Roma

In my opinion it is position is very important to be vacant. I declare to all citizens who I have the capacity to exert the functions of the Editor Commentariorum position. However most important, I have a true soul Roman.

I am ready to publish the March issue of the Aquila if elected.

I want to enlist as many Nova Roman as posable to help make this a great newsletter and to make it YOUR newsletter. So if you can draw, write or research articles or use a computer I need you help!

When you are elected you may want to ask for staff from Italy,BG France... any nation with Roman ruins who can write and send in pictures for the newsletter ie Reporters.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
T•MARCIVS•FELIX
LEGATVS•PROVINCIAE•BRASILIAE
QUAESTOR•NOVAE•ROMAE
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



---------------------------------
Yahoo! Search
Dê uma espiadinha e saiba tudo sobre o Big Brother Brasil.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42145 From: darren_pile Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: 90 days for provisional citizens
Salvete,

Just a quick question; why is there a 90 day between being
accepted as a provisional citizen and becoming a full citizen of
Nova Roma? In my opinion, new recruits are at their most
enthusiastic immediately after joining. As long as any potential
citizens take the citizenship test, then surely they should be
allowed immediate full membership? By enforcing a 90 day cooling off
period provisional citizens are forced to sit on the side lines
becoming more and more disillusioned, irritated (and even leaving)
at being unable to contribute to Nova Roma.

Also by allowing these new members full citizenship, they
will be eligible for taxation thus increasing the revenue available
to Nova Roma.

What are other people's views on this matter? I'm not
against a cooling off period but I feel that 90 days is just too
long.

G. Livius Crassus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42146 From: CN•EQVIT•MARINVS (Gnaeus Equitius Mari Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: The pointlessness of the legal debate on the Edictum
Salve Fusce, et salvete omnes,

Domitius Constantinus Fuscus <dom.con.fus@...> writes:

> I think, we can even close the legal debate on the consular edictum.

I agree. It doesn't seem to be going anywhere.

[...]
> While the Censores, who should in theory judge on the way we are following
> roman costumes, rather than expressing their point of view on this total
> revolvement of the mores, sit idly by, probably siding, quietly, with one
> of the parties (guess who).

This censor has expressed his opinion to the consuls on the magistrates list.
Since I have no statutory authority to stop the consuls, there seems little
point in adding flames to the fire here. I've no wish to be drawn into the
disputation.

Since you (implicitly) ask, I'll allow that my opinion of the matter is that
F. Vedius is now and has been an augur since the founding of Nova Roma. I
also think that Consul Modianus has taken a very dangerous step in arrogating
to the consular imperium maior a function which in antiquity was almost always
considered outside of it. Only during the last days of the Republic would a
consul have considered it proper to issue such an edictum.

Consul Modianus knows my opinion on this matter, as does Consul Strabo. My
censorial colleague has not yet expressed any opinion.

Vale,

CN•EQVIT•MARINVS
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42147 From: CN•EQVIT•MARINVS (Gnaeus Equitius Mari Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: 90 days for provisional citizens
Salve Gai Livi,

> Just a quick question; why is there a 90 day between being
> accepted as a provisional citizen and becoming a full citizen of
> Nova Roma?

Because I wrote the law that way. In the past we've had a big problem with
new people joining Nova Roma shortly before elections and voting with very
little knowledge of the issues.

> By enforcing a 90 day cooling off
> period provisional citizens are forced to sit on the side lines
> becoming more and more disillusioned, irritated (and even leaving)
> at being unable to contribute to Nova Roma.

If 90 days is too long to wait, then perhaps they didn't belong here in the
first place.

Vale,

CN•EQVIT•MARINVS
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42148 From: Timothy P. Gallagher Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Salve Marca Hortensia Maior

What does any of this have to do with the fact that the Consul, who
is a nice guy, has violated the constitution ?

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus



--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> M. Hortensia Paulino Sabinoque Quiritibus spd;
>
> please let's remember we are talking about real human
> beings. I just talked with F. Vedius Germanicus and it is very
> difficult for him. He said to me 'how would you like to see your
> name hundreds of times on the ML?"
>
> He's a real human being who founded Nova Roma, not just a name on
> the Main List. Please for those of us who are cultores deorum, for
> those of us who love Nova Roma, let's remember Consul G. Buteo
> Modianus is a wonderful guy who's doing his best to make Nova Roma
> real and Fl. Vedius Germanicus is the Founder who should be
accepted
> by us all & with thanks.
> bene vale in pacem deorum
> Marca Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebis
>
>
> >
> > Salve
> >
> >
> > "What is sad is your worship of laws that that were written
after
> > Vedius Germanicus became augur. I worship the gods. Politics and
> old
> > grudges are clouding what is important."
> >
> > What is sad is your inability to understand that the Romans
> worshiped both
> > the law and the gods.
> >
> >
> > Legum servi sumus ut liberi esse possimus -
> >
> > We are slaves of the law so that we may be able to be free.
> (Cicero)
> >
> > "And if a state has no law, is it not for that reason to be
> reckoned no state at all"?
> > M. Tullius Cicero
> >
> > Dura lex, sed lex - The law is harsh, but it is the law
> >
> > We must therefore reckon law among the very best things. M.
> Tullius Cicero
> >
> > Libertas inaestimabilis res est - Liberty is a thing beyond all
> price. (Corpus Iuris Civilis)
> >
> > "Accipere quam facere praestat injuriam - It is better to suffer
> an injustice than to do an injustice"
> >
> > Cedant arma togae - Let arms yield to the toga. (Let violence
give
> place to law)
> >
> > In gremio legis - In the protection of the law
> >
> >
> > Vale
> >
> > Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42149 From: ivlia_vespasia Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Roman Knot Tying
I am trying to find information on the knots used by the Roman army
and navy and would appreciate any help on where to look. So far all I
can find is that Pliny recommended using the reef knot when tying
bandages to promote healing.
Ivlia Vespasia
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42150 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
> What does any of this have to do with the fact that the Consul, who
> is a nice guy, has violated the constitution ?

:1,$s/fact/opinion/

Vale, O.

--
hucke@...
http://www.graveyards.com

"The day will come when our silence will be more powerful than the
voices you are throttling today." -- August Spies, 1887
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42151 From: Timothy P. Gallagher Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Ex Officio Tiberius Galerius Paulinus Praetor
Ex Officio Tiberius Galerius Paulinus Praetor

In the matter of the Petitio actionis C. Equitius Cato who on Wed
Feb 22, 2006 6:28 am submitted a petitio actionis to me in my
capacity as Praetor of Nova Roma.

To wit: "I hereby formally accuse G. Fabius Buteo Modianus of ABVSVS
POTESTATIS (Magisterial Abuse):under sections V.A and XVII of the
lex Salicia Poenalis by the exercise of powers not within the
prerogatives of the office of consul. I hereby issue a petitio
actionis to the praetor Ti. Galerius Paulinus to hear my complaintÂ….
C. Equitius Cato"

I gave formal notice that I was in receipt of his petitio actionis
and would, according to the LEX SALICIA POENALIS XVII and the laws
of Nova Roma, inform him within seventy-two hours of the status of
his petitio actionis.

NOTICE

Pursuant to rules of procedure the Lex Salicia Iudiciaria as amended
by the Lex Equitia de Iurisdictione and given that the praetores
shall have competence to grant trial in any matter between citizens
(or in any matter between a citizen and a peregrinus or between
peregrini provided that the conditions set in the Lex Salicia
Poenalis, Article VII. B are observed),Â…

Because the Reus in this petitio actionis is a sitting magistrate I
have no choice but must dismiss the petitio actionis under the Lex
Salicia Iudiciaria article II.

As long as the Reus remains a sitting magistrate of Nova Roma he is
immune from prosecution in any Nova Roman court.

This petitio actionis is hereby dismissed. It may be resubmitted,
in accordance with article III of the Lex Salicia Iudiciaria, to any
Nova Roman Praetor for adjudication when the exception no longer
applies.

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
Praetor

Given this the 23rd day of February 2759 a.u.c (2006 C.E.) at 6:00
pm Roman time

In the consulship of Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus and Pompeia Minucia
Tiberia
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42152 From: darren_pile Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: 90 days for provisional citizens
I understand the reasons, but surely having to wait a quarter of a
year is a bit excessive? I agree there should a period between
application and admittance, but wouldn't a month be better than
three?





--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "CN•EQVIT•MARINVS \(Gnaeus
Equitius Marinus\)" <gawne@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Gai Livi,
>
> > Just a quick question; why is there a 90 day between being
> > accepted as a provisional citizen and becoming a full citizen of
> > Nova Roma?
>
> Because I wrote the law that way. In the past we've had a big
problem with
> new people joining Nova Roma shortly before elections and voting
with very
> little knowledge of the issues.
>
> > By enforcing a 90 day cooling off
> > period provisional citizens are forced to sit on the side lines
> > becoming more and more disillusioned, irritated (and even
leaving)
> > at being unable to contribute to Nova Roma.
>
> If 90 days is too long to wait, then perhaps they didn't belong
here in the
> first place.
>
> Vale,
>
> CN•EQVIT•MARINVS
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42153 From: kari piessa Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
SALVETE OMNES!

I've followed a recent discussion for few days.
I'm only a provisional citizen but I would like to express
my opinion, not about the matter in question in itself,
but the way it has been conducted. Marca Hortensia Maior
wisely said: "we are talking about the real people!"
That's true. So, are we real new roman human beings
or are we some kind of pseudo roman fiction game
where some figures seem to be seeking little personal victories
when lacking politeness?
I know that the matter in question is very serious!
I'm in impartial position. I just wanted to say that at l
east for me the discussion itself would be more serious if
my fellow Romans would treat each other with more polite tone.
I hope not to offend anyone with this appeal of greater politeness in discussions.

Vale et valete!

Gaius Cassius Piso















Matt Hucke <hucke@...> escreveu:


> What does any of this have to do with the fact that the Consul, who
> is a nice guy, has violated the constitution ?

:1,$s/fact/opinion/

Vale, O.

--
hucke@...
http://www.graveyards.com

"The day will come when our silence will be more powerful than the
voices you are throttling today." -- August Spies, 1887


SPONSORED LINKS
Roman empire Ancient history Citizenship test Fall of the roman empire The 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! Acesso Grátis
Internet rápida e grátis. Instale o discador agora!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42154 From: Lucius Equitius Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: History behind the debate
Salvete, Quirites

Where do we begin?

(2753): the old constitution in effect before the Interregnum and the dictatorship of Flavius Vedius Germanicus
http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/constitution_old.html
Article VI: Public Religious Institutions
2. ...Only Citizens of Nova Roma may be members of the public institutions of the Religio Romana, ...
4. The collegium augurum shall be the second-highest ranked of the priestly collegiae. It shall consist of fifteen members (known as augurs), five of whom shall be appointed by the Pontifex Maximus of the collegium pontificum and ten of whom shall be elected by the comitia centuriata. Augurs shall hold their positions for life, with no exceptions.

A contradiction should an Augur resign citizenship.

The Resignation of Germanicus
http://www.novaroma.org/annales/2751/resignat.htm
On the morning of the seventh day before the Ides of September (7 Sep), the Roman world was stunned by an abrupt announcement by one of the consuls, Flavius Vedius Germanicus:
Effective immediately, I am resigning all of my offices (secular and sacred), my membership in the Senate, and my Citizenship in Nova Roma.
F Vedius resigns, but still a contradiction should anyone else take issue with his own expressed wishes that he resigned "all my offices (secular and sacred),"

I don't recall the exact date the he returned to Nova Roma, but I do recall that he did not resume a position as Augur then. As I have stated, F Vedius gave as a rational for his first resignation as an epiphany from his Germanic Gods to leave the Roman Gods.

http://www.novaroma.org/annales/2751/religion.htm
Religion and the Republic
On the third day before the Nones of November, after an absence of two months, Fvavius Vedius Germanicus announced his return and offered an explanation of his actions:

Simply put, the night before my fateful announcement, I underwent a spiritual crisis. Not to put too fine a point on it, but the Religio Romana and the Gods and Goddesses of Rome were forever closed to me. Up until that time, the Religio Romana was central to my involvement with Nova Roma (which, of course, had originally been conceived by Cassius and myself as a purely religious organization). Because of these extremely close ties (in my own mind), I thought the best thing would be to make a clean break, and thus I not only left my religious positions and offices, but secular as well.
These are his own words, "Simply put, the night before my fateful announcement, I underwent a spiritual crisis. Not to put too fine a point on it, but the Religio Romana and the Gods and Goddesses of Rome were forever closed to me."

Who now will say that he is still an Augur of Nova ROMA?

(2753): the new constitution implemented by dictator Flavius Vedius Germanicus
http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/constitution_new.html
VI. Public Religious Institutions
B. Only Citizens of Nova Roma may be members of the public institutions of the Religio Romana, which shall be organized, and have their responsibilities divided, as follows:
2. The collegium augurum (college of augurs) shall be the second-highest ranked of the priestly collegiae. It shall consist of nine augurs, five from the plebeian order and four from the patrician order. They shall be appointed by the collegium pontificum, and shall hold their offices for life, with no exceptions.

How is that he wrote this, "They shall be appointed by the collegium pontificum," yet appoints himself...all after having said, "but the Religio Romana and the Gods and Goddesses of Rome were forever closed to me."?
Whether or not one finds the Dictatorship legal, or as I point out, Illegal.

Which Forever are we to believe? The "forever closed to me" or the "for life with no exceptions"? I'm saying this with the view of stating the facts. Please excuse me, but I'm having difficulty Not being sarcastic, because F Vedius Germanicus resigned from Nova Roma AGAIN.

Consistent with this is the fact that while he was not a citizen, having resigned twice now, the constitution stipulated repeatedly through it's various amendments that, "Only Citizens of Nova Roma may be members of the public institutions of the Religio Romana,"

When F Vedius Germaicus Re-reapplied for citizenship Nova Roma had gone through, and continues to go through, resignations. Therefore, laws were enacted to attempt to remedy the problems these resignations impose.

When F Vedius Germanicus returned it was under the following conditions,

"Salvete Quirites!

The Censors have decided to allow former citizen Flavius Vedius
Germanicus to re-enter Nova Roma as a Patrician citizen. He will be
allowed to retake his name: Flavius Vedius Germanicus as a tribute to
the work he did as one of the founders of Nova Roma.

But as he have left the Res Publica twice before Lex Cornelia et
Maria de civitate eiuranda
http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2001-05-20-iii.html fully
apply, especially V and VI.
--

Vale

Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Censor, Consularis et Senator"


LEX CORNELIA ET MARIA DE CIVITATE EIVRANDA
http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2001-05-20-iii.html

V. The ex-citizen, in the event that he desires to reacquire citizenship, must apply in the same fashion as any other person desirous of citizenship would, with the exception that he/she is directed to state in his/her application the reasons behind his/her resignation and decision to reverse the resignation and come back. His/her Roman name may be resumed if no other citizen of Nova Roma has taken it up in his/her absence. No public offices, titles or century points carry over to the returning citizen, with the exception of any religious titles and corresponding century points **that may be specified by the Collegium Pontificum.** Senatorial status may be resumed at the discretion of both the Senate and of the censores collegially. Gens affiliation in all instances remains at the discretion of the pater or materfamilias.


VI. If a citizen resigns, is subsequently reinstated, and resigns a second time, that ex-citizen is barred for two years from reinstatement. Such a citizen is furthermore barred from running for any elected public office for two years following re-admission, with no recourse.

Nota Bene: "Senatorial status may be resumed at the discretion of both the Senate and of the censores collegially."
F Vedius Germaicus was readmitted to the Senate without Senate approval. The Censores doing this on their own. If I'm wrong show me the vote that was taken.
I do not oppose F Vedius' senate seat, but the law was ignored.
I'm becoming very upset at the slipshod manner in which Nova Roma is being administered. One would think that with all the Assistants required and given (a Cohors), and the law being quoted in the readmittance announcement, 'somebody would know that anybody would' see to it.

Again, I do not oppose F Vedius a Senate seat.

He then petitioned the College for reinstatement, which was not given by the College Pontificum, as required by the Constitution and the LEX CORNELIA ET MARIA DE CIVITATE EIVRANDA.

The Constitution has been consistent in it's last two versions.
a.. The Constitution of Nova Roma
includes amendments passed in 2757
http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/constitution.html
(2757): reflects the Constitution prior to Amendments adopted in Oct 2757
http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/constitutionoct57.html
VI. Public Religious Institutions
B. Only Citizens of Nova Roma may be members of the public institutions of the Religio Romana, which shall be organized, and have their responsibilities divided, as follows:
2. The Collegium Augurum (College of Augurs) shall be the second-highest ranked of the priestly Collegia. The eldest member of the Collegium shall be the Magister Collegii. The Collegium Augurm shall consist of nine Augurs, five from the Plebeian order and four from the Patrician order. They shall be appointed by the Collegium Pontificum, and shall hold their offices for life, excepting in cases of resignation of office, resignation of citizenship, or loss of Assiduus citizenship by process of law. Resignation of office or citizenship by an Augur must be made in writing to the Pontifex Maximus and the Magister Collegii; the Pontifex Maximus and Magister Collegii shall be informed in writing of any process of law by which such an Augur has lost citizenship. Augurs who have resigned their office, resigned their citizenship, or have lost their citizenship by process of law shall remain sacer in their persons but may exercise no augural powers or functions, nor shall they be accounted members of the Collegium Augurum.

Nota Bene: IV.B.2."The eldest member of the Collegium shall be the Magister Collegii." (this is attested by Cicero, who often mentions the esteem in which the elderly are held in his writings)
That is L Equitius Cincinnatus Augur b. MMDCCVIII


Nowhere is a Consul given authority over religious matters. Any lex giving a consul more power is no more powerful than other leges, and certainly not more powerful than the Constitution. Any law giving civil magistrates religious authority would be unConstitutional.


2. Consul. Two consuls shall be elected annually by the comitia centuriata to serve a term lasting one year. They shall have the following honors, powers, and obligations:
1.. To hold Imperium and have the honor of being preceded by twelve lictors;
2.. To issue those edicta (edicts) necessary to engage in those tasks which advance the mission and function of Nova Roma (such edicts being binding upon themselves as well as others);
3.. To call the Senate, the comitia centuriata, and the comitia populi tributa to order;
4.. To pronounce intercessio (intercession; a veto) against another consul or magistrate of lesser authority;
5.. To appoint accensi (personal assistants) to assist with administrative and other tasks, as they shall see fit.
I've tried to keep my own words from interfering and let the facts speak for themselves, but I do have my own thoughts on matters.
A man's word is his bond.
Say what you mean, and mean what you say.

Di nos ament

Valete,
Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus Augur
Senator Censorius et Consularis
Pontifex et Flamen Martialis
Magister Collegii Auguri
Lictor, Founder Gens Equitia

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42155 From: gaiuspopilliuslaenas Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: History behind the debate
Gaius Popillius Laenas Quiritibus salutem plurimam dicit,

I am no longer a sitting magistrate, but I feel the need to speak on
this subject.

It is clear from the information posted by Lucius Equitius
Cincinnatus Augur that the Consul's edict is in error and certainly
against the spirit of all of our Constitutions, current and past.

I have no problem with Flavius Vedius Germanicus being either a
Senator or Augur. I have had cordial relations with him and I
generally agree with his positions.

It is true the Senate did not vote on his readmittance to that body,
but if we do he has my vote. I call on the Consuls to put the item
on our next agenda.

However, the law must rule. It is clear that the spirit of all of
our Constitutions is that the College of Pontiffs to control all
matters of the Religio.

I call on:

- Consul Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus to withdraw his edict.

- The College of Pontiffs to consider Flavius Vedius Germanicus
for Augur (assuming Flavius Vedius wants to be appointed).

- The Tribunes to enforce the SPIRIT of the Constitution where
the LETTER(s) is/are contradictory/confusing.

- All quirites to put politics and personalities aside for the
good of the Republic.

Valete.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42156 From: Q. Caecilius Metellus Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: Digest Number 2349
Q. Metellus Domitio Constantino Fusco salutem dicit.

I only want to comment on one thing here.

Quoting you:

> b) if, as it seem more and more probable, this is an act ina broader
> political agenda and a push of a minority of the CP to impose its will
> almost manu militari on the majority of the Collegium...

At this point, it's not quite accurate to claim the minority/majority
yet. Unless I've missed something, only C. Buteo himself, M. Cassius,
L. Cincinnatus Augur, C. Scaurus, and Q. Fabius have commented on the
issue. That still leaves the other half of the pontiffs (M. Antonius,
L. Sicinius, Cn. Astur, C. Hadrianus Felix, and Q. Metellus Pius)
without comment. It would be more correct, perhaps, to claim a
majority/minority of those who have commented.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42157 From: CN•EQVIT•MARINVS (Gnaeus Equitius Mari Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: History behind the debate
Salve Luci Equiti, et salvete quirites,

Lucius Equitius <vergil96@...> writes:

> Nota Bene: "Senatorial status may be resumed at the discretion of both the
> Senate and of the censores collegially."
> F Vedius Germaicus was readmitted to the Senate without Senate approval.

The Lex Popillia de Senatoribus superseded the provision quoted above. It is
the most recent authority governing the appointment of senators.

> The Censores doing this on their own. If I'm wrong show me the vote that
> was taken.

The vote was taken among the populus back in December to adopt the Lex
Popillia de Senatoribus.

Vale, et valete,

CN•EQVIT•MARINVS
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42158 From: gaiuspopilliuslaenas Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: History behind the debate
Salve Gnae Equiti et salvete omnes,

I am not intending to get into any kind of squabble, but I am not
sure the Lex Popillia would apply to the status of a resigned Senate
seat which is mentioned specifically by the Lex quoted by
Cincinnatus.

Also, if the lex Senatoria was in effect when the most recent slate
of Senators was appointed, why is the Senate total at 38 members
when the Lex popillia limits it to 36?

Valete,

Laenas

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "CN•EQVIT•MARINVS \(Gnaeus
Equitius Marinus\)" <gawne@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Luci Equiti, et salvete quirites,
>
> Lucius Equitius <vergil96@...> writes:
>
> > Nota Bene: "Senatorial status may be resumed at the discretion
of both the
> > Senate and of the censores collegially."
> > F Vedius Germaicus was readmitted to the Senate without Senate
approval.
>
> The Lex Popillia de Senatoribus superseded the provision quoted
above. It is
> the most recent authority governing the appointment of senators.
>
> > The Censores doing this on their own. If I'm wrong show me the
vote that
> > was taken.
>
> The vote was taken among the populus back in December to adopt the
Lex
> Popillia de Senatoribus.
>
> Vale, et valete,
>
> CN•EQVIT•MARINVS
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42159 From: Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: 90 days for provisional citizens
Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus S.P.D.

90 days is not that much time, I'm going to have to agree with the
censor on this. If Nova Roma is something that people are interested
in they 90 days will seem like nothing. Additionally, provisional
citizens can still participate in real world activities and the
various e-mail lists.

Valete:

Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus

On 2/23/06, darren_pile <devon199@...> wrote:
> I understand the reasons, but surely having to wait a quarter of a
> year is a bit excessive? I agree there should a period between
> application and admittance, but wouldn't a month be better than
> three?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42160 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: History behind the debate
Thank you for that email Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus Augur!

Salvete all,

What I would like to know is why the Consul Fabius Modianus is even bothering to push this for a guy
who has quit NR twice seemingly because it was in conflict with his worship of other Gods. And am I
mistaken, or isn't Vedius the guy that deleted the NR Main List in the spring of 2002 because he was
pissed off? It was called novaroma@yahoogroups.com) back then, no?

Ok, what is really going on here? I find it hard to believe that this is about Vedius at all. I
can't believe that anyone would go out on a limb for a guy who quit twice, renounced the Gods and
deleted the main list. I can only believe that this Vedius issue is a cover for something else. This
seems to be a power struggle in the CP because Consul Modianus may have wrote the edict as a Consul,
but he is an Augur as well.

Vale,
Diana Octavia
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42161 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Salve Quintus Sertonius,

<The way it looks, once in power you do what
> you like as long as you have high magisterial friends to say it's OK...

Maybe we should have less laws to make it easier for our magistrates to learn them.

It seems whenever the law isn't followed, there are people who chime in that "it's good for the
Republic so why are you making a big deal". And what is good for the Republic is a matter of
opinion, and I for one think that it is BAD for the Republis when the laws aren't followed.

I've decided that since I'm the only citizen living in Tongeren-- and no one cares anyway since
there's just a handful of aboriginals living there-- I'm making it my own private province and
changing the name to Dianaville. Hey, it's good for the Republic!

Vale,
Diana
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42162 From: rysullivan Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Maxentius palace found
TITUS LICIUS CRASSUS CIVIBUS S.P.D.

As a diversion from the current, sometimes heated, debate, I thought you
all might find this of some interest:

http://www.insidedenver.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_4462757,00\
.html
<http://www.insidedenver.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_4462757,0\
0.html>


valete,

Crassus



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42163 From: CN•EQVIT•MARINVS (Gnaeus Equitius Mari Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: History behind the debate
Salve Gai Popilli,

> I am not intending to get into any kind of squabble, but I am not
> sure the Lex Popillia would apply to the status of a resigned Senate
> seat which is mentioned specifically by the Lex quoted by
> Cincinnatus.

Since the Lex Popillia has not yet been added to the tabularium, I had to dig
out my own copy of the lex as voted upon. It does not explicitly state that
it is superseding the Lex Cornelia et Maria's provisions, but it does state
that the censores may sublect any dictatorius (former dictator) without
making any provision anywhere for citizens who've resigned since serving as
dictator. Following the principle of Roman law that if two leges conflict
the one passed more recently prevails, I'd say the Lex Popillia prevails. In
any case no objections were raised at the time of the appointment.

> Also, if the lex Senatoria was in effect when the most recent slate
> of Senators was appointed, why is the Senate total at 38 members
> when the Lex popillia limits it to 36?

Because according to the Lex Popillia current magistrates don't count against
the total number of senators.

Now it's worth noting that when Censor Quintilianus and I posted the edictum
listing new senate appointments late on 31 December, the voting results for
the Lex Popillia were not yet known, and while we felt sure that it had
passed, we couldn't be absolutely sure. We had an edictum prepared which
would have appointed senators according to the Lex Popillia, but had to
rewrite it late on the afternoon of the 31st to remove the references to the
Lex Popillia and replace them with references to the Lex Vedia Senatoria and
the Lex Octavia Senatoria. We also had to explicitly list all of the newly
elected praetors and consuls and censor Hadrianus as senators.

Vale,

CN•EQVIT•MARINVS
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42164 From: Timothy P. Gallagher Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: A Senate vote is required
Salve Censor Gnaeus Equitius Marinus et al

According to the edict you issued the new Senators were announced on
31st day of December 2005. The authority for the appointments you
cited were the Legis Vediae Senatoriae, the Legis Arminiae
Senatoriae and the constitution.

The Lex Popillia de Senatoribus was not yet in effect.

A Senate vote is required.

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
Praetor




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

Ex Officio

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

EDICTVM CENSORIVM DE ADLEGENDIS SENATORIBVS

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Gaius Minucius Hadrianus Felix (CENSOR elect)

Gaius Fabius Buteo Quintilianus (CONSUL elect)

Tiberius Octavius Pius Ahenobarbus (PRAETOR elect)

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus (PRAETOR elect)

Flavius Vedius Germanicus (DICTATOR: 1999-07-04 to 1999-08-01 CENSOR:
1998-03-01 to 1998-09-07 and 1999-07-05 to 2000-03-02 CONSUL: 1998-
03-01
to 1998-09-07 and 2001-01-01 to 2001-12-31 PROCONSUL: 1998-03-01 to
1998-09-07 and 1999-07-05 to 2001-11-05)

Gaius Minucius Hadrianus Felix (PROPRAETOR: 2003-01-01 to 2004-03-12)

Marcus Bianchius Antonius (PROPRAETOR: 2002-07-03 to 2005-10-17)

Caius Curius Saturnius (PROPRAETOR: 2005-04-01 to current )

Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia (PROPRAETOR: 2005-04-01 to current )

Sextus Apollonius Scipio (PROPRAETOR: 2002-07-03 to 2004-03-12, and
2005-04-01 to current )

Quintus Suetonius Paulinus (PROPRAETOR: 2004-03-12 to current )

Lucius Minicius Sceptius (PROPRAETOR: 2004-03-12 to 2004-12-21)

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

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

V. Lucius Sicinius Drusus Albo Senatorum/Senatorio movetur.

V. Lucius Sicinius Drusus is hereby removed from the Album
Senatorium.

Datum sub manibus nostris pridie Kal. IANVARIAS MMDCCLVIII a.u.c.

Given under our hands this 31st day of December 2005 CE

Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Gnaeus Equitius Marinus

Censores, Novae Romae






--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "CN•EQVIT•MARINVS \(Gnaeus
Equitius Marinus\)" <gawne@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Luci Equiti, et salvete quirites,
>
> Lucius Equitius <vergil96@...> writes:
>
> > Nota Bene: "Senatorial status may be resumed at the discretion
of both the
> > Senate and of the censores collegially."
> > F Vedius Germaicus was readmitted to the Senate without Senate
approval.
>
> The Lex Popillia de Senatoribus superseded the provision quoted
above. It is
> the most recent authority governing the appointment of senators.
>
> > The Censores doing this on their own. If I'm wrong show me the
vote that
> > was taken.
>
> The vote was taken among the populus back in December to adopt the
Lex
> Popillia de Senatoribus.
>
> Vale, et valete,
>
> CN•EQVIT•MARINVS
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42165 From: Flavius Vedius Germanicus Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: On the current issue
Salvete, Omnes,

First of all, I would like to extend my heartfelt appreciation to our
good Senior Consul for acting on my behalf, in regards to reclaiming my
place as a member of the Collegium Augurum. That he has enough respect
for the laws of Nova Roma to take such a stand over an arcane point of
law speaks to his credit.

I have always maintained that the question of my membership in the
Collegium Augurum is a matter of law, not of decreta. That is, it deals
specifically with the application of the Lex Equitia Galeria de Legibus
Ex Post Factis. Such an interpretation of law is clearly a matter to be
decided amongst the elected magistrates.

That being said, it most certainly is an issue which impacts the purview
of the Collegium Pontificum, which has the responsibility for handling
the membership of the Collegium Augurum. It is therefrom that the
*impression* (and it cannot be stressed enough that it is only an
impression, and not a reality) that the Consul is seeking to infringe on
the rights of the Collegium Pontificum arises.

Specifically, the problem arises from the fact that the Collegium
Pontificum's purview is ensured by our Constitution, which as a document
is under the control of the Comitiae and the Senate, given their power
to make changes thereto. In fact, it was precisely just such a change
that lies at the heart of the current issue; it was made by the Comitia,
ratified by the Senate, and has had the unexpected result of impacting
the Pontiffs.

I know it's involved, and I apologize to those not versed in the arcana
of Nova Roma's Constitution and laws, but I think that's it in a
nutshell. The realm of the priests was intruded upon quite
unintentionally by the Constitutional change, and that fact was brought
to light by the current Consul's attempt to enforce the full
ramifications of that change, and they resent the intrusion. Let us not
go overboard in the assertion of fell motives on either side; that will
do no one any good.

I would say that, given this dichotomy, the solution is clear.

Let the Collegium Pontificum enact a decretum aimed not at my specific
situation, but rather which addresses the broader issue, which is that
the above-mentioned change to the Constitution has brought about, as an
unintended side effect, the fact that certain former members of the
Collegium Augurum would be elligible for reinstatement should they
return to Citizenship. I would suggest to our good and ever-hardworking
Pontiffs, something along the lines of:

"Those members of the Collegium Augurum who are deemed emeritus by
virtue of having lost or resigned their Citizenship prior to October 15,
2757* shall hereby be accorded full membership in the Collegium Augurum
should they regain their Citizenship according to those procedures as
shall have been stipulated by law, with no lapse in their membership,
inasmuch as the Augurship was a lifetime position at the time of their
induction into the Collegium Pontificum. This provision shall not apply
to those who lose or resign their citizenship after that date."

In this way, the general legal principle would be acknowledged by the
Collegium Pontificum, but they would also retain a measure of
empowerment over its application over those functions which are accorded
it by the Constitution. In addition, the issue would be raised from it's
current level, wherein some have unfortunately sought to bring
personalities and personal grudges into the discussion, to a higher
plane wherein such base tactics will, hopefully, find no fertile ground.

I offer this suggestion in the best interests of regaining the amity to
which Nova Roma should strive. Let us move on to more productive pursuits.

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus
Pater Patriae
Senator

* That is the date the change to the Constitution took effect.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42166 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: On the current issue
Salve Germanice.

Arcane? There is nothing mysterious about:

"Only Citizens of Nova Roma may be members of the public institutions
of the Religio Romana"

Your suggestion unfortunately will not succeed, given the above
(Section VI.B). As a result of Section I.B and the limitations of
VI.B.2.a.ii Any decretum would be in conflict with VI.B and
VI.B.2.a.ii only permits a decretum priority over a law passed in the
Comitia or a Senatus consultum, not the Constitution itself.

This also appears somewhat complicated now by the indication you
resigned all secular and sacred offices. Even if one ignores the
obvious consequences of:

"Only Citizens of Nova Roma may be members of the public institutions
of the Religio Romana"

and concentrates only on VI.B.2, I think even those that cleave to
this notion that you always have been an Augur would have a hard time
justifying how Nova Roman law could compel someone to remain an
Augur, as a non-citizen (who cannot hold religious office) when
clearly they resigned ALL offices, secular AND sacred, but then again
I expect some inventive process will be discovered.

As to the rest of your post, I regret I can find nothing that speaks
to the credit of the Senior Consul who has abrogated powers to
himself he doesn't have and violated his oath to protect the
Constitution in the process.

Also as his Accensus, you don't exactly occupy an impartial position,
(without even considering the reason for this edict) and thus I fear
your impression maybe focused through somewhat rose-tinted glasses.

Vale
Caesar

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Flavius Vedius Germanicus
<germanicus@...> wrote:
>
> Salvete, Omnes,
>
> First of all, I would like to extend my heartfelt appreciation to
our
> good Senior Consul for acting on my behalf, in regards to
reclaiming my
> place as a member of the Collegium Augurum. That he has enough
respect
> for the laws of Nova Roma to take such a stand over an arcane point
of
> law speaks to his credit.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42167 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: a.d. VII Kal. Mar.
OSD C. Equitius Cato

Salvete omnes!

Hodie est ante diem VII Kalendas Martias; haec dies nefastus publicus est.

"When night has passed, let the god be celebrated
With customary honour, who separates the fields with his sign.
Terminus, whether a stone or a stump buried in the earth,
You have been a god since ancient times.
You are crowned from either side by two landowners,
Who bring two garlands and two cakes in offering.
An altar's made: here the farmer's wife herself
Brings coals from the warm hearth on a broken pot.
The old man cuts wood and piles the logs with skill,
And works at setting branches in the solid earth.
Then he nurses the first flames with dry bark,
While a boy stands by and holds the wide basket.
When he's thrown grain three times into the fire
The little daughter offers the sliced honeycombs.
Others carry wine: part of each is offered to the flames:
The crowd, dressed in white, watch silently.
Terminus, at the boundary, is sprinkled with lamb's blood,
And doesn't grumble when a sucking pig is granted him.
Neighbours gather sincerely, and hold a feast,
And sing your praises, sacred Terminus:
`You set bounds to peoples, cities, great kingdoms:
Without you every field would be disputed.
You curry no favour: you aren't bribed with gold,
Guarding the land entrusted to you in good faith.
If you'd once marked the bounds of Thyrean lands,
Three hundred men would not have died,
Nor Othryades' name be seen on the pile of weapons.
O how he made his fatherland bleed!
What happened when the new Capitol was built?
The whole throng of gods yielded to Jupiter and made room:
But as the ancients tell, Terminus remained in the shrine
Where he was found, and shares the temple with great Jupiter.
Even now there's a small hole in the temple roof,
So he can see nothing above him but stars.
Since then, Terminus, you've not been free to wander:
Stay there, in the place where you've been put,
And yield not an inch to your neighbour's prayers,
Lest you seem to set men above Jupiter:
And whether they beat you with rakes, or ploughshares,
Call out: "This is your field, and that is his!"'
There's a track that takes people to the Laurentine fields,
The kingdom once sought by Aeneas, the Trojan leader:
The sixth milestone from the City, there, bears witness
To the sacrifice of a sheep's entrails to you, Terminus.
The lands of other races have fixed boundaries:
The extent of the City of Rome and the world is one." - Ovid, Fasti II

Today is the celebration of the Terminalia, in honor of the god
Terminus, who ruled over boundaries. His statue was merely a stone or
post stuck in the ground to distinguish between properties. On the
festival the two owners of adjacent property crowned the statue with
garlands and raised a rude altar, on which they offered up some corn,º
honeycombs, and wine, and sacrificed a lamb. It is the traditional
end of the Roman year. The rites of the Terminalia included
ceremonial renewal and mutual recognition of the boundary stone, the
marker between properties. A garland would be laid on this marker by
all parties to the land so divided. After kindling a fire,
honey-cakes, fruits and wine would be offered and shared, and songs of
praise to the god called Terminus would be sung. Terminus was
considered to have the appearance of stone and was often honored with
the placement of a large stone at the boundaries, much as farmers do
today in various countries. With this feast, the year as a whole comes
to an end, as the Roman new year began traditionally on March 1st.

Valete bene!

Cato



SOURCES

Ovid, Terrminalia
(http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/secondary/SMIGRA*/Terminalia.html)
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42168 From: A. Tullia Scholastica Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: 90 days for provisional citizens
> A. Tullia Scholastica C. Liuio Crasso quiritibus, sociis, peregrinisque bonae
> uoluntatis S.P.D.
>
> Salvete,
>
> Just a quick question; why is there a 90 day between being
> accepted as a provisional citizen and becoming a full citizen of
> Nova Roma? In my opinion, new recruits are at their most
> enthusiastic immediately after joining. As long as any potential
> citizens take the citizenship test, then surely they should be
> allowed immediate full membership? By enforcing a 90 day cooling off
> period provisional citizens are forced to sit on the side lines
> becoming more and more disillusioned, irritated (and even leaving)
> at being unable to contribute to Nova Roma.
>
>
> ATS: In addition to the points raised by Censor Marinus, (uidelicet, that
> this is our law, etc.), it happens that in the past many citizens left after
> about two months following the acquisition of citizenship. Therefore, three
> months were allotted for the novitiate, as it were, so that new citizens would
> demonstrate their seriousness of purpose in being here, and do so not only by
> having an enforced period before being allowed to vote, but also by having a
> test on matters Roman and Noua Roman. Some still think that this is an
> RPG‹and say so on their citizenship applications.
>
> ATS: I should also point out that no one is allowed to serve as a
> magistrate or magistrate¹s assistant until he or she has been here six
> months‹and has paid the tax.
>
> CLC: Also by allowing these new members full citizenship, they
> will be eligible for taxation thus increasing the revenue available
> to Nova Roma.
>
> ATS: Taxes are not required for the entire first year of
> citizenship‹unless one wishes to run for a magistracy or to serve as an
> appointed a magisterial assistant.
>
> What are other people's views on this matter? I'm not
> against a cooling off period but I feel that 90 days is just too
> long.
>
> ATS: No, it isn¹t...delayed gratification is part of adulthood.
>
> G. Livius Crassus
>
> Vale, et ualete,
>
> A. Tullia Scholastica
> Rogatrix
>
>
>
>
>
>
>




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42169 From: M. Lucretius Agricola Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
M. Lucretius Agricola G. Cassio Pisoni S.P.D.

Welcome to Nova Roma.

Great strides have been made in the promotion of civility on the Main
List. I agree that we have not come all the way yet. It is only
through the dedication of individuals such as yourself to the Roman
Virtues that we can have a completely civil, and therefore completely
open forum.

Optime vale




--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, kari piessa <legio_x_equitata@...>
wrote:
>
> SALVETE OMNES!
>
> I've followed a recent discussion for few days.
> I'm only a provisional citizen but I would like to express
> my opinion, not about the matter in question in itself,
> but the way it has been conducted. Marca Hortensia Maior
> wisely said: "we are talking about the real people!"
> That's true. So, are we real new roman human beings
> or are we some kind of pseudo roman fiction game
> where some figures seem to be seeking little personal victories
> when lacking politeness?
> I know that the matter in question is very serious!
> I'm in impartial position. I just wanted to say that at l
> east for me the discussion itself would be more serious if
> my fellow Romans would treat each other with more polite tone.
> I hope not to offend anyone with this appeal of greater politeness
in discussions.
>
> Vale et valete!
>
> Gaius Cassius Piso
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Matt Hucke <hucke@...> escreveu:
>
>
> > What does any of this have to do with the fact that the Consul, who
> > is a nice guy, has violated the constitution ?
>
> :1,$s/fact/opinion/
>
> Vale, O.
>
> --
> hucke@...
> http://www.graveyards.com
>
> "The day will come when our silence will be more powerful than the
> voices you are throttling today." -- August Spies, 1887
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
> Roman empire Ancient history Citizenship test Fall
of the roman empire The 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! Acesso Grátis
> Internet rápida e grátis. Instale o discador agora!
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42170 From: A. Tullia Scholastica Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
> A. Tullia Scholastica C. Cassio Pisoni quiritibus, sociis, peregrinisque bonae
> uoluntatis S.P.D.
>
> SALVETE OMNES!
>
> I've followed a recent discussion for few days.
> I'm only a provisional citizen but I would like to express
> my opinion, not about the matter in question in itself,
> but the way it has been conducted. Marca Hortensia Maior
> wisely said: "we are talking about the real people!"
> That's true. So, are we real new roman human beings
> or are we some kind of pseudo roman fiction game
> where some figures seem to be seeking little personal victories
> when lacking politeness?
> I know that the matter in question is very serious!
> I'm in impartial position. I just wanted to say that at l
> east for me the discussion itself would be more serious if
> my fellow Romans would treat each other with more polite tone.
> I hope not to offend anyone with this appeal of greater politeness in
> discussions.
>
> ATS: I agree with you. However, I would point out that despite the
> heated nature of the discussion on Flauius Vedius Germanicus¹ position as
> augur, the behavior of the contributors to this thread has been considerably
> better than at times in the past, though the gentlemen (note that virtually
> all are of the male persuasion) should perhaps tone things down a bit, if not
> drop the subject pro tempore. Secondly, I should note that M. Octauius
> Germanicus¹ comments copied below may be computerese, not swear words, as he
> is the owner of our NR website¹s server, former webmaster, and resident
> cybernaut.
>
> Vale et valete!
>
> Gaius Cassius Piso
>
> Optime uale et ualete,
>
> A. Tullia Scholastica
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Matt Hucke <hucke@...> escreveu:
>
>
>> > What does any of this have to do with the fact that the Consul, who
>> > is a nice guy, has violated the constitution ?
>
> :1,$s/fact/opinion/
>
> Vale, O.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42171 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Rome in the East
M. Hortensia T. Iulio Quiritibus spd;
Apropos of your remark about our common interest in Eastern
thought, I recommend this fascinating book "Rome in the East" by
Warwick Ball. There is a chapter mind-bogglingly entitled "Romano-
Buddhist Art" ! And a wonderful discussion of the East's influence on
Rome & temple architecture of the various solar cults.
bene vale
M. Hortensia Maior
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42172 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Salve Consul
I must have missed that further edictum.. I had asked some of those
involved and was assured that it was to be placed before the Senate... May
I ask were I can find this corrective edictum?... Also.. The only
connection to the consuls (in my opinion)illegal edictum and what I broth
up, is that it too smacks of a sort of autocratic flaunting of NR's laws ...
Something we all do not want... As to not wanting those islands... Why try
to make them part your provincia in the first place (a couple of years ago),
and the edict them to our provincia (and then unedict them[pardon the pun]),
in one month?!?..
Vale
Quintus Sertorius

From: "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!
> ---Salve Marcus Octavius et Salvete Omnes:
> I relinquished any claim over these lands a couple of weeks ago via
> edictum, a day or so after I took note that this was a problem.
> There is no dispute, other than that which Quintus Sertorius has
> chosen to facticate. And I don't know either, what this has to do
> with the discussion.
> I do not need Baffin Island or Resolution Island as part of my
> provincia. Glad to have them if need be, but such is not essential,
> and hardly worth a dispute, for sure.
> We will likely defer this matter for a Senate decision, for the
> benefit of future propraetores.
> Valete
> Pompeia Minucia Strabo
> Propraetrix et Consul
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42173 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Salve Diana
I like the cut of your jib!!... In fact I have always had my eye on
Greenland for some reason!!.. Then maybe Iceland!!!.. Then the
orld!!!.... };-)
Vale
Quintus Sertorius
"From: "Diana Octavia Aventina"
> Salve Quintus Sertonius,
> Maybe we should have less laws to make it easier for our magistrates to
> learn them.
> It seems whenever the law isn't followed, there are people who chime in
> that "it's good for the
> Republic so why are you making a big deal". And what is good for the
> Republic is a matter of
> opinion, and I for one think that it is BAD for the Republis when the laws
> aren't followed.
> I've decided that since I'm the only citizen living in Tongeren-- and no
> one cares anyway since
> there's just a handful of aboriginals living there-- I'm making it my own
> private province and
> changing the name to Dianaville. Hey, it's good for the Republic!
> Vale,
> Diana"
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42174 From: iulius sabinus Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: Rome in the East
SALVE MARCA HORTENSIA !

Thanks. I'm sure is interesting. Now I'm looking to the Amazon. Hm...an impressive table of content. Lepcis Magna, Petra and Palmyra. Also a few pages about Philip the Arab ( from 245 AC for two years he was on the Danube frontier in war with the free dacians ). A lot of historical places. Sometime I belive the life is sad because in the world are a lot of wonderful historical places to visit, but only a few posibilities. We are lucky with this internet. Through it we are in touch. I hear something from you, you hear something from me....we have the same opinions, or, sometime opposite...but the last one it isn't important, because, I'm sure that somewhere in our deepest, we ALL are in the same cadency.

VALE BENE,
IVL SABINVS


Maior <rory12001@...> wrote:
M. Hortensia T. Iulio Quiritibus spd;
Apropos of your remark about our common interest in Eastern
thought, I recommend this fascinating book "Rome in the East" by
Warwick Ball. There is a chapter mind-bogglingly entitled "Romano-
Buddhist Art" ! And a wonderful discussion of the East's influence on
Rome & temple architecture of the various solar cults.
bene vale
M. Hortensia Maior







SPONSORED LINKS
Roman empire Ancient history Citizenship test Fall of the roman empire The 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.


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







NOVA ROMANI !
Add the new logo and link for the Magna Mater Project support page to your websites.
http://www.dacia-novaroma.org/draft.htm

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





---------------------------------
Relax. Yahoo! Mail virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42175 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-23
Subject: Re: A Consular Ultimatum- Accepting Vedius Germanicus
Salvete Aula Tullia,

> Secondly, I should note that M. Octauius Germanicus¹ comments copied
> below may be computerese, not swear words,

> > :1,$s/fact/opinion/

Exactly right. That's the syntax for the "substitute" command
in the venerable "vi" editor (often referred to fondly as
"vi vi vi, the editor of the beast").

Vale, Octavius.

--
hucke@...
http://www.graveyards.com

"The day will come when our silence will be more powerful than the
voices you are throttling today." -- August Spies, 1887
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42176 From: Mage Allen Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Rome and the East
Salve, Hortensia. Kim here (Homo Indomitus Altuspilosus). I've been
intrigued by your posts about the Romans in the East. I know you meant
a bit farther east than what I'm going to mention, but the east nevertheless.
A couple of weeks ago I had the pleasure of reading (couldn't put it down!)
Aurelian and the Third Century, by Alaric Watson. It's a scholarly read, but
nevertheless very readable. It describes the reunification of the Empire by
Aurelianus, an Empire beset more than usual by tribal inroads, the Gallic
Secessionist State began by the usurpur Postumus, and very importantly,
the odd relationship between the Romans and the city state of Palmyra,
which upon the death of her husband, came to be ruled by a strong woman
named Zenobia. Palmyra was situated in a spot that took advantage of the
trade routes that ran east and west. This is quite an intriguing story, and
I recommend it heartily, Hortensia. And, Hortensia, what is the name of
your podcast again? I'd like to listen. I've been getting into podcasts for
a few weeks now and am amazed at the variety there are among them, and
on all sorts of strange and not so strange topics. Vale, Hortensia! Kim


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42177 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Rome and the East
M. Hortensia Quritibus spd;
I am not replying to this poster as he not only was rude and
disrespectful to his praeceptor at Academia Thules but additionally
was kicked out of Sodalitas Latinitas, and then assumed another
identity thus wasting everyone's time.
Otherwise if anyone wishes to discuss this book or the Roman
East, or the fascinating history of solar cults, I am more than happy
to oblige.
bene valete
M. Hortensia Maior
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42178 From: Lucius Aurelius Severus Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Shocked
Salvete Omnes,

I've been following these "debates" over the Edictum issued by Consul
Modianus, and also the Edictum issued (then nullified) over two
Canadian Islands by Consul Pompeia.

In these threads, I found reference to another Roman group that
Modianus has apparently set up, and in another, a verbal attack on
Toronto.

I'm not one to take sides, but I find these references absolutely
bizarre. What Modianus does in his spare time is his business. As
for a verbal attack on Toronto, what in heaven's name does that have
to do with the issue at hand?

I am absolutely shocked at the lack of virtues displayed here.

My only request - as a citizen of Nova Roma - is that if you have a
point to argue, please stick to it. Attacks on cities and people's
free time are not only unproductive but are just plain confusing and
make me question your dedication to your own point of view and this
micronation. If anyone with these kinds of arguments plans on running
for any other offices, I can assure you, you've lost my vote because
as I see it, you resort to personal attacks when your backs are
against the wall.

Lucius Aurelius Severus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42179 From: Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Quinto Sertorio salutem dicit

The Edictum that Consul Pompeia Minucia Strabo issued is listed below
(your quoted post). You will notice: "Atlanticus Canadiana Region is
hereby officially relinquished of association with Baffin Island and
Resolution Island, said Islands having no association with the
entirety of Canada Orientalis Provincia, said Islands not being an
immediate, integral aspect of provincial livelihood."

Vale:

Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus

On 2/23/06, Nathan Guiboche <nate@...> wrote:
> Salve Consul
> I must have missed that further edictum.. I had asked some of those
> involved and was assured that it was to be placed before the Senate... May
> I ask were I can find this corrective edictum?... Also.. The only
> connection to the consuls (in my opinion)illegal edictum and what I broth
> up, is that it too smacks of a sort of autocratic flaunting of NR's laws ...
> Something we all do not want... As to not wanting those islands... Why try
> to make them part your provincia in the first place (a couple of years ago),
> and the edict them to our provincia (and then unedict them[pardon the pun]),
> in one month?!?..
> Vale
> Quintus Sertorius

---

Pompeia Minucia Strabo Consul Propraetrix Canada Orientalis Quiritibus
Novae Romae S.P.D.


EDICTUM PROPRAETORE CANADA ORIENTALIS PROVINCIA- PROVINCIAL REGIONS,
LEGATE, OFFICIAL LANGUAGES, ARCHIVES II

This edictum is issued to amend the Edictum Propraetore Canada
Orientalis Provincia-Provincial Regions, Legate, Official Languages,
Archives issued Feb. 4 2759 A.V.C. as follows:

A.] Atlanticus Canadiana Region is hereby officially relinquished of
association with Baffin Island and Resolution Island, said Islands
having no association with the entirety of Canada Orientalis
Provincia, said Islands not being an immediate, integral aspect of
provincial livelihood.

B]This edictum commits governorship of said land parcels to Senate
determination, as this august body deems appropriate

C]All other aspects of the edictum of Feb. 4 remain inclusive and are
reprinted below.


D] Legal Processing of Disputes : Prevailing legal policy is pursued
in the establishment of all official policies of Canada Orientalis
Provincia. Every effort is made to mediate misunderstandings by due
lawful process, with the goal of providing acceptable legal and
social outcomes for all parties concerned. Equally, all parties
concerned are encouraged to reciprocate accordingly in finding
desirable solutions, and methods discouraged by legal and social
convention in Nova Roma are also discouraged by Canada Orientalis
Provincial Administration

Particular: While respecting his potestas, Tribune G. Vipsianus
Agrippa is hereby officially reminded that the constitution of Nova
Roma provides him with the option of pronouncing intercessio against
the action of another magistrate which he feels maligns the letter and
spirit of the constitution, subject further to pursuant comitia laws
regarding Tribune intercessio. Said Tribune is -not-, so far that it
can be reasonably determined, constitutionally endowed with the
freedom to employ use of misrepresenting slurs on a Nova Roma
provincial list regarding the motivations of the magistrate issuing an
edictum in question, under the heading *Stolen Land* ,as an acceptable
alternative to his powers of intercessio, in his administration of the
law.
*****

i Canada Orientalis Provincia shall be organized into three Regions as
follows:

ONTARIO REGION
The Canadian province of Ontario and Islands directly above Ontario,
including South Hampton Island.

NOVA GALLIA REGION
The Canadian Province of Quebec

ATLANTICUS CANADIANA REGION
The Canadian Provinces of Newfoundland (including Labrador), New Brunswick,
Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island.

ii LEGATES

Each Region shall have, as available, a Legate appointed by the Propraetrix as a
representative of that Region and an assistant to the Propraetrix. Such
decisions regarding Legate selection shall be at the discretion of the
Propraetrix.

Such Legates shall be citizens of Good Standing of Nova Roma, assidui,
and reside in
the Region they respresent.

iii OFFICIAL LANGUAGES

The official language of Canada Orientalis Provincia is Latin.

The official languages of the Macronation of Canada are English and French.
In keeping with the greater comprehension of English in the majority of Nova
Roma, official edicta and discourses to the populace of Nova Roma regarding
Canada Orientalis shall be made in English.

iv EDICTUM ARCHIVES

This Provincial Edictum, and those subsequent to this, shall be archived by
the Propraetrix, and may be produced at the request of any of the
Magistrates, Senators or populace of Nova Roma by notifying the Propraetrix.

Given Officially by my hand this 6 Feb. 2759 A.V.C. 0924 Roman Time in
the Consulship of G. Fabius Buteo Modianus et Pompeia Minucia Strabo
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42180 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Shocked
Salve Severe.

Anything that calls into question the impartiality of a Tribune of
Nova Roma is a concern - at least to me. If you feel comfortable
with this situation, I do not. The fact that some of the key players
in the push to ram this edict home happen to all be members of the
same organization is also, to me, instructive of the fact that close
ties forged in one environment can spill over into another place,
making independence of action questionable.

As to the issue of the islands, the poster appeared to believe that
the same high handed approach he felt was displayed there was also
displayed here.

Finally, none of us Severe have a vote in this, nor do opinions
count. This action will proceed regardless and it was a clumsy,
heavy handed approach which rode rough shod over the constitution.
What you, I or anyone else thinks doesn't matter, unless of course
it happens to be supportive of the current action.

I am more "shocked" at what was done than having to point out these
connections between key players in this.

Vale
Caesar

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Lucius Aurelius Severus"
<luciusaureliusseverus@...> wrote:
>
> Salvete Omnes,
>
> I've been following these "debates" over the Edictum issued by
Consul
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42181 From: Lucius Aurelius Severus Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Shocked
Salve Caesar,

You Wrote:
>
> Anything that calls into question the impartiality of a Tribune of
> Nova Roma is a concern - at least to me. If you feel comfortable
> with this situation, I do not. The fact that some of the key players
> in the push to ram this edict home happen to all be members of the
> same organization is also, to me, instructive of the fact that close
> ties forged in one environment can spill over into another place,
> making independence of action questionable.
>
> As to the issue of the islands, the poster appeared to believe that
> the same high handed approach he felt was displayed there was also
> displayed here.

LAS: Yes, it is funny how ties forged in one environment can spill
over into another place, and I've noticed that you, Surtonius, and
Agrippa all hail from the same provincia. Perhaps you should consider
your own "independence of action" into question.

>
> Finally, none of us Severe have a vote in this, nor do opinions
> count. This action will proceed regardless and it was a clumsy,
> heavy handed approach which rode rough shod over the constitution.
> What you, I or anyone else thinks doesn't matter, unless of course
> it happens to be supportive of the current action.

LAS: Your opinion. I don't share that opinion.

>
> I am more "shocked" at what was done than having to point out these
> connections between key players in this.

LAS: As shocked as I was when I found the connection between the three
of you, perhaps?

Vale,

Lucius Aurelius Severus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42182 From: A. Tullia Scholastica Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Rome and the East
> A. Tullia Scholastica M. Hortensiae Maiori quiritibus, sociis, peregrinisque
> bonae uoluntatis S.P.D.
>
> M. Hortensia Quritibus spd;
> I am not replying to this poster as he not only was rude and
> disrespectful to his praeceptor at Academia Thules but additionally
> was kicked out of Sodalitas Latinitas, and then assumed another
> identity thus wasting everyone's time.
>
> ATS: Not to mention that he was kicked out a second time under an assumed
> female identity, lied about his praeceptrix‹and has assumed yet another new
> name‹Mage Allen.
>
> Otherwise if anyone wishes to discuss this book or the Roman
> East, or the fascinating history of solar cults, I am more than happy
> to oblige.
> bene valete
> M. Hortensia Maior
>
> Valete.
>
>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42183 From: Domitius Constantinus Fuscus Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Shocked
Salve Lucius Aurelius Severus

Shockingly enough, I bet most, if not all, the people involved in the
dispute are white and yet keep their independance of thought.

Almost as shockingly, I bet they can all read, but that doesn't make them
any more independant.

Now, I will venture in adfirming ther eis a difference between a
geographical connection among people, which is by nature fortuituous, and a
political connection, that is volountary and based on ideas and opinions.

Now, while you associate Gneus Iulius Caesar to others on a matter of
geography and from there you infere a possibility of inter-dependance of
their words. He, on the other hand, associated the two consuls, the Augur
wanna be, several tribunes and other magistrates on the base of being
together in a political group within Nova Roma (that chose, I don't think
casually, as one of the two words for its name "Allegiance") to infere a
interdipendance of their words and actions.

You will forgive me, I hope, if I tend to belive that his point is a tad
more credible than yours, will you not? :)

Vale

DCF

On 2/24/06, Lucius Aurelius Severus <luciusaureliusseverus@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Caesar,
>
> You Wrote:
> >
> > Anything that calls into question the impartiality of a Tribune of
> > Nova Roma is a concern - at least to me. If you feel comfortable
> > with this situation, I do not. The fact that some of the key players
> > in the push to ram this edict home happen to all be members of the
> > same organization is also, to me, instructive of the fact that close
> > ties forged in one environment can spill over into another place,
> > making independence of action questionable.
> >
> > As to the issue of the islands, the poster appeared to believe that
> > the same high handed approach he felt was displayed there was also
> > displayed here.
>
> LAS: Yes, it is funny how ties forged in one environment can spill
> over into another place, and I've noticed that you, Surtonius, and
> Agrippa all hail from the same provincia. Perhaps you should consider
> your own "independence of action" into question.
>
> >
> > Finally, none of us Severe have a vote in this, nor do opinions
> > count. This action will proceed regardless and it was a clumsy,
> > heavy handed approach which rode rough shod over the constitution.
> > What you, I or anyone else thinks doesn't matter, unless of course
> > it happens to be supportive of the current action.
>
> LAS: Your opinion. I don't share that opinion.
>
> >
> > I am more "shocked" at what was done than having to point out these
> > connections between key players in this.
>
> LAS: As shocked as I was when I found the connection between the three
> of you, perhaps?
>
> Vale,
>
> Lucius Aurelius Severus
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42184 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Shocked
Salve Severe.

I think Paulinus has actually supported the edict, so that point is
in error. Neither does that affect my cordial and friendly
relationship with him. Check your facts.

As to being from the same province, well you happen to hail from the
province where the Junior Consul is governor. You also happen to be
procurator, no? Is this not the same Junior Consul who supported
this edict? My, what a surprise you were "shocked".

All of that information is freely and openly available in on the NR
webpage. By contrast the "external" connections between some of the
key movers on this edict doesn't appear to be indexed there.
Shocking ommission obviously.

In cases where one occupies a position of oversight, say for
instance an Ombudsman, and a connection exists that could call your
impartiality into question, it is a the very least common practice
and in other cases mandated by law, for one to remove oneself from
the decision making process or at least declare an "interest" or
connection. That did not occur here. Not a peep uttered, not a word
was said.

Severe, I am no more surprised by your position than I was to
discover that one of the "independent" posters who just happened to
breeze into this forum to give their opinion on this matter turned
out also to be an Accensus of the Senior Consul and a member of this
other organization. The opinion given was, oh lets guess shall
we.....supportive. I was staggered by this, staggered, I tell you.
Well not really. That's politics for you.

Nor am I swayed or intimidated by the loss of votes I may incur by
taking a position in defence of the Constitution, however flawed it
maybe. Somehow I have this little nagging doubt that I would have
ever had your vote anyway.

Nor will I refrain from calling into question circumstances that
reflect on the impartiality of the one office that stands between
the citizens and magisterial abuse of power.

Wrong acts are wrong acts, illegal acts are illegal acts,
unconstitutional acts are unconstitutional acts. These must be
opposed. No attempt at some form of coded clumsy intimidation will
silence me Severe, a message you can take home to your province.

As to the Senior Consul and his spare time, he can occupy his time
building pointy hats out of matchsticks as far as I am concerned. In
fact that maybe a good idea, since it may teach him the patience
that he patently lacked in this matter. I would be happy to donate a
large box of them to keep him occupied. That way the Constitution
and our rights may actually stand a chance of surviving the year
intact.

I'll throw in the glue as well.

Vale
Caesar

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Lucius Aurelius Severus"
<luciusaureliusseverus@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Caesar,
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42185 From: M Arminius Maior Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: A Cousul Annexing portions of another Provincia!!
Salve


In 05/feb., Gubernatrix Pompeia Minucia Strabo issued
an edict, published in the "Nova Roma Announce" list,
under the number 831, including Baffin and Resolution
islands in her province.

In the next day, 06/feb., she issued another edict, in
the same list, under the number 834, excluding the
mentioned islands from their province.

The mentioned islands have a population of around
11.000, none of them being members of Nova Roma.

And I could not see any signs in her willing to
conquer Greenland, and/or the world.


Vale
M. Arminius Maior

--- Nathan Guiboche <nate@...> escreveu:

> Salve Consul
> I must have missed that further edictum.. I had
> asked some of those
> involved and was assured that it was to be placed
> before the Senate... May
> I ask were I can find this corrective edictum?...
> Also.. The only
> connection to the consuls (in my opinion)illegal
> edictum and what I broth
> up, is that it too smacks of a sort of autocratic
> flaunting of NR's laws ...
> Something we all do not want... As to not wanting
> those islands... Why try
> to make them part your provincia in the first place
> (a couple of years ago),
> and the edict them to our provincia (and then
> unedict them[pardon the pun]),
> in one month?!?..
> Vale
> Quintus Sertorius
>
> From: "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: A Cousul Annexing portions
> of another Provincia!
> > ---Salve Marcus Octavius et Salvete Omnes:
> > I relinquished any claim over these lands a couple
> of weeks ago via
> > edictum, a day or so after I took note that this
> was a problem.
> > There is no dispute, other than that which Quintus
> Sertorius has
> > chosen to facticate. And I don't know either,
> what this has to do
> > with the discussion.
> > I do not need Baffin Island or Resolution Island
> as part of my
> > provincia. Glad to have them if need be, but such
> is not essential,
> > and hardly worth a dispute, for sure.
> > We will likely defer this matter for a Senate
> decision, for the
> > benefit of future propraetores.
> > Valete
> > Pompeia Minucia Strabo
> > Propraetrix et Consul









_______________________________________________________
Yahoo! doce lar. Faça do Yahoo! sua homepage.
http://br.yahoo.com/homepageset.html
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42186 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: 90 days for provisional citizens
A. Apollonius C. Livio omnibusque sal.

I think it's important to say, as some others have
already hinted, that there is absolutely nothing to
stop a provisional citizen getting involved in Nova
Roma during those 90 days. He can join and contribute
to almost any of the e-mail lists, he can join most if
not all the sodalitates, and so on. All he can't do is
vote, run for office, &c. So there is plenty of room
for that initial burst of enthusiasm to display
itself.

Having said that, I do think an initial burst of
enthusiasm is not always a good thing. Over many years
Nova Roma has had a problem of inflated statistics on
the number of citizens because of people joining in an
initial burst of enthusiasm and then lapsing into
total inactivity. Keeping people who have newly joined
in a separate category for a reasonably long time
means that we can tell more accurately how many
long-term citizens we have, and it also allows us more
accurately to work out what proportion of people who
fill in the application form eventually go on to
become long-lasting citizens. In short, we know that
some new citizens are going to lose interest quite
quickly, and it's better that they should lose it
before they become full citizens than after.

I can speak from some experience here. Although I
joined before the pobationary period was introduced, I
had a sort of probation of my own. I joined this forum
several months before becoming a citizen, to get to
know the place, and indeed I started to take part in
discussions before even applying for citizenship.
Then, when I did apply, it was at the beginning of the
election season, during which time new citizens are
not admitted; so I then had to wait a month or longer
before my citizenship was approved. I think it did me
a world of good to have this slow introduction: it
meant that by the time I became a full citizen I had a
pretty good understanding of the community and could
get really stuck in.



___________________________________________________________
Win a BlackBerry device from O2 with Yahoo!. Enter now. http://www.yahoo.co.uk/blackberry
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42187 From: M. Lucretius Agricola Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: 90 days for provisional citizens
M. Lucretius Agricola A. Apollonio Cordo Omnibusque sal.

What you describe is known in my field as "legitimate peripheral
participation". You can read about it here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimate_peripheral_participation and
here http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/situated.htm

As you said, there is nothing about the probationary period that
prevents this sort of participation in our community.

optime vale et valete



--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "A. Apollonius Cordus"
<a_apollonius_cordus@...> wrote:
>
> A. Apollonius C. Livio omnibusque sal.
>
> I think it's important to say, as some others have
> already hinted, that there is absolutely nothing to
> stop a provisional citizen getting involved in Nova
> Roma during those 90 days. He can join and contribute
> to almost any of the e-mail lists, he can join most if
> not all the sodalitates, and so on. All he can't do is
> vote, run for office, &c. So there is plenty of room
> for that initial burst of enthusiasm to display
> itself.
>
> Having said that, I do think an initial burst of
> enthusiasm is not always a good thing. Over many years
> Nova Roma has had a problem of inflated statistics on
> the number of citizens because of people joining in an
> initial burst of enthusiasm and then lapsing into
> total inactivity. Keeping people who have newly joined
> in a separate category for a reasonably long time
> means that we can tell more accurately how many
> long-term citizens we have, and it also allows us more
> accurately to work out what proportion of people who
> fill in the application form eventually go on to
> become long-lasting citizens. In short, we know that
> some new citizens are going to lose interest quite
> quickly, and it's better that they should lose it
> before they become full citizens than after.
>
> I can speak from some experience here. Although I
> joined before the pobationary period was introduced, I
> had a sort of probation of my own. I joined this forum
> several months before becoming a citizen, to get to
> know the place, and indeed I started to take part in
> discussions before even applying for citizenship.
> Then, when I did apply, it was at the beginning of the
> election season, during which time new citizens are
> not admitted; so I then had to wait a month or longer
> before my citizenship was approved. I think it did me
> a world of good to have this slow introduction: it
> meant that by the time I became a full citizen I had a
> pretty good understanding of the community and could
> get really stuck in.
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> Win a BlackBerry device from O2 with Yahoo!. Enter now.
http://www.yahoo.co.uk/blackberry
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42188 From: Mage Allen Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Solar Cults
Yes, I've made it a minor obsession along with my huge obsession with
Roman history to study the solar cults. This was a phenomenon all through
their history. Traianus minted several denarii with the reverse portrait of Sol,
stunningly done (as are all Roman coins!). In the late third century, Soli
Invicto was a common reverse, with Sol personified standing in full form.
Aurelian encouraged worship of Sol, which among the legions was not
a rare thing anyway. I could go on and on, but would enjoy hearing others
talk about the Romans (any aspect would do!). I will enjoy also retaking the
Latin class, as the Academia Thules has welcomed me to do so when it
is again offered. I appreciate their spontaneous offer and will accept.
When will another notice go out? Kim


---------------------------------
Brings words and photos together (easily) with
PhotoMail - it's free and works with Yahoo! Mail.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42189 From: Gaius Vipsanius Agrippa Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Shocked
The "verbal attack" was in jest. Sometimes humour doesn't carry over the Internet well. I also believe you may be confusing two people as one. Quintus Sertorius was the original propraetor and a former tribune who had to resign his office due to his commitment with the Canadian Forces. Quintus Suetonius Paulinus is the current propraetor and also currently a tribune.

Gaius Vipsanius Agrippa

Lucius Aurelius Severus <luciusaureliusseverus@...> wrote:
Salvete Omnes,

I've been following these "debates" over the Edictum issued by Consul
Modianus, and also the Edictum issued (then nullified) over two
Canadian Islands by Consul Pompeia.

In these threads, I found reference to another Roman group that
Modianus has apparently set up, and in another, a verbal attack on
Toronto.

I'm not one to take sides, but I find these references absolutely
bizarre. What Modianus does in his spare time is his business. As
for a verbal attack on Toronto, what in heaven's name does that have
to do with the issue at hand?

I am absolutely shocked at the lack of virtues displayed here.

My only request - as a citizen of Nova Roma - is that if you have a
point to argue, please stick to it. Attacks on cities and people's
free time are not only unproductive but are just plain confusing and
make me question your dedication to your own point of view and this
micronation. If anyone with these kinds of arguments plans on running
for any other offices, I can assure you, you've lost my vote because
as I see it, you resort to personal attacks when your backs are
against the wall.

Lucius Aurelius Severus






SPONSORED LINKS
Roman empire Ancient history Citizenship test Fall of the roman empire The 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.


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





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42190 From: daylily218 Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Wahb-Allat
Bizarre name for a post, but historically significant
and along the lines of the thread about Rome and the East.
A bit of a trivia contest to relieve the angst: in light of
my post about Palmyra, Zenobia, and the emperor Aurelianus,
a letter of commendation to anyone who can identify the
person more than merely alluded to in the subject line. Further
mention of your prowess will be made in said letter if the
Roman name of said person is identified. A bonus of a
cybernetically affixed gold star to the letter will be awarded
if the Latin of the reverse of coins minted in said person's
name by Zenobia is posted. This is very relevant to the
thread, also, in that Palmyra was a perfect synthesis of
Roman and Eastern culture, language, architecture, religion,
and even army makeup. I've been fascinated with Palmyra for
aeons (figuratively) and this thread has appealed to that.
Situated as it was right smack twixt Roman territory and Persian,
it was quite an amalgam. Rather sad, too, that Palmyra suffered
the fate it eventually did considering it was instrumental in
staving off Persian inroads into the eastern Empire while it
(the empire) was occupied in the West with barbarian inroads.
Of course, Zenobia bit off far more than she could chew in
presuming to, literally (in invasion) and figuratively (in coinage)
elevate said person alluded to above to almost co-augustus status.
Valete. Kim
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42191 From: CN•EQVIT•MARINVS (Gnaeus Equitius Mari Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Wahb-Allat
> A bit of a trivia contest to relieve the angst: in light of
> my post about Palmyra, Zenobia, and the emperor Aurelianus,
> a letter of commendation to anyone who can identify the
> person more than merely alluded to in the subject line.

Google is your friend.

Wahb-Allat (Roman name Vaballathus) was a Palmyran king. Son of Udhainat II
and Zenobia.

http://www.srr.axbridge.org.uk/chron_tab3.html

CN•EQVIT•MARINVS
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42192 From: Tita Artoria Marcella Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Wahb-Allat
Salve!

Marinus is right, Google is your friend! Hercules was on the coin's reverse.

Vale,
Artoria

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42193 From: Lucius Aurelius Severus Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Shocked
Salve Agrippa,

I did not realize the attack on a city was in jest, in which case, I
offer my apologies to you.

You are quite correct, I was referring to Quintus Sertorius, not
Suetonius Paulinus. Again, my apologies for any confusion.

Vale,

Lucius Aurelius Severus



--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Gaius Vipsanius Agrippa
<canadaoccidentalis@...> wrote:
>
> The "verbal attack" was in jest. Sometimes humour doesn't carry
over the Internet well. I also believe you may be confusing two
people as one. Quintus Sertorius was the original propraetor and a
former tribune who had to resign his office due to his commitment with
the Canadian Forces. Quintus Suetonius Paulinus is the current
propraetor and also currently a tribune.
>
> Gaius Vipsanius Agrippa
>
> Lucius Aurelius Severus <luciusaureliusseverus@...> wrote:
> Salvete Omnes,
>
> I've been following these "debates" over the Edictum issued by Consul
> Modianus, and also the Edictum issued (then nullified) over two
> Canadian Islands by Consul Pompeia.
>
> In these threads, I found reference to another Roman group that
> Modianus has apparently set up, and in another, a verbal attack on
> Toronto.
>
> I'm not one to take sides, but I find these references absolutely
> bizarre. What Modianus does in his spare time is his business. As
> for a verbal attack on Toronto, what in heaven's name does that have
> to do with the issue at hand?
>
> I am absolutely shocked at the lack of virtues displayed here.
>
> My only request - as a citizen of Nova Roma - is that if you have a
> point to argue, please stick to it. Attacks on cities and people's
> free time are not only unproductive but are just plain confusing and
> make me question your dedication to your own point of view and this
> micronation. If anyone with these kinds of arguments plans on running
> for any other offices, I can assure you, you've lost my vote because
> as I see it, you resort to personal attacks when your backs are
> against the wall.
>
> Lucius Aurelius Severus
>
>
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
> Roman empire Ancient history Citizenship test Fall
of the roman empire The 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.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42194 From: daylily218 Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Congratulations, CN EQUIT MARNIUS
Congrats and salutations to the winner of the trivia
contest. Google or not, a fast response and right on
the money. Speaking of money, can anyone identify the
Latin inscription on coins minted by Zenobia in the name
of Vaballathus? I have three of them in my collection.
I will admit, too, that until I'd recently read Aurelian
and the Third Century, I didn't know his birth name. I
knew it only in its Latinized version. Again, kudos to
the winner. P.S. and hint: the coins in question bear
the portraits of Aurelian and Vaballathus, and though
Vaballathus is supposedly on the reverse and has adopted
a less than augustan role in his inscription, these coins
were said to infuriate Aurelian no end. Kim
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42195 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Shocked
Salve
What no apologies for Quintus...
Vale
Quintus Sertorius

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lucius Aurelius Severus" <luciusaureliusseverus@...>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 2:00 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Shocked


> Salve Agrippa,
>
> I did not realize the attack on a city was in jest, in which case, I
> offer my apologies to you.
>
> You are quite correct, I was referring to Quintus Sertorius, not
> Suetonius Paulinus. Again, my apologies for any confusion.
>
> Vale,
>
> Lucius Aurelius Severus
>
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Gaius Vipsanius Agrippa
> <canadaoccidentalis@...> wrote:
>>
>> The "verbal attack" was in jest. Sometimes humour doesn't carry
> over the Internet well. I also believe you may be confusing two
> people as one. Quintus Sertorius was the original propraetor and a
> former tribune who had to resign his office due to his commitment with
> the Canadian Forces. Quintus Suetonius Paulinus is the current
> propraetor and also currently a tribune.
>>
>> Gaius Vipsanius Agrippa
>>
>> Lucius Aurelius Severus <luciusaureliusseverus@...> wrote:
>> Salvete Omnes,
>>
>> I've been following these "debates" over the Edictum issued by Consul
>> Modianus, and also the Edictum issued (then nullified) over two
>> Canadian Islands by Consul Pompeia.
>>
>> In these threads, I found reference to another Roman group that
>> Modianus has apparently set up, and in another, a verbal attack on
>> Toronto.
>>
>> I'm not one to take sides, but I find these references absolutely
>> bizarre. What Modianus does in his spare time is his business. As
>> for a verbal attack on Toronto, what in heaven's name does that have
>> to do with the issue at hand?
>>
>> I am absolutely shocked at the lack of virtues displayed here.
>>
>> My only request - as a citizen of Nova Roma - is that if you have a
>> point to argue, please stick to it. Attacks on cities and people's
>> free time are not only unproductive but are just plain confusing and
>> make me question your dedication to your own point of view and this
>> micronation. If anyone with these kinds of arguments plans on running
>> for any other offices, I can assure you, you've lost my vote because
>> as I see it, you resort to personal attacks when your backs are
>> against the wall.
>>
>> Lucius Aurelius Severus
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> SPONSORED LINKS
>> Roman empire Ancient history Citizenship test Fall
> of the roman empire The 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.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42196 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: Re: Rome in the East
M. Hortensia Quiritibus spd;
The two books now for this area are the Warwick Ball "Rome in
the East" Rougledge, 2000. He is a Near East archelogist & past
director of excavations for the British school in Iraq. The other is
Prof. Fergus Millar "The Roman Near East" Harvard University
Press, 1996. He is prof emeritus at Oxford. I haven't read the
Millar book yet, but I'd read both. It's very important as though
Millar is a classicist, while Ball is a Near East specialist,
fantastic on architecture and material remains & how to read things
like epigraphic remains in context.
The Bryn Mawr review does a good job on distinguishing between
the two books. I admire the Ball book as it is loaded with plates so
when he discusses temple buildings, he shows you with coins, plans,
& pictures.
For the Mithraists, he only spends about 3 pages on the topic,
but he discusses Zoroastrian thought and religious practice, but
he's great about religious influences in the area at the time. It
seems Millar believes that Graeco-Roman influence wiped out the Near
East pre-Hellenic culturs. But Ball to my mind disproves this with
his discussion & picture of temple edifices, city architecture.
Aurelian's temple to the Sun in Rome, which Turcan says had
nothing to do with Elagabalus's solar cult, is purely Eastern in
plan, it is not a Roman temple of Sol Indiges. Ball is good on the
various Baals of the Near East and the differences and internal
syncretism between town people and bedouin who had their own
gods...& of course Hellenism/Rome does enter the mix. So a Baal
associated with Jupiter, then assumes a solar aspect eg: Jupiter
Heliopolitanus, whilst Baal of Emesa is Sol in Rome & they just
might be the same!
I'll stop now, but if anyone has more questions I'm happy to
help. I also have G. Halsberghe's "Cult of Sol Invictus" and
Teixidor "The Pantheon of Palmyra" & Turcan "The Cults of the Roman
Empire". I intend to take out Teixidor's "Pagan Religion.." as it is
about cult in the Near East. You can't really understand solar cults
of Rome without understanding what they meant to those in the Near
East & then see the syncretism.
valete
Marca Hortensia Maior
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42197 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-02-24
Subject: a.d. VI Kal. Mar.
OSD C. Equitius Cato

Salvete omnes!

Hodie est ante diem VI Kalendas Martias; haec dies nefastus est.

"Now I have to tell of the Flight of the King:
The sixth day from the end of the month has that name.
Tarquin the Proud held the last kingship of the Roman people,
A man of injustice, but powerful in might.
He had taken cities, and overthrown others,
And made Gabii his, by base trickery.
For the youngest of his three sons, Sextus, clearly a child
Of Tarquin, entered the midst of his enemies in the still of night.
They drew their swords: he said: `Don't kill the unarmed!
That's what my brother, and father, Tarquin, desire,
He who lacerated my back with a cruel scourge.'
So he could make his plea, he had suffered a beating...

It was night, and the whole house was without light:
He rose, and drew his sword from his gilded scabbard,
And, chaste wife, he entered your bedroom.
As he touched the bed, the king's son said:
`Lucretia I have a blade, and I, a Tarquin, speak!'
She said nothing: she'd no voice or powers of speech
Nor any capability for thought in her whole mind.
But she trembled like a little lamb, caught straying
From the fold, brought low by a wolf's attack.
What could she do? Fight? In battle a woman loses.
Cry out? But the sword in his right hand restrained her...

What she could, she told. The end she suppressed:
She wept, and a blush spread over a wife's cheeks.
Her husband and her father forgave her being forced:
She said: `I deny myself the forgiveness that you grant.'
Then she stabbed herself with a blade she had hidden,
And, all bloodied, fell at her father's feet.
Even then she took care in dying so that she fell
With decency, that was her care even in falling...

Brutus, with a shout,
Gathered the Quirites, and told of the king's evil act.
Tarquin the Proud and his children fled, a consul took up the rule
For the year: That day was the last day of kingship.
Am I wrong, or has the swallow come, herald of the Spring:
Does she not fear lest winter should turn back, return again?
Often, Procne, you'll complain that you've been too swift,
And your husband, Tereus, rejoice in the cold you feel.." - Ovid, Fasti II

Today we celebrate the Regifugium, the king's flight, a festival which
was celebrated by the Romans every year on the 24th of February, and
according to Varro and Ovid held in commemoration of the flight of
king Tarquinius Superbus from Rome --- a story of anger, rape,
suicide, and revenge. Some ancient sources (Cincius and Plutarch, in
paticular) are of opinion that these two days derived their name from
the symbolical flight of the Rex Sacrorum from the comitium; for this
king-priest was generally not allowed to appear in the comitium, which
was destined for the transaction of political matters in which he
could not take part. But on certain days in the year, and certainly on
the two days mentioned above, he had to go to the comitium for the
purpose of offering certain sacrifices, and immediately after he had
performed his functions there, he hastily fled from it; and this
symbolical flight is said to have been called Regifugium.

Valete bene!

Cato




SOURCES

Ovid, Regifugium
(http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/secondary/SMIGRA*/Regifugium.html)
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42198 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-25
Subject: Re: Rome in the East
M. Hortensia omnibus sal;
on the last page of the March-April issue of Harvard Magazine is
a picture of a Han Dynasty clay horse circa 2nd Century C.E. entitled
"Chinese, but with a Roman accent"
The sculpture belongs to the Arthur M. Sackler Museum and the
curator of Chinese art Robert D. Mowry, points out "The bridle sports
five circular medallions, each boasting a human face at its
center." "The number,placement, and decoration of the medallions
accord exactly with Roman convention. The bridle thus stands as
evidence of the early influence from the West that reached China via
the Silk Route."
The horse is in pristine condition; fascinating!
bene valete
M. Hortensia Maior.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42199 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-25
Subject: Re: Rome in the East
Salve
Did this not have connectuions to Crassus' lost legions after the battle of
Carrhae?
Vale
Quintus Sertorius

From: "Maior" <rory12001@...>
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Rome in the East
> M. Hortensia omnibus sal;
> on the last page of the March-April issue of Harvard Magazine is
> a picture of a Han Dynasty clay horse circa 2nd Century C.E. entitled
> "Chinese, but with a Roman accent"
> The sculpture belongs to the Arthur M. Sackler Museum and the
> curator of Chinese art Robert D. Mowry, points out "The bridle sports
> five circular medallions, each boasting a human face at its
> center." "The number,placement, and decoration of the medallions
> accord exactly with Roman convention. The bridle thus stands as
> evidence of the early influence from the West that reached China via
> the Silk Route."
> The horse is in pristine condition; fascinating!
> bene valete
> M. Hortensia Maior.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42200 From: Quintus Suetonius Paulinus (Michael Kell Date: 2006-02-25
Subject: Re: Rome in the East (Battle Of Carrahe)
Salvete Quinte Sertori et omnes,

Looks like it could have;here is a good, quick synopsis of the
Battle Of Carrahae with mention of the Chinese connection from UNVR
History Site:

Battle of Carrhae

-After receiving word from his scouts about the presence of a
Parthian army near Carrhae in 53 BC, Crassus seems to have panicked.
His troops were exhausted and poorly prepared for battle after a
long and fast march through the Mesopotamian desert. He didn't allow
his men to rest or make camp, but instead began to form lines for
battle. Advised by his officer staff to stretch out in classic
formation with the infantry flanked by cavalry, Crassus instead
ordered hollow square formations to allow defense against flanking.
He commanded the middle while his son Publius and another officer,
Cassius, commanded the wings. They advanced toward the smaller and
less impressive Parthian force far too confident.

As they approached with 35,000 men, the Parthian force seemed to be
only about 10,000 men, mainly light horse archers. However, as they
approached, the Parthian commander Surena ordered cavalry positioned
at the rear uncover their concealed armor. The vaunted Parthian
cataphracts were small in number, but their heavy armor was
definitely an impressive and intimidating sight. As the battle
opened a hail of Parthian arrows pinned down the Romans. Crassus
ordered his son Publius to attack the archers with his Gallic
cavalry and a force of infantry. Initially, Publius drove back the
horse archers, but found himself far away from the main Roman body.
The Parthians cut off his force, surrounding it with horse archers
and the cataphracts. Though the Gauls fought bravely and
ferociously, Publius was overwhelmed, and the cataphracts seemed
invincible. Trapped away from his father and the army, Publius
ordered his own death at the hand of one of his men, and the Roman
force was butchered.

Crassus meanwhile got word that his son was in trouble, just as
pressure was diverted from his own lines to that of Publius' force.
Crassus reformed his lines in the traditional Roman style and
ordered a general advance. As this was getting under way however,
the Parthians who had defeated the Gallic cavalry rode in front of
the Romans with the head of Publius on a spear. The Roman advance
was stopped fast by the Parthians, and the already rattled Crassus,
seems to have lost the will to fight. His legates, Cassius and
Octavius ordered a retreat intended to save the army during the
night, desperately leaving the wounded on the field. Remaining
cavalry fled the battle immediately, leaving Crassus without scouts.
They rode first to Carrhae to inform the garrison of the battle and
then hurried on to Zeugma to avoid the disaster that was sure to
come.

In the confusion and desperation of the Roman retreat, as many as
4,000 wounded legionaries were put to the sword as the Parthians
came in pursuit the following morning. Another 4 cohorts had been
separated from the main body and were surrounded and killed, save
for 20 men who were allowed to flee for displaying exceptional
bravery. Crassus and the remaining Roman army reached the relative
safety of Carrhae and probably prepared for a siege. Crassus
however, was still obviously unsettled. Once again a Parthian spy
duped him, this time into fleeing the safety of the town. The spy
led the Romans to inescapable terrain and the Parthian main force
approached. They offered a parlay, including an offer of peace if
Crassus himself joined the negotiation. At first he refused, but the
legionaries, afraid and exhausted, threatened his life if he didn't
accept the offer. At the meeting, the Parthians seized and executed
Crassus and the Roman party, sending the Romans into further
disarray.

In the end, the great bulk of the Roman army was hunted down and
killed or captured. Nearly 20,000 were killed and another 10,000
captured. Of the original force, only about 5,000 men under Cassius,
and the cavalry that departed early, managed to escape. The
Parthians meanwhile, settled the Roman prisoners in an eastern
territory called Sogdia. Interestingly, the Han Chinese later
captured this area and the Roman transplants were likely among the
first westerners to meet the Chinese directly.

The death of Crassus helped signal the end of the triumvirate
between he, Caesar and Pompey, but even if he had lived its doubtful
that civil war wouldn't have erupted eventually anyway. As the
Romans were too pre-occupied with western concerns and the political
turmoil that was about to erupt, the situation with Parthia was
largely ignored for nearly another 30 years. Parthian king Orodes II
ordered the death of Surena shortly thereafter, and the Parthians
did little to press their advantage in eastern Roman territories.
The lost standards of Crassus' lost legions remained in a Parthian
temple Rome's first emperor, Augustus, negotiated their return in 20
BC.-

Regards,

QSP






--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Nathan Guiboche" <nate@...> wrote:
>
> Salve
> Did this not have connectuions to Crassus' lost legions after the
battle of
> Carrhae?
> Vale
> Quintus Sertorius
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42201 From: Nathan Guiboche Date: 2006-02-25
Subject: Re: Rome in the East (Battle Of Carrahe)
Salve QSP
I remember seeing a story some where were there are people in china with
light features that will tell any one that they are decedents of those same
Crassusian legionnaires!! Yes truly amazing..
Vale
Quintus Sertorius

----- Original Message -----
From: "Quintus Suetonius Paulinus (Michael Kelly)" <mjk@...>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 7:33 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Rome in the East (Battle Of Carrahe)


> Salvete Quinte Sertori et omnes,
>
> Looks like it could have;here is a good, quick synopsis of the
> Battle Of Carrahae with mention of the Chinese connection from UNVR
> History Site:
>
> Battle of Carrhae
>
> -After receiving word from his scouts about the presence of a
> Parthian army near Carrhae in 53 BC, Crassus seems to have panicked.
> His troops were exhausted and poorly prepared for battle after a
> long and fast march through the Mesopotamian desert. He didn't allow
> his men to rest or make camp, but instead began to form lines for
> battle. Advised by his officer staff to stretch out in classic
> formation with the infantry flanked by cavalry, Crassus instead
> ordered hollow square formations to allow defense against flanking.
> He commanded the middle while his son Publius and another officer,
> Cassius, commanded the wings. They advanced toward the smaller and
> less impressive Parthian force far too confident.
>
> As they approached with 35,000 men, the Parthian force seemed to be
> only about 10,000 men, mainly light horse archers. However, as they
> approached, the Parthian commander Surena ordered cavalry positioned
> at the rear uncover their concealed armor. The vaunted Parthian
> cataphracts were small in number, but their heavy armor was
> definitely an impressive and intimidating sight. As the battle
> opened a hail of Parthian arrows pinned down the Romans. Crassus
> ordered his son Publius to attack the archers with his Gallic
> cavalry and a force of infantry. Initially, Publius drove back the
> horse archers, but found himself far away from the main Roman body.
> The Parthians cut off his force, surrounding it with horse archers
> and the cataphracts. Though the Gauls fought bravely and
> ferociously, Publius was overwhelmed, and the cataphracts seemed
> invincible. Trapped away from his father and the army, Publius
> ordered his own death at the hand of one of his men, and the Roman
> force was butchered.
>
> Crassus meanwhile got word that his son was in trouble, just as
> pressure was diverted from his own lines to that of Publius' force.
> Crassus reformed his lines in the traditional Roman style and
> ordered a general advance. As this was getting under way however,
> the Parthians who had defeated the Gallic cavalry rode in front of
> the Romans with the head of Publius on a spear. The Roman advance
> was stopped fast by the Parthians, and the already rattled Crassus,
> seems to have lost the will to fight. His legates, Cassius and
> Octavius ordered a retreat intended to save the army during the
> night, desperately leaving the wounded on the field. Remaining
> cavalry fled the battle immediately, leaving Crassus without scouts.
> They rode first to Carrhae to inform the garrison of the battle and
> then hurried on to Zeugma to avoid the disaster that was sure to
> come.
>
> In the confusion and desperation of the Roman retreat, as many as
> 4,000 wounded legionaries were put to the sword as the Parthians
> came in pursuit the following morning. Another 4 cohorts had been
> separated from the main body and were surrounded and killed, save
> for 20 men who were allowed to flee for displaying exceptional
> bravery. Crassus and the remaining Roman army reached the relative
> safety of Carrhae and probably prepared for a siege. Crassus
> however, was still obviously unsettled. Once again a Parthian spy
> duped him, this time into fleeing the safety of the town. The spy
> led the Romans to inescapable terrain and the Parthian main force
> approached. They offered a parlay, including an offer of peace if
> Crassus himself joined the negotiation. At first he refused, but the
> legionaries, afraid and exhausted, threatened his life if he didn't
> accept the offer. At the meeting, the Parthians seized and executed
> Crassus and the Roman party, sending the Romans into further
> disarray.
>
> In the end, the great bulk of the Roman army was hunted down and
> killed or captured. Nearly 20,000 were killed and another 10,000
> captured. Of the original force, only about 5,000 men under Cassius,
> and the cavalry that departed early, managed to escape. The
> Parthians meanwhile, settled the Roman prisoners in an eastern
> territory called Sogdia. Interestingly, the Han Chinese later
> captured this area and the Roman transplants were likely among the
> first westerners to meet the Chinese directly.
>
> The death of Crassus helped signal the end of the triumvirate
> between he, Caesar and Pompey, but even if he had lived its doubtful
> that civil war wouldn't have erupted eventually anyway. As the
> Romans were too pre-occupied with western concerns and the political
> turmoil that was about to erupt, the situation with Parthia was
> largely ignored for nearly another 30 years. Parthian king Orodes II
> ordered the death of Surena shortly thereafter, and the Parthians
> did little to press their advantage in eastern Roman territories.
> The lost standards of Crassus' lost legions remained in a Parthian
> temple Rome's first emperor, Augustus, negotiated their return in 20
> BC.-
>
> Regards,
>
> QSP
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Nathan Guiboche" <nate@...> wrote:
>>
>> Salve
>> Did this not have connectuions to Crassus' lost legions after the
> battle of
>> Carrhae?
>> Vale
>> Quintus Sertorius
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42202 From: Timothy P. Gallagher Date: 2006-02-25
Subject: Rome's six-hundred-year struggle for control of the ancient world
Salve Romans

Here is a great article from MHQ: The Quarterly Journal of Military
History

I read this last year. As the article notes Rome's problems vs
Persia was not years or even decades in duration but lasted six
centuries.

vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus

*********************************************************************
Rome's Persian Mirage

Rome's six-hundred-year struggle for control of the ancient world
was one of the earliest tests of East versus West.

By Barry S. Strauss

Missiles fell on the capital city of Iraq. The invaders were speedy
and destructive. Eventually they compelled surrender, and a Western
army occupied much of the country.

The scene might be drawn from recent headlines, but it comes instead
from the history of ancient Rome. When their empire stretched from
Syria to Britain, only one power could challenge Roman arms on
anything approaching an equal footing: the Persian rulers of the
land that now comprises Iraq. This area, the location of numerous
ancient civilizations, was the heart of a Persian empire that
stretched from modern Pakistan to the Syrian border. The empire's
proud horsemen had ridden out from their ancestral Iranian homeland
during the second century B.C. and established the capital city of
Ctesiphon thirty-five miles from the site of modern Baghdad. During
the following centuries, as they became great empires, Rome and
Persia fought many wars. The Romans, for example, attacked Ctesiphon
more than a half-dozen times, and on five occasions in the second
and third centuries A.D., they took the city by storm.

Roman victories in Iraq were transitory and self-defeating.
Moreover, they were part of a conflict that lasted not for months or
years or even for decades but for more than six centuries. The
quarrel began during the late Roman Republic (133-27 B.C.) and was
handed down from the early Roman Empire (27 B.C.-A.D. 283) to the
late Roman Empire (A.D. 280-476) to the Eastern Roman, or Byzantine,
Empire. Two dynasties, meanwhile, ruled the Persian Empire, the
Parthians (238 B.C.-A.D. 227) and then the Sassanids (A.D. 227-651),
without any diminution in the conflict. On the contrary, the
Sassanids were far more aggressive than their predecessors.

During the centuries-long struggle, border towns and provinces in
the Near East passed back and forth like Alsace-Lorraine or the
Polish Corridor would in nineteenth- and twentieth-century Europe.
Unable to hold on to their gains, conquerors returned home and then
had monuments to their victories carved in bold relief on the sides
of cliffs. For the civilians whose lands the contending armies
passed through, peace was fleeting--sieges, sackings, and
deportations were common. Rarely in the history of human conflict
has a feud such as the one between the empires of Rome and Persia
lasted so long and accomplished so little. The Hundred Years' War
and even Rome's long and epic struggle with Carthage were brief
compared to Rome and Persia's Near Eastern struggle.

Not surprisingly, the names of the Roman commanders involved in the
conflict read like a roll call of the great commanders of ancient
history. Julius Caesar's planned invasion of Iran through Armenia
was cut short by his assassination on the Ides of March in 44 B.C.
Caesar had intended to avenge Marcus Licinius Crassus' disastrous
defeat by Persia near Carrhae (Harran) in 53 B.C. Mark Antony
carried out Caesar's invasion plan in 36 B.C. but without the great
military leader's tactical skill--he lost half his men in the
mountains of northwest Iran and on the harsh winter march home
through Armenia.

Trajan wept when his armies reached the Persian Gulf in A.D. 115
because the great soldier and emperor was too old to continue on to
India. Julian the Apostate was killed in an inglorious rear-guard
action in A.D. 363 during a difficult retreat north after his army
had failed to take Ctesiphon. And Justinian was forced to spend a
fortune on border fortresses and bribes to protect his rear in
Persia while his main armies were conquering Italy, North Africa,
and Spain.

The names on the Persian side are far more obscure, but then Iranian
history is little studied in the West, and the sources of evidence
are not nearly as good as for the Romans. One has merely to glance
at Iranian history, nevertheless, to see that the Persians too had
their Caesars and Trajans. Shapur I "King of Kings," for example,
plundered Antioch and captured Roman Emperor Valerian after crushing
his army in A.D. 260, and Khusro II in 611 penetrated to the
Bosporus, in sight of Constantinople, before a Byzantine
counterattack drove him and his men back to Iraq.

The blow and counterblow of Persian and Roman armies showed no sign
of abating until both Rome and Persia were driven from the Fertile
Crescent by a new power--the Arabs. The Sassanid state collapsed not
long after the Arab victory at the Battle of Qadesiya in Iraq in
637. Byzantium survived but only after losing Syria, Egypt,
Palestine, and northern Africa to the Arabs. The net result of the
age-old Romano-Persian conflict was the Pax Arabica.

Any conflict that lasts for six centuries has a prima facie claim to
inevitability. If the stakes had been small, then the two sides
would not have let the conflict continue. Nor is it difficult to
imagine causes for the war. When two armed empires face each other
across a long border, sparks can fly, and Romans and Persians
confronted each other across a long line running roughly from
Armenia through eastern Asia Minor to modern northern Iraq and
eastern Syria. Sparks indeed did fly, yet the rough balance of power
between the two sides could have allowed an uneasy but peaceful
coexistence between Rome and Persia. Indeed, Emperor Augustus, who
ruled Rome from 31 B.C. to A.D. 14, negotiated just such a peace,
which lasted more or less intact for a century until war again broke
out during the reign of Trajan (98-117). Why, then, did the Roman
and Persian empires pursue a six-centuries-long war against each
other? Did substantive differences and aggressive ambitions feed the
cycle of conflict?

To answer these questions, four stages of the long struggle need to
be examined: the outbreak of war in the first century B.C.,
culminating in Augustus' compromise peace; the renewal of war
following Roman aggression under Trajan in the second century A.D.;
the shift to aggression by Sassanid-ruled Persia and Rome's response
in the second and third centuries A.D.; and, finally, the fruitless
Byzantine-Persian wars of the sixth and seventh centuries A.D. A
paucity of Persian sources and the prevailing Western orientation
probably make it inevitable that the struggle is approached
primarily from the Roman perspective.

By the first century B.C., Romans and Persians, or Parthians, faced
each other at the crossroads of the Near East. Commanded
successively by Lucullus (74-66 B.C.) and Pompey the Great (66-62
B.C.), the Romans had fought their way into Armenia and had annexed
central Anatolia (Asia Minor) as well as Syria. The Parthians of
this era had consolidated their position in what is now northern
Iraq and, along with Rome, intervened in the kaleidoscopic domestic
politics of Armenia.

Both Armenia and northern Mesopotamia were of vital strategic
interest. Ancient Armenia roughly comprised the same area as today's
Armenia plus the easternmost provinces of Turkey. Northern
Mesopotamia was a triangular salient extending from the Euphrates
River in the west to the modern Iran-Iraq border and the Tigris
River beyond in the east; the northern edge of the salient extended
into what is now Turkey.

Armenia is a country of rugged mountains, but it also offers an
excellent east-west invasion route through the Araxes (Aras) River
Valley. If the Romans controlled Armenia, they could take the Araxes
route into Media Atropatene (modern Iranian Azarbayjan) and thence
into the heart of the Iranian plateau. If, on the other hand, the
Persians controlled Armenia, they could march westward into Rome's
Anatolian provinces of Cappadocia or Pontus. By denying the other
side control of Armenia, each power could also greatly reduce the
costs of defense. With a friendly client king in Armenia, for
example, the Romans had no need to station large numbers of forces
in Cappadocia and Pontus. Instead, they could defend those provinces
from the large legionary base in Syria. If the Persians had an ally
on the Armenian throne, they could likewise save money on the
defense of Media Atropatene. The obvious solution, implemented by
Augustus, was to make Armenia a neutral buffer state, open to the
influence of both powers but to the armies of neither.

Northern Mesopotamia was another key strategic gateway, though of
relatively little intrinsic value. Aside from a belt of cities, such
as Edessa (Urfa), Carrhae (Harran), and Nisibis (Nusaybin), most of
northern Mesopotamia consisted of more or less arid rolling steppes.
To the west, however, was the province of Syria, one of the richest
jewels in the Roman imperial crown, an agricultural breadbasket, and
home to the great city of Antioch. With a population of perhaps half
a million, Antioch was a city where caravan merchants from the East
rubbed shoulders with the cream of the Greek intelligentsia and the
backbone of the Roman military and governing class, as well as with
the Syriac speakers of the countryside. Syria was also of great
strategic importance, as it controlled the land route between
Anatolia and Egypt.

Cross the Persian side of the border from northern Mesopotamia,
however, and one entered a region of possibly even greater wealth.
Here, one passed into Mesopotamia proper, the central Tigris-
Euphrates Valley, an area of ancient cities and rich agriculture
supported by vast irrigation projects. It was more sophisticated and
richer than the Persian plateau. It is estimated, for example, that
the Sassanid dynasty derived two-fifths of its wealth from
Mesopotamia. As on the Roman side of the border, most of the
population spoke Syriac. Not the least of the ironies of the Roman-
Persian conflict is linguistic: Very few of the inhabitants of the
lands over which the two sides fought spoke either Latin or Persian.
The prizes then, were clear. On the one side stood Roman Cappadocia,
Pontus, and, above all, Syria; on the other was Persian Mesopotamia.
The border regions of Armenia and northern Mesopotamia were the
places where the two empires met.

Rome's intervention in the Near East was the culmination of four
centuries of conquest that transformed a tiny Italian city-state
into a world empire. During those centuries, the Roman governing
elite developed a distinct style of political and military behavior
in the international arena. The dominant trait was a tendency toward
preventive war against any potentially hostile power. Rome's wars
against Carthage, Macedonia, and the Gauls are examples of conflicts
that conformed to this pattern. Coexistence did not come easily to
Romans.

For centuries, every ambitious young Roman dreamed of winning a
battle and returning home to celebrate a triumph. A triumph was not
merely a victory parade, although the successful general--in a
chariot pulled by white horses and with a laurel wreath on his head--
would ride through the city of Rome to the cheers of the crowd,
accompanied by his troops and with booty and captives on display.
The ostentatious parade was an official recognition by the Roman
Senate that the general had won a major victory and that, in effect,
he was a man to be reckoned with. For many a Roman noble, the
triumphal procession led to the Forum, where political success
began.

In 55 B.C., Marcus Licinius Crassus anticipated following precisely
that road. The ambitious army commander envisioned leading Rome's
eastern legions to victory against Parthia. He would then have
outdone Pompey the Great's deeds in the East and matched Julius
Caesar's current victories in Gaul, both of whom were his rivals in
Rome's First Triumvirate. In addition to fear and glory, a third
time-honored Roman motive for war underlay Crassus' expedition--
greed. Considered by many to be the richest man in Rome (Crassus
once said that no one was wealthy unless he could raise a private
army), Crassus understood this motive well. With the booty of
Mesopotamia to tempt him, and with a glorious triumph in prospect,
he could all but taste the political fruit that his war in the East
would bear.

It did not turn out that way, though. Although Crassus is cited in
some sources as planning an Alexander-style march on India, he
probably intended the less grandiose objective of marching down the
Euphrates Valley to capture Ctesiphon and the rich Greek city of
Seleucia nearby. Victory would permit the expansion of Rome's empire
to include some or all of the land between the Tigris and Euphrates.
Alas, Crassus' campaign was a clear violation of Pompey's earlier
treaty, which set the northwest boundary of the Parthian empire on
the Wadi Balik, leaving the little kingdom of Osroene, between
Parthia and Roman Syria, about sixty miles to the west, independent.

Nor had Parthia done anything to provoke Roman intervention. But
treaties counted for little against glory, fear, and greed. It
could, moreover, be argued that since the Greek-speaking Seleucid
monarchs had once controlled Mesopotamia, the area was a natural
part of the Roman empire. In any case, Crassus expected an easy
victory, since the Parthian army had performed tepidly when last
observed by Rome in Armenia about a dozen years earlier. Crassus
also had plenty of manpower: seven legions, a fighting force of
about thirty thousand men, plus about ten thousand cavalry and light
troops. Unfortunately, he failed as a tactician.

More than sixty years old, Crassus had relatively little war
experience. After desultorily securing friendly towns in Osroene
during his first year in the East (54 B.C.), the next year he made
the unforgivable error of underestimating his enemy by offering
battle on flat plains tailor-made for Parthia's cavalry.

The Parthian forces were led by a brilliant tactician known to us
only as the Suren, that is, first lord of the nobility. Some argue
that he was the hero of later Persian legend, Rustam. The Suren
commanded about ten thousand cavalrymen, specialists in the rapid
desert fighting by which the Parthians made their mark. Some were
cataphracts, that is, mailed heavy cavalrymen armed with spears;
others were light-armed bowmen able to fire in continuous volleys.
These archers were masters of the famous Parthian shot, an arrow
shot by a horseman who pivoted on his mount during retreat.

Together, cataphracts and bowmen could deliver a devastating one-two
punch: After the bowmen had forced the Romans into massing their
ranks defensively, the cataphracts with their thrusting spears would
charge. Rome's response should have been to fight in the hills and
to parry with a very large cavalry force.

The battle, fought about twenty miles south of Carrhae in June 53
B.C., was a disaster, costing the Romans perhaps three-fourths of
the nearly forty thousand men they had committed to the battle,
including legionnaires, cavalrymen, and light-armed troops. Ten
thousand men were captured and deported to central Asia. The eagles
of seven Roman legions ended up in Parthian hands. Carrhae took its
place, alongside Cannae (216 B.C.), the Allia (ca. 390 B.C.), the
Caudine Forks (321 B.C.), and Arausio (105 B.C.), in the select
pantheon of great Roman defeats.

Although he survived the battle, during the Roman retreat a few days
later Crassus was captured and killed. His corpse was mutilated, and
his head is supposed to have made its way to Seleucia, where it was
presented to the Parthian king. So much for Crassus' boast to a
Parthian ambassador that he would dictate terms in Seleucia.
Vengeance now became a leitmotif of Roman policy, and not merely for
psychological reasons, although the Battle of Carrhae and its
aftermath made Parthia's new status as a great power on a par with
Rome all too clear. After Carrhae, Parthia moved its border westward
to the Euphrates, opposite Roman Syria. Meanwhile, farther north,
Armenia defected to the Parthian camp. The security of its empire
required that Rome act. It is therefore small wonder that Mark
Antony, who inherited Julius Caesar's plan of invading Parthia
through the "back door," via Armenia into Media Atropatene,
undertook an eastern expedition in 36 B.C.

Antony's greatest achievement in the East was diplomatic rather than
military. By deftly negotiating a network of client states from
Egypt to Armenia to share the burden of defending Rome's eastern
border, Antony unknowingly laid the foundation for a long-term
diplomatic settlement. A brilliant general who was a seasoned
veteran of foreign and domestic wars, Antony's immediate goal,
however, was victory on the battlefield. After recovering the
legionary standards lost at Carrhae and the Roman prisoners who were
still alive would come the re-establishment of Roman prestige in the
East.

Antony supplied himself with sixteen legions for his eastern
expedition, more than twice the size of Crassus' force, as well as
with cavalry and light-armed troops--a force of eighty thousand men.
He was careful to march through mountainous territory, thereby
denying the Parthian cavalry favorable terrain, and he secured
Armenian help before entering Media. Unfortunately, Antony
underestimated the enemy. He had barely arrived in Media when the
Parthians attacked his siege train and the two legions defending it,
leaving ten thousand Roman soldiers dead. Moreover, his Armenian
ally deserted him.

Despite this setback, like his predecessor Crassus, Antony was
undone mainly by faulty strategy. He concentrated on besieging
cities, but the Parthian strength was their mobile army that lived
off the land. Unable to capture Parthian cities because he had lost
much of his siege equipment and unable to defeat their armies,
Antony was forced to retreat from Media, harassed by the Parthians
every step of the way. By the time he crossed back into Armenia, he
had lost twenty thousand legionnaires, four thousand cavalrymen, and
an undetermined number of light troops. Forced to leave Armenia in
the dead of winter, Antony lost another eight thousand men during
his retreat westward to Syria. Antony's casualties rivaled Crassus'
at Carrhae. Rome was farther than ever from defeating Parthia.
Antony, meanwhile, turned his attention to civil war. His rival was
Julius Caesar's heir and great-nephew, Octavian (63 B.C.-A.D. 14).
The two men's fleets clashed at Actium in 31 B.C., and Octavian
emerged victorious; the defeated Antony committed suicide. Octavian
became sole ruler of the Roman world and, renamed Augustus, was
Rome's first emperor. However grand his position, Augustus was a
practical man with few illusions. He wisely recognized that if
mighty Antony with sixteen legions had failed against Parthia on the
battlefield, he, Augustus, was unlikely to do better. He decided,
therefore, to solve Rome's Parthian problem by using both diplomacy
and force.

In 20 B.C., Augustus took advantage of disorder in Armenia and
Parthia to put on the throne of Armenia a new pro-Roman king, whom
he backed up with an army. With this as a stick and a treaty as a
carrot, Augustus struck a deal with Rome's enemy. Although Persia
had thrashed two huge Roman armies, it too had lost its taste for
war, perhaps because victory had taken its toll of manpower and
finances. In the north, Armenia would be a buffer state between the
two great empires. In the south, Rome recognized the Euphrates
boundary. Parthia, in turn, returned the legionary standards and all
surviving Roman prisoners. Ever the master of public relations,
Augustus declared victory without fighting a war. He even advertised
victory on his coins with slogans like civibus et signis militaribus
a Parthia recuperatis ("citizens and military standards recovered
from Parthia").

In a sense, Augustus' treaty with Parthia was a victory for Rome.
The settlement would last more or less intact for a century. While
there continued to be jockeying back and forth over Armenia,
occasionally with the involvement of troops, the two sides remained
at peace. By not avenging Carrhae on the field of honor, Augustus
dealt Rome's military reputation a setback, regardless of his
attempt to disguise it as a victory. Yet Rome had finally achieved
security in the East at little cost.

The relative tranquility came to an end, however, in A.D. 113, when
Rome changed course, and Emperor Trajan mounted a massive invasion
of Parthian territory. The Parthian king Osroes' deposing a pro-
Roman king in Armenia and installing a Parthian puppet had provoked
the emperor. There had, however, been similar provocations in the
past, which Rome had settled calmly with a small show of force.
Trajan's desire for glory was no doubt a factor, but there seems to
have been method to his marching. During the last generation, Rome
had slowly moved away from the client-kingdom system of border
defense favored by Augustus. Under the new system, client kingdoms
were annexed and made part of a network of forward defenses on
favorable terrain, complete with walls, trenches, highways, and
legions. In the Balkans, Trajan had already conquered the client
kingdom of Dacia (Romania) and made it a Roman province. In the
East, he planned to push the Parthians back east from the Euphrates
and conquer northern Mesopotamia, whose hilly terrain was eminently
defensible. He also annexed Armenia.

The Parthian state, meanwhile, had declined considerably and could
no longer mount an effective opposition to Rome. With at least
eleven legions and other auxiliary troops at his disposal, Trajan
was victorious everywhere, conquering Armenia, cutting through what
is now Iraq, capturing Ctesiphon, and finally reaching the Persian
Gulf. Carrhae had finally been avenged but only temporarily.
Revolts broke out in 116, not only in newly conquered Iraq but
throughout the empire. Trajan was forced to give up most of his
Iraqi and Armenian conquests and to hurry westward. He died en
route, a broken man. His successor Hadrian immediately abandoned the
rest of Trajan's eastern conquests, allowed Armenia to return to its
client-kingdom status, and made peace with Parthia.

Trajan had stretched Rome's resources dangerously thin; Hadrian made
the necessary correction. Unfortunately, Hadrian's realignment had
dealt stability in the East a deathblow. Having shattered Parthia's
post-Carrhae mystique, Trajan opened the door to new Roman
adventurism in Iraq. Romans now invaded the region frequently,
capturing Ctesiphon again in 165 and 198. In 199, the Emperor
Septimius Severus finally got a firm hold on northern Mesopotamia,
where he established a permanent defensive boundary.

Wars, however, often leave unintended consequences. Rome lacked the
power to annex northern Mespotamia, but Roman victories undercut the
prestige of the Parthians, whose collapse was a Pyrrhic victory for
Rome. The new Persian state that emerged under the Sassanid dynasty
in 227 was a far greater threat than its predecessor. (Following the
change of dynasty, the Parthians came to be called Persians.) Where
the Parthians were loosely organized, the Sassanids were
centralized; while the Parthians stood on the defensive, the
Sassanids moved aggressively in hopes of restoring ancient Persian
glory and driving Rome from the Near East; while the Parthian threat
was sporadic, the Sassanids kept up the pressure; while the
Parthians were poor at siegecraft, the Sassanids were skilled in the
technology of siege warfare.

The Sassanids styled themselves "Kings of Kings of Iran and non-
Iran," a sign of their imperial ambitions. Rome had no choice but to
respond to the threat that it had unwittingly created.

A prolonged Sassanid drive on Roman Syria took place during the
third century A.D., when King Shapur I (241-ca. 272) posed the
greatest threat to Rome. Among the great king's early achievements
were driving the Romans from Armenia and extracting a humiliating
ransom of half a million denarii from his foe. Antioch was attacked
repeatedly and plundered in 260, the same year that Shapur crushed a
Roman army at Edessa (Urfa) and captured the emperor Valerian, who
died a Persian prisoner. A Persian Augustus, Shapur vigorously
advertised this coup, most graphically on rock carvings near Shiraz
showing the king on horseback and Valerian kneeling before him.
Shapur deported hordes of Roman prisoners to Iraq and Iran; their
permanent presence contributed greatly to the growing prosperity of
these regions.
Rome, however, recovered, thanks to the heroic exertions of soldier-
emperors like Gallienus and Diocletian, and ended the third century
in a very strong position in the East. The Romans took Ctesiphon
again in 283 and 298 under Emperors Carus and Galerius,
respectively. More important, Galerius crushed a Sassanid army under
King Narses at Ezerum (in Turkish Armenia) in 298. As a result of
this decisive victory, Narses was forced to surrender northern
Mesopotamia and five small provinces east of the Tigris. The Romans
built up the city of Nisibis (Nusaybin) as a fortress guarding their
new frontier.

The fourth century began with a respite for Rome in the East, thanks
both to Galerius' victory and to the construction of a new capital
at Constantinople by Emperor Constantine the Great (312-337). This
city symbolized Rome's commitment to defense against the Sassanids--
a good thing too, for by mid-century, under Shapur II (309-379),
they were again pressuring Rome in northern Mesopotamia, and they
captured several important border towns.

The empire was so hard-pressed by the German tribes in the West that
it could ill afford a major, Trajan-style invasion of Iraq.
Unfortunately, that is precisely what it got under Emperor Julian
(361-363), a brilliant but headstrong man in his thirties who
marched on Ctesiphon in 363. Julian not only failed to take the city
but also made insufficient preparation for his army's eventual
retreat. Short of supplies and harassed by the enemy, Julian's
legions were stopped short when the emperor fell in a minor
skirmish. Julian's successor, Jovian, was forced to surrender
Nisibis and everything that Galerius had won in 298 in order to gain
a safe conduct back to Roman territory. The Sassanids held on to
their new gains for 150 years as both Rome and Persia changed from
ancient to medieval states.

Deprived of its western, Latin-speaking provinces by Germanic
invaders, the Eastern Roman empire, centered on Constantinople,
slowly evolved into the Greek-speaking Byzantine state. Meanwhile,
in sixth-century Persia, society coalesced around the new and
lasting medieval ideal of the courtier-gentleman. In spite of these
changes, the Romano-Persian conflict continued. The decisive factors
of instability, as they had been since the year 227, were Sassanid
aggression and Roman overextension.

After a period of relatively peaceful coexistence for a century or
so after Julian's defeat, the conflict heated up again in the sixth
century under the Sassanid Kavad (488-531) and particularly his son
Khusro I (531-579). Khusro "the Just," as he was later known, was a
great and ambitious administrative and military reformer. The aims
of the Sassanids during sixty years of intermittent fighting (502-
562) were generally less a matter of annexing Roman territory than
of laying siege to major Roman centers (Antioch, for example, which
fell in 540) and thereby winning plunder, prestige, and tribute from
the Byzantine government. The Byzantines had no one but themselves
to blame for this renewed threat.

Justinian (527-565) devoted most of his energy to reconquering
Rome's lost western territory in Italy, Spain, and northern Africa.
In itself this was one of the spurs to Khusro's war. Khusro feared
the threat that a reunified Roman Empire might pose to Persia.
Justinian's efforts in the West forced him to strip the defenses of
the East, an opportunity of which Khusro took advantage. In the end,
the two sides made peace in 562, although the Byzantine Empire was
required to make large annual subsidies to Persia. It was a hollow
peace for Rome. Like Trajan, Justinian had overextended himself. His
successors lost the reconquered western territories in short order,
while Justinian's settlement with Khusro was not backed up by the
military resources it required--resources that had been devoted to
the draining war in the West.


The last act--some might say that it was the most dramatic act of
all--came forty years later. The protagonists were the Sassanid
Khusro II "the Victorious" (590-628) and the Byzantine Heraclius
(610-641). In the face of a succession struggle in Byzantium, Khusro
made a breathtaking sweep from Armenia through Anatolia and Syria
down to Egypt. In effect, he had finally fulfilled the old Sassanid
dream of a Mediterranean empire--only briefly though. Heraclius made
a heroic reorganization of Byzantine defenses and counterattacked.

The culmination was a great defeat of the Sassanid army on the
plains of northern Iraq in 627. Khusro II was murdered a year later.
The epilogue is well-known. At the time of Khusro II's death in 628,
Mohammed was about to return in triumph to Mecca. He and his Arab
armies were the real victors of the exhausting Perso-Byzantine wars.
By the end of the century, they had conquered most of the Byzantine
empire and virtually all of the Sassanid. Most of this territory has
remained Muslim, if not Arab, until the present day.

From Crassus to Augustus to Trajan to Shapur I and Galerius, to
Julian to Khusro I and Justinian, and to Khusro II and Heraclius--
what are the lessons of the seemingly all-but-endless war between
Rome and Persia?

The first, perhaps, is a simple deduction concerning imperial
aggression: Empires often seek security, but sometimes they just
simply seek. The Parthians had done nothing to justify Crassus'
invasion. The Sassanids, for their part, seem to have been less
interested in avenging Roman invasions of Iraq than in acquiring a
larger empire for themselves.

On the other hand, once the Rome-Persia conflict was engaged, it had
a momentum of its own. More than one scholar has come away with the
sense that Romans and Persians continued to fight each other for
centuries because neither one could find another opponent worthy of
their mettle. Neither Rome nor Persia had another great empire on
its immediate border. Romans might fight in Germany, Persians might
fight in Central Asia, but for each side, the Romano-Persian duel
was the main event.

A third point is the paradox of parity. The two powers' relative
equality ensured that the conflict would go on and on. As soon as
one side got the advantage, it tended to press it too far, like
Trajan or Khusro II, and thus allowed the enemy to recoup. There was
a constant cycle of conquest, overextension, and forced
retrenchment.

Augustus had demonstrated that Rome's security dilemma in the East
was soluble through negotiation. The Parthians seemed quite willing
to accept his point. Over time, nevertheless, it came back to war,
as the forces of greed and glory reasserted themselves. First Trajan
and then the Sassanids gave in to the temptation of the battlefield.
Ironically, for all the centuries of conflict, very little land
changed hands. Rome, the civilizer of Europe, barely touched what is
modern Iraq. Persia left little mark on Syria or Anatolia.

Finally, of course, is an example of the irony of war if ever there
was one: The Arabs inherited the energy that the two powers wasted
on the conflict. In the long run, for both Rome and Persia, victory
proved to be little more than a mirage.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42203 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: Rome in the East (Battle Of Carrahe)
Hortensia Paulino Sertorio spd;
I do know from Buddhist history that there was a great deal of
movement from Afghanistan to China bringing texts etc. Kushan was a
hub of activity. Really a bit of modern DNA analysis might help.
optime valete
Marca Hortensia Maior

>
> Salve QSP
> I remember seeing a story some where were there are people in china
with
> light features that will tell any one that they are decedents of
those same
> Crassusian legionnaires!! Yes truly amazing..
> Vale
> Quintus Sertorius
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42204 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: a.d. IV Kal. Mar.
OSD C. Equitius Cato

Salvete omnes!

Hodie est ante diem IV Kalendas Martias; haec dies endotercisus est.

"After the combat between the triplets, the Romans who were then in
the camp buried the slain brothers in a splendid manner in the places
where they had fallen, and having offered to the gods the customary
sacrifices for victory, were passing their time in rejoicings. On the
other side, the Albans were grieving over what had happened and
blaming their leader for bad generalship; and the greatest part of
them spent that night without food and without any other care for
their bodies. The next day the king of the Romans called them to an
assembly and consoled them with many assurances that he would lay no
command upon them that was either dishonourable, grievous or
unbecoming to kinsmen, but that with impartial judgment he would take
thought for what was best and most advantageous for both cities; and
having continued Fufetius, their ruler, in the same office and made no
other change in the government, he led his army home.

After he had celebrated the triumph which the senate had decreed for
him and had entered upon the administration of civil affairs, some
citizens of importance came to him bringing Horatius for trial, on the
ground that because of his slaying of his sister he was not free of
the guilt of shedding a kinsman's blood; and being given a hearing,
they argued at length, citing the laws which forbade the slaying of
anyone without a trial, and recounting instances of the anger of all
the gods against the cities which neglected to punish those who were
polluted. But the father spoke in defence of the youth and blamed his
daughter, declaring that the act was a punishment, not a murder, and
claiming that he himself was the proper judge of the calamities of his
own family, since he was the father of both. And a great deal having
been said on both sides, the king was in great perplexity what
decision to pronounce in the cause. For he did not think it seemly
either to acquit any person of murder who confessed he had put his
sister to death before a trial — and that, too, for an act which the
laws did not concede to be a capital offence — lest by so doing he
should transfer the curse and pollution from the criminal to his own
household, or to punish as a murderer any person who had chosen to
risk his life for his country and had brought her so great power,
especially as he was acquitted of blame by his father, to whom before
all others both nature and the law gave the right of taking vengeance
in the case of his daughter. Not knowing, therefore, how to deal with
the situation, he at last decided it was best to leave the decision to
the people. And the Roman people, becoming upon this occasion judges
for the first time in a cause of a capital nature, sided with the
opinion of the father and acquitted Horatius of the murder.

Nevertheless, the king did not believe that the judgment thus passed
upon Horatius by men was a sufficient atonement to satisfy those who
desired to observe due reverence toward the gods; but sending for the
pontiffs, he ordered them to appease the gods and other divinities and
to purify Horatius with those lustrations with which it was customary
for involuntary homicides to be expiated. The pontiffs erected two
altars, one to Juno, to whom the care of sisters is allotted, and the
other to a certain god or lesser divinity of the country called in
their language Janus, to whom was now added the name Curiatius,
derived from that of the cousins who had been slain by Horatius; and
after they had offered certain sacrifices upon these altars, they
finally, among other expiations, led Horatius under the yoke. It is
customary among the Romans, when enemies deliver up their arms and
submit to their power, to fix two pieces of wood upright in the ground
and fasten a third to the top of them transversely, then to lead the
captives under this structure, and after they have passed through, to
grant them their liberty and leave to return home. This they call a
yoke; and it was the last of the customary expiatory ceremonies used
upon this occasion by those who purified Horatius. The place in the
city where they performed this expiation is regarded by all the Romans
as sacred; it is in the street that leads down from the Carinae as one
goes towards Cuprius Street. Here the altars then erected still
remain, and over them extends a beam which is fixed in each of the
opposite walls; the beam lies over the heads of those who go out of
this street and is called in the Roman tongue "the Sister's Beam."
This place, then, is still preserved in the city as a monument to this
man's misfortune and honoured by the Romans with sacrifices every
year. Another memorial of the bravery he displayed in the combat is
the small corner pillar standing at the entrance to one of the two
porticos in the Forum, upon which were placed the spoils of the three
Alban brothers. The arms, it is true, have disappeared because of the
lapse of time, but the pillar still preserves its name and is called
pila Horatia or "the Horatian Pillar." The Romans also have a law,
enacted in consequence of this episode and observed even to this day,
which confers immortal honour and glory upon these men; it provides
that the parents of triplets shall receive from the public treasury
the cost of rearing them until they are green. With this, the
incidents relating to the family of the Horatii, which showed some
remarkable and unexpected reversals of fortune, came to an end." -
Dionysius of Halicarnassus 3.22

"Their decision was mainly influenced by Publius Horatius, the father,
who declared that his daughter had been justly slain; had it not been
so, he would have exerted his authority as a father in punishing his
son. Then he implored them not to bereave of all his children the man
whom they had so lately seen surrounded with such noble offspring.
Whilst saying this he embraced his son, and then, pointing to the
spoils of the Curiatii suspended on the spot now called the Pila
Horatia, he said: "Can you bear, Quirites, to see bound, scourged, and
tortured beneath the gallows the man whom you saw, lately, coming in
triumph adorned with his foemen's spoils? Why, the Albans themselves
could not bear the sight of such a hideous spectacle. Go, lictor, bind
those hands which when armed but a little time ago won dominion for
the Roman people. Go, cover the head of the liberator of this City!
Hang him on the fatal tree, scourge him within the pomoerium, if only
it be amongst the trophies of his foes, or without, if only it be
amongst the tombs of the Curiatii! To what place can you take this
youth where the monuments of his splendid exploits will not vindicate
him from such a shameful punishment?" The father's tears and the young
soldier's courage ready to meet every peril were too much for the
people. They acquitted him because they admired his bravery rather
than because they regarded his cause as a just one. But since a murder
in broad daylight demanded some expiation, the father was commanded to
make an atonement for his son at the cost of the State. After offering
certain expiatory sacrifices he erected a beam across the street and
made the young man pass under it, as under a yoke, with his head
covered. This beam exists to-day, having always been kept in repair by
the State: it is called "The Sister's Beam." A tomb of hewn stone was
constructed for Horatia on the spot where she was murdered." - Livy,
History of Rome 1.26

The story of the Horatii is probably the basis for the Roman law which
allowed anyine convicted of a capital crime to appeal to the People.


"Lewis the French king, sent unto King Henrie, for a present, an
Elephant, a beast most strange and wonderful to the English people,
sith most seldome or neuer any of that kind had beene scene in England
before that time." - Raphael Holinshed, English chronicler, 26
February A.D. 1256

On this day, Louis IX of France sent Henry III of England the first
elephant seen in the British Isles since the invasion by the emperor
Claudius in A.D. 43. The Tower of London was being used as a kind of
primitive zoo; it evolved into the Tower Menagerie, which existed up
until the mid-nineteenth century. It was at this same menagerie that
William Blake saw the "tyger" that was to inspire his famous poem.


Valete bene!

Cato



SOURCES

Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Livy
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42205 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: What is going on please?
Salvete all!

As some of you know, I'm putting together a welcome message for new subscribers, which gives all of
the other NR lists out there. I've been searching through the yahoogroups trying to find any others
that I missed.

Although no one sent me this link, I found a group called http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pax_deorum/
that is run by 3 Pontiffs: Modianus, Hadrianus and Moravius Piscinus and the list is a who's who of
NR citizens most of who are disgruntled with the Religio Romana of NR.
.
If you read the messages (which are public) this appears to be a separate Religio Romana
organization which is by invitation only. I've read and there is no doubt that these 3 Pontifices
are not happy with NR Religio Romana and have started their own Religio organization for NR
citizens. The Society Pax Deorum even has offshoot groups such as the
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sodalitas_trium_montium/

The website of the organization http://www.paxdeorum.org is password protected (I wonder why...),
but it is owned by our Consul Modianaus and hosted by Marcus Octavius who also hosts the NR website.

This goes hand in had with my theory that Consul Modianuus's edict making Vedius Germanicus an Augur
had little to do with Vedius but all to do with a power struggle amongst the Pontifices. Honestly,
this disgusts me.

Could one of the three involved pontifices comment please? I for one find it a bit odd that 3
pontifices have started a separate Relegio organization for NR citizens.

Vale,
Diana Octavia
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42206 From: Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Dianae Octaviae Aventinae salutem dicit

Why should this disturb you Diana?

It is a matter of FACT that the state of the Religio Romana within
Nova Roma is in a state of crisis. You can consult the Pontifex
Maximus and realize this. Yes, several Nova Roman citizens have been
involved in other Religio projects, because Nova Roma (in regard to
the Religio) is not meeting their needs. Does that take away from our
love of Nova Roma? Absolutely not.

As a matter of fact Pax Deorum has several senators, pontifices, and
sacerdotes involved with it. But Pax Deorum is not an active group.
We do not actively seek to increase our numbers and we are taking a
wait and see attitude. All of us have an enormous amount of time
invested in Nova Roma, and we very much want to see the Religio Romana
of Nova Roma become the flagship of the Religio within the world.
However, this has not happened. More people have left Nova Roma who
were interested in the Religio than have stayed. Because of the way
they were treated by our own priests. This is unacceptable, and Pax
Deorum is a reaction to that.

However, none of us have made efforts to keep Pax Deorum "hush hush."
Several people are aware of it. It has not been publicised but it has
not been kept in secret. For example, Drusus (Boni and former NR
senator) had a project he was working on, and his "secret" yahoo
discussion list was called: Mongolian Mushrooms (nicely disguised to
keep people from finding it). Drusus was unhappy with Nova Roma and
wanted to put together a new Roman group. Likewise, both Drusus and
Sulla had a website they were working on called www.mosmaiorum.org. I
notice the link is dead, probably because Sulla was paying for it and
must have lost interest. Also, Graecus (the pontifex) had been
working for years with a group known as the "Temple of the Religio
Romana," as has Piscinus.

The Pax Deorum website is password protected because the site is
terribly "under construction" and none of us wanted to have a site
under construction accessible to the general public. Also, Pax Deorum
-- as an organization -- is not "live." Everything doing on within
Pax Deorum has been put on hold as we try to focus on Nova Roma.
Myself as Consul, Hadrianus as Censor, Piscinus as Tribune, etc...

Your reaction to this is baffling. What is your intention? If you
simply wanted understanding surely you would have contacted myself (or
any other person you mentioned by name) privately to inquire.
However, it seems like an opportunity to generate confusion, and stir
up conflict. Paint the picture that this is some major conspiracy to
ruin Nova Roma. Please, by all means do what you must. Spin your web
of propaganda as you will. Because your reaction is precisely the
reason why several people felt it necessary to do what they did.

Many of us came to Nova Roma because of our love for the Gods of Rome.
Not because we want to play political games. This is not a political
game Diana. This is about the desire to truly practice the Pax
Deorum, the peace of the Gods. There are several of us who are
serious about our relationship with the Gods, and this seriousness
occupies our lives.

Several of us who are TIRED of the many fights. Political games. We
want to worship the Gods of Rome. We want an environment were we can
study, discuss, and build community. We would prefer that environment
become Nova Roma. Deadlock, and struggle seems the only thing that
has prevailed within the Collegium Pontificum thus far. I hope the
future proves more promising.

Vale:

Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
Consul

On 2/26/06, Diana Octavia Aventina <diana@...> wrote:
> Salvete all!
>
> As some of you know, I'm putting together a welcome message for new subscribers, which gives all of
> the other NR lists out there. I've been searching through the yahoogroups trying to find any others
> that I missed.
>
> Although no one sent me this link, I found a group called http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pax_deorum/
> that is run by 3 Pontiffs: Modianus, Hadrianus and Moravius Piscinus and the list is a who's who of
> NR citizens most of who are disgruntled with the Religio Romana of NR.
> .
> If you read the messages (which are public) this appears to be a separate Religio Romana
> organization which is by invitation only. I've read and there is no doubt that these 3 Pontifices
> are not happy with NR Religio Romana and have started their own Religio organization for NR
> citizens. The Society Pax Deorum even has offshoot groups such as the
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sodalitas_trium_montium/
>
> The website of the organization http://www.paxdeorum.org is password protected (I wonder why...),
> but it is owned by our Consul Modianaus and hosted by Marcus Octavius who also hosts the NR website.
>
> This goes hand in had with my theory that Consul Modianuus's edict making Vedius Germanicus an Augur
> had little to do with Vedius but all to do with a power struggle amongst the Pontifices. Honestly,
> this disgusts me.
>
> Could one of the three involved pontifices comment please? I for one find it a bit odd that 3
> pontifices have started a separate Relegio organization for NR citizens.
>
> Vale,
> Diana Octavia
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42207 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
> Could one of the three involved pontifices comment please? I for one find
> it a bit odd that 3 pontifices have started a separate Relegio
> organization for NR citizens.

Revival of the Religio Romana is too important to trust to a single
organization. If Nova Roma does collapse because of all the fighting,
politics, and deviant personalities, there will be an alternative.

Things haven't gotten to that point here yet; we have some hope for
the future. As long as Nova Roma looks viable, Pax Deorum will be
nothing more than a lifeboat, standing ready.

Vale, M. Octavius Germanicus,
Senator of Nova Roma,
Decurion of Pax Deorum,
Ordinary Member of Societas Via Romana.

--
hucke@...
http://www.graveyards.com

"The day will come when our silence will be more powerful than the
voices you are throttling today." -- August Spies, 1887
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42208 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Salve Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus,

> For example, Drusus (Boni and former NR
> senator) had a project he was working on, and his "secret" yahoo
> discussion list was called: Mongolian Mushrooms (nicely disguised to
> keep people from finding it). Drusus was unhappy with Nova Roma and
> wanted to put together a new Roman group. Likewise, both Drusus and
> Sulla had a website they were working on called www.mosmaiorum.org. I
> notice the link is dead, probably because Sulla was paying for it and
> must have lost interest.

Umm, you made my point. After creating those groups, they've split off from NR .

<If you simply wanted understanding surely you would have contacted myself (or
> any other person you mentioned by name) privately to inquire.

I doubt that any of the people on the paxdeorum mailing list would have done the same for me if the
situations were reversed.

I didn't contact you privately because I was sure that you wouldn't give me a straight answer
anyway. I'm an ex-Boni, remember? One of the evil mysterious citizens with secret plots that you and
yours hate? Who is plotting now? Not me.

> However, it seems like an opportunity to generate confusion, and stir
> up conflict.

Ah, I see. I'd forgotten that publicly asking 3 pontifices and a Consul to explain their actions was
stirring up conflict and confusion. I forgot that freedom of speech is only applicable if one is
saying something that is in accord with this year's political correctness.

Vale,
Diana Octavia
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42210 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
C. Equitius Cato D. Moraviae Aventinae G. Fabio Buteoni Modiano
quiritibusque S.P.D.

Salvete omnes.

Diana, I discovered Pax Deorum a couple of months ago, and engaged in
written conversation with both Modianus and a couple of other members;
my feeling after these conversations were over was that it was
basically a harmless digression for some of our citizens.

Modianus is obviously being completely disingenuous in his response to
you --- if he was so unhappy with the religio in Nova Roma why on
earth would he ask us to consult its titular head the Pontifex
Maximus, a man for whom he has voiced nothing but contempt in the
past, about it? Why did he have himself named Pontifex Maximus in Pax
Deorum (unlike,say, pontifex Graecus in the Temple of the Religio
Romana group)? What happens if he and these others decide that things
aren't going exactly the way they want in Nova Roma, are they all
going to resign en masse? --- but I don't think it's a "clear and
present danger" to the Republic.


Consul, your ringing cry for purpose over politics would ring somewhat
more true if you were not persistent in willingly and knowingly
violating the lex Constitutiva in an effort to secure some sort of
political "upper hand" --- that you are so virulent in your
denunciation of the religious state of affairs in the Republic and
since the balance of power in the College of Pontiffs does not lean
your way, makes your blatant attempt to change that balance fairly
transparent. At least be honest, consul; you want a College of
Pontiffs that will work with you instead of one with whom you are not
influential --- and you're willing to make political side deals in
order to make this happen. That is a perfectly reasonable,
straightforward, and honest political goal. Your means for attaining
that goal, however, are not reasonable, straightforward, or honest.
And pretending that you are not attempting to play at politics is
amusing but not very effective.

As you'll find, the more side deals you make, the more maze-like your
personal interactions become --- until eventually you will find
yourself unable to move constructively in any direction.

Valete bene,

Cato
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42211 From: Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Salve Diana,

> Umm, you made my point. After creating those groups, they've split
> off from NR .

I think it's important to mention that the creation of Pax Deorum was
a result of a number of citizens wanting more emphasis on the revival
of the Religio than we were finding. It was a personal matter. It was
not an attempt to 'split off' or 'threaten' NR in any way.

This is not a political maneuver, and I hope this does not become a
political argument. For example, the website - it is not a secret,
it's just not finished.

How is it a problem for NR if some citizens choose to focus on the
religio in this way? I am sincerely curious.

A. Moravia Aurelia
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42212 From: marcushoratius Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Salve Diana

Nova Roma is not a religious organization. It is incorporated as an
educational organization and is open to people of all religious
faiths. As such it cannot establish a religious organization for
those of us who are cultores Deorum, gentiles Romani.

Practitioners of the religio Romana, not only in Nova Roma but
elsewhere as well, have for years discussed the possibility of
establishing a nationwide, legally recognized, not for profit,
organization for the religio Romana. So far one group has done so
locally, in California. Another group, none of whose members happen
be in Nova Roma, is filing its incorporation papers in
Pennsylvania. I was just there last September working with them.
There are some other people forminggroups now who are considering
doing the same thing. Pax Deorum is looking into the possibility of
incorporating in Ohio. Incorporation is not so great a problem, but
laws differ from state to state on what can be legally recognized as
a religious organization. So the first step towards forming a
national organization will be to form local groups at the state
level that may eventually be brought together into a national
convention of the religio Romana.

This is something that has been going on in the wider community of
cultores Deorum for some time. It is good that it will now include
some who are inside Nova Roma as well. The fact is that there are
many more practitioners of the religio Romana who are not members of
Nova Roma than who are. But this has nothing to do with Nova Roma,
the effort expands well beyond the membership of Nova Roma.

We are talking about real world communities where cultores Deorum
may gather together in worship. The reason why you may not see much
activity on Pax Deorum's website yet is that our focus is not on
establishing yet another Internet community. When incorporated,
established as a local community, we will offer more on the Internet
so as to link up with similar religious organizations and build
towards our goal of a nationwide religious organization in the US.

There are similar organizations for the Hellenes, to which some
Novae Romani belong. Nothing similar has yet been attempted for
those of us who do practice the religio Romana. So I do not see why
you should be so concerned that we would attempt this now. Do you
oppose practitioners of the religio Romana forming their own
religious organizations, or that we might seek to join with fellow
worshipers in our own communities as do Hellenes, Christians, Jews,
Hindus and Muslims? Are you suspiscious of everyone who belongs to
a different religious community? I really don't see what point you
are trying to make.

Vale
Piscinus


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Diana Octavia Aventina"
<diana@...> wrote:
>
> Salvete all!
>
> As some of you know, I'm putting together a welcome message for
new subscribers, which gives all of
> the other NR lists out there. I've been searching through the
yahoogroups trying to find any others
> that I missed.
>
> Although no one sent me this link, I found a group called
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pax_deorum/
> that is run by 3 Pontiffs: Modianus, Hadrianus and Moravius
Piscinus and the list is a who's who of
> NR citizens most of who are disgruntled with the Religio Romana of
NR.
> .
> If you read the messages (which are public) this appears to be a
separate Religio Romana
> organization which is by invitation only. I've read and there is
no doubt that these 3 Pontifices
> are not happy with NR Religio Romana and have started their own
Religio organization for NR
> citizens. The Society Pax Deorum even has offshoot groups such as
the
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sodalitas_trium_montium/
>
> The website of the organization http://www.paxdeorum.org is
password protected (I wonder why...),
> but it is owned by our Consul Modianaus and hosted by Marcus
Octavius who also hosts the NR website.
>
> This goes hand in had with my theory that Consul Modianuus's edict
making Vedius Germanicus an Augur
> had little to do with Vedius but all to do with a power struggle
amongst the Pontifices. Honestly,
> this disgusts me.
>
> Could one of the three involved pontifices comment please? I for
one find it a bit odd that 3
> pontifices have started a separate Relegio organization for NR
citizens.
>
> Vale,
> Diana Octavia
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42213 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
C. Equitius Cato wrote:

> Modianus is obviously being completely disingenuous in his response to
> you --- if he was so unhappy with the religio in Nova Roma why on
> earth would he ask us to consult its titular head the Pontifex
> Maximus, a man for whom he has voiced nothing but contempt in the
> past, about it?

That was, as you say, in the past. It is possible for one's opinion of
another to change after speaking at length with that person.

> Why did he have himself named Pontifex Maximus in Pax
> Deorum (unlike,say, pontifex Graecus in the Temple of the Religio
> Romana group)?

Because there are multiple Pontifices in Pax Deorum, and if the ancient
model is to be followed, one of them should be designated senior in
the traditional manner.

> What happens if he and these others decide that things
> aren't going exactly the way they want in Nova Roma, are they all
> going to resign en masse?

Things would have to get *very* bad here before any of us would consider
doing that. We still believe Nova Roma is viable and worthy of support,
despite its moribund collegia.

> At least be honest, consul; you want a College of Pontiffs that will
> work with you instead of one with whom you are not influential

He wants one that is not completely impotent, dominated by title-collectors
who have published no written material, performed no public rituals,
offered no educational courses, or done anything to advance the Religio
in years.

One way or another, we'll have that. It is my hope that Nova Roma will
be the organization that one day includes functioning priestly collegia;
but if not, we'll build them elsewhere.

Vale, Octavius.

--
hucke@...
http://www.graveyards.com

"The day will come when our silence will be more powerful than the
voices you are throttling today." -- August Spies, 1887
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42214 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
C. Equitius Cato M. Octavio quiritibusque S.P.D.

Salve et salvete.

And this is an honest answer, and I certainly can respect that. I
find myself in an odd position, of course, not being a practitioner
myself; our Republic *should* be a moving, driving force in the
religio romana as it is practiced (and apparently that practice is
flourishing) in the macronational world.

The uncomfortable parts of this arrangement are not that a group of
citizens want to increase the presence and effectiveness of the
religio; the more the rituals of the religio are studied and practiced
in the Republic, the better. There is nothing wrong with a group
creating another list which promotes the religio; we have one or two
already, under the general auspices of the Republic.

Octavius, you criticize the current College as being "impotent,
dominated by title-collectors", yet our own consul, using the
appearance of trying to foster a more vibrant religio, has gone off
and...gotten a new title, one that is already filled in our Republic;
the problem is that we already *have* a Pontifex Maximus, and by
definition you cannot have more than one of anything that is titled
"maximus".


You wrote:

"It is my hope that Nova Roma will be the organization that one day
includes functioning priestly collegia; but if not, we'll build them
elsewhere."

The consular edict is perhaps an attempt to *force* the College of
Pontiffs to change, and while there may be every valid reason under
the sun for wanting such a change, it cannot be done by fiat; to
threaten to break from the Republic if you cannot get your way, no
matter how subtly, is not necessarily a very good incentive for
getting the People to agree with you. It comes off as "if you won't
play by MY rules I'll take my toys and leave the sandbox".

Well, the Republic comes with rules --- the law. None of the goals
that you set necessitate the violation of the law. The game that is
being played out over the edict is a political, not religious, one.
It is being played for power. To pretend otherwise is an insult to
the intelligence of the People.

Vale et valete,

Cato
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42215 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Salve Octavi.

Nova Roma does not, of course, have the monopoly on the Religio
Romana. The existence of Pax Deorum, in itself, is NOT the issue.

What is of concern is that this has all the hallmarks of a
government within a government. People in senior positions in NR,
disaffected people, all collaborating on a project, which
apparently, is dormant. A bolthole for refugees from Nova Roma
should the objectives shared by the Pax Deorum members/citizens not
be achieved in NR. These objectives, or the stated ones anyway,
appear to be focused on a political coup inside the Collegium
Pontificum in Nova Roma, for that is what is being attempted here
through this edict - a strategic shift in "power".

Nova Roma relies on its Tribunes to protect its Constitution and the
rights of citizens. Here in this situation one of its Tribunes is a
close ally, obviously, of a Senior Consul embarked on a very
dangerous course of action, which a number of us hold has violated
the Constitution. Given the close ideological proximity of the
Consul and the Tribune, it is clear that there is no impartiality
and thus our individual and constitutional safeguards have been
compromised.

This project clearly should have been disclosed to the voters when
the Senior Consul stood for election, along with the junior Censor
and the Tribune. Why? It is simple. This project clearly compromises
the independence of action of a Tribune and demonstrates that
members of an external power structure are seeking office in Nova
Roma, on a platform of positive change and growth, while at the same
time a "lifeboat" is being secretly built.

It really doesn't say much for the level of commitment of any of the
participants to Nova Roma either.

This clearly is akin to disaffected Ancient Romans sneaking out of
Rome in the dead of night over a year or so and building a new city,
near to Rome, but hidden. Then the builders stand for election in
Rome, prepared to depart if they don't get their way. On top of that
they deliberately precipitate a crisis, having ensured that the
protectors of the people, the Tribunes, are deprived of alternative
views, placed under a time constraint and, I am sure, unaware of
this "dormant" hidden city.

Vale
Caesar


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Matt Hucke <hucke@...> wrote:
>
>
> C. Equitius Cato wrote:
>
> > Modianus is obviously being completely disingenuous in his
response to
> > you --- if he was so unhappy with the religio in Nova Roma why on
> > earth would he ask us to consult its titular head the Pontifex
> > Maximus, a man for whom he has voiced nothing but contempt in the
> > past, about it?
>
> That was, as you say, in the past. It is possible for one's
opinion of
> another to change after speaking at length with that person.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42216 From: Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Cato;

Pax Deorum discarded the concept of "magistrates," "senators," and
"pontifices" about a year ago. We have a Decuria, and three Magistiri
but no pontifices and not pontifex maximus. That particular model was
discarded a long time ago.

Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus

On 2/26/06, gaiusequitiuscato <mlcinnyc@...> wrote:
> C. Equitius Cato M. Octavio quiritibusque S.P.D.

> Octavius, you criticize the current College as being "impotent,
> dominated by title-collectors", yet our own consul, using the
> appearance of trying to foster a more vibrant religio, has gone off
> and...gotten a new title, one that is already filled in our Republic;
> the problem is that we already *have* a Pontifex Maximus, and by
> definition you cannot have more than one of anything that is titled
> "maximus".
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42217 From: Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Salve,

<gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:

> These objectives, or the stated ones anyway,
> appear to be focused on a political coup inside the Collegium
> Pontificum in Nova Roma...

The objectives of Pax Deorum actually have very little to do with Nova
Roma at all. There is no grand scheme here to break down the structure
of Nova Roma, and no secret plots to force an agenda or to defect. We
are all simply working towards real world goals that we consider to be
important, in whatever ways we can.

> It really doesn't say much for the level of commitment of any of the
> participants to Nova Roma either.

Yes, the memberships of the two groups overlap. I'm sure that everyone
in Nova Roma is also a member of some other organizations. How is that
a threat? I am a member of several ancient Roman living history
groups - does that mean that I am not committed to NR or that I don't
care about what happens here?

No, it doesn't.

Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42218 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Salve Consul.

Is a year is now comprised of 3 months? Apparently, as I understand
it, the titles were still being used on the website of Pax Deorum in
November of 2005, maybe even still in Decemeber.

Vale
Caesar


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus"
<tau.athanasios@...> wrote:
>
> Cato;
>
> Pax Deorum discarded the concept of "magistrates," "senators," and
> "pontifices" about a year ago. We have a Decuria, and three
Magistiri
> but no pontifices and not pontifex maximus. That particular model
was
> discarded a long time ago.
>
> Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42219 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Salve Aurelia.

I think the difference should be clear. Pax Deorum is apparently to
lie dormant, according to posts here, until such time as Nova Roma
collapses. A lifeboat in other words.

Impatiality is in question in the decision making processes inside
NR and the degree of oversight exercised.

A shared belief concerning the needs of the Religio finds expression
in a radical, dangerous and I and others say, utterly
unconstitutional edict, promulgated to effect a political victory.

This is not just another Roman themed group. It has structure,
purpose and its members occupy some of the highest offices in NR.

That is why this is different.

Vale
Caesar



--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia"
<arnamentia_aurelia@...> wrote:
>
> Salve,
>
> <gn_iulius_caesar@> wrote:
>
> > These objectives, or the stated ones anyway,
> > appear to be focused on a political coup inside the Collegium
> > Pontificum in Nova Roma...
>
> The objectives of Pax Deorum actually have very little to do with
Nova
> Roma at all. There is no grand scheme here to break down the
structure
> of Nova Roma, and no secret plots to force an agenda or to defect.
We
> are all simply working towards real world goals that we consider
to be
> important, in whatever ways we can.
>
> > It really doesn't say much for the level of commitment of any of
the
> > participants to Nova Roma either.
>
> Yes, the memberships of the two groups overlap. I'm sure that
everyone
> in Nova Roma is also a member of some other organizations. How is
that
> a threat? I am a member of several ancient Roman living history
> groups - does that mean that I am not committed to NR or that I
don't
> care about what happens here?
>
> No, it doesn't.
>
> Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42220 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
M.Hortensia Quritibus spd;
I am sorry indeed to see Diana Octavia return and what; join a
cohors, taking Latin, help make a real life Nova Roma? No, more old
Boni stuff which I won't go into.
And more incredibly rude and cruel words on another list. I am
really shocked Cato to see you behave in such a fashion.

Pax Deorum is a public list where we welcome and encourage real
life practices of the Religio. It was an antidote to the moribund
official Religio list, but thanks to our active pontifices the
Religio list is is happily active again. I post in both places. I
want to encourage as much real life activity as possible.

So please post something worthwhile; an article as I did, discuss
Roman history, write a carmen, take a class at Academia Thules, post
what you are actually doing for Nova Roma. Fighting & conspiracy-
mongering just for the sake of fighting on the ML is just plain
destructive and I want no part of it.
M. Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebis
producer "Vox Romana" podcast
student of Assimil Latin at Academia Thules
cultrix deorum
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42221 From: Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Caesar:

You are wrong. Those titles were changed some time ago. On October
17th we voted our bylaws in. Those bylaws reflected a major shift in
focus, and truth be told the shift in focus started much earlier than
October. October 17th was simply the day when some things were
finalized. It took several months to get everything worked out.

Initially we were going to have a senate, and pontifices. But after
discussing our focus with others within the organization we felt it
necessary NOT to have a system that even came close to what Nova Roma
had. Therefore, we developed a decuria led by magistririi. We have
no Collegium. As a religious organization we have no strictly "civil"
side. We have no "legal fiction." Our board of directors is a
decuria, not a senate.

Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus

On 2/26/06, Gnaeus Iulius Caesar <gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:
> Salve Consul.
>
> Is a year is now comprised of 3 months? Apparently, as I understand
> it, the titles were still being used on the website of Pax Deorum in
> November of 2005, maybe even still in Decemeber.
>
> Vale
> Caesar
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42222 From: Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
"It has structure, purpose and its members occupy some of the highest
offices in NR."

There are several members of Nova Roma who are also Roman Catholic.
Catholicism has both structure, purpose and its members occupy some
very high offices of Nova Roma. Should we require Catholics to
provide the name of their parish, priest, bishop etc..? Catholicism
is also headed by the Pope who is also referred to as "Pontifex
Maximus," and individual bishops are called pontiffs. So should we
require every Nova Roman who is Catholic to disclose their Catholicism
before running for office?

Absolutely not.

Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus

On 2/26/06, Gnaeus Iulius Caesar <gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:
> Salve Aurelia.
>
> I think the difference should be clear. Pax Deorum is apparently to
> lie dormant, according to posts here, until such time as Nova Roma
> collapses. A lifeboat in other words.
>
> Impatiality is in question in the decision making processes inside
> NR and the degree of oversight exercised.
>
> A shared belief concerning the needs of the Religio finds expression
> in a radical, dangerous and I and others say, utterly
> unconstitutional edict, promulgated to effect a political victory.
>
> This is not just another Roman themed group. It has structure,
> purpose and its members occupy some of the highest offices in NR.
>
> That is why this is different.
>
> Vale
> Caesar
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42223 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Salve Consul.

Your own words indicated that a year before the titles had been
disposed of. Yet, apparently, they remained on the Pax Deorum
webpage, until November or maybe December? So in reality if the
decision was not taken until when you said it was, formally, then
they existed until October 17th or is it November or December? Who
knows....

In any case there is a vast difference between February or earlier
of 2005 and October, nearly November of 2005.

The "facts" appear to have the consistency of jello, wobbling around
all over the plate pursued by the spoon of truth.

Vale
Caesar


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus"
<tau.athanasios@...> wrote:
>
> Caesar:
>
> You are wrong. Those titles were changed some time ago. On
October
> 17th we voted our bylaws in. Those bylaws reflected a major shift
in
> focus, and truth be told the shift in focus started much earlier
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42224 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Salve Consul.

You might have included in your resume for Consul the little snippet
of news that you and your compatriots were building a lifeboat to
escape in as NR sinks.

The people may have found it instructive, and they certainly had the
right to know that the man preparing aspiring to be Consul had his
own personal lifeboat prepared even before NR struck the iceberg.

Vale
Caesar


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus"
<tau.athanasios@...> wrote:
>
> "It has structure, purpose and its members occupy some of the
highest
> offices in NR."
>
> There are several members of Nova Roma who are also Roman
Catholic.
> Catholicism has both structure, purpose and its members occupy some
> very high offices of Nova Roma. Should we require Catholics to
> provide the name of their parish, priest, bishop etc..?
Catholicism
> is also headed by the Pope who is also referred to as "Pontifex
> Maximus," and individual bishops are called pontiffs. So should we
> require every Nova Roman who is Catholic to disclose their
Catholicism
> before running for office?
>
> Absolutely not.
>
> Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
>
> On 2/26/06, Gnaeus Iulius Caesar <gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:
> > Salve Aurelia.
> >
> > I think the difference should be clear. Pax Deorum is apparently
to
> > lie dormant, according to posts here, until such time as Nova
Roma
> > collapses. A lifeboat in other words.
> >
> > Impatiality is in question in the decision making processes
inside
> > NR and the degree of oversight exercised.
> >
> > A shared belief concerning the needs of the Religio finds
expression
> > in a radical, dangerous and I and others say, utterly
> > unconstitutional edict, promulgated to effect a political
victory.
> >
> > This is not just another Roman themed group. It has structure,
> > purpose and its members occupy some of the highest offices in NR.
> >
> > That is why this is different.
> >
> > Vale
> > Caesar
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42225 From: Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Salve Caesar,

The fact that many of us are too busy with NR and with life to
participate in Pax Romana the way we might want should not be taken
as a sign that the organization was created as a 'lifeboat.'

Instead, try to recognize that it there is a very real need for a
revival of the religio, and Pax deorum was created to do that. This
remains true, whether or not the website has been updated.

Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gnaeus Iulius Caesar"
<gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Consul.
>
> You might have included in your resume for Consul the little
snippet
> of news that you and your compatriots were building a lifeboat to
> escape in as NR sinks.
>
> The people may have found it instructive, and they certainly had
the
> right to know that the man preparing aspiring to be Consul had his
> own personal lifeboat prepared even before NR struck the iceberg.
>
> Vale
> Caesar
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42226 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Salve Aurelia.

As Octavius said: "As long as Nova Roma looks viable, Pax Deorum
will be nothing more than a lifeboat, standing ready."

Not my words, his.

Vale
Caesar


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia"
<arnamentia_aurelia@...> wrote:
>
>
> Salve Caesar,
>
> The fact that many of us are too busy with NR and with life to
> participate in Pax Romana the way we might want should not be
taken
> as a sign that the organization was created as a 'lifeboat.'
>
> Instead, try to recognize that it there is a very real need for a
> revival of the religio, and Pax deorum was created to do that.
This
> remains true, whether or not the website has been updated.
>
> Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42227 From: pompeia_minucia_tiberia Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Apology
Pompeia Minucia Strabo A. Tulliae Scholasticae Quiritibus S.P.D.

Re: Message

41696

After an expanse of thought, and well, a bit of a nagging conscience,
I'd like to offer an apology to Tullia for being what I think is a
little crustier than I should have been during the discussion of
Senate Agendae.

You of all citizens do not deserve anything but politeness and
appreciation.

Sorry amica
Valete
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42228 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Hortensia Iulio spd;
as we see the difficulties that have erupted over even
reviving the College of Augurs, this is what prompts all of us to
participate in Pax Deorum, rather than get depressed and leave.
I am loyal to Nova Roma for life as is Consul Buteo Modianus (we
talked on the phone about this) and I'm sure Arnamentia Aurelia, the
sacerdos of Diana. So we have another group to continue to foster
the Religio - without egos or unpleasantness! Surely a cause for
rejoicing not dissension. How is your "Go Roman" project going?
bene vale
Marca Hortensia Maior

> Salve Aurelia.
>
> As Octavius said: "As long as Nova Roma looks viable, Pax Deorum
> will be nothing more than a lifeboat, standing ready."
>
> Not my words, his.
>
> Vale
> Caesar
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia"
> <arnamentia_aurelia@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Salve Caesar,
> >
> > The fact that many of us are too busy with NR and with life to
> > participate in Pax Romana the way we might want should not be
> taken
> > as a sign that the organization was created as a 'lifeboat.'
> >
> > Instead, try to recognize that it there is a very real need for
a
> > revival of the religio, and Pax deorum was created to do that.
> This
> > remains true, whether or not the website has been updated.
> >
> > Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42229 From: Maxima Valeria Messallina Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: Congratulations, CN EQUIT MARNIUS
Congratulations, G. Equitius Marinus!

So, you win trivia contests as well. Obviously, a man of many talents. :)

Vale bene in pace deorum, amicus

Maxima Valeria Messallina



daylily218 <daylily218@...> wrote:
Congrats and salutations to the winner of the trivia
contest. Google or not, a fast response and right on
the money.
Speaking of money, can anyone identify the
Latin inscription on coins minted by Zenobia in the name of Vaballathus? I have three of them in my collection.
I will admit, too, that until I'd recently read Aurelian and the Third Century, I didn't know his birth name. I knew it only in its Latinized version. Again, kudos to the winner. P.S. and hint: the coins in question bear the portraits of Aurelian and Vaballathus, and though Vaballathus is supposedly on the reverse and has adopted a less than augustan role in his inscription, these coins were said to infuriate Aurelian no end. Kim


---------------------------------
Relax. Yahoo! Mail virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42230 From: Gnaeus Equitius Marinus Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: Congratulations, CN EQUIT MARNIUS
Salve Maxima Valeria,

Maxima Valeria Messallina wrote:

> Congratulations, G. Equitius Marinus!

*Gn.* please, (it's Gnaeus, not Gaius.)

> So, you win trivia contests as well. Obviously, a man of many talents. :)

I dance a mean Fandango too.

Vale,

-- Marinus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42231 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006, Gnaeus Iulius Caesar wrote:

> Salve Aurelia.
>
> As Octavius said: "As long as Nova Roma looks viable, Pax Deorum
> will be nothing more than a lifeboat, standing ready."
>
> Not my words, his.

Not all of us in Pax Deorum have the same vision for it. If Nova Roma
were to become a viable place for the Religio Romana again, I would
not be sad at all to see Pax Deorum evaporate; others there may have
a different perspective.

I, personally, see it as a lifeboat, because the revival of the Religio
is too important to be left to the useless, vain and impotent.

Vale, Octavius.

--
hucke@...
http://www.graveyards.com

"The day will come when our silence will be more powerful than the
voices you are throttling today." -- August Spies, 1887
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42232 From: Maxima Valeria Messallina Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: Congratulations, CN EQUIT MARNIUS
Salve, Gn. Equitius Marinus (Oops! Sorry about the typo. I know you're Gnaeus.)

Wow, dances, too! Well, I'm the Vestal with her own chariot. Wanna go for a ride? Just hold on tight - I drive FAST!!! :)

Grinning as wickedly as a Vestal dares,
Maxima Valeria Messallina

P.S. Just a wild idea! Imagine a Nova Roma version of "Dancing with the Stars!" Now, what would we call it? Series titles anyone?


Gnaeus Equitius Marinus <gawne@...> wrote:
Salve Maxima Valeria,

Maxima Valeria Messallina wrote:

> Congratulations, G. Equitius Marinus!

*Gn.* please, (it's Gnaeus, not Gaius.)

> So, you win trivia contests as well. Obviously, a man of many talents. :)

I dance a mean Fandango too.

Vale,

-- Marinus


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42233 From: Gnaeus Equitius Marinus Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: Congratulations, CN EQUIT MARNIUS
Salve Maxima Valeria,

Maxima Valeria Messallina wrote:

> Wow, dances, too! Well, I'm the Vestal with her own chariot.
> Wanna go for a ride? Just hold on tight - I drive FAST!!! :)

You bet!

> Grinning as wickedly as a Vestal dares,

That could be very daring indeed, I suspect.

> P.S. Just a wild idea! Imagine a Nova Roma version of "Dancing
> with the Stars!" Now, what would we call it? Series titles anyone?

Survivor -- The Insanity

(Based on Cato the Elder's assertion that only insane men dance when
they're not drunk.)

Vale,

-- Marinus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42234 From: Quintus Suetonius Paulinus (Michael Kell Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Waiting For The Barbarians
Salvete omnes,

Here is another interesting poem about Ancient Rome with perhaps
some contemporary twists that I found:

Waiting for the Barbarians

By Constantine Cavafy (1864-1933), translated by Edmund Keeley
What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum?


The barbarians are due here today.
Why isn't anything happening in the senate?
Why do the senators sit there without legislating?

Because the barbarians are coming today.
What laws can the senators make now?
Once the barbarians are here, they'll do the legislating.
Why did our emperor get up so early,
and why is he sitting at the city's main gate
on his throne, in state, wearing the crown?

Because the barbarians are coming today
and the emperor is waiting to receive their leader.
He has even prepared a scroll to give him,
replete with titles, with imposing names.
Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today
wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas?
Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts,
and rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds?
Why are they carrying elegant canes
beautifully worked in silver and gold?

Because the barbarians are coming today
and things like that dazzle the barbarians.
Why don't our distinguished orators come forward as usual
to make their speeches, say what they have to say?

Because the barbarians are coming today
and they're bored by rhetoric and public speaking.
Why this sudden restlessness, this confusion?
(How serious people's faces have become.)
Why are the streets and squares emptying so rapidly,
everyone going home so lost in thought?

Because night has fallen and the barbarians have not come.
And some who have just returned from the border say
there are no barbarians any longer.
And now, what's going to happen to us without barbarians?
They were, those people, a kind of solution.





Regards,

Quintus Suetonius Paulinus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42235 From: daylily218 Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Hadrianus/Sol coins
Relevant to the thread on solar cults and worship of
Sol, please let me know if anyone on the list would like
me to send eum/eam photographs of two of my coins. They
both show Hadrian on the obverse, and an equally prominent
bust of Sol on the reverse of each. I obtained both of these
because of my own particular interest (academically and
even, yes, spiritually) in Sol, and they are truly stunning
portraits. Let me know, and the pics will on the way to you
posthaste if not sooner. You can contact me offlist if you'd
prefer: daylily218@... or iconic@.... You won't
be disappointed. The coins are denarii, with a high silver
content, and are exemplary examples. Relevant to the discussion
of Pax Deorum (too ignorant to take sides here!) I have a coin
with the reverse inscription PROVIDEN DEOR if that would be of
interest to anyone. Valete. Kim
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42236 From: Timothy P. Gallagher Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Salve Marca Hortensia Maior who said in part

"as we see the difficulties that have erupted over even reviving the
College of Augurs,"

The "difficulties" were not over "reviving the College of Augurs,"
the "difficulties" were in the manner in which it was done.

Illegal and unconstitutional.

If you submit an application the CP votes yes or no. If then vote
you in you are an Augur. If they vote no you reapply.

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus



--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> Hortensia Iulio spd;
> as we see the difficulties that have erupted over even
> reviving the College of Augurs, this is what prompts all of us to
> participate in Pax Deorum, rather than get depressed and leave.
> I am loyal to Nova Roma for life as is Consul Buteo Modianus (we
> talked on the phone about this) and I'm sure Arnamentia Aurelia,
the
> sacerdos of Diana. So we have another group to continue to foster
> the Religio - without egos or unpleasantness! Surely a cause for
> rejoicing not dissension. How is your "Go Roman" project going?
> bene vale
> Marca Hortensia Maior
>
> > Salve Aurelia.
> >
> > As Octavius said: "As long as Nova Roma looks viable, Pax Deorum
> > will be nothing more than a lifeboat, standing ready."
> >
> > Not my words, his.
> >
> > Vale
> > Caesar
> >
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia"
> > <arnamentia_aurelia@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Salve Caesar,
> > >
> > > The fact that many of us are too busy with NR and with life to
> > > participate in Pax Romana the way we might want should not be
> > taken
> > > as a sign that the organization was created as a 'lifeboat.'
> > >
> > > Instead, try to recognize that it there is a very real need
for
> a
> > > revival of the religio, and Pax deorum was created to do that.
> > This
> > > remains true, whether or not the website has been updated.
> > >
> > > Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia
> >
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42237 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
M. Hortensia Quiritibus spd;
Kindly stop this incessant argument "yes, I'm right" "No,
you are wrong!"
This is why we participate in Pax Deorum *sigh*

And what real life thing have you done for Nova Roma, Tiberi
Galeri?
valete
Marca Hortensia Maior

> Salve Marca Hortensia Maior who said in part
>
> "as we see the difficulties that have erupted over even reviving
the
> College of Augurs,"
>
> The "difficulties" were not over "reviving the College of Augurs,"
> the "difficulties" were in the manner in which it was done.
>
> Illegal and unconstitutional.
>
> If you submit an application the CP votes yes or no. If then vote
> you in you are an Augur. If they vote no you reapply.
>
> Vale
>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
>
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@> wrote:
> >
> > Hortensia Iulio spd;
> > as we see the difficulties that have erupted over even
> > reviving the College of Augurs, this is what prompts all of us
to
> > participate in Pax Deorum, rather than get depressed and leave.
> > I am loyal to Nova Roma for life as is Consul Buteo Modianus
(we
> > talked on the phone about this) and I'm sure Arnamentia Aurelia,
> the
> > sacerdos of Diana. So we have another group to continue to
foster
> > the Religio - without egos or unpleasantness! Surely a cause for
> > rejoicing not dissension. How is your "Go Roman" project going?
> > bene vale
> > Marca Hortensia Maior
> >
> > > Salve Aurelia.
> > >
> > > As Octavius said: "As long as Nova Roma looks viable, Pax
Deorum
> > > will be nothing more than a lifeboat, standing ready."
> > >
> > > Not my words, his.
> > >
> > > Vale
> > > Caesar
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia"
> > > <arnamentia_aurelia@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Salve Caesar,
> > > >
> > > > The fact that many of us are too busy with NR and with life
to
> > > > participate in Pax Romana the way we might want should not
be
> > > taken
> > > > as a sign that the organization was created as a 'lifeboat.'
> > > >
> > > > Instead, try to recognize that it there is a very real need
> for
> > a
> > > > revival of the religio, and Pax deorum was created to do
that.
> > > This
> > > > remains true, whether or not the website has been updated.
> > > >
> > > > Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia
> > >
> >
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42238 From: Timothy P. Gallagher Date: 2006-02-26
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Salve Marca Hortensia Maior

Well I published Nova Roma's hands on newsletter a " physical "
thing that people can touch. I have had dinner with Nova Romans.
Attended Roman Days. Donated books on Rome to local libraries and
created the Nova Roma book plate that all Nova Romans can use when
they make similar donations. Worked for a "physical" symbol of
being Nova Roman ie the SPQR ring. I am currently working to
establish a Maryland Society for Roman Studies and a research
library.

"The mission of Maryland Society for Roman Studies is to promote the
study of Roman civilization in all of its forms: language, history
and culture. We will work to increase the interest in the Classics
both in the secondary schools and in our colleges and universities .
Maryland Society for Roman Studies will have a quarterly newsletter
Praeco."

I am also working to establish a magazine called ROME © as there is
not currently any general interests magazine, in the world devoted
to the 2000 plus years of Roman civilization. ROME © would be
similar to KMT, Archaeology, Military History Quarterly and other
magazines.


Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
















--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> M. Hortensia Quiritibus spd;
> Kindly stop this incessant argument "yes, I'm right" "No,
> you are wrong!"
> This is why we participate in Pax Deorum *sigh*
>
> And what real life thing have you done for Nova Roma, Tiberi
> Galeri?
> valete
> Marca Hortensia Maior
>
> > Salve Marca Hortensia Maior who said in part
> >
> > "as we see the difficulties that have erupted over even reviving
> the
> > College of Augurs,"
> >
> > The "difficulties" were not over "reviving the College of
Augurs,"
> > the "difficulties" were in the manner in which it was done.
> >
> > Illegal and unconstitutional.
> >
> > If you submit an application the CP votes yes or no. If then
vote
> > you in you are an Augur. If they vote no you reapply.
> >
> > Vale
> >
> > Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hortensia Iulio spd;
> > > as we see the difficulties that have erupted over even
> > > reviving the College of Augurs, this is what prompts all of us
> to
> > > participate in Pax Deorum, rather than get depressed and leave.
> > > I am loyal to Nova Roma for life as is Consul Buteo Modianus
> (we
> > > talked on the phone about this) and I'm sure Arnamentia
Aurelia,
> > the
> > > sacerdos of Diana. So we have another group to continue to
> foster
> > > the Religio - without egos or unpleasantness! Surely a cause
for
> > > rejoicing not dissension. How is your "Go Roman" project going?
> > > bene vale
> > > Marca Hortensia Maior
> > >
> > > > Salve Aurelia.
> > > >
> > > > As Octavius said: "As long as Nova Roma looks viable, Pax
> Deorum
> > > > will be nothing more than a lifeboat, standing ready."
> > > >
> > > > Not my words, his.
> > > >
> > > > Vale
> > > > Caesar
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Arnamentia Moravia
Aurelia"
> > > > <arnamentia_aurelia@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Salve Caesar,
> > > > >
> > > > > The fact that many of us are too busy with NR and with
life
> to
> > > > > participate in Pax Romana the way we might want should not
> be
> > > > taken
> > > > > as a sign that the organization was created as
a 'lifeboat.'
> > > > >
> > > > > Instead, try to recognize that it there is a very real
need
> > for
> > > a
> > > > > revival of the religio, and Pax deorum was created to do
> that.
> > > > This
> > > > > remains true, whether or not the website has been updated.
> > > > >
> > > > > Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42239 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
M. Hortensia T. Galerio spd;
that's fantastic! I didn't know any of that. See rather than
rehashing a subject 1,000 times, let's talk about all the things we
are doing!
bene vale in pacem deorum
Marca Hortensia Maior
>
> Salve Marca Hortensia Maior
>
> Well I published Nova Roma's hands on newsletter a " physical "
> thing that people can touch. I have had dinner with Nova Romans.
> Attended Roman Days. Donated books on Rome to local libraries and
> created the Nova Roma book plate that all Nova Romans can use when
> they make similar donations. Worked for a "physical" symbol of
> being Nova Roman ie the SPQR ring. I am currently working to
> establish a Maryland Society for Roman Studies and a research
> library.
>
> "The mission of Maryland Society for Roman Studies is to promote
the
> study of Roman civilization in all of its forms: language, history
> and culture. We will work to increase the interest in the
Classics
> both in the secondary schools and in our colleges and
universities .
> Maryland Society for Roman Studies will have a quarterly
newsletter
> Praeco."
>
> I am also working to establish a magazine called ROME © as there
is
> not currently any general interests magazine, in the world devoted
> to the 2000 plus years of Roman civilization. ROME © would be
> similar to KMT, Archaeology, Military History Quarterly and other
> magazines.
>
>
> Vale
>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@> wrote:
> >
> > M. Hortensia Quiritibus spd;
> > Kindly stop this incessant argument "yes, I'm
right" "No,
> > you are wrong!"
> > This is why we participate in Pax Deorum *sigh*
> >
> > And what real life thing have you done for Nova Roma, Tiberi
> > Galeri?
> > valete
> > Marca Hortensia Maior
> >
> > > Salve Marca Hortensia Maior who said in part
> > >
> > > "as we see the difficulties that have erupted over even
reviving
> > the
> > > College of Augurs,"
> > >
> > > The "difficulties" were not over "reviving the College of
> Augurs,"
> > > the "difficulties" were in the manner in which it was done.
> > >
> > > Illegal and unconstitutional.
> > >
> > > If you submit an application the CP votes yes or no. If then
> vote
> > > you in you are an Augur. If they vote no you reapply.
> > >
> > > Vale
> > >
> > > Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hortensia Iulio spd;
> > > > as we see the difficulties that have erupted over even
> > > > reviving the College of Augurs, this is what prompts all of
us
> > to
> > > > participate in Pax Deorum, rather than get depressed and
leave.
> > > > I am loyal to Nova Roma for life as is Consul Buteo
Modianus
> > (we
> > > > talked on the phone about this) and I'm sure Arnamentia
> Aurelia,
> > > the
> > > > sacerdos of Diana. So we have another group to continue to
> > foster
> > > > the Religio - without egos or unpleasantness! Surely a cause
> for
> > > > rejoicing not dissension. How is your "Go Roman" project
going?
> > > > bene vale
> > > > Marca Hortensia Maior
> > > >
> > > > > Salve Aurelia.
> > > > >
> > > > > As Octavius said: "As long as Nova Roma looks viable, Pax
> > Deorum
> > > > > will be nothing more than a lifeboat, standing ready."
> > > > >
> > > > > Not my words, his.
> > > > >
> > > > > Vale
> > > > > Caesar
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Arnamentia Moravia
> Aurelia"
> > > > > <arnamentia_aurelia@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Salve Caesar,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The fact that many of us are too busy with NR and with
> life
> > to
> > > > > > participate in Pax Romana the way we might want should
not
> > be
> > > > > taken
> > > > > > as a sign that the organization was created as
> a 'lifeboat.'
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Instead, try to recognize that it there is a very real
> need
> > > for
> > > > a
> > > > > > revival of the religio, and Pax deorum was created to do
> > that.
> > > > > This
> > > > > > remains true, whether or not the website has been
updated.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42240 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
> And what real life thing have you done for Nova Roma, Tiberi
> Galeri?

< I am sorry indeed to see Diana Octavia return and what; join a
<cohors, taking Latin, help make a real life Nova Roma?

This is your favorite line Maoira. Unfortunately you never list your NR CV which includes being the
most incompetent Tribune that we've ever seen here to date. Maybe you spread yourself a bit too
thin? The titles mean nothing if you can't handle the work.

-Diana Aventina
(who spends her time volunteering at real Pagan organizations and not internet micronations full of
wanna-be Romans with puffed up egos and empty internet titles)
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42241 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
M. Hortensia Octavia salutem dicit;
for one, why are you here if to be unpleasant? If NR is
just 'puffed up wannabes with empty titles' I think you'd be happier
at Pagan Federation.

I actually am the only tribune who made sure that the election
results were announced and avoided an interrex. Or weren't you here
then? I also made sure that the tribune elections were held. I think
despite my faults I've done a good job.
I have always fufilled the offices I held, and they sure were
not empty titles;
I organized Provincia Hibernia & held a meeting as Propraetrix. I've
worked and am still working and researching the names project of the
Censors. And as tribune I made sure we had 2 Consuls. Even as a
priestess I wrote the Magna Mater ritual and another for lectisternia.
All historically accurate as possible.

I am also a member and supporter of the coin project. And right now
I'm trying to help a member of the religio in Romania to get some kind
of religious recognition under EU law.
So I think I'm doing okay.
so what positive thing are you doing today for Nova Roma?
vale
Marca Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebis
and yes we're responsible for the Certamen that
wonderful Serapio started: a real life literay prize.
started

> This is your favorite line Maoira. Unfortunately you never list your
NR CV which includes being the
> most incompetent Tribune that we've ever seen here to date. Maybe
you spread yourself a bit too
> thin? The titles mean nothing if you can't handle the work.
>
> -Diana Aventina
> (who spends her time volunteering at real Pagan organizations and
not internet micronations full of
> wanna-be Romans with puffed up egos and empty internet titles)
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42242 From: A. Tullia Scholastica Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Apology
> A. Tullia Scholastica Pompeiae Minuciae Straboni quiritibus, sociis,
> peregrinisque bonae uoluntatis S.P.D.
>
> Pompeia Minucia Strabo A. Tulliae Scholasticae Quiritibus S.P.D.
>
> Re: Message
>
> 41696
>
> After an expanse of thought, and well, a bit of a nagging conscience,
> I'd like to offer an apology to Tullia for being what I think is a
> little crustier than I should have been during the discussion of
> Senate Agendae.
>
> You of all citizens do not deserve anything but politeness and
> appreciation.
>
> ATS: Thank you for your gracious apology, which I accept in the spirit of
> friendship and courtesy with which it is offered. While I try to avoid
> getting deeply involved in political issues unnecessarily, it is important for
> the citizens to know what is going on in the Senate‹and elsewhere.
>
> Sorry amica
> Valete
>
> Vale, et ualete,
>
> Scholastica
>
>
>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42243 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Salve Octavi

You state that "the revival of the Religio is too important to be
left to the useless, vain and impotent" and that, to me at least,
confirms that the motivating factor behind this edict is a
personality dispute.

There was no urgency, no pressing need for this edict to be issued
now and in this manner. It was a matter of choice; in fact you
described the Senior Consul as being "compelled" to act. No one has
provided a rational and factual explanation for why he was so
compelled and up until now I was at a loss to deduce one myself to
explain this edict.

I believe it is the result of a combination of a collective
rashness, bitterness and pride. Allow me to explain and evidence
what at face value may seem a somewhat harsh verdict.

I think the rashness derives from the knowledge that the clock is
ticking on Modianus' consulship. We are already almost into March
and I think you all have certain objectives you wish to push
through. I don't know what they are and I shudder to speculate, but
I refuse to believe even the Senior Consul doesn't have the
rudiments of a political plan. This I think explains the compulsion
to act in such haste.

The bitterness is all to evident in your words above I quoted and
was also well documented on the now erased Peace List from 2004. You
were exceptionally frank there and agreed with me that personality
disputes underpinned much of what ailed Nova Roma. You even drew a
distinction between political opposition and personal opposition,
the latter founded on hurts done to friends of yours in the past.

Pride stems from your own admission that despite believing that the
Constitution contains a contradiction, a judgement was made and it
was interpreted to mean what you all wanted it to mean. You said it
could be fixed later, but it should have been fixed first, for there
was no power to interpret the Constitution and even if you don't
accept that, no evident immediate need to act, other than I suppose
a belief that the Collegium Augurum was broken and had to be fixed
and fixed now. Despite believing there was a constitutional
contradiction, you ignored that and ploughed on anyway. It also
stems I believe from the knowledge you had Pax Deorum tucked away as
your insurance policy.

This edict, and the lengths you are all prepared to go to, only
makes sense when seen as part of the ongoing struggle to alter
the "political" balance of the Collegium Pontificum. You all speak
about reviving the Religio Octavi, and Pax Deorum has been a year in
the planning and design apparently. What has been achieved? A web
page, a charter, some Yahoo lists, some titles (defunct now
apparently), but what else? Where is the action plan, the details,
the time lines and the resources necessary? Does it exist and if it
does why is it not being implemented now in NR, and please don't
tell me that gaining political control of the CP is necessary before
anyone can "do" anything, for that runs contrary to what has been
claimed in the past.

For two years this has been the mantra, the Religio is broken, the
CP should fix it and hasn't, failures one and all, and various
variations on a theme. For one year Pax Deorum has been planned and
frankly it just seems as though you have wasted that year creating
structures. No one will ever convince me that splitting your time
between two or more organizations has value. If in theory one only
has one hour a day free, is it better to choose one organization and
invest the full hour, or two and invest thirty minutes?

So I contend that Modianus (for as Consul he must take the
responsibility), but you as well and others, have deliberately
propelled us into this mess for no good or necessary reason, other
than to settle some old scores and move further towards your goal of
gaining control of the CP and worst of all I don't think any the
prime movers in this care that they have done so, because you have
your lifeboat ready and waiting.

Just after midday on April 10th 1912 Captain E.J. Smith ordered his
vessel out of Southampton, England. It charted a course that put it
into waters where there was an increased risk of icebergs. She was
of course RMS Titanic. Captain Smith's prime duty was the safety of
his passengers, but time was of the essence. He also allowed the
presence of a Director of the White Star Line to influence his
determination to press on. We all know the result. He by contrast
went down with his ship. He didn't, after taking a risk and causing
an unnecessary disaster, get in a lifeboat and row away into the
darkness towards rescue.

How sad that this edict was deemed so necessary when it is so
pointless in the bigger picture and worse still that if it all goes
wrong, now or at some point in the future, thanks to their
commencing a chain reaction of events all that we will see of our
Captain and his First Officer will be their hats disappearing over
the side as their own lifeboat is launched, and all we will hear is
the "splish splash" of their oars fading into the distance. I
suppose by contrast all they would hear would be "glug glug glug -
thunk" as NR sinks. Well they would hear it if they would be
listening, but I suspect they will close their ears and be planning
the activation of Pax Deorum.

A worse scenario is more likely however, that you continue this
political action plan and then after NR is sufficiently dented and
holed, you just row away because you couldn't achieve what you
wanted here, leaving those that are left to try and pump it dry.

The Senior Consul's duty is to the Constitution and where doubt
exists as to it's meaning, he should behave responsibly and elect
not to act, even if that costs him a political point or two.

There is still time to abandon what seems a very selfish and
dangerous action. I have little faith this will happen, but it
should.

That would be the right thing to do.

Vale
Caesar

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Matt Hucke <hucke@...> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 26 Feb 2006, Gnaeus Iulius Caesar wrote:
>
> > Salve Aurelia.
> >
> > As Octavius said: "As long as Nova Roma looks viable, Pax Deorum
> > will be nothing more than a lifeboat, standing ready."
> >
> > Not my words, his.
>
> Not all of us in Pax Deorum have the same vision for it. If Nova
Roma
> were to become a viable place for the Religio Romana again, I would
> not be sad at all to see Pax Deorum evaporate; others there may
have
> a different perspective.
>
> I, personally, see it as a lifeboat, because the revival of the
Religio
> is too important to be left to the useless, vain and impotent.
>
> Vale, Octavius.
>
> --
> hucke@...
> http://www.graveyards.com
>
> "The day will come when our silence will be more powerful than the
> voices you are throttling today." -- August Spies, 1887
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42244 From: M. Lucretius Agricola Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: The brave marcher
M. Lucretius Agricola Omnibus S.P.D.

If the brave soul planning to march the length of Hadrian's Wall is
present... could you contact me off list?

optime valete
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42245 From: Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Edictum Consulare Regarding Edictum dated Feb 18
EDICTUM CONSULARE

Regarding Edictum dated February 18, 2006.

Ex Officio

I hereby withdraw my previous edictum regarding Flavius Vedius
Germanicus as an Augur of Nova Roma. I stand firm that it was within
the law to reaffirm the status of Vedius as an Augur, however, in
order to maintain concordia within Nova Roma I withdraw said Edictum.
The status of Vedius as an augur is being deliberated within the
Collegium Pontificum and I trust the Pontifices will find a suitable
solution.

Dated XXVII February 11:10 AM Roman time, issued officially in the
consulship of Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus and Pompeia Minucia Strabo.

-----

EDICTUM CONSULARE

Regarding Flavius Vedius Germanicus as an Augur of Nova Roma.

Ex Officio

Flavius Vedius Germanicus, a Pater Patriae of Nova Roma, has
previously been an Augur of Nova Roma (March 1998 - March 2002). At
the time he resigned his citizenship, membership in the Collegium
Augurum was not automatically rescinded when citizenship was
renounced, in accordance with ancient tradition. With the authority of
LEX EQVITIA GALERIA DE LEGIBVS EX POST FACTIS (which states, "No one
shall suffer a penalty for an action which was not subject to a
penalty when the action was performed") and the authority to interpret
Nova Roma Law (integral to Consular Imperium), based on the
application of the LEX EQVITIA GALERIA DE LEGIBVS EX POST FACTIS to
this matter, I reinstate Flavius Vedius Germanicus as a full member of
the Collegium Augurium.

Dated XVIII February 11:30 AM Roman time, issued officially in the
consulship of Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus and Pompeia Minucia Strabo.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42246 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: a.d. III Kal. Mar.
OSD C. Equitius Cato

Salvete omnes!

Hodie est ante diem III Kalendas Martias; haec dies nefastus publicus est.

"Ecurria ab equorum cursu: eo die enim ludis currunt in Martio Campo."
- Varro, de Lingua Latina VI

"Mars Pater, te precor uti fortitudine et peritia horum equitum
Equirriae Senatus Populusque Norvorum Romanorum Quiritum iniciantur et
sies volens propitius mihi et Senatui Populoque Novorum Romanorum
Quiritum. Mars Pater, qui currui temporis equos citos suos iungit ut
mensem Martii adduucat, tibi fieri oportet culignam vini dapi, eius
rei ergo hac illace dape pullucenda esto."

(Father Mars, I pray you that the Senate and People of the Nova
Romans, the Quirites, may be inspired by the courage and skill of
these horsemen of the Equirria and that you may be propitious to the
Senate and People of the Nova Romans, the Quirites. Father Mars, who
hitches his swift horses to the chariot of time to bring on the month
of March, to you it is proper for a cup of wine to be given, for the
sake of this thing therefore may you be honoured by this feast
offering.) - L. Equitius Cincinnatus Augur (NR)

"Today the circus holds all of Rome." - Juvenal 11.197

"Now two nights of the second month remain,
And Mars urges on his chariot's swift horses.
The day has retained the name Equirria,
From the horse races the god views on his Fields.
Rightly you're here, Gradivus, Marching God: your season
Demands its place, the month marked by your name is near." - Ovid Fasti II

Today is the celebration of the first Equirria. The Equirria were holy
days with religious and military significance at either end of the new
year celebrations for Mars. The Roman state placed great emphasis on
celebrating the god of war - to support the army, and to boost public
morale. The aspect of Mars which was celebrated was as the god full of
the power of war; as opposed to Mars Quirinus, the god as protector of
the People, this is Mars Gravidus, "heavy" or "full". Priests
performed rites purifying of the army. Celebrants held horse races on
the Campius Martius (field of Mars), and drove a scapegoat out of the
city of Rome, expelling the old and bringing in the new. Romans
walked around the city boundaries in solemn procession and then gave
sacrifice, followed by a public feast. If the Campus Martius was
overflowed by the Tiber, the races took place on a part of the Mons
Coelius.

Valete bene!

Cato




SOURCES

Equirria (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equirria), Varro, Ovid
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42247 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: AEDILICIAN EDICT
Ex Officio Aedilis Curulis C. Equitius Cato

APPOINTMENT OF G. VIPSANIUS AGRIPPA

In accordance with the Senatus Consultum regarding the creation of the
new Nova Roman "QVADRIGA" sestertius, I hereby appoint Gaius Vipsanius
Agrippa, a member of the Ordo Equester and an authorized vendor in the
Macellum, to act as central distributor of the new coins.

He may, at his discretion, establish a network of secondary
distributors in order to facilitate the transportation of coins to our
various provinciae in the most effective manner.

This edict also recognizes and thanks the following citizens for their
hard work and support in the matter of the new sestertius:

A. Apollonius Cordus
M. Lucretius Agricola
Ti. Galerius Paulinus
Q. Seutonius Paulinus
L. Vitellius Triarius
P. Minius Mercator
D. Claudius Aquilius Germanicus
M. Hortensia Maior
Gn. Equitius Marinus
A. Tullius Cato
Q. Fabius Alectus
Gn. Salvius Astur
M. Arminius Minor

and the non-citizen:

Stephanus Vogelsangus

Their dedication is proof positive that citizens, acting together, can
create lasting physical monuments to the genius of the Republic.

Given by my hand this a.d. III Kalendas Martias in the consulship of
G. Fabius Buteo Modianus and P. Tiberia Strabo.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42248 From: CN•EQVIT•MARINVS (Gnaeus Equitius Mari Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Edictum Consulare Regarding Edictum dated Feb 18
Salve Consul Modiane, et salvete quirites,

> I hereby withdraw my previous edictum regarding Flavius Vedius
> Germanicus as an Augur of Nova Roma. I stand firm that it was within
> the law to reaffirm the status of Vedius as an Augur, however, in
> order to maintain concordia within Nova Roma I withdraw said Edictum.

Thank you Consul. I have hope that this will lead to a resolution of the
difficulties.

Vale,

CN•EQVIT•MARINVS
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42249 From: Lucius Equitius Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: EQUIRRIA PRIMA -- THE SACRIFICES
Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus Augur Quiritibus salutem dicit

Salvete,

As posted last year, an historical background for the 'CAERIMONIA EQUIRRIAE'.


The day of the Equirria begins shortly after dawn with a sacrifice* at
the Ara Martis in the Campus Martius, not far from the Porta
Fontinalis in the Servian wall, west of the Via Latia, the altar where
Romulus and Numa sacrificed. The pontifices are there and the Flamen
Martialis. Silence is pronounced and the sacred flute plays to
prevent an inauspicious sound from disturbing the caaerimonia. The
Capitoline Triad is invoked with Quirinus by offerings of incense and
libations of unmixed wine, prayers to Mars Himself addressed by the
Flamen Quirinalis on half of the Senate and People of Rome, the
Quirites. The victim, an ox, garlanded white white and scarlet woolen
ribbons, his back covered with an elaborately embroidered and fringed
dorsuale, is brought forward. The dorsuale is removed by attendants,
then the Flamen Martialis pours a few drops of wine upon the ox's
head, sprinkles the victim's back with mola salsa, and draws the
bronze sacrificial blade down the ox's back. The Flamen Martialis
commands the victimarius to strike, bringing the bronze poleaxe down
upon the victim's head. Stunned, the ox goes to his knees, and another
victimarius neatly cuts the victim's throat. Within moments the
victim is dead. This victim is placed on his back, the belly opened
quickly, and the haruspex inspects the internal organs (exta): the
liver, the lungs, the biliary blister, peritoneum and heart. Each is
normal, and the haruspex and Flamen Martialis pronounce the sacrifice
to be litatio -- accepted by Mars Pater. These exta are reserved and
skewered to be grilled before offering to Mars. The victimarii render
the remainder of the ox in preparation for the epulum.

When the skewered exta are grilled, the Flamen Martialis sprinkles
them with mola salsa and salt before placing them upon the burning
focus of the altar, the offers a libation of unmixed wine, "Mars
Pater, macte istace dape pollucenda esto, macte vino inferio esto
[Father Mars, may you be honoured by this feast offering, may you be
honoured by the humble wine]." He pours then a libation to each of
the invoked Gods and Goddeses in turn, and to Vesta, custodian of the
sacred fire. He profanes the remainder of the meat which is taken to
be roasted for the epulum feast.

The participants in the sacrifice partake of the epulum, eating the
meat and bread, drinking wine, praying and offering libations to Mars
Pater, joining in a common meal with the Gods to celebrate the feria.

It is likely that a second sacrifice, or perhaps a series of
libations, was offered somewhat later in the morning at the Aedes
Martis in Circo Flaminio, the temple of Mars adjoining the Circus
Flaminius near the Theatre of Pompey. This temple was designed for D.
Iunius Brutus Callaicus by Hermodorus of Salamis and dedicated in 138
BCE. According to Pliny, it contained Scopas' colossal statues of
Mars and Venus, and Valerius Maximus informs us it was decorated with
poetry by Accius. The ceremony here is believed to have served as a
preparation for the races of the day.

__________________
* - The precise formulae of the caerimoniae of the sacrifices of the
Feria Equirriae are unknown, but it is likely that they followed the
general form of most propritiatory sacrifices of the ritus Romanus, as
suggested here. Since Nova Roma is not in the position to offer
animal sacrifices at this time, the Flamen Martialis will offer a
non-animal sacrifice for the feria.


Valete

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42250 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Edictum Consulare Regarding Edictum dated Feb 18
A. Apollonius C. Buteoni omnibusque sal.

Thank you for this welcome move.



___________________________________________________________
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42251 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Do ex-Boni drink wine from lead cups?
F. Galerius Aurelianus flamen Cerialis S.P.D.

I have been a member of Nova Roma for about five years and have always wondered if when someone joined the Boni did they get a lead cup for wine-drinking. Every year, there has been some sort of major ML situation involving members or ex-members of the Boni and most of us rapidly become sick of it. If it is not Boni/ex-Boni versus someone else, it is Boni/ex-Boni versus Boni/ex-Boni. It becomes tiresome.
I get on with Aventina, Modianus, Hadrianus, Maximus, and Scaurus pretty well although I have had some problems with each of them from time to time but cannot understand why they go at each other so hard.

This post of Diana's is an example of something that is nothing but I can understand her question. I am a member of about ten lists that have something to do with the Sacra et Religio outside Nova Roma. I joined to learn more so I can better serve as a flamen and follower of the Sacra et Religio. No big mystery. Easy to answer if asked.

I would like to tell my friend Modianus that he is being overly sensitive to criticism and comments from some of his former friends, as well as private citizens & other magistrates, and he needs to be more careful and diplomatic in his responses. Remember, Modianus Consul, you are the co-president of Nova Roma and that requires you to practice a great deal more courtesy and tact than someone who is not an officer. If you cannot be even-handed in all your dealings with everyone, you may want to reconsider any further civil offices within Nova Roma. Not everything constitutes a WAR, you know.

Finally, to everyone involved in one or more of the recent disagreements, debates, arguments, trashing, and bashing I would just like to say, regardless of how put upon or victimized or justified you may be feeling in your responses--


--

--


GET DOWN OFF YOUR CROSS, BUILD A BRIDGE WITH THE WOOD, AND GET OVER IT!!!

Valete.

<snip>




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42252 From: Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Do ex-Boni drink wine from lead cups?
Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus F. Galerio Aureliano salutem dicit

You are absolutely right. I am the co-president of Nova Roma, and as
such should be a diplomatic, courteous, and tactful. My sincere
apologies to you, Diana, and everyone involved in the discussion of
late.

Valete:

Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
Consul

On 2/27/06, PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@... <PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@...> wrote:
> F. Galerius Aurelianus flamen Cerialis S.P.D.
>
> I have been a member of Nova Roma for about five years and have always wondered if when someone joined the Boni did they get a lead cup for wine-drinking. Every year, there has been some sort of major ML situation involving members or ex-members of the Boni and most of us rapidly become sick of it. If it is not Boni/ex-Boni versus someone else, it is Boni/ex-Boni versus Boni/ex-Boni. It becomes tiresome.
> I get on with Aventina, Modianus, Hadrianus, Maximus, and Scaurus pretty well although I have had some problems with each of them from time to time but cannot understand why they go at each other so hard.
>
> This post of Diana's is an example of something that is nothing but I can understand her question. I am a member of about ten lists that have something to do with the Sacra et Religio outside Nova Roma. I joined to learn more so I can better serve as a flamen and follower of the Sacra et Religio. No big mystery. Easy to answer if asked.
>
> I would like to tell my friend Modianus that he is being overly sensitive to criticism and comments from some of his former friends, as well as private citizens & other magistrates, and he needs to be more careful and diplomatic in his responses. Remember, Modianus Consul, you are the co-president of Nova Roma and that requires you to practice a great deal more courtesy and tact than someone who is not an officer. If you cannot be even-handed in all your dealings with everyone, you may want to reconsider any further civil offices within Nova Roma. Not everything constitutes a WAR, you know.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42253 From: Lucius Equitius Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: CAERIMONIA EQUIRRIAE
Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus Augur Quiritibus salutem dicit

Performed this year with a more accurate pronunciation.

CAERIMONIA EQUIRRIAE

I bathed in preparation, then, garbed in toga praetexta, cinctu Gabino,
capite velato, I began the praefatio.

Praefatio

"Iane Pater, te hoc ture commovendo bonas preces precor, uti sies volens
propitius mihi et Senatui Populoque Novae Romae"
[Father Ianus, by offering this incense to you I pray good prayers, so that you may be willingly propitious to me and the Senate and People of Nova Roma"].
I placed incense in the focus of the altar.

"Iuppiter Optime Maxime, te hoc ture commovendo bonas preces precor, uti
sies volens propitius mihi et Senatui Populoque Novae Romae"
[Iuppiter Best and Greatest, by offering this incense to you I pray good prayers,
so that you may be willingly propitious to me and the Senate and People
of Nova Roma"].
I placed incense in the focus of the altar.

"Iuno Dea, te hoc ture commovendo bonas preces precor, uti sies volens
propitia mihi et Senatui Populoque Novae Romae"
[Goddess Iuno, by offering this incense to you I pray good prayers, so that you may be willingly propitious to me and the Senate and People of Nova Roma"].
I placed incense in the focus of the altar.

"Minerva Dea, te hoc ture commovendo bonas preces precor, uti sies volens
propitia mihi et Senatui Populoque Novae Romae"
[Goddess Minerva, by offering this incense to you I pray good prayers, so that you may be willingly propitious to me and the Senate and People of Nova Roma."
I placed incense in the focus of the altar.

"Quirine Pater, te hoc ture commovendo bonas preces precor, uti sies
volens propitius mihi et Senatui Populoque Novae Romae"
[Father Quirinus, by offering this incense to you I pray good prayers, so that you may be willingly propitious to me and the Senate and People of Nova Roma.]"
I placed incense in the focus of the altar.

"Iane Pater, uti te ture commovendo bonas preces bene precatus sum,
eiusdem rei ergo macte vino inferio esto"
[Father Ianus, as by offering to you the incense virtuous prayers were well prayed, for the sake of this be honored by this humble wine.]"
I poured a libation on the altar.

"Iuppiter Optime Maxime, uti te ture commovendo bonas preces bene
precatus sum, eiusdem rei ergo macte vino inferio esto"
[Iuppiter Best and Greatest, as by offering to you the incense virtuous prayers were well prayed, for the sake of this be honored by this humble wine.]"
I poured a libation on the altar.

"Iuno Dea, uti te ture commovendo bonas preces bene precatus sum, eiusdem
rei ergo macte vino inferio esto"
[Goddess Iuno, as by offering to you the incense virtuous prayers were well prayed, for the sake of this be honored by this humble wine.]"
I poured a libation on the altar.

"Minerva Dea, uti te ture commovendo bonas preces bene precatus sum,
eiusdem rei ergo macte vino inferio esto"
[Goddess Minerva, as by offering to you the incense virtuous prayers were well prayed, for the sake of this be honored by this humble wine.]"
I poured a libation on the altar.

"Quirine Pater, uti te ture commovendo bonas preces bene precatus sum,
eiusdem rei ergo macte vino inferio esto"
[Father Mars, as by offering to you the incense virtuous prayers were well prayed, for the sake of this be honored by this humble wine.]"
I poured a libation on the altar.

I washed my hands in preparation for the praecatio.

Precatio

"Mars Pater, te precor uti fortitudine et peritia horum equitum
Equirriae Senatus Populusque Norvorum Romanorum Quiritum iniciantur et
sies volens propitius mihi et Senatui Populoque Novorum Romanorum
Quiritum. Mars Pater, qui currui temporis equos citos suos iungit ut
mensem Martii adduucat, tibi fieri oportet culignam vini dapi, eius rei
ergo hac illace dape pullucenda esto"
[Father Mars, I pray you that the Senate and People of the Nova Romans, the Quirites, may be inspired by the courage and skill of these horsemen of the Equirria and that you may be propitious to the Senate and People of the Nova Romans, the
Quirites. Father Mars, who hitches his swift horses to the chariot of time to bring on the month of March, to you it is proper for a cup of wine to be given, for the sake of this thing therefore may you be honored by this feast offering]."
I poured a libation on the altar and added laurel for Mars.

Again I washed my hands in preparation for the redditio.

Redditio

"Mars Pater, qui in campo suo certamen Equirriae semper prospicit, macte
istace dape pollucenda esto, macte vino inferio esto"
[Father Mars, who always observes from afar the race of the Equirria on his own field, may you be honoured by this feast offering, may you be honoured by the
humble wine.]"
I offered Mars Pater laurel, cakes and wine on the altar.

"Quirine Pater, uti te ture commovendo bonas preces bene precatus sum,
eiusdem rei ergo macte vino inferio esto"
[Father Mars, as by offering to you the incense virtuous prayers were well prayed, for the sake of this be honoured by this humble wine.]"
I poured a libation on the altar.

"Minerva Dea, uti te ture commovendo bonas preces bene precatus sum,
eiusdem rei ergo macte vino inferio esto "
[Goddess Minerva, as by offering to you the incense virtuous prayers were well prayed, for the sake of this be honoured by this humble wine.]"
I poured a libation on the altar.

"Iuno Dea, uti te ture commovendo bonas preces bene precatus sum, eiusdem
rei ergo macte vino inferio esto"
[Goddess Iuno, as by offering to you the incense virtuous prayers were well prayed, for the sake of this be honoured by this humble wine.]"
I poured a libation on the altar.

"Iuppiter Optime Maxime, uti te ture commovendo bonas preces bene
precatus sum, eiusdem rei ergo macte vino inferio esto"
[Iuppiter Best and Greatest, as by offering to you the incense virtuous prayers were well prayed, for the sake of this be honoured by this humble wine.]"
I poured a libation on the altar.

"Iane Pater, uti te ture commovendo bonas preces bene precatus sum,
eiusdem rei ergo macte vino inferio esto"
[Father Ianus, as by offering to you the incense virtuous prayers were well prayed, for the sake of this be honoured by this humble wine.]"
I poured a libation on the altar.

"Vesta Dea, custos ignis sacri, macte vino inferio esto"
[Goddess Vesta, guardian of the sacred fire, be honoured by this humble wine.]"
I poured a libation on the altar.

"Illicet" [It is permitted to go.]"

I profaned wine and cakes, and I partook of the epulum with Mars Pater,
praying as I ate and offering libations in my private devotions.

Piaculum

Since the historical caerimonia of the feria of the Equirria has not yet
been recovered (in fact we know virtually nothing about it; a few
formulae here have been adapted from Ovid's _Fasti_) , I offered a
piaculum to Mars Pater if anything in this caerimonia should offend him:

"Mars Pater, si quidquam tibi in hac caerimonia displicet, hoc ture
veniam peto et vitium meum expio"
[Father Mars, if anything in this ceremony is displeasing to you, with this incense I ask forgiveness and expiate my fault.]"
I offered incense on the altar.

"Mars Pater, si quidquam tibi in hac caerimonia displicet, hoc vino inferio veniam peto et vitium meum expio"
[Father Mars, if anything in this ceremony is displeasing to you, with this humble wine I ask forgiveness and expiate my fault.]"
I poured a libation on the altar.


Valete

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42254 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
A. Apollonius omnibus sal.

Since I seem to have missed all the fun yesterday, let
me just state my view on this as briefly as I may.

The only thing that really worried me about Pax Deorum
was its use of titles taken from the historical sacra
publica populi Romani. This was not in keeping with
its expressed aim. The existence of pontifices implies
the existence of sacra publica, and the existence of
sacra publica implies a populus and thus a res publica
- and yet the organization explicitly disavowed any
link with any particular state or people. But it seems
that this has now been rectified, and I can see
nothing objectionable about the group now.

One might draw an analogy with the Church of England.
The Church of England is an established church with a
very specific constitutional role within a particular
state, the United Kingdom. Similarly our sacra
publica, supervised by the pontifices and other public
priests, fulfill a specific constitutional role within
our res publica. But no doubt many members, and many
senior officials, of the Church of England are also
members of international and purely private
organizations which seek to promote or support
Christianity in general, and that presents no
constitutional problem. Nor, in my view, are any
constitutional problems presented by the membership of
certain of our senior public priests of a purely
private organization which aims to support and promote
traditional Roman religion.

It is, however, regrettable that some of those people
should feel the need to contemplate a sort of escape
plan from Nova Roma. There is a great difference
between seeing an organization like Pax Deorum as a
valuable complement to Nova Roma, able to do things
that Nova Roma cannot do or has less time to do, and
seeing such an organization as a back-up or an
alternative to Nova Roma, a safe place to go to when
Nova Roma gets too frustrating.

Time and again our res publica has suffered as a
result of one or other group of energetic and valuable
citizens being overcome by frustration and simply
giving up on Nova Roma to pursue their aims by some
other means. They often say that they have been driven
out: this is simply another way of saying that they
took the path of least resistance rather than staying
and working for the change they wanted. Leaving is
always a choice, and it is usually a choice which
makes life easier and better for the one who leaves
and harder and worse for those who remain.

Lifeboats are first and foremost for the passengers of
a ship. But the how much confidence can those
passengers have when they see senior members of the
crew constructing their own lifeboat? Not a lot, in my
opinion. Those who claim to be leaders of our
community should not have their own private escape
plans. They should be unequivocally committed to
saving the ship, and if they can't save the it they
should be prepared to go down with it.



___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Photos – NEW, now offering a quality print service from just 8p a photo http://uk.photos.yahoo.com
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42255 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Salve Gnae Iuli,

> You state that "the revival of the Religio is too important to be
> left to the useless, vain and impotent" and that, to me at least,
> confirms that the motivating factor behind this edict is a
> personality dispute.

The motivating factor is our frustration that what was once the primary
mission of Nova Roma has been abandoned.

> You all speak about reviving the Religio Octavi, and Pax Deorum has
> been a year in the planning and design apparently. What has been achieved?

Very little; it hasn't been a high priority. Getting Nova Roma back on
course has been our primary concern. As long as there's a shred of hope
here, Pax Deorum will likely come together very slowly, if at all. I myself
have done much more work on Nova Roma than on Pax Deorum in the past
three months (watch this space for a major announcement concerning one of
those projects, later today).

What has been achieved by the religious institutions of Nova Roma in the
past two years? How many articles have you published? How many public
rituals have you done? How many newspaper interviews have the Pontifices
given?

The Collegium Augurium is in even worse shape. The senior Augur refuses
to acknowledge the existence of the junior Augur, has thrown him off
the collegiate mailing list, and has mocked his title in front of the
Collegium Pontificum. It is out of frustration with such evil treatment
that Modianus sought to repair the augurship.

> Just after midday on April 10th 1912 Captain E.J. Smith ordered his
> vessel out of Southampton, England.

If Modianus and I are captaining the Titanic, then the Collegium Pontificum
and Collegium Augurium of Nova Roma are the iceberg. Frozen, inert,
barely mobile, yet a major obstacle to anyone who wishes progress.

Unfortunately, a captain who tried to steer around the iceberg has had
his character assassinated by the passengers. Unable to make his course
correction, we're now aimed squarely for that iceberg once again.

Vale, Octavius.

--
hucke@...
http://www.graveyards.com

"The day will come when our silence will be more powerful than the
voices you are throttling today." -- August Spies, 1887
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42256 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: The sense of family that is needed in Nova Roma
F. Galerius Aurelianus S.P.D.

The gentes Galeria Aureliana and Galeria Paulina have always strived to be oriented towards one another, Nova Roma, and the real world in a very active manner. We speak by telephone, email, and visit with each other as often as possible. This is something that creates a strong bond between us and prevents the divisions between family members that one sees all to often these days in Nova Roma in some of our more prominent families and gentes. Tiberius, Gaia, Appius, Violentilla, myself, and most of the family consider Helena Galeria Aureliana our materfamilias and offer her the respect and affection that she deserves as the founder of our clan.

The foundation of Nova Roma and Old Rome is the family and the foundation of the Religio Romana is the sacra privata or family religion. The strong roots of family ties and respect for each other's beliefs encourages strength and trust within of our organization. I encourage each and every active member of Nova Roma to communicate within your chosen families, patch up quarrels, and reach an understanding with one another. Although the Feast of Cara Cognatio (Dear Relation) is past, there is still time to begin to build good family relations within each gens and domus. Once the channels of communication are opened between individual members of the Fabii, Iulii, Cornelii, Equitii, and our other families, there will be a better chance that conflicts can be avoided in the future by private communication and a renewed sense of trust.

Vadete in pacem Cereri.

-----Original Message-----
From: Timothy P. Gallagher <spqr753@...>
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 04:55:29 -0000
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: What is going on please?


Salve Marca Hortensia Maior

Well I published Nova Roma's hands on newsletter a " physical "
thing that people can touch. I have had dinner with Nova Romans.
Attended Roman Days. Donated books on Rome to local libraries and
created the Nova Roma book plate that all Nova Romans can use when
they make similar donations. Worked for a "physical" symbol of
being Nova Roman ie the SPQR ring. I am currently working to
establish a Maryland Society for Roman Studies and a research
library.

<snip>

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42257 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Edictum Consulare Regarding Edictum dated Feb 18-OH Yeah!
HOORAY! Three cheers and an "Atta-boy" to our conscientious Modianus Consul.

(And I don't want to see no gloating by his opposition!)

F. Galerius Aurelianus


EDICTUM CONSULARE

Regarding Edictum dated February 18, 2006.

Ex Officio

I hereby withdraw my previous edictum regarding Flavius Vedius
Germanicus as an Augur of Nova Roma. I stand firm that it was within
the law to reaffirm the status of Vedius as an Augur, however, in
order to maintain concordia within Nova Roma I withdraw said Edictum.
The status of Vedius as an augur is being deliberated within the
Collegium Pontificum and I trust the Pontifices will find a suitable
solution.

Dated XXVII February 11:10 AM Roman time, issued officially in the
consulship of Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus and Pompeia Minucia Strabo.

<snip>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42258 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: What is going on please?
Cat-Fight! Cat-Fight! Twenty serterces on Diana Octavia. Any takers?

C'mon ladies, take your argument off the list.

Aurelianus

<snip>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42259 From: gaiuspopilliuslaenas Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Edictum Consulare Regarding Edictum dated Feb 18
--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "A. Apollonius Cordus"
<a_apollonius_cordus@...> wrote:
>
> A. Apollonius C. Buteoni omnibusque sal.
>
> Thank you for this welcome move.
>


Slave Consul Modianus et salvete onmes,

I wish to echo the words of mi maicer Cordus - thank you consul.

Vale et valete,

Laenas
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42260 From: rysullivan Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Archaeology Links of Possible Interest
TITUS LICINIUS CRASSUS CIVIBUS S.P.D.

Piscinus wrote earlier:
"Nova Roma is ... incorporated as an educational organization ..."

While I realize that this is taking it a bit out of context, it made me
think about what might be helpful or of interest in an "educational
organization". Therefore, I thought our citizens might be interested in
some or all of the following links to recent news items:

Parthenon sculptures were coloured blue, red and green

http://www.physorg.com/news11191.html
<http://www.physorg.com/news11191.html>


Photo of Roman Headstone fnd. in Lancaster/UK:

http://www.romanarmy.com/imb/imagebase-show.asp?ID=232
<http://www.romanarmy.com/imb/imagebase-show.asp?ID=232>


Archaeologists Expand Live Online Greek and Roman Workshops into the
Evening

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2006/2/prweb350469.htm
<http://www.prweb.com/releases/2006/2/prweb350469.htm>

I hope these are of interest to some and will pass on more as I find
them.

valete,

Crassus








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42261 From: Gnaeus Cornelius Lentulus Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Edictum Consulare Regarding Edictum dated Feb 18
Cn. Cornelius Lentulus: COS C. Fabio Buteoni.: omnibusque: sal.:

I would like to add my voice to those who give publicly thank to the Consul that he has withdrawn his Edictum. Even if I agreed with him, I thought that concord is the most important aspiration in a voluntary organization.

Now everybody can see that the Consul had a good intention and a persuasion that what he did was legal -- the incidental danger that this debate will make furher enmity in NR impelled him to withdraw the Edictum, as it's manifest now.

It is worthless to mention how was ridiculous to suppose a conspiracy while the Consul just laboured to rescue the Collegium Augurum which, in that form it exists today in, is rather disabled. The instrument he adopted was probalbly unconstitutional in our view, but was not in the view of the ancient Romans: they would see it to be problematic or questionable, but not against the unwritten constitution. Namly according to this unwritten constitution Consuls have all the power, the power to do anything they think to be necessary for the betterment of the State (except issuing laws)-- similarly to what our written constitution says: "Consuls have the power to issue those edicta necessary to engage in those tasks which advance the mission and function of Nova Roma."

This edictum was necessery to engage in those tasks which advanced the mission and function of Nova Roma, as consul Buteo thought. He issued that edictum: when he would step down from his consulatus he would be amenable to law, he, but not his edictum which if once issued by a consul and didn't supersede the law, is legal under any cosideration.

Valete!


Gnaeus Cornelius Lentulus,
Q U A E S T O R
-------------------------------
Propraetor Provinciae Pannoniae
Sacerdos Provinciae Pannoniae
Accensus Consulis C. Fabii Buteonis
Scriba Censoris C. Minucii Hadriani Felicis
Scriba Aedilis Curulis T. Iulii Sabini
Scriba Interpretis Linguae Latinae Tulliae Scholasticae
-------------------------------
Sodalis Sodalitatis Latinitatis
Latinista, Classicus Philologus


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

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42262 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Edictum Consulare Regarding Edictum dated Feb 18
C. Equitius Cato G. Fabio Buteoni Modiano quiritibusque S.P.D.

A very good action, consul.

Vale et valete,

Cato
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42263 From: Timothy P. Gallagher Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Thank you
Salve Consul Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus

I wish express my sincere thanks to you for this action.

Thank you Consul.

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42264 From: gaiuspopilliuslaenas Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Auguries
Salvete Quirites,

As I was catching up on the Main List this morning, I noted a few
posts about "fixing" a College of Augurs that was not functioning
properly.

I am not sure exactly what the writers meant. During my Consulship,
Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus Augur served as my religious advisor. I
usually (perhaps always, I can't remember) asked him to take the
auspices when I was calling the Senate, setting dates for voting,
etc. He was always available to me and always responded on a timely
basis. On at least one occasion, he helped me avoid what would have
been a Religio blunder.

My colleague in the Consulship, Fr. Apulus Caesar, had Gaius Fabius
Bueto Modianus as his religious advisor and, I believe, asked him to
take the auspices most of the time when he was presiding magistrate.

Therefore, although it would not hurt to have more Augurs in the
college and I would personally welcome that, it is not my experience
that the College needs "fixing" or that it has failed in what I
understand to be its primary duties. On the contrary, on my watch
their performance was exemplary.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42265 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Edictum Consulare Regarding Edictum dated Feb 18
Salve Consul.

This was a good and correct action.

Vale
Caesar

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus"
<tau.athanasios@...> wrote:
>
> EDICTUM CONSULARE
>
> Regarding Edictum dated February 18, 2006.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42266 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Do ex-Boni drink wine from lead cups?
Salve Uncle P,

I don't have a lead cup, but a mug with an un-smiley face since I am not a morning kind of gal.

> I get on with Aventina, Modianus, Hadrianus, Maximus, and Scaurus pretty well although I have had
> some problems with each of them from time to time but cannot understand why they go at each other
> so hard.

I am certain that we've never had a problem, but I haven't had a mid-term memory since a 106 fever
wiped it out in 1981. If there was a problem between us, I'll remember it in about 5 years time. But
let's not wait 5 years for me to apologize. If you remember a problem with me, let me know offlist
and I will do the appropriate grovelling and offer a very humble apology.

Vale,
Diana
PS- I'm serious!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42267 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Do ex-Boni drink wine from lead cups?
Salve Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus,

> You are absolutely right. I am the co-president of Nova Roma, and as
> such should be a diplomatic, courteous, and tactful. My sincere
> apologies to you, Diana, and everyone involved in the discussion of
> late.

Aren't you sweet? Apology accepted. And I aplogize in return for sending that alarmist email. My
worry was that you'll all leave NR and really nothing more than that.

Vale,
Diana
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42268 From: Gnaeus Cornelius Lentulus Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: The sense of family that is needed in Nova Roma
Cn. Cornelius Lentulus Fl. Galerio Aureliano sal.:

I like your suggestion, care Galeri Aureliane, and I myself thought of this more than once, but I had to realize the problem that my gens, which once was big and flourishing and one of the most active gentes: today is sleeping deeply.

I don't know any Cornelius who is presently active, perhaps L. Cornelius Malacitanus whose messages I could read sometimes, but not too frequently.

How could I build relationships in that way? My father is also a citizen, Cn. Lentulus maior, but I don't to build relationship with him as we keep in thouch quite frequently. :-)

Your idea, however, would suit me...

Cura ut valeas!

Cn. Cornelius Lentulus
Propraetor & Quaestor
Sacerdos Pannoniae


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

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42269 From: Patrick D. Owen Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: HEY, CORNELII!! MEMBERS OF THE GENS CORNELIA--READ THIS!!!
Here is a member of the Gens Cornelia that wants to communicate with
members of his clan. Write to him and open up some dialogue. Get
back in the organization. Vivat Cornelius Lentulus.

FGA

Cn. Cornelius Lentulus Fl. Galerio Aureliano sal.:

<SNIP>
I don't know any Cornelius who is presently active, perhaps L.
Cornelius Malacitanus whose messages I could read sometimes, but not
too frequently.

How could I build relationships in that way? My father is also a
citizen, Cn. Lentulus maior, but I don't to build relationship with
him as we keep in thouch quite frequently. :-)

Your idea, however, would suit me...

Cura ut valeas!

Cn. Cornelius Lentulus
Propraetor & Quaestor
Sacerdos Pannoniae
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi, antispam, antivirus, POP3
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42270 From: darren_pile Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Augeries
Salvete,

This might seem like a dopey question but how are the augeries
taken? I appreciate that it's about watching the flight of birds
i.e. how high / low and what direction they're flying etc, but what
are the good or bad signs?

Does one divide the sky up and say if birds enter a certain section
then that's a good sign or conversely a bad sign?

I am aware that the ancient Romans kept sacred chickens which they
gave special cakes and if the chickens ate them furiously then this
was supposedly a good sign but I know nothing about the flight of
birds.

Vale,

G. Livius Crassus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42271 From: Patrick D. Owen Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: ON AUGURIES-an article by M. Moravius Horatius Piscinus flamen Carm
F. Galerius Aurelianus flamen Cerialis G. Livio Crasso. Salve

This might seem like a dopey question but how are the augeries
taken? I appreciate that it's about watching the flight of birds
i.e. how high / low and what direction they're flying etc, but what
are the good or bad signs?

G. Livius Crassus

ON AUGURIES

"Acting on presages lies within our power, and their value
depends on the way in which they are interpreted Â…"
Pliny the Elder Natural History 28, 17

Contributed by Marcvs Moravivs Horativs Piscinvs

Background
The art of augury concerns the taking and interpreting signs from
nature in order to determine the will of the gods. Chrysippus
(2.130) defined divination as the "power to see, to understand, to
interpret the signs that are given to men by the gods." But augury
is not a form of divination as we usually think of such, in that it
does not attempt to foretell future events. Instead a course of
action is proposed, such as the planning of a wedding or plans to
erect a public building, and the gods are consulted as to whether
they approve or not.
More specifically, augury concerns signs brought from the gods by
birds. Augury is therefore distinct from haruspicy, which looks at
the entrails (exta) of sacrificial animals to see if they had been
acceptable to the gods (see modern method of haruspicy in Art of
Harupsicy page). The Etruscans were credited with bringing haruspicy
to Rome. They were also said to have brought to Rome their form of
augury. But there is a notable difference between the Etruscan
practices and those found at Rome (Cicero: On Divination 1.41, 2.35,
38; On the Nature of the Gods II.4).

The Etruscans employed ostentaria that notes the direction from
which certain birds call. The Romans noted the oscines as well, but
also watched for the flights of birds. The use of the flight of
birds as omens was common in other parts of Italy as well as in
Greece and the Near East (Cicero, On Divination 1.92). The earliest
mention of augury is found in Homer's Iliad, dating to around 700
BCE. That is not to say that the Romans adopted their particular
form of augury from others, for there are some differences between
the Roman practice and elsewhere.

For example the Greeks regarded signs on the right to be favourable,
whereas in Roman practice the left was considered favourable. In the
Libri Fulgurales the Etruscans recorded those omens concerning the
direction from which thunder could be heard and lightning seen. The
sky was divided into sixteen regions for divining, and eleven
different kinds of lightning were recognized by the Etruscan, each
wielded by a different god. The Romans adopted a similar method from
the Etruscans that they included alongside their other forms of
augury, but recognized only three gods and one goddess as wielders
of lightning – Iuppiter, Veiovis, Summanus, and Minerva. (Pliny,
Natural History II.138 only recognized Iuppiter and Summanus.) While
the Romans greatly acknowledged the Etruscan influence, what they
borrowed from their northern neighbors was only accretions on a
traditional core of practices that were essentially Italic in
origin.

Back to Top

The Roman form of augury was said to have begun with Attus Navius
around 600 BCE. According to legend, Navius was a swineherd who
owned a vineyard. One day when he lost one of his pigs, he prayed to
the Lares that if they would assist him in finding the pig, he would
sacrifice his choicest bunch of grapes to them. The next day the pig
was found. Going to the center of his vineyard, Attus Navius used
his swineherd's staff to divide his vineyard into four quarters. He
then noticed that the birds favoured one particular quarter. He went
to the center of this quarter and again using his staff he divided
it into another four quarters. Again the birds favoured one
quarter, and so he again divided that section of his vineyard into
four sections. Proceeding in this manner he discovered an enormous
bunch of grapes, which he then sacrificed to the Lares. News of this
spread to Navius' neighbors who then began to consult with him.
Thereby Navius gained a reputation as an augur. When news of Navius
reached the king of Rome, Tarquinius Priscus, he was called upon to
take the auspices for an important matter.

Tarquinius wished to create new centuries of cavalry in addition to
the three existing ones of the Ramnes, Titienses and Luceres,
established by Romulus. Navius found that all the omens were
unfavourable to Tarquin's plan. This angered the king, who mockingly
demanded that Navius, "Come then, prophet, divine by your augural
art whether it is possible to do what I am thinking of at this
moment." Navius took the auspices and reported that whatever the
king was thinking would in fact come to pass. Tarquinius said, "Well
then, I was thinking of you cutting a whetstone in half with a
razor. Fetch them at once and perform what your birds declare can be
done." Navius did as he was told and cut the whetstone in half. A
statue of Navius with his head veiled was erected in the comitium to
the left of the Senate House, along with the whetstone, and he went
on to serve as the official augur (Livy, A.U.C. I.36.2-6).

Any paterfamilias was able to take auspices for private ceremonies.
Most commonly private auspices were taken when marriages were
proposed. For the auspicia publica, however, only the highest
magistrates were permitted. The magistrates represented the state
and thus acted on behalf of all of Rome whenever the gods were
consulted. The power to take auspices was transferred from one
magistrate to the next; that is, after an official was elected he
had to perform a special augury to see if the gods approved his
election. If the omens were good he was then "inaugurated" into
office. The magistrates also took the auspices whenever the various
comitia and Senate were to meet, whenever the erection of a temple
or other public building was proposed, or whenever the Romans were
about to go to war. Magistrates also commanded the Roman armies,
and auspices were taken prior to engaging in any battle. In taking
the auspicia publica the magistrates were assisted by various
priests.

Augures were on hand for interpreting the calls and flights of
birds. As sacrifices were often made along with the taking of
auspices, Haruspices were present for reading entrails. Fulgatores
might be present should any lighting and thunder occur that would
need interpreting. Always present for auguries were the tibicines
(flute-players) who played throughout the ceremony. Originally at
Rome there seems to have been two official augurs established as a
collegium during the regal period. These were increased to four,
and later to nine by the inclusion of five plebeian augurs in 300
BCE. The augurs did not themselves conduct the ceremony of taking
auspices. Their role was mainly to oversee that the ceremony was
conducted properly especially in establishing a templum, to point
out certain possible omens to a magistrate, and to interpret omens
as might appear.

Very early in the history of the Roman Republic members of the
patrician order put forward a claim that only patricians could act
as mediators between the gods and men, and that therefore only
patricians could take the auspices (Livy: IV.2, VI.41; X.8). The
issue first arose when a new law was included in the Twelve Tablets
in 450 BCE that outlawed intermarriage between patricians and
plebeians. A special marriage ceremony was held for patricians
called a confarreatio in which the taking of auspices was part of
the ceremony. There is really nothing to suggest that plebeians did
not conduct confarreatio ceremonies as well, whereas there is
everything to suggest that confarreatio was conducted for marriages
between patricians and plebeians prior to the introduction of the
Twelve Tablets.

Intermarriage between patricians and plebeians was commonly
practiced before 450 BCE. This particular law was then overturned in
445 BCE with the passage of the Lex Canuleia. Patricians continued
to insist that only they could take auspices and tried to use that
excuse to exclude plebeians from magistracies, prevent the comitia
plebis from meeting, and to veto plebiscita passed in the comitia.
However the very first consul of the Roman Republic, L. Junius
Brutus, was a plebeian, as were possibly as many as fifteen other
consuls between 509 and 445 BCE. Plebeian rights to hold the highest
magistracies were guaranteed under a series of laws: quaestores were
already being elected by the plebeians in 447 BCE, the Leges
Liciniae-Sextae for consuls in 367 BCE, dictator in 356, censor in
351, lex Genucia for consuls again in 342, Lex Ovinia of 339
required plebeian inclusion in the Senate, praetorship by 337 BCE.
The comitia plebis was first organized in 494 BCE during the first
secessio of the plebeians. It met without a requirement for
auspicia publica. With the Lex Icilia of 471, magistrates were no
longer able to interrupt its proceedings.

Thus patrician augurs could not use the excuse of bad omens to
prevent the plebeians from holding their councils. Patrician veto
over the Comitia Centuriata, another assembly of the people composed
of both patricians and plebeians, was next cancelled in 339 when the
requirement of the patrum auctoritas in advance of votes on laws was
then proscribed. With the passage of the Leges Ogulniae in 300 BCE
the collegium of augurs was opened to plebeians so that the four
patrician augurs were then joined by five plebeian augurs. Thus the
repeated claim by some patricians that only they had a right to take
auspices was generally ignored during the history of the Roman
Republic and finally made mute. (See Religions of Rome, May Beard
et al, p.64.)

When to take Auguries

For certain events affecting an entire society auspicia publica
should be taken. This would include after the election of public
magistrates to see that they are acceptable to the gods. The same
should be made for elected officials of any sodalitas. If only
auspices of the gods' disapproval are obtained, or if something
should vitiate the auspices, then the official-elect is obliged to
withdraw and another election held. Even if it is later discovered
that the favorable auspices were performed improperly, the
magistrate is to resign his or her office (Cicero: On the Nature of
the Gods II.10-12). If bad omens occur along with approving auspices
the elected official may take office and special rites conducted to
attain divine assistance during their tenure. (See below on more
details on mixed omens.) When a call is made for the assembly of any
comitia auspices should be taken, but the assembly of the comitia
cannot be prevented by bad omens. The assembly of the Senate does
not require auspices be taken. Any decision made or leges passed by
the comitia or Senate does not generally require auspices be taken.
However, decisions to erect temples or other special public
facilities, or decisions on joining with other societies, or on
sending or receiving ambassadors, do require the taking of auspices.
Treaties, alliances, and declarations of war cannot be finalized
until the auspices are taken and the gods signify their approval. If
the auspices indicate disapproval of a proposal to build a temple or
other public facility, then it should be determined whether the
chosen site or some other aspect of the proposal needs to be
altered, and auspices taken again.

Private auspices should be taken whenever major decisions affecting
the patrimony of a family are to be made. This would include
proposed marriages (Cicero: On Divination 1.16) or plans to buy,
sell, or build on any property. At other times, whenever a special
request is made of the gods, then auspices may be taken in private
to see if the gods will approve of the request. Such requests are
usually made by a do ut des formula, and thus it may be required to
take auspices to see if the proposed action is sufficient to please
the god(s) who are being asked the favor. Individuals may also want
to take auspices when considering major decisions in their personal
lives.

Performing an augury

The first step in observing auspices is to select a spot of high
ground. At Rome the tale is told of how Romulus took auspices for
the founding of the city while seated on the Palatine Hill; Remus
also took auspices on the Aventine Hill. Later when the Latins and
Sabines united, Romulus established the Auguraculum upon the Arx,
the northern summit of Mons Saturni now known as the Capitoline
Hill. The Sabines on the collis Latiaris established another
auguraculum, which is the southern most point on the Quirinal. This
Auguraculum Quirnale is mentioned only by Varro (L.L. V.5.2). At
these established auguracula it was not necessary to make the first
step of drawing out a templum for where the ceremony would be held.
In military camps augurale were similarly established (Tacitus:
Annales II.13, XV.30). But each time the Comitia Centuriata was to
be called a new templum would have to be drawn in the Campus
Martius, and the same would hold true for any other occasion.

A spot is selected to mark out a templum on the ground, drawing out
first the cardo running east and west, then the decumanus running
north and south, according to astronomical observations. The same is
described for laying out an estate, as Pliny mentions (NH XVIII.76-
77), or a military camp, a colony or a city. The cardo is determined
by the point on the horizon where the sun rises and sets, altering
through the seasons, and not by determining the true east-west
direction. The decumanus is determined by observing Polaris and not
by employing a compass. Then two sets of parallel lines are drawn to
form a rectangle in a proportion of 6:5. At the center of the
templum the Romans would erect a tabernaculum, a square tent with
its opening facing south.

The magistrate taking the auspices is referred to as an auspex,
distinct from the augurs who interpret the signs (Cicero: On
Divination 1.48; On the Nature of the Gods II.3; On the Laws II.13).
The auspex sits out in front of the tabernaculum, usually near the
edge of a hilltop, while his assistants and the tibicines and
tibicinae will stand within. The purpose of the tabernaculum was to
avoid the auspex from being distracted by auspicia oblativa, or
naturally occurring omens, and that he might concentrate on the
auspicia imperitiva being sought in the sky (see below).

Throughout the ceremony the tibicines and tibicinae are to play
their flutes. Mention is made in the ancient texts that this was
done to prevent the magistrate from being interrupted by the sounds
of any ill omens. However there may have been more to this and the
flute players might have also been present to draw birds to the
templum. It was normal practice to have tibicnes and tibicinae play
during any Roman ceremony, as a way of pleasing the gods. The first
step in the ceremony would be to perform a libation to Iuppiter,
stating the reason that auspices are being taken and asking that He
give his approval. Only Iuppiter sends the birds to act as
messengers of the gods in public auguries (Cicero: On Divination
2.34, Aves internuntiae Jovis; On the Laws II.8, Interpretes Jovis
optimi maximi publici augures). For private auguries other gods or
goddesses may be called upon and a sacrifice would then be offered
to them. One emblem of an augur is the special earthen vessel
(capis) used in making this libation. Incense and flute music are
also offered as a part of this opening sacrifice.

Next the magistrate would employ his lituus to designate another
templum in the sky. A lituus is a special wand of augury, made from
a tree branch (possibly ash or hazel) without any knots and with one
end naturally curled. With the lituus he would again draw out a
templum by designating the cardo and decumanus. One formula has the
auspex call out, "This shall be to my left is the East, and this to
my right shall be the West. This before me is South, that behind me
is North." Then the enclosing sides are drawn. The boundaries of
this celestial templum are designated by the auspex in calling out
points of reference on the ground. Varro says that different
formulas were used to designate a templum, and offers one such
formula as was used on the Arx:

"Let the boundaries of my templa and the wild lands (tesca) be as I
declare them with my words. That tree of whatever kind it is which I
deem myself to have named, let it be the boundary of my templum and
the wild land to the right. That tree, of whatever kind it is,
insofar as I deem myself to have named it, let it be the boundary of
my temple and the wild land on the left. Between these points I
have established the templa and the wild lands by means of directing
(conregione), viewing (conspicione), reflecting (cortumiones) as far
as I have been most rightly aware of it within this limit." (Varro:
On the Latin Language, VII.8)

The plural form is used here, seemingly making each boundary line a
templum. Varro goes on by quoting from Ennius' play
Medea, "Contemplate and see the templum of Ceres on the leftÂ…" to
draw a parallel between the words contemplate (contempla) and
templa. The formula also mentions the plural form tesca that is
translated as "wild lands" but these are rural sanctuaries of gods.
The area within the boundaries of the rectangular templum is divided
into four quarters by the cardo and decumanus, and there were
further divisions, to a total of sixteen, each division dedicated to
a particular divinity. A similar practice is found in the Etruscan
practice of haruspicy where the liver of a sacrificial animal is
divided into sixteen sections, each associated with a particular
divinity. This formula by Varro seems to indicate that other regions
beyond the designated templum were also associated with divinities.
The cardinal directions marked out above were associated with light
and life in the East, darkness and death in the West, the abode of
the gods was held to be in the North, while the South was associated
with the lower regions of the earth and below.

Once the templum is established, the auspex would then
pray, "Juppiter Optimus Maximus, and all You other gods and spirits
whom it is proper to invoke, I ask that if it is good and right that
(the proposed action) be done, that You will send clear and certain
signs within the boundaries that I have marked." Here the auspex may
specify the kinds of signs he wishes to appear within the templum he
has marked out. These become the auspicia impeeritiva that he must
watch for. He may also designate other signs that he will ignore,
whether within or outside the templum. These, together with all
other omens, become auspicia oblativa, and while they may be noted
and used in clarifying more details about the augury, they are not
to be considered as omens specifically answering the question posed.
The auspex then awaits the auspices by watching the sky (sevare de
caelo) for signs (spectio). This was to be done without interruption
(silentium; silentio surgere) and anything that might make the
augury invalid was called a vitium. For the auspices taken for
inaugurating an official, the templum that was drawn and established
on the ground might be made after midnight, where the auspex would
remain in contemplation and offering sacrifices to the gods. Just
before dawn he would then draw the templum in the sky and begin to
look for signs.

The signs used in augury

Roman augury observed the birds. Only the flight of certain birds
(alites) was noted as signs in augury. These were mainly eagles and
vultures. Pliny recognized six kinds of eagles (Natural History X.6-
7), the black eagle, hare-eagle, morphos or Homer's dusky eagle
(Iliad XXIV.316), the hawk-eagle or mountain stork that he says is
like a vulture, the sea eagle, and what he refers to as the true
eagle, being reddish in colour and of medium size. Other alites were
the osprey (avis sanqualis or ossifraga) and the immusculus.
(Virgil: Aeneid I.394; Livy 1.7, 34; Pliny: Natural History X.7) The
other form of augury employed the call of certain birds (oscines).
These were mainly owls, ravens, crows, and chickens. Some birds were
used for both. Of the call of ravens, Pliny says that the worse
message is when they make a plaintive "whine, as though they were
being strangled (Natural History X.33)." They were then birds of
ill omen (lugubres). Livy mentions at least one instance where the
flight of a raven towards a general from his front, and then calling
out over him, was taken as a good omen. The Romans regarded an owl
(bubo) as an ill omen, unlike the Greeks. Owls were considered by
Romans as funerary birds (funebres) who inhabit the night, the
dessert, and "inaccessible and awesome" places. "As a result of
this," Pliny says (Natural History X.34), "it is a direful omen
whenever seen inside the city or at all in daytime." Other birds
noted for both their calls and observed flights were the picus
martius (woodpecker), feronius, and parrha (a type of owl). (Pliny:
Natural History X.18; Horace: Carmina III.27.15)

The most important aspect of a sign is the direction from which it
comes. Facing south, the flight of birds on the left, and thus in
the east, or from the front in the south, is generally regarded as a
favorable sign. A bird of omen approaching from the right or from
behind is regarded as unfavorable. The same is true for the calls
of birds of good omens, but not always. It is regarded a favorable
sign if a crow (cornix) calls from the left, while the call of a
raven (corvus) is considered favorable if from the right (Plautus:
Asin. II.1.12; Cicero: On Divination 1.39). While an owl (noctua)
is generally regarded as a bird of ill omen, his call from the left
is considered favorable. However in this it is not always that
simple. Every sound and motion a bird makes may hold a different
significance according to the circumstances in which they occur, and
the different times of the year. A good augur will be familiar with
the habits of the various birds in his area. He will look for only
certain signs, but when something out of the ordinary occurs, even
if not by one of the birds specifically used in augury, then he
should take note of it. Interpreting the meaning of the signs is
based on experience. This is made clear by Cicero who says that
divination of any kind depends upon the "frequency of the records"
(On divination 1.109-110). The habits of birds and the significance
they signaled were recorded in different books and these were
consulted when unusual occurrences were seen. Every paterfamilias
kept his own books on omens to use when he was called upon to
perform private auguries.

After designating the templum in the sky an augur will state the
proposed action for which he or she seeks auspices, and in doing so
the augur can stipulate what particular signs will be looked for. If
the proposal falls under the providence of Venus, the augur could
designate that the call or appearance of a dove would be accepted as
a sign, as a dove is a bird sacred to Venus. The augur can just as
easily designate the bark of a dog as a sign were he or she
consulting Hecate, although for auspicia publica this should not be
done as only signs sent from Iuppiter may be considered. Only those
signs which are specifically called to be watched for (imperitiva)
should be considered as a proper sign in the augury. Other natural
events (oblativa), which may occur and could be regarded as omens,
should be noted and used in interpreting the auspices, but not held
to be an auspicium in itself. Such oblativa might be the chance
appearance of some animal, or their unusual behavior. Pliny records
that "indeed augurs, who always think the presence of bees is a bad
omen are not invariably correct (Natural History XI.55)." Normally
such signs of oblativa appearing to the auspex are guarded against
by pitching a tent or erecting a screen (tabernaculum capere) to
block his view, and the playing of flute music to drown out sounds
other than are imperitiva. What an auspex should consider, however,
are common weather signs; as they indicate the circumstances under
which a sign is given, and those signs that are ex caelo. These
latter signs would include the appearance of comets, eclipses, and
other astronomical phenomenon. The most important ex caelo signs to
be kept in mind are the direction from which thunder and lightning
may appear (the maximum auspicium: Servius: Commentary on the Aeneid
by Virgil II.693; Cicero: On divination 2.18). While Iuppiter
thundered and cast His lightning bolts, the comitia could not meet
(Cicero: On Divination 2.14; Philippics V.3). The historical records
stated that thunderbolts were sent in answer to certain prayers and
rites. Numa was said to frequently make prayers to Iuppiter which
were answered by thunderbolts, and Piso added that when Tullius
Hostilius followed in his example, but with too little regard for
the ritual, he was struck by lightning (Pliny: Natural History
II.140). Because the auspicia publica are asked of Iuppiter, and
thunder and lightning are associated with Him, such signs are
regarded to have the same weight if not more than the flights and
calls of birds. In general the sound of thunder or flash of
lightning on the left, or to the front of the auspex is considered a
favorable sign, while those from the right or behind are taken to be
a sign of disapproval. Thunder and lightning occurring out of
season, such as in winter, are especially considered a potent
portent.

The Rule of Four

A method of categorizing and ranking the importance of various signs
is given by the Rule of Four. The system uses four categories of
signs, each of four kinds of signs.

I. Ex Caelo


1. Cloud forms: nimbus, cirrus, stratus, cumulus

2. Precipitation: snows, hail, sleet, rain

3. Lightning, sheet or forked, and thunder, rolling or a clap

4. Light: rainbows, occultation of the sun, moon, or stars,
shooting stars, comets



II. Ex Avibus Alites (flight)


1. Eagle (Jovis ales) and/or Vulture (vultur)

2. Hawk (ossifraga)

3. Crow (cornix)

4. Woodpecker (picus)



III. Ex Avibus Oscines (calls)

1. Raven (corvus) and/or Crow (cornix)

2. Owl (noctua, parrha)

3. Woodpecker (picus Martius)

4. Hen (gallina)



IV. Quadrupedibus

1. Wolf (lupus)

2. Fox (vulpes)

3. Dog (canis)

4. Horse (equus)

If more than one omen is received, and they should contradict one
another, then the higher ranked category and kind has the greater
import. The greater number of equally ranked signs appearing in one
quarter of the templum as opposed to another quarter, likewise takes
precedent. Such was the case in the auguries taken respectively by
Romulus and Remus. Both received favourable auspices of vultures,
yet Romulus received more and was thus judged to become the founder
of Rome.

All birds and animals taken as omens, and the order in which they
are ranked, varies according to the location where the augury is
made. What is given above is based on the ancient texts used at
Rome. In general, a bird or animal that is more rarely seen in a
given locality would be ranked higher. The system used at Rome for
official auguries was recorded in the Libri Augurales, while in the
Commentarii Augurales a collection of interpretations of signs given
in specific cases were kept for future reference. In practice every
paterfamilias maintained his own books, handed down through the
family. Cicero, who was himself an official augur for the state,
mentions a different system of omens used by his friend Divitiacus;
a Druid of the Aedui. In the Druidic system he recognized one
similar to his own, only different in that it used the birds and
animals native to its own location. Through careful observation and
experience, each augur would develop his or her own system.

The possibility of receiving multiple signs raises the question of
how long the auspices should be taken. If ill omens arrive, should
the auspex continue to wait for other signs that might be more
favourable? Once the auspex makes a sound or leaves his seat the
augury ends under any circumstances. How long an auspex should plan
to conduct an augury should be a natural unit of time. A natural
hour (measured by a sundial, not a clock), from dawn to midday or
midday to dusk, or for a full day from dawn to dusk can be used.

Announcing the auspices
The question put to the gods in an augury is made in a straight yes
or no format. "Do you approve of this?" The results of an augury
can therefore only be favorable (nuntiatio) or unfavorable
(obnuntiatio). Auspicia were described as "favourable"
(addictivae), "admitted" or "allowed" (admissivae), "prosperous"
(secundae) or simply as "good omens" (praepetes) when the gods
approved. If favorable the results are announced in a nuntiato,
stating the day the auspices were taken, what was asked, and that
the signs were favorable. "Aves admittunt!" (The birds allow it.)
If the signs were unfavorable, this is announced by saying "Alio
die!" Another day." The auspices may then be taken on another day,
depending on the matter concerned in the inquiry. Ill omens are
described as clivia or clamatoria; the birds giving ill omens
described as "funerary" or "murderous" (funebres), "inhibiting"
(inhibitae), evil (malae), or "disastrous" and "plaintive"
(lugubres). Depending on the question that was asked, unfavourable
omens can indicate that one should "resign" or "abdicate"
(abdicere), be "prevented" from taking the proposed action (arcere),
or that the action itself is "opposed" by the gods (refragari).
Such auguries of the gods' disapproval are named either adversae or
alterae. If no sign is received then it means that the gods are
indifferent to the proposed action. One can proceed without the
approval of the gods in this case, or wait until another day to take
the auspices again.


Contact us at info@...

Temple of Religio Romana.
Copyright © 2002 - 2006 Temple of Religio Romana. All rights
reserved.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42272 From: wuffa2001 Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: HEY, CORNELII!! MEMBERS OF THE GENS CORNELIA--READ THIS!!!
Salve
any CORNELI that wants to e-mail
may
and anyone needs rites to Mercurius etc..


Sacerdos Templi Mercurius
Sacerdotus Provincia America Boreoccidentalis

House Priest Patrician Gens Cornelia
Marcus Cornelius Felix
magewuffa@...




In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick D. Owen" <Patrick.Owen@...>
wrote:
>
> Here is a member of the Gens Cornelia that wants to communicate
with
> members of his clan. Write to him and open up some dialogue. Get
> back in the organization. Vivat Cornelius Lentulus.
>
> FGA
>
> Cn. Cornelius Lentulus Fl. Galerio Aureliano sal.:
>
> <SNIP>
> I don't know any Cornelius who is presently active, perhaps L.
> Cornelius Malacitanus whose messages I could read sometimes, but
not
> too frequently.
>
> How could I build relationships in that way? My father is also a
> citizen, Cn. Lentulus maior, but I don't to build relationship with
> him as we keep in thouch quite frequently. :-)
>
> Your idea, however, would suit me...
>
> Cura ut valeas!
>
> Cn. Cornelius Lentulus
> Propraetor & Quaestor
> Sacerdos Pannoniae
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi, antispam, antivirus, POP3
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42273 From: rocknrockabilly Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: A few religious questions
Salvete omnes,

Since a member of the gens Cornelius raised the question, I would
also like to know if there is any active member of the gens
Africanus Secundus. Does our gens observe or celebrate any specific
religious festivals?

This brings me to my second point. European (western) history has
been characterized by two very different (but not necessarly
opposed) religious conceptions, implying equally different
worldviews: ancient paganism and chritianity.

Most of us Roman citizens are familiar with the religion of our
Ancestor, backbone of the Classical civilization. We know that from
it sprang philosophy, rationalism, humanism, etc.

I believe that most of us are also very familiar with the latter
religious concept, Christianity. From medieval Christianity (which
was in many ways the successor and continuation of the Roman
imperial authority), sprang universalism and brotherly love.

Those two religious philosophies are sometimes so apart that the
Christian concepts supported a culture and worldview opposed to the
Classical one; in other words, a new civilization. Yet the Pagan
religion has left us immense temples: the temple of reason, of
philosophy, and of humanism. Neither classical paganism nor
Christianity cannot be swept aside if we want to understand the
modern Western cosmology.

In the current geopoitical context, what do these two religious
heritages mean? At the European level, no mention of any of these
religious views exist officially (think about the failed
Constitution). Internationally, with the rise of Islam and the
Confucian-oriented culture of China, what does it mean to be a
westerner?

Could we combine those two different religious concepts into a
large synthesis of Pagano-christian, unique western system? I
beleive these questions are important to all of us, not only to us
westerners, but also to others, who identify the west as a single
cultural identity. Who do we want to be? This means that we must
identify a precise cosmology.

I would like to view your inputs on the question. Can Paganism
and Christianity be synthesized?

Valete bene,

Titus Afr. Sec. Flamininus.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42274 From: Maior Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: A few religious questions
M. Hortensia T. Africano Secundo Fmainiano spd;
this may suprise you but Christianity is the direct child of
the syncretic Roman Empire. It always shocks me (being Jewish) how
ill-informed people are!
Here are two excellent historical backgrounds "The Roman
Near East" by Fergus Millar, Harvard University Press, 1993, and
Warwick Ball "Rome in the East" Routledge, 2000.
Ball is a Near Eastern specialist & archeologist and makes
fascinating points about the influence of Zoroastrianism (not
Judaism) on Christianity, as well as the syncretic mix. Egyptian
ascetics, pre-Christian stylites (Dea Syria). Icons of Isis and
Hathor the prototypes for Madonna and child. And perhhaps Buddhism
for relic worship.
Millar, Oxford classics prof (emeritus) traces Hellenistic and
Roman history and thought. Think of explanations of the Trinity etc
pure Platonism.
I tend to agree with Ball that the two great influences
are Roma and Iran.
bene vale
Marca Hortensia Maior


> Could we combine those two different religious concepts into a
> large synthesis of Pagano-christian, unique western system? I
> beleive these questions are important to all of us, not only to us
> westerners, but also to others, who identify the west as a single
> cultural identity. Who do we want to be? This means that we must
> identify a precise cosmology.
>
> I would like to view your inputs on the question. Can Paganism
> and Christianity be synthesized?
>
> Valete bene,
>
> Titus Afr. Sec. Flamininus.
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42275 From: M. Lucretius Agricola Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Archaeology Links of Possible Interest
--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "rysullivan" <rysullivan@...> wrote:
>
>
> TITUS LICINIUS CRASSUS CIVIBUS S.P.D.
>

[SNIP]

>
> Photo of Roman Headstone fnd. in Lancaster/UK:
>
> http://www.romanarmy.com/imb/imagebase-show.asp?ID=232
> <http://www.romanarmy.com/imb/imagebase-show.asp?ID=232>


A photo of a Roman headstone was found in Lancaster? Is it known who
took the photo? Was it able to be dated in context? Is this suggesting
that the Romans had photography?


Now you know why I didn't go into comedy.

Sorry for the levity. Return to your business.

Optime valete

M. Lucr. Agricola
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42276 From: Gnaeus Equitius Marinus Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Re: Augeries
Salve Gai Livi, et salvete quirites,

G. Livius Crassus (darren_pile) wrote:

> This might seem like a dopey question but how are the augeries
> taken?

Appreciate that I am *not* an augur. I have, however, been a consul,
and have discussed the arts with those who practice them in order to
carry out my consular duties.

The most usual sort of augury requires that the person taking the
auspices define a 'templum' on the sky. This is typically done while
facing east, and using the augur's littus (somewhat like a wand) to draw
a square that defines the portion of the sky in which the flights of
birds will be meaningful. From there it's a matter of watching for
something to happen within the templum. (Note that templum also refers
to the place where the augur stands while observing.)

To interpret what the various birds mean, one needs to study De
Devinationes by Cicero. This book explains the meaning of different
birds and how they fly.

There's also the somewhat simpler tripudium, in which sacred chickens
are offered grain to eat. If the chickens eat the grain it is
considered a favorable auspicium. The degree of enthusiasm shown by the
chickens is divided into five different categories, the names of which
Pontifex Scaurus patiently provided me but I've now forgotten.

That's the quick introduction. I trust that those more skilled will
jump in and correct any error in what I've said above.

Vale, et valete,

-- Marinus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42277 From: jcottrell01 Date: 2006-02-27
Subject: Lonely in California (off topic??)
Salve Quirtes,

I am new to Nova Roma and hope that I do not make too many mistakes
in regards to the Roman Culture that we are a part of. I am in
Califonia and would like to know if there is anything that I can be
involved with here. I am currently trying to get in touch with the
Proconsule of California via email, but he may not be able to check
it on a regular basis.

If anybody is an active member in California, I would like to start
communication with them. As many of you may also experience, I do
not have many people around me that share my interest in Roman
history and wold like to have an outlet to explore something that I
am very fond of.

So, I you are in Califonia (Los Angeles) please send me an email and
possibly we can start a dialog and maybe get together someday.
Also, if you have plans to come to Los Angeles, I would love to be
able to meet you and possibly show you aroung LA.

Vale,

Gaius Iulius Macer.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42278 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-02-28
Subject: Re: A few religious questions
C. Equitius Cato T. Africano Secundo Flaminio quiritibusque S.P.D.

Salve Africanus Flaminius et salvete omnes.

I must point out, as an Orthodox Christian, that while there can be
numerous ways in which we as citizens both practitioners and
non-practitioners can respect and work with each other, Christianity
is by its very nature an exclusive religious belief system.

From wherever it drew its outward forms, the single most fundamental
(to use its meaning correctly) basis of Christian belief is that there
is only one God and that He became incarnate as a human being, and it
is only through that single human being that salvation can be
attained; it is ultimately impossible for Christianity, true
Christianity, to recognize any other form of religious experience as
*fully* capable of performing the act of bringing mankind to the
Divine or vice versa. Any attempt to syncretize Christianity with any
belief that lessens the absolute and utter uniqueness of Jesus Christ
may be noble in intent but cannot stand as a reflection of what
Christianity actually teaches about itself.

I am NOT arguing that that belief is "right" or "wrong" in this Forum,
as any discussion of that aspect of religious belief, no matter how
well intended, is doomed to cause animosity and friction; in the end,
no matter what academic, psychological, or emotional basis anyone
might use to try to explain "why" or "how" Christianity came to be, it
will fail because the bedrock of the Christian faith is simply
immoveable in a believer. I say that not because I think that
examining the development of Christian doctrine is unedifying in any
way, but because in the end, for a believer, if science or technology
or human history or psychology --- any of the structures by which
mankind examines his world --- disagree with the faith of the Church,
the faith wins. Illogical, indefensible even, perhaps, but that is
simply the way it is. 500 years ago, the idea of a man flying to the
moon would have been as inconceivable or illogical to the most
brilliant academic minds on the planet.

Vale et valete,

Cato
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42279 From: Gregory Rose Date: 2006-02-28
Subject: Re: Augeries
G. Iulius Scaurus G. Livio Crasso SPD.

It's not a dopey question at all. The problem is that the answer is
extremely complex and not entirely fleshed out by classical sources.
I agree with Censor Marinus that Cicero's _De Divinatione_is useful,
although more for the first book where Cicero's brother is laying out
the reasons for believing in auguries than the second where Cicero
debunks the notion of augury on philosophical grounds. However there
are several dozen other references in classical sources which are
rather more detailed in providing guidance for interpretation of
particular avian and celestial signa. I have been working for some
time on collecting and translating such sources and hope to have a
compendium for the Collegium Augurum completed this summer.

Vale.

Scaurus