Selected messages in Nova-Roma group. Mar 27-31, 2006

Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42848 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42849 From: P. Dominus Antonius Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42850 From: Q. Caecilius Metellus Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: A Responses to the Responses to My Question to the People
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42851 From: QFabiusMaxmi@aol.com Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42852 From: David Kling (Modianus) Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42853 From: Gnaeus Equitius Marinus Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42854 From: Gnaeus Salvius Astur Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42855 From: Andy Gyll Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42856 From: dicconf Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42857 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: a.d. VI Kal. Apr.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42858 From: Andy Gyll Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: A Responses to the Responses to My Question to the People
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42859 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - State Religion
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42860 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Ludi Circenses
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42861 From: Titus Iulius Sabinus Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: MEGALESIA - Cultural Award
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42862 From: Iulia Caesaris Cytheris Aege Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Cultural Award
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42863 From: iulius sabinus Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Ludi Circenses
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42864 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: Salvete Omnes!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42865 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Roma Futura
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42866 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42867 From: Titus Iulius Sabinus Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: MEGALESIA - Face on Roman Body
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42868 From: Titus Iulius Sabinus Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Ludi Circenses - descriptions
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42869 From: Titus Iulius Sabinus Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Dominus Factionum - second call
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42870 From: Virginia Richards-Taylor Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Looking for help with a timeline
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42871 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Face on Roman Body
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42872 From: iulius sabinus Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Face on Roman Body
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42873 From: Titus Iulius Sabinus Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Only for fun ( was : Re: MEGALESIA - Ludi Circenses )
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42874 From: A. Tullia Scholastica Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Salvete Omnes!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42875 From: Q. Caecilius Metellus Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Face on Roman Body
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42876 From: S Ullerius Venator Piperbarbus Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Looking for help with a timeline
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42877 From: M·CVR·COMPLVTENSIS Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Edictum Propraetoricium XLIIII (Complutensi XVIIII) De Legatus Exte
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42878 From: Titus Iulius Sabinus Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: MEGALESIA - Call for Munera Gladiatoria & Venationes
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42879 From: Gnaeus Equitius Marinus Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Seeking another censorial scribe
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42880 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: a.d. V Kal. Apr.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42881 From: Pompeia Minucia Strabo Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA IS SUMMONED
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42882 From: Gnaeus Cornelius Lentulus Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: MEGALESIA - Certamen Latinum
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42883 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA IS SUMMONED
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42884 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: De legibus Moraviis Minuciis
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42885 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA IS SUMMONED
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42886 From: Sebastian José Molina Palacios Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42887 From: David Santo Orcero Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42888 From: Titus Iulius Sabinus Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: MEGALESIA - Cultural Award
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42889 From: Pompeia Minucia Strabo Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA IS SUMMONED (Corrected Link to Lex Armin
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42890 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42891 From: pompeia_minucia_tiberia Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: De legibus Moraviis Minuciis
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42892 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Salvete neighbours...
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42893 From: pompeia_minucia_tiberia Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA IS SUMMONED
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42894 From: CN•EQVIT•MARINVS (Gnaeus Equitius Mari Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA IS SUMMONED (Corrected Link to Lex A
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42895 From: pompeia_minucia_tiberia Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA IS SUMMONED (Corrected Link to Lex A
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42896 From: Maxima Valeria Messallina Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Ludi Circenses
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42897 From: David Kling (Modianus) Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Calling Candidates for Censor
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42898 From: Pompeia Minucia Strabo Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Fwd: THE COMITIA CENTURIATA IS SUMMONED
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42899 From: Pompeia Minucia Strabo Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Fwd: THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA IS SUMMONED (REVISED)
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42900 From: A. Tullia Scholastica Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA IS SUMMONED
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42901 From: A. Tullia Scholastica Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Salvete neighbours...
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42903 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA IS SUMMONED
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42904 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42905 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42906 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: The Comitia Populi
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42907 From: Gnaeus Equitius Marinus Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA IS SUMMONED (Corrected Link to Lex A
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42908 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Calling Candidates for Censor
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42909 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42910 From: P. Dominus Antonius Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42911 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42912 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42913 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42914 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: The Lex Moravia Minucia Abdicatone Magistratum: (Was: THE COMITIA P
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42915 From: Kirsteen Wright Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42916 From: G. Aurelia Falconis Silvana Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: MEGALESIA - Ludi Circenses
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42917 From: Titus Iulius Sabinus Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: MEGALESIA - Call for Munera Gladiatoria & Venationes
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42918 From: Titus Iulius Crassus Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Ludi Circenses
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42919 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Octavia for Censor!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42920 From: QFabiusMaxmi@aol.com Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42921 From: Caius Curius Saturninus Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: roman wine set or similar, help requested
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42922 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42923 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: a.d. IV Kal. Apr.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42924 From: Phil Perez Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: roman wine set or similar, help requested
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42925 From: P. Dominus Antonius Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42926 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: In leges Moravias Minucias
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42927 From: David Kling (Modianus) Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42928 From: CN•EQVIT•MARINVS (Gnaeus Equitius Mari Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Airatarianism?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42929 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Calling Candidates for Censor
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42930 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Calling Candidates for Censor
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42931 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42932 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42933 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Airatarianism?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42934 From: S Ullerius Venator Piperbarbus Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Calling Candidates for Censor
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42935 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: In leges Moravias Minucias--A Response to A. Apollonius Cordus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42936 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Calling Candidates for Censor
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42937 From: Patrick D. Owen Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Ludi Cerialia et Ludi Floralia
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42938 From: Stefanie Beer Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Betreff: [Nova-Roma] roman wine set or similar, help requested
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42939 From: Tita Artoria Marcella Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: MEGALESIA --Certamen Historicum
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42940 From: QFabiusMaxmi@aol.com Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Lex Moravia Minucia de Civitate Eiuranda & Lex Moravia Minucia
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42941 From: dicconf Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42942 From: dicconf Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Ludi Circenses
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42943 From: dicconf Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42944 From: dicconf Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA --Certamen Historicum
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42945 From: QFabiusMaxmi@aol.com Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42946 From: Appius Iulius Priscus Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42947 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Ludi Circenses
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42948 From: Caeso Fabius Buteo Quintilianus Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Calling Candidates for Censor
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42949 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Ludi Circenses
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42950 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Airatarianism? - Religio and living today...
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42951 From: Sebastian José Molina Palacios Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42952 From: Tita Artoria Marcella Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA --Certamen Historicum
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42953 From: Diana (Pagan Federation International) Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Ludi Circenses
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42954 From: Titus Iulius Sabinus Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: MEGALESIA - in spanish ( translation by Ivl Severus ).
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42955 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Airatarianism? - Religio and living today...
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42956 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42957 From: P. Dominus Antonius Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Airatarianism? - Religio and living today...
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42958 From: Lucius Equitius Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Digest Number 2399
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42959 From: Patrick D. Owen Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42960 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Calling Candidates for Censor
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42961 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42962 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42963 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Roma Futura - Roma in the ages
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42964 From: P. Dominus Antonius Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42965 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42966 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Airatarianism? - Religio and living today...
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42967 From: P. Dominus Antonius Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42968 From: P. Dominus Antonius Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42969 From: David Kling (Modianus) Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42970 From: David Kling (Modianus) Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42971 From: pompeia_minucia_tiberia Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: In leges Moravias Minucias--A Response to A. Apollonius Cordus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42972 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42973 From: Gnaeus Equitius Marinus Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42974 From: P. Dominus Antonius Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42975 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42976 From: Timothy P. Gallagher Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Please vote no
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42977 From: dicconf Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42978 From: P. Dominus Antonius Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42979 From: P. Dominus Antonius Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42980 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42981 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42982 From: Caius Curius Saturninus Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Digest Number 2399
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42983 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42984 From: A. Tullia Scholastica Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Digest Number 2399
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42985 From: M. Lucretius Agricola Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Digest Number 2399
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42986 From: QFabiusMaxmi@aol.com Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42987 From: Appius Iulius Priscus Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42988 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42989 From: Gnaeus Equitius Marinus Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42990 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Ludi Cerialia et Ludi Floralia
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42991 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42992 From: M•IVL•SEVERVS Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: TRYING TO SERVE...
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42993 From: Caius Moravius Brutus Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42994 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42995 From: Stefanie Beer Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Betreff: Re: [Nova-Roma] Digest Number 2399
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42996 From: Stefanie Beer Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Betreff: [Nova-Roma] Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Mod
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42997 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42998 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42999 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Diet and the State
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43000 From: A. Tullia Scholastica Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Betreff: Re: [Nova-Roma] Digest Number 2399
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43001 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Romana Diet
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43002 From: Stefanie Beer Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Betreff: [Nova-Roma] Romana Diet
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43003 From: pompeia_minucia_tiberia Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: In leges Moravias Minucias
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43004 From: S Ullerius Venator Piperbarbus Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: You are what you eat ,-)
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43005 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Betreff: [Nova-Roma] Romana Diet
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43006 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Nova Roma as Nation State
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43007 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43008 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: In leges Moravias Minucias
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43009 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43010 From: pompeia_minucia_tiberia Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: In leges Moravias Minucias
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43011 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: In leges Moravias Minucias
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43012 From: dicconf Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43013 From: pompeia_minucia_tiberia Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: In leges Moravias Minucias
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43014 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: In leges Moravias Minucias
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43015 From: A. Tullia Scholastica Date: 2006-03-31
Subject: ANNOUNCEMENTS LIST: MIA POSTS?
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43016 From: G. Aurelia Falconis Silvana Date: 2006-03-31
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Ludi Circenses
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43017 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-03-31
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43018 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-31
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43019 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-31
Subject: Re: In leges Moravias Minucias
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43020 From: Stephen Gallagher Date: 2006-03-31
Subject: Trojan War: The Palace of Ajax
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43021 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-31
Subject: prid. Kal. Apr.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43022 From: marcushoratius Date: 2006-03-31
Subject: Re: In leges Minucia Moravia
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43023 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-03-31
Subject: Re: In leges Moravias Minucias (details)
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43024 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-03-31
Subject: Re: In leges Moravias Minucias (fundamentals)



Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42848 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory
M. Hortensia Q. Fabio Maximo spd;
well we have NR cultores in Dacia, what are we doing to help them?
I was the only one who bothered and wrote to Iulia Caesaris & helped
her join with the Italian and Greek polytheists, but the fact that
the Religio in NR isn't incorporated is pretty embarassing. We should
do this; why hasn't it been done?
vale
M. Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebis

>
>
> This is amazing news. But now it has to get by the magistrates
court, if
> there was an appeal
> filed. Still, perhaps there are greater stirrings among the
immortals as
> their recognition grows.
>
> Q Fabius Maximus
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42849 From: P. Dominus Antonius Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory
Why does a court have to "approve" an association to worship old gods, new
gods, waxed fruit or anything else. If this is an example of an enlightened
European Judiciary, I guess I prefer being a bit dim.
--
>|P. Dominus Antonius|<
Tony Dah m

Oderint dum metuant - Cicero
Si vis pacem, para bellum - Vegetius


On 3/26/06, Maior <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> M. Hortensia quiritibus spd;
> I read over at SaturniaTellus, the forum for the Italian MTR & it
> was also posted over at RogueClassicism that a lower court in Greece
> approved the formation of an association to worship the Greek gods. I
> hope this leads to official recognition as a religion under the
> European Union, the same for our fellow cultores in Italy.
> It's been a real struggle for the Greek polytheists & they've
> been fighting for their rights. In many European countries there are
> state churches. I hope we all support them; their org is YSEE, the
> Council for Ethnic Hellenes google will give you the website. I
> valete
> M. Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebis
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42850 From: Q. Caecilius Metellus Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: A Responses to the Responses to My Question to the People
Q. Caecilius Metellus Fetialis et Pontifex Quiritibus salutem.

Salvete,

I was particularly happy to see the responses which I received to the
original question I proposed here about a week ago. As promised, I'd
like to take a moment now to respond to those, now that I have your
attention.

One respondant asked for more information on the website, and suggested
that I write an article. This, I think, is a great idea, and something
I would recommend to all of my fellow pontiffs. A while ago, though in
private chambers, I had asked for members of our priesthood to assist me
in writing a series of articles on the Gods, something of an
introduction to Them, if you will. I have chosen to write one on Janus,
and will probably write a few more as well. On the ReligioRomana list
in particular, there have been a number of requests along the lines of
"To which god ought I pray for 'x'". I think that by compiling articles
on the Gods and publishing them, we can improve the knowledge of the
Gods among ourselves and among people whom use our website as a point of
reference for items on the Sacra Romana.

Since the calendar seems to be my particular area of speciality, I will
also be writing quite a few articles on that topic (if entire volumes
can be written on it, certainly articles can too!), as well as articles
on the various observances throughout the year. The latter part of this
you can expect to see in my quarterly report under the "Roman Book of
Days"; what I mentioned in the previous paragraph will also be there,
under the "Roman Book of Gods".

There was also mention that people want to know about Roman beliefs on
death, funerary rites, and I would add to this the Afterlife. There are
quite a few books on this as well. I perhaps may not be the best person
to write articles on these things, though I am certainly willing to do so.

While I think of it, though, another good idea is to begin compiling a
"directory" of books on the Sacra, and organising them into topics. If
anyone is willing to help organise this one, let me know, and I will
certainly do what I can to help, as this too is something that shoud go
on the website.

There were also responses that called for some video footage of Roman
rites being performed, as well as a request for perhaps audio files of
prayers. In application to the Sacra Domestica, I have already stated
my views on that. However, I would certainly support this for the Sacra
Publica, though, of course, this has a slight dependance on having
multiple people present. I certainly would like, though, to see this
happen, when it is feasible. I will surely do what I can with this one.

On my wider question of expectations from the Collegium Pontificum on
the whole, there was an overwhelming clamour for leadership and
coordination. It should not be a surprise to anyone who was reading
these fora right around the time of my co-optation that I fully agree
with this. This very thing, in fact, was among the major contributors
to my pursuit of the pontificate. I can say that, for my own part, I
have tried, and will continue to try, to work with my fellow pontiffs
for progress. Of course, there is still a lot of research to be done,
but I know that some, if not all, of the pontiffs are working on things:
researching, finding ways to implement their findings, and, in the end,
bringing about progress. I can safely say that much of the material
which I have found to be available to me is not available to many of my
colleagues. The Classics Library of the University of Cincinnati has a
very unique collection of 18th and 19th-century dissertations, almost
all of which are not to be found in other libraries, and which are not
available to patrons outside the University. (Incidentally, if anyone
happens to need a dissertation which only this university has, let me
know and I will be more than happy to find a way to get a copy to you!
The full catalog is at http://uclid.uc.edu/screens/opacmenu.html.)

In response to this, though, I do have to ask one question. In exactly
what ways do you want leadership from the Collegium? Surely each
pontifex knows what he wants to see from the Collegium, but knowing what
the People want from the Collegium is something different altogether
(hence why I keep asking these open questions). I hate to seem
overly-demanding, but unfortunately, the only way we will know what you,
the People, want, is by your telling us.

In the end, I was happy to receive the responses. I must say, though,
that I was slightly disenheartened by the small number of responses I
gathered, though I certainly will not let that slow me down at all.
But, I hope that, as time goes on, we will be able to breathe life back
into the Sacra Publica and the Sacra Domestica. The fact that we are
all here is a great start for that, and something for pride among all of
us. So we must now continue the process.

Lastly, I know that among many there is a fear of the Collegium
Pontificum. I can not, of course, speak for my fellow pontiffs, but for
myself, I hope that no one fears me. I am not here to use my position
as a political tool. That is simply not my job. I am here for two
reasons, and those alone: to serve the Gods, and to serve the People.
Please, do not hesitate to ask a question, either in public or in
private. It is our duty, as pontiffs, to serve, to educate, and to
guide. My personal opinion is that this fear is hindering both sides of
the equation. It hinders the Collegium because the People fear asking
questions and telling the Collegium what they want. It hinders the
People because the Collegium likely will not (and, in fact, can not) act
without knowing what the People want, what the People do not know, and
how to guide the People properly. I hope that, now and in the future,
we can all work together. We can only become better if we work together.

Iane, Iuppiter, Mars, et Quirine,
Ceres, Vesta, Iuno, et Minerva,
Nos Di Omnes Vos Protegatis,
Liberos Vestros, qui Romani.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42851 From: QFabiusMaxmi@aol.com Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory
In a message dated 3/26/2006 9:22:16 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
rory12001@... writes:

well we have NR cultores in Dacia, what are we doing to help them?
I was the only one who bothered and wrote to Iulia Caesaris & helped
her join with the Italian and Greek polytheists, but the fact that
the Religio in NR isn't incorporated is pretty embarassing


Wouldn't that be Caesaria? As for incorporating, our Pontifix Maximus has
been working on that for sometime now. When the papers are complete I'm sure
there will be an announcement.
But I don't feel being slow is embarrassing. I'm believe it just means one
is being careful and thorough .

Q. Fabius Maximus


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42852 From: David Kling (Modianus) Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory
Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Q. Fabio Maximo salutem dicit

To say he is working on it is probably not necessarily true. It was
mentioned in the Collegium Pontificum several years ago, but never
actually voted on or followed up on. Since incorporation is something
that affects the total incorporation of Nova Roma it is something that
should probably be reviewed by the senate, and then if approved
maintained by the Collegium Pontificum.

However, I am fairly confident that nothing has been done regarding
the incorporation of Nova Roma as a religious organization. I would
be happy to present this to the senate in the next session, it is part
of my platform of promoting the Religio and I think it is something
that should be done. We ARE a religious organization, among other
things - its time we invest the necessary time and energy to show our
citizens that this IS a priority. I'll do my part.

Vale:

Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus

On 3/27/06, QFabiusMaxmi@... <QFabiusMaxmi@...> wrote:
>
> In a message dated 3/26/2006 9:22:16 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
> rory12001@... writes:
>
> well we have NR cultores in Dacia, what are we doing to help them?
> I was the only one who bothered and wrote to Iulia Caesaris & helped
> her join with the Italian and Greek polytheists, but the fact that
> the Religio in NR isn't incorporated is pretty embarassing
>
>
> Wouldn't that be Caesaria? As for incorporating, our Pontifix Maximus has
> been working on that for sometime now. When the papers are complete I'm sure
> there will be an announcement.
> But I don't feel being slow is embarrassing. I'm believe it just means one
> is being careful and thorough .
>
> Q. Fabius Maximus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42853 From: Gnaeus Equitius Marinus Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory
Salve Antoni,

P. Dominus Antonius wrote:

> Why does a court have to "approve" an association to worship old gods,

Because Greece has an official state religion. Many countries do.

Vale,

-- Marinus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42854 From: Gnaeus Salvius Astur Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory
CN·SALVIVS·ASTVR·CONCIVIBVS·S·P·D

One very brief comment, if you please:

P. Dominus Antonius wrote:

> > Why does a court have to "approve" an association to worship old gods,

To which Cn. Equitius Marinus replied:

> Because Greece has an official state religion. Many countries do.

Many countries do have an official state religion, but the Hellenic
Democracy (Greece) is not one of them. The Greek constitution
guarantees freedom of religion. That is the case in all the member
states of the European Union.

What is true, however, is that the Greek constitution recognises that
the Greek Orthodox Church has a special importance in Greece, being
the church to which over a 95% of the population are affiliated in
some way. And what the Greek constitution does not say is that the
Greek Orthodox Church is a major opinion maker among public opinion in
Greece.

What does this piece of news mean, then? It means that a Greek
polytheistic organization has been given official status by the Greek
government. It is now being legally recognised as a "church". But it
doesn't mean that the practice of polytheist rituals were illegal
prior to this recognition.

S·V·B·E·E·V

CN·SALVIVS·T·F·A·NEP·OVF·ASTVR·SCRIPSIT
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42855 From: Andy Gyll Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory
Salvete Antoni et Marine!

This quite intrigues me as does the idea of "incorporating" a religion. Also bizarre sounding to a British pagan is the idea of Pagan "churches". This is a term I notice that Americans and Canadians sometimes use but never, to my knowledge, us Europeans to whom it has rather unpleasant connotations.

In Britain we have an official state religion - which is generally ignored by the overwhelming majority of the population except when they get married - and until 1950 the practice of Pagan religions was more or less illegal. Although now we are generally free to follow whatever religion we choose I've never come across the idea of somehow making our religion(s) more "official". By and large I think I'd rather keep my faith as far away from the Government as possible!

Having said this I do appreciate that the Hellenes have faced particular problems with the Orthodox church. Hopefully this latest decision will provide them with a greater level of protection in the face of hostility.

Valete

Caius Moravius Brutus







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

P. Dominus Antonius wrote:

> Why does a court have to "approve" an association to worship old gods,

Because Greece has an official state religion. Many countries do.

Vale,

-- Marinus


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


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

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

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


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





CAIUS MORAVIUS BRUTUS

---------------------------------
Yahoo! Cars NEW - sell your car and browse thousands of new and used cars online search now
---------------------------------


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42856 From: dicconf Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory
On Mon, 27 Mar 2006, Gnaeus Equitius Marinus wrote:

> Salve Antoni,
>
> P. Dominus Antonius wrote:
>
>> Why does a court have to "approve" an association to worship old gods,
>
> Because Greece has an official state religion. Many countries do.

In addition, a number of countries grant special privileges (with regard
to taxation, for instance) to religious organizations, and don't want to
simply hand them out to any group that calls itself religious (as seems to
be done in the United States and Great Britain).

-- Publius Livius Triarius
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42857 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: a.d. VI Kal. Apr.
OSD C. equitius Cato

Salvete omnes!

Hodie est ante diem VI Kalendas Aprilis; haec dies comitialis est.

"Finally, the Roman festival closed on the twenty-seventh of March
with a procession to the brook Almo. The silver image of the goddess,
with its face of jagged black stone, sat in a wagon drawn by oxen.
Preceded by the nobles walking barefoot, it moved slowly, to the loud
music of pipes and tambourines, out by the Porta Capena, and so down
to the banks of the Almo, which flows into the Tiber just below the
walls of Rome. There the high-priest, robed in purple, washed the
wagon, the image, and the other sacred objects in the water of the
stream. On returning from their bath, the wain and the oxen were
strewn with fresh spring flowers. All was mirth and gaiety. No one
thought of the blood that had flowed so lately. Even the eunuch
priests forgot their wounds." - Sir James Frazer, The Golden Bough
(1922) p. 351

"When I was a young man I used to go to Â… spectacles put on in honour
of gods and goddesses – in honour of the Heavenly Virgin, and of
Berecynthia [a title of Cybele], mother of all. On the yearly festival
of Berecynthia's washing, actors sang in front of her litter Â… they
performed in the presence of the Mother of the Gods before an immense
audience of spectators of both sexes...And the name of the ceremony is
`the fercula', which might suggest the giving of a dinner-party." -
St. Augustine of Hippo, City of God 11.4

The coming of the Magna Mater to Rome and the west was under the most
dramatic circumstances. It was in the year 204 B.C.; Hannibal was
still in Italy and Rome was thoroughly exhausted. Moreover, the people
had become frightened because of frequent showers of stones and other
unusual phenomena. In desperation the Sibylline Books were consulted,
and it was learned that the enemy could be conquered if the Idaean
Mother should be brought from Pessinus to Rome. Accordingly, a
delegation was sent to King Attalus of Pergamum, who conducted them to
Pessinus and gave them the sacred stone which was the Mother of the
Gods. On her arrival in Italy, the goddess was officially welcomed by
the "best man" of the Republic and the leading matrons of Rome.
Miracles attended the event, the citizens made holiday, and an annual
festival was instituted in honor of the goddess. As a result--so it
seemed--the crops of that year were successful and Hannibal was driven
out of Italy and conquered. So the Magna Mater came in triumph to the
west in 204 B.C.

Today is the celebration of the Lavatio, or washing. On this day the
Romans would perform the ceremonial rites that we know today as spring
cleaning. An annual procession would take place through the streets of
Rome in honor of the Mother of the Gods. The carriage in which her
silver image was carried was washed in the waters of the river Almo.

Valete bene!

Cato



SOURCES

Magna Mater (http://www.earth-history.com/Europe/Pagan/will-05.htm)
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42858 From: Andy Gyll Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: A Responses to the Responses to My Question to the People
Salve Quinte Caecili Metelle!
Thank you for this response and also for the time and thought you have obviously given it. May I wish you every success with all of your ongoing projects!!!

You ask about leadership from the CP. For my part I do not mean to say that leadership is lacking at present, merely that it could perhaps take a different form in future. The political structure of NR is just that - ‘political’. I have no particular problem with this and I certainly wouldn’t want to hound non-cultores out of office but by the same token I wouldn’t turn to them for spiritual guidance. I also don’t for one moment think that they would expect me to.

The CP (and I would include the Flamens here) is rather different and has a distinctly religious role both to carry out the rites of the public religion and also to guide and educate followers of the Religio. I feel that it is probably in the latter field that things could change for the better. I would certainly welcome the new articles that you speak of. I would also be fascinated to hear the views of the various Pontifices on any matters concerned with the Religio, hopefully in a form that will not lead to bloodshed (either real or symbolic!!!) on the forum.

As Romans we have a wealth of literature to draw from and within NR we have citizens with an extraordinary breadth of knowledge. What is not so apparent sometimes is what drives us to the worship of the Gods? What is our motivation? What do we hope to achieve? Why do we worship the Gods we do?

I do not hold to the idea that the Romans were unimaginative, excessively pragmatic and unspiritual. Nova Romans certainly arenÂ’t. The Religio is to me a deeply spiritual path which I chose to follow because it answers the"big questions" and provides me with a profound link to Nature and the Divine. As you know IÂ’ve recently been helping with putting together the Annales Maximi. It has been fascinating peering into the soul of NR if not always a pretty sight! What has impressed me though is the work that certain of the Pontifices have done both in actually carrying out the various rites and also in constructing them in forms pleasing to the Gods. It would surely be good if we could share the wisdom and experience, both practical and spiritual, that has been gained.

Finally the matter of fear! Most Pagans in my experience are understandably worried about issues of religious authority. The question is - should we be? Trust is a funny thing. In the flesh you can meet someone shake their hand and know instinctively that you can trust them. On-line things are more difficult and we judge people primarily by their words, and some of the Pontifices and Flamens are rather quiet. I do recognise that the fora are not for everyone. The mainlist certainly drove me into inactivity for a long spell and the Religio Romana list is doing my head in at the moment for other reasons (all my posts get sent back unapproved!). What we need to do is to make sure that people do not just retreat into their shells and also that people just finding the Religio are not driven away by either hostility or indifference.

SoÂ…postive action, communication, new articles and a collective sense of purpose.

Vale!

Caius Moravius Brutus


"Q. Caecilius Metellus" <metellus@...> wrote: Q. Caecilius Metellus Fetialis et Pontifex Quiritibus salutem.

Salvete,

I was particularly happy to see the responses which I received to the
original question I proposed here about a week ago. As promised, I'd
like to take a moment now to respond to those, now that I have your
attention.

One respondant asked for more information on the website, and suggested
that I write an article. This, I think, is a great idea, and something
I would recommend to all of my fellow pontiffs. A while ago, though in
private chambers, I had asked for members of our priesthood to assist me
in writing a series of articles on the Gods, something of an
introduction to Them, if you will. I have chosen to write one on Janus,
and will probably write a few more as well. On the ReligioRomana list
in particular, there have been a number of requests along the lines of
"To which god ought I pray for 'x'". I think that by compiling articles
on the Gods and publishing them, we can improve the knowledge of the
Gods among ourselves and among people whom use our website as a point of
reference for items on the Sacra Romana.

Since the calendar seems to be my particular area of speciality, I will
also be writing quite a few articles on that topic (if entire volumes
can be written on it, certainly articles can too!), as well as articles
on the various observances throughout the year. The latter part of this
you can expect to see in my quarterly report under the "Roman Book of
Days"; what I mentioned in the previous paragraph will also be there,
under the "Roman Book of Gods".

There was also mention that people want to know about Roman beliefs on
death, funerary rites, and I would add to this the Afterlife. There are
quite a few books on this as well. I perhaps may not be the best person
to write articles on these things, though I am certainly willing to do so.

While I think of it, though, another good idea is to begin compiling a
"directory" of books on the Sacra, and organising them into topics. If
anyone is willing to help organise this one, let me know, and I will
certainly do what I can to help, as this too is something that shoud go
on the website.

There were also responses that called for some video footage of Roman
rites being performed, as well as a request for perhaps audio files of
prayers. In application to the Sacra Domestica, I have already stated
my views on that. However, I would certainly support this for the Sacra
Publica, though, of course, this has a slight dependance on having
multiple people present. I certainly would like, though, to see this
happen, when it is feasible. I will surely do what I can with this one.

On my wider question of expectations from the Collegium Pontificum on
the whole, there was an overwhelming clamour for leadership and
coordination. It should not be a surprise to anyone who was reading
these fora right around the time of my co-optation that I fully agree
with this. This very thing, in fact, was among the major contributors
to my pursuit of the pontificate. I can say that, for my own part, I
have tried, and will continue to try, to work with my fellow pontiffs
for progress. Of course, there is still a lot of research to be done,
but I know that some, if not all, of the pontiffs are working on things:
researching, finding ways to implement their findings, and, in the end,
bringing about progress. I can safely say that much of the material
which I have found to be available to me is not available to many of my
colleagues. The Classics Library of the University of Cincinnati has a
very unique collection of 18th and 19th-century dissertations, almost
all of which are not to be found in other libraries, and which are not
available to patrons outside the University. (Incidentally, if anyone
happens to need a dissertation which only this university has, let me
know and I will be more than happy to find a way to get a copy to you!
The full catalog is at http://uclid.uc.edu/screens/opacmenu.html.)

In response to this, though, I do have to ask one question. In exactly
what ways do you want leadership from the Collegium? Surely each
pontifex knows what he wants to see from the Collegium, but knowing what
the People want from the Collegium is something different altogether
(hence why I keep asking these open questions). I hate to seem
overly-demanding, but unfortunately, the only way we will know what you,
the People, want, is by your telling us.

In the end, I was happy to receive the responses. I must say, though,
that I was slightly disenheartened by the small number of responses I
gathered, though I certainly will not let that slow me down at all.
But, I hope that, as time goes on, we will be able to breathe life back
into the Sacra Publica and the Sacra Domestica. The fact that we are
all here is a great start for that, and something for pride among all of
us. So we must now continue the process.

Lastly, I know that among many there is a fear of the Collegium
Pontificum. I can not, of course, speak for my fellow pontiffs, but for
myself, I hope that no one fears me. I am not here to use my position
as a political tool. That is simply not my job. I am here for two
reasons, and those alone: to serve the Gods, and to serve the People.
Please, do not hesitate to ask a question, either in public or in
private. It is our duty, as pontiffs, to serve, to educate, and to
guide. My personal opinion is that this fear is hindering both sides of
the equation. It hinders the Collegium because the People fear asking
questions and telling the Collegium what they want. It hinders the
People because the Collegium likely will not (and, in fact, can not) act
without knowing what the People want, what the People do not know, and
how to guide the People properly. I hope that, now and in the future,
we can all work together. We can only become better if we work together.

Iane, Iuppiter, Mars, et Quirine,
Ceres, Vesta, Iuno, et Minerva,
Nos Di Omnes Vos Protegatis,
Liberos Vestros, qui Romani.




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


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





CAIUS MORAVIUS BRUTUS

---------------------------------
Yahoo! Cars NEW - sell your car and browse thousands of new and used cars online search now
---------------------------------


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42859 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - State Religion
Remember that Rome always had a state religion be it Pagan or
Christianity. Nova Roma has a 'state religion'.

The main point is not having a state religion, which often serves
historic or cultural purposes. But having a decent view and respect
for the beliefs of others, organised or not. You can be a born
again christian, devout Catholic, muslim, wicca or belive that the
hedgehog is the gods messengers on earth; it make no difference to
me as long as you respect me and the general rules of society.

Pagan prosecution is plain wrong any way you slice it - and
yes 'right' and 'wrong' are real ideals no matter what your religion
is or even if you are athestist. Decent fair minded people can
agree on certain standards.

So good for the Helennes, may they enjoy their newly recovered
freedom in their ancient realm...

Vale bene,
Cato 2
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42860 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Ludi Circenses
Salve Iulius,

> Because three years ago you had good results with the Alburnus Maior campaign, maybe a publican
> post is available.

Oh, I have a horrible memory, but this sounds familiar. Was this the campaign to save a sacred site
in Italy where I put a link on a few of my websites? I think I heard about it from Serapio in
2002/2755?

<< ... You know how my driver Latina Harmonia is these
>< days-- she's going to insist on new clothes and a makeover..>>>

> Yes... but still the same chariot ? http://aediles.novaroma.org/albata/photo.htm

Nah, that was her chariot before they both had an Extreme Makeover. She's a sweet girl now (all
fluffy bunny, sunshine and rainbows).
http://www.be.paganfederation.org/Latina.htm

Vale,
Diana
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42861 From: Titus Iulius Sabinus Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: MEGALESIA - Cultural Award
SALVETE OMNES !

I want to remember you the subject :

"This year the Cultural Award has as a subject not just a simple
description of historical facts or military strategies of the Punic
Wars, but its goal is, besides encouraging everyone to participate,
to allow the participants to express their innermost believes and
expectations. Both poetry and short stories (no longer than 500
words) are welcomed no matter the style and fictional approach. The
subject in itself is rather vast and there are so many possible
perspectives as different individuals have different passions. Works
which talk about the setting of the roman camp or about the personal
thoughts of a simple soldier before the battle will be regarded by
the honorable jury with the same attention as for example the poems
which describe the road either back home or the road to the realm of
the heroes.
The challenge consists not only in proving one's literary talent but
it aims at one's both general and personal view of roman life."

To participate :

Each competitor can participate sending a work in any language, with
a maximum of 500 words (these kinds of works are accepted: short
stories or poetry) about the subject presented to the rules section

Each text must have the following facts about the participant(s):
Nova Roman name, Nova Roman Province, and e-mail address.

The deadline to send own work is April 3th 2006 (2759 a.u.c.) at
24.00 time of Roma, by e-mail to iulia.cytheris.aege@... with
the subject "Megalesia Cultural Award". Entries posted to any Nova
Roma mailing list will be disqualified.

http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/rules.htm

Don't forget : we accept works in any international language.

Let's honoured the Gods and our ancestors.

VALETE,
IVL SABINVS
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42862 From: Iulia Caesaris Cytheris Aege Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Cultural Award
Salvete omnes!

Thank you for you message, Iulius Sabinus.This is the first time i organize such an important event and i cannot wait to receive the works. I have been thinking a lot concerning the subject because literature is a means of finding a necessary equilibrium, and i also like to think that the writing of fiction offers the individual the best possibility to express the most inner thoughts and feelings. When Ludi are taking place all the disputes should be put aside and we all should honour the Gods.Besides, the Romans did have their original way of dealing with whatever inconveniences might have appeared.Add a little philosophical inquiry, joyfulness, do not forget wit, well measured words and wisdom. You have the subject, you have the Roman heritage. Pray to the Gods of Rome for good omens and do not hesitate : write.

Valete,
Iulia Iulia Caesaris Cytheris Aege

Titus Iulius Sabinus <iulius_sabinus@...> wrote:
SALVETE OMNES !

I want to remember you the subject :

"This year the Cultural Award has as a subject not just a simple
description of historical facts or military strategies of the Punic
Wars, but its goal is, besides encouraging everyone to participate,
to allow the participants to express their innermost believes and
expectations. Both poetry and short stories (no longer than 500
words) are welcomed no matter the style and fictional approach. The
subject in itself is rather vast and there are so many possible
perspectives as different individuals have different passions. Works
which talk about the setting of the roman camp or about the personal
thoughts of a simple soldier before the battle will be regarded by
the honorable jury with the same attention as for example the poems
which describe the road either back home or the road to the realm of
the heroes.
The challenge consists not only in proving one's literary talent but
it aims at one's both general and personal view of roman life."

To participate :

Each competitor can participate sending a work in any language, with
a maximum of 500 words (these kinds of works are accepted: short
stories or poetry) about the subject presented to the rules section

Each text must have the following facts about the participant(s):
Nova Roman name, Nova Roman Province, and e-mail address.

The deadline to send own work is April 3th 2006 (2759 a.u.c.) at
24.00 time of Roma, by e-mail to iulia.cytheris.aege@... with
the subject "Megalesia Cultural Award". Entries posted to any Nova
Roma mailing list will be disqualified.

http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/rules.htm

Don't forget : we accept works in any international language.

Let's honoured the Gods and our ancestors.

VALETE,
IVL SABINVS









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


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





Qui dedit beneficium taceat; narrat qui accepit. (L. Annaeus Seneca)


Iulia Iulia Caesaris Cytheris Aege
Provincial Sacerdos
Legatus Internis Rebus Provincia Dacia.




---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42863 From: iulius sabinus Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Ludi Circenses
SALVE DIANA OCTAVIA !

Diana Octavia Aventina <diana@...> wrote:
Salve Iulius,
> Because three years ago you had good results with the Alburnus Maior campaign, maybe a publican post is available.
>Oh, I have a horrible memory, but this sounds familiar. Was this the campaign to save a sacred site in Italy where I put a link on a few of my websites? I think I heard about it from Serapio in 2002/2755?>>>

Alburnus Maior is in Dacia :
http://www.rosiamontana.org/
and indeed you heard from Serapio.

<< ... You know how my driver Latina Harmonia is these
>< days-- she's going to insist on new clothes and a makeover..>>>
> Yes... but still the same chariot ? http://aediles.novaroma.org/albata/photo.htm
Nah, that was her chariot before they both had an Extreme Makeover. She's a sweet girl now (all fluffy bunny, sunshine and rainbows).
http://www.be.paganfederation.org/Latina.htm >>>

Oh...the peoples eyes are already like the snails eyes.

VALE BENE,
Iulius
( 1 from 79 )







---------------------------------
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! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42864 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: Salvete Omnes!
Glad you approve, was a little worried about being too close to your
name, and we are in the same province too! Do you ever go to Roman
Days in Wells, Maine, Nova Brittanica? Maybe we could carpool if I
can go this year... I am about halfway there for you (Maryland).

There is an idea for other provinces too, maybe rent a van together
to get to events if 6 or more people want to go, saves wear and tear
on personal cars and fuel. Shared driving is nice too, I get tired
after driving 12 hours...

I have to admit I picked Gaius after Gaius Baltar in the New
Battlestar Galactica...

Vale,
Cato II

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "gaiusequitiuscato" <mlcinnyc@...>
wrote:
>
> C. Equitius Cato C. Domitio Catoni sal.
>
> Salve Domitius Cato!
>
> And let me be the first to congratulate you on an outstanding
name!
>
> :-)
>
> Vale optime,
>
> Cato
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gaius Domitius Cato"
> <dcwnewyork2002@> wrote:
> >
> > Salve Iuli,
> >
> > Tis done!
> >
> > Vale bene,
> > Gaius Domitius Cato
> > Citizenship Pending
> >
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42865 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Roma Futura
Interesting that 'the new Roman Empire' was mentioned as period of
future earth history in the new Doctor Who episode 'The End of the
World'. Often science fiction goes beyond 'fanciful musings' and for
tells the actual future - humans going to the moon, other planets
around other stars, large practical submarines...

New Roman Empire, interesting idea...

Cato II
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42866 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory
M. Hortensia quiritibus spd;
the point of incorporating in the U.S is that you get treated
as an 'official' religion, meaning a tax break & the gov't and no
one else can interfere with you. The U.S Constitutional
guarantee "Freedom of religion" is protected so if you let's say
want to sacrifice to the gods, the ASPCA won't come & arrest you..(I
don't want to go there via animal sacrifice).

Also for our cultores in Dacia, Romania, Iulia Caesaris is forced to
take a class in university in Orthodox Christianity, she only wanted
a certificate from NR saying she belonged to the Religio to try to
get out of this. She also got a F in her religion class for writing
about her beliefs.

As for the Hellenic polytheists, they've been fighting to get
an 'official' place to worship, otherwise if they meet & worship in
a private home, the police could arrest them. So yes it is extremely
important. Under the EU religions have rights, cults do not.....


So I'm with our esteemed Consul Fabius Buteo Modianus, he's an
energetic member of the Religio & a pontiff. I know it's no big deal
to incorporate as a religion, having been a lawyer. Let the other
pontiffs finally take some responsibility & get it done!!!
bene valete in pacem deorum
M. Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebis



> This quite intrigues me as does the idea of "incorporating" a
religion. Also bizarre sounding to a British pagan is the idea of
Pagan "churches". This is a term I notice that Americans and
Canadians sometimes use but never, to my knowledge, us Europeans to
whom it has rather unpleasant connotations.
>
> In Britain we have an official state religion - which is
generally ignored by the overwhelming majority of the population
except when they get married - and until 1950 the practice of Pagan
religions was more or less illegal. Although now we are generally
free to follow whatever religion we choose I've never come across
the idea of somehow making our religion(s) more "official". By and
large I think I'd rather keep my faith as far away from the
Government as possible!
>
> Having said this I do appreciate that the Hellenes have faced
particular problems with the Orthodox church. Hopefully this latest
decision will provide them with a greater level of protection in the
face of hostility.
>
> Valete
>
> Caius Moravius Brutus
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Gnaeus Equitius Marinus <gawne@...> wrote:
> Salve Antoni,
>
> P. Dominus Antonius wrote:
>
> > Why does a court have to "approve" an association to worship old
gods,
>
> Because Greece has an official state religion. Many countries do.
>
> Vale,
>
> -- Marinus
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
> Visit your group "Nova-Roma" on the web.
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
> CAIUS MORAVIUS BRUTUS
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Cars NEW - sell your car and browse thousands of new and
used cars online search now
> ---------------------------------
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42867 From: Titus Iulius Sabinus Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: MEGALESIA - Face on Roman Body
SALVETE NOVI ROMANI !

This is a simple contest, but with a lot of fun, where the Nova Romans
citizens can participate. Send to me your image in jpg format with a
good resolution, in attachment at : iulius_sabinus@... . The
dead line to send the image is April 1st and April 9th is the date
when you will see the results of my work. The best processed image
will be chosen from all, by the Curule Aedilis Iulius Sabinus Cohors
members, and it will represent the contest winner. The result will be
published on April 11th 2006( 2759 ) at the Aediles Website Result
section and on the Main Mailing List of Nova Roma.
An exemple is here :
http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/face%20to%20roman%20body.htm

VALETE,
IVL SABINVS
Curule Aedile
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42868 From: Titus Iulius Sabinus Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Ludi Circenses - descriptions
SALVETE OMNES !

I want to thank to all Ludi Circenses participants, who sent me a
description of the chariots,drivers and horses.
That it was a wonderful ideea, amici, and your descriptions represent
a good help. Now the stories will include these descriptions.

I want to encourage all the participants to add a short description in
their mail. The stories will be more attractive.

VALETE,
IVL SABINVS
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42869 From: Titus Iulius Sabinus Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Dominus Factionum - second call
SALVETE !

The Dominus Factionum duties are :

- to keep alive the Ludi Circenses spirit.

- to coordinate his Factio activities.

- to enlist new members for his/her factio.

- to manage his/her factio advertising messages.


Until now, we have :

Albata - Dominus Factionum : G. Equitius Marinus.

Veneta - Dominus Factionum : L. Octavianus Pompeius.

Russata - Dominus Factionum : vacant

Praesina - Dominus Factionum : vacant.


Send a message to iulius_sabinus@... , and you will have the
privilege to lead a Faction.

Subscriptions are still open for two days.



VALETE,

IVL SABINVS
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42870 From: Virginia Richards-Taylor Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Looking for help with a timeline
Hail the list, I'm still new and not really posting yet, but I
thought some people might like to know about this:
My friend J. Morgan Kuberry is trying to organize a Time Line to
enhance the Kingston Renaissance Faire.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v129/kittywitch/art/fourchar.jpg

He's looking for Romans and Vikings, and basically to help what's in
essence a weekend-long church event to "fight hunger". It's in Ulster
county, NY, and he's hoping to find help to invest some actual
history into what much of the audience doesn't realize is very poor
re-enactment.
If anyone is interested, please call Morgan at 814-282-5220. Could be
fun and a chance to find others who might be more interested in
history than in just eating, drinking, wearing costumes and spending
money on silly stuff.

Thanks- Tchipakkan

known to banks etc. as: Virginia Fair Richards-Taylor

known in the SCA as: Arastorm the Golden

known in Rhuddlan as: AElfgifu of Haywarden

known in family as Mother

(no Roman name yet)




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42871 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Face on Roman Body
Hey, you're doing a lot of work and it all sounds fun! I'll be signing up for a few things tomorrow.
Congratulations in advance Sabinus, Curule Aedile Extraordinaire!

<Send to me your image in jpg format with a
> good resolution, in attachment at : iulius_sabinus@... . The
> dead line to send the image is April 1st and April 9th is the date
> when you will see the results of my work.

Could you put my head on a Roman body that is 15 years younger? :-))
Vale,
Diana
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42872 From: iulius sabinus Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Face on Roman Body
SALVE !

Diana Octavia Aventina <diana@...> wrote: Hey, you're doing a lot of work >>>

Thank you. The hardest part it was to search for oil paintings with roman subject. I have now an entire art gallery in one of my folders.

and it all sounds fun! I'll be signing up for a few things tomorrow.>>>
I'll wait with interest.
<Send to me your image in jpg format with a
> good resolution, in attachment at : iulius_sabinus@... . The
> dead line to send the image is April 1st and April 9th is the date
> when you will see the results of my work.

Could you put my head on a Roman body that is 15 years younger? :-))>>>

I can't take your question in a simple way. It's an entire philosophy here. Only our spirituality is important. The question is how to point out that.( maybe using something from Dali )

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





---------------------------------
Blab-away for as little as 1¢/min. Make PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42873 From: Titus Iulius Sabinus Date: 2006-03-27
Subject: Only for fun ( was : Re: MEGALESIA - Ludi Circenses )
SALVE DIANA OCTAVIA !
SALVETE !

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Diana Octavia Aventina"
<diana@...> wrote:
>... You know how my driver Latina Harmonia is these days-- she's
going to insist on new clothes and a makeover..>>>
>
>Yes... but still the same chariot ?
http://aediles.novaroma.org/albata/photo.htm
>
> Nah, that was her chariot before they both had an Extreme
Makeover. She's a sweet girl now (all
> fluffy bunny, sunshine and rainbows).
> http://www.be.paganfederation.org/Latina.htm >>>

In this case what I can say ? Let's have some fun :
http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/fun.htm

VALE ET VALETE,
IVL SABINVS
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42874 From: A. Tullia Scholastica Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Salvete Omnes!
> Salue, Cato II, et saluete, omnes!
>
> Glad you approve, was a little worried about being too close to your
> name, and we are in the same province too!
>
> ATS (the original one...) That makes three of us...not only in the same
> province, but the same state (if memory serves). There are several people
> with the same cognomen; Seuerus is very common, Caesar is extremely common,
> and Cicero is a close second. Cato isn¹t rare.
>
> Do you ever go to Roman
> Days in Wells, Maine, Nova Brittanica? Maybe we could carpool if I
> can go this year... I am about halfway there for you (Maryland).
>
> ATS: Cato I lives in Manhattan, and, like most of the tribe, doesn¹t
> drive. Moreover, he doesn¹t like leaving Trantor. Secondly, word has it that
> Market Days will be cancelled this year, as will Roman Days Northeast, so that
> the only possibility even remotely close to the NE is Roman Days in Maryland.
> Are you in Maryland, or NYS?
>
> There is an idea for other provinces too, maybe rent a van together
> to get to events if 6 or more people want to go, saves wear and tear
> on personal cars and fuel. Shared driving is nice too, I get tired
> after driving 12 hours...
>
> ATS: So do I‹even the nine or ten hours I have to put in are very
> exhausting.
>
> I have to admit I picked Gaius after Gaius Baltar in the New
> Battlestar Galactica...
>
> Vale,
> Cato II
>
> Vale, et ualete,
>
> A. Tullia Scholastica
> Classicist and reenactor, inter alia
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "gaiusequitiuscato" <mlcinnyc@...>
> wrote:
>> >
>> > C. Equitius Cato C. Domitio Catoni sal.
>> >
>> > Salve Domitius Cato!
>> >
>> > And let me be the first to congratulate you on an outstanding
> name!
>> >
>> > :-)
>> >
>> > Vale optime,
>> >
>> > Cato
>> >
>> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gaius Domitius Cato"
>> > <dcwnewyork2002@> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > Salve Iuli,
>>> > >
>>> > > Tis done!
>>> > >
>>> > > Vale bene,
>>> > > Gaius Domitius Cato
>>> > > Citizenship Pending
>>> > >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42875 From: Q. Caecilius Metellus Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Face on Roman Body
Metellus Sabino Cohorti Ei sal. plur. dic.

The ones you have up so far came out pretty well! Arria Carina's image
is absolutely seamless for what I can see, and Cato looks like quite the
poet (probably working on a version of the "Fasti" to rival Ovid). You
were a little harder to find, but I still found you in there (I've been
in bifocals for years now, so everything is hard to find!) I'll have to
see what you can do with me....

Valete, and Bravo!

Q. Caecilius Metellus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42876 From: S Ullerius Venator Piperbarbus Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Looking for help with a timeline
Ave Tchipakkan;

> [excision]
>
> known in the SCA as: Arastorm the Golden
>
> [excision]

Would this be the same Arastorm whose mead recipe of about 1982
inspired me to start brewing mead, in addition to ale, beer and
wine???

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

Religio Septentrionalis - Poet

Dominus Sodalitas Coquuorum et Cerevisiae Coctorum
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sodalis_Coq_et_Coq/

http://anheathenreader.blogspot.com/
http://www.catamount-grange-hearth.org/

--
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: 42877 From: M·CVR·COMPLVTENSIS Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Edictum Propraetoricium XLIIII (Complutensi XVIIII) De Legatus Exte
Edictum Propraetoricium XLIIII (Complutensi XVIIII) De Legatus Externis Rebus

EX HOC, SEQUENS CIVIS DESIGNATVS EST LEGATUS EXTERNIS REBUS:

POR EL QUE EL SIGUIENTE CIUDADANO ES NOMBRADO LEGATUS EXTERNIS REBUS:

THE FOLLOWING CITIZEN IS HEREBY APPOINTED AS LEGATUS EXTERNIS REBUS (2ND RANK OFFICIAL):

� AVLVS AVRELIVS FIRMVS (ID#8654)

Hoc edictum dehinc valebit

Este Edicto entra en vigor inmediatamente.

This edictum becomes effective immediately.


DATVM�SVB�MANV�MEA�A�D�V�KAL�APRILES� MMDCCLVIII�A�V�C�,
G�FABIO�BVTEO�MODIANO�P�MINUCIA�STRABE�CONSVLIBVS

M�CVRIATIVS�COMPLVTENSIS
PROPRAETOR HISPANIAE

NOVA ROMA



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42878 From: Titus Iulius Sabinus Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: MEGALESIA - Call for Munera Gladiatoria & Venationes
SALVETE NOVI ROMANI !

Just a remind : we still accept subscriptions !
Complete your application form :

Munera Gladiatoria :
http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/ludi/ludi_form_gladiatoria.php

Venationes :
http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/ludi/ludi_form_venationes.php

Give to the peoples the possibility to vote your fighter !

( somebody said that they don't have the necessary courage to come in
Circus Maximus, is true ? )

VALE BENE,
IVL SABINVS
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42879 From: Gnaeus Equitius Marinus Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Seeking another censorial scribe
Salvete omnes,

Due to changing demands on the time of my current censorial scribes, I'm
now accepting applications from any of you who may be interested in
becoming a member of my censorial staff. Fluency in one or more Romance
languages is a plus, but I will consider all applicants.

To apply, please send me via private e-mail an application listing your
name, time in Nova Roma, language aptitude, and approximate number of
hours you can devote to the work each week.

Valete,

Gn. Equitius Marinus
Censor
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42880 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: a.d. V Kal. Apr.
OSD C. Equitius Cato

Salvete omnes!

Hodie est ante diem V Kalendas Aprilis; haec dies comitialis est.


"THE study of Grammar was not even pursued at Rome in early days,
still less held in any esteem; and naturally enough, since the state
was then still uncultivated and given to war, and had as yet little
leisure for liberal pursuits. The beginnings of the subject, too, were
humble, for the earliest teachers, who were also both poets and
Italian Greeks (I refer to Livius and Ennius, who gave instruction in
both tongues at home and abroad, as is well known), did no more than
interpret the Greeks or give readings from whatever they themselves
had composed in the Latin language. For while some tell us that this
same Ennius published a book 'On Letters and Syllables' and another
'On Meters,' Lucius Cotta is right in maintaining that these were not
the work of the poet, but of a later Ennius, who is also the author of
the volumes 'On the Science of Augury.'

In my opinion then, the first to introduce the study of grammar into
our city was Crates of Mallos, a contemporary of Aristarchus. He was
sent to the Senate by King Attalus between the second and third Punic
wars, at about the time when Ennius died [169 B.C.]; and having fallen
into the opening of a sewer in the Palatine quarter and broken his
leg, he held numerous and frequent conferences during the whole time
both of his embassy and of his convalescence, at which he constantly
gave instruction, and thus set an example for our countrymen to
imitate. Their imitation, however, was confined to a careful criticism
of poems which had as yet but little circulation, either those of
deceased friends or others that met with their approval, and to making
them known to the public by reading and commenting on them. For
example, Caius Octavius Lampadio thus treated the Punic War of
Naevius, which was originally written in a single volume without a
break, but was divided by Lampadio into seven books. At a later time
Quintus Vargunteius took up the 'Annals' of Ennius, which he expounded
on set days to large audiences; and Laelius Archelaus and Vettius
Philocomus the satires of their friend Lucilius, which Lenaeus
Pompeius prides himself on having read with Archelaus, and Valerius
Cato with Philocomus.

The foundations of the study were laid, and it was advanced in all
directions, by Lucius Aelius of Lanuvium and his son-in-law Servius
Clodius, both of whom were Roman equites and men of wide and varied
experience in scholarship and statecraft. Aelius had two surnames, for
he was called Praeconinus because his father had followed the
occupation of a crier ["praeco"] and Stilo [from "stylus"], because he
used to write speeches for all the great men of the day; and he was so
devoted to the aristocratic party that he accompanied Metellus
Numidicus into exile. Servius stole one of his father-in-law's books
before it was published, and being in consequence disowned, left the
city through shame and remorse, and fell ill of the gout. Unable to
endure the pain, he applied a poisonous drug to his feet, which
finally killed him, after he had lived for a time with that part of
his body as it were prematurely dead. After this the science
constantly grew in favor and popularity, so much so that even the most
eminent men did not hesitate to make contributions to it, while at
times there are said to have been more than twenty well-attended
schools in the city. The grammarians too were so highly esteemed, and
their compensation was so ample, that Lutatius Daphnis, whom Laevius
Melissus, punning on his name, often called the 'darling of Pan,' is
known to have been bought for seven hundred thousand sesterces and
soon afterwards set free, while Lucius Appuleius was hired for four
hundred sesterces a year by Eficius Calvinus, a wealthy Roman eques,
to teach a large school. In fact, Grammar even made its way into the
provinces, and some of the most famous teachers gave instruction
abroad, especially in Gallia Togata, including Octavius Teucer,
Pescennius Iaccus and Oypius Chares; indeed the last named taught
until the very end of his life, when he could no longer walk, or even
see." - C. Seutonius Tranquillus, "De Grammaticus" 1-3


Valete bene!

Cato



SOURCES

Seutonius
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42881 From: Pompeia Minucia Strabo Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA IS SUMMONED
Pompeia Minucia Strabo Consul Quiritibus Novae Romae S.P.D.

The required auspices have been taken and deemed favourable by Consul, Pontifex et Augur G. Fabius Buteo Modianus.

Schedule is as follows:

Contio shall being March 28 1800 Roman time and shall continue Until April 2 1800.

Voting shall commence April 2 1801 Roman Time and shall continue until April 4 2400. Roman Time. Voting shall be suspended until April 24 2400 hours Roman Time due to nefasti where no voting is permitted. Voting shall resume April 25 0001 Roman Time until April 28 1830 hrs Roman Time.

******

Matters of Election:

_____________________________________________________________________

Election of Editor Commentariorum:

Candidate seeking approval: Titus Marcius Felix, Citizen 8193, Plebian, Assuidi, Citizen since 2004/11/18

______________________________________________________________________


Lex Moravia Minucia de Civitate Eiuranda

I. The lex Cornelia et Maria De Civitate Eiuranda is hereby repealed.

http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2001-05-20-iii.html

II. The Lex Equitia de Civitate Eiuranda is hereby repealed.

http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/letes/200410-07-v.html


III.A: Citizenship from Nova Roma, as stated in paragraph II.A.4. in the Constitution of Nova Roma, may be voluntarily relinquished by notification of the Censors or by public statement before 3 or more witnesses. Messages posted to official Nova Roma e-mail lists or electronic message boards, or statements of an intent to resign citizenship that are made at a public function of Nova Roma meet the requirement for three witnesses to a resignation if and only if three witnesses to the resignation notify the Censors thereof within 72 hours of the initial proclamation. In accordance with the Constitution
II.A.5 a parent or guardian, as above, may voluntarily rescind citizenship of Impuberes.
B. The Censor(s) shall, at their earliest convenience, but no later than within seven days, issue to the citizen in writing or by electronic message an official acknowledgement of this intent to resign citizenship. Resignation becomes effective within 48 hours from the date and time the Censor(s) issue such acknowledgment.
C. Before such time that a resignation of citizenship would come into effect, a citizen may rescind his or her intention to resign, or a legal guardian may rescind the intention to resign of an impubere, by writing or by sending an electronic message to the Censors or to a Rogatoral designate of the Censors.

IV Failure to respond to a Nova Roma census, as per legal obligation, places an individualÂ’s citizenship in temporary suspension. A citizen under suspended citizenship may be given a designation other than citizen, as prevailing law provides. Suspended citizenship may be lifted by the individual notifying the Censors of his or her intent to renew active citizenship, by responding to the following census, or by paying annual dues within the following year. Individuals who are under suspended citizenship are not to be counted as assidui or as capiti censi, and thus temporarily lose the right vote, but retain all other rights of citizenship. If within a five-year period an individual member fails to respond to two consecutive censuses, the Censors may rescind the individualÂ’s citizenship and all its attendant rights.

V. A: If citizenship is resigned without also stating that public offices are resigned, any and all public offices held by the citizen at that time become vacated when a resignation of citizenship comes into effect. No public offices, elected or appointed, carry over into a new citizenship if a resigning citizen should later seek to reacquire citizenship.

VI.A: A former citizen, in the event he or she desires to reacquire citizenship must reapply for citizenship to the Censors through prevailing legal procedures. Additionally, the former citizen is directed to state in his or her application the reasons behind the initial resignation of citizenship, and the nature of the reasons influencing the desire to have it reinstated.
B: The Roman name of a returning citizen may be resumed if no other citizen of Nova Roma has taken it in his or her absence

VII. When a former citizen applies for reinstatement of citizenship (postliminium):

No office, religious or civil, held by the citizen at the time of his or her resignation, is regained if that person is granted citizenship once more. After ninety days of being reinstated into citizenship, the returning citizen may apply to the Collegium Pontificum for reappointment to any religious offices that he or she may have previously held. Only the Collegium Pontificum, or otherwise designated religious body, is authorized to reappoint a returning citizen to a religious office.
Any titles, honors and/or effects of past public administrative offices shall be restored to the returning citizen only after a period of ninety days has passed from the date that citizenship is regained. Century points that are due to a returning citizen for any and all public and/or religious offices that he or she may have previously held shall be restored at the end of ninety days.
Senatorial status may be resumed at the discretion of the Censors collegially


VIII. If a citizen resigns, is subsequently reinstated, and resigns a second time, this former citizen is barred for two years from reinstatement as a citizen of Nova Roma.

IX.A: This lex does not influence in itself a returning citizen's lawfully established entitlements or restrictions to pursue official positions (via election or appointment) for which he or she would again become eligible. All rights of citizenship are restored in full to a returning citizen after ninety (90) days from when a censor re-enrolls a citizen. At the discretion of the Senate, the normal waiting period may be waived and full rights of citizenship restored prior to the ninety-day period.
B: Further, the language of this lex does not in itself serve to influence those established lawful authorities or parameters by which religious and/or legislative bodies may issue or fail to issue appointments relative to their respective roles and functions, in the consideration of any citizen's application.

X. The Censors will note the dates of submitted and withdrawn resignations in the censorial album civium.

______________________________________________________________________


Lex Moravia Minucia Abdicatone Magistratum
I This Lex pursues the constitutional language of Section IV, headed 'Magistrates', which states that an office becomes vacant when a magistrate resigns or dies.
II.This lex clarifies the legal definition of magisterial resignation, consequences of resignation, and those procedures legally necessary to validate and remedy magisterial vacancy due to resignation of office.

III. The language of this lex is binding on resignation of magisterial offices elected in the Comitia Centuriata, in the Comitia Populi Tributa and in the Comitia Plebis Tributa.


IV. A tendered resignation from an elected office becomes legal and binding once receipt of same is acknowledged to the resigning Magistrate by an appropriate presiding official (defined below) of the comitia by which he or she was elected.



A i. Resignation of an office elected in the Comitia Plebis Tributa is tendered in writing to the Tribuni Plebii or tendered in writing in the presence of three or more Plebian citizens, who shall witness and communicate the resignation to the Tribunes. Once advised of a resignation, the Tribuni Plebii shall respond in writing to the resigning magistrate within 24 hours, in order to acknowledge the tendered resignation, and a vacancy of that office is legally established.

A. ii Elections shall be held in the Comitia Plebis Tributa within 45 days of the established vacancy for a suffect magistrate,according to prevailing legal procedure governing elections of this comitia.

Aiii
This lex does not in itself restrict a former magistrate from standing for election in the Comitia Plebis Tributa to fill the vacancy caused by his or her resignation.

B i Resignations of offices elected in the Comitia Populi Tributa or the Comitia Centuriata are to be tendered in writing to the Consuls, or in the presence of three or more citizens,who shall acknowledge and communicate receipt of the resignation to the Consuls. Once advised of the resignation, the Consuls shall respond in writing within 24 hours to the resigning magistrate in order to acknowledge the tendered resignation, and a vacancy of that office is thereby legally established.

B.ii Elections shall be held in the appropriate comitia within 45 days of the established vacancy for a suffect magistrate, according to the respective prevailing laws governing these comitia elections.

Biii This lex does not in itself restrict a former magistrate from standing for election in the appropriate comitia to fill the vacancy caused by his or her resignation.

V. Consuls may not accept resignations of offices elected of the Comitia Plebis Tributa.


VI. The presiding comitia magistrate who lawfully acknowledges receipt of a resignation of office to the tendering magistrate as detailed in Ai and Bi, shall be responsible for communicating this information to the Censors, the Magister Aranearius and the citizenry via public fora within 48 hours.


VII. Accreditation of century points for partial service of a term of office shall not be affected by this lex.



_______________________________________________________________________
Lex to Repeal Current Items of Legislation
I don't have a proper Latin name for this measure yet, but comitia's
approval of this item will officially repeal the following legislations:

Lex Arminia Equitia de Dignitate Curule
http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2004-06-30-ii.html

Lex Arminia Equitia de Sanctitate
http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2004-08-13-i.html


The last lines of both these leges (above) nullify their respective legal and binding forces. Further, there is no corresponding constitutional language that I can see to clarify their legal purpose. Although they are remarkable from an academic standpoint, the language of these legislations has caused issues of controversy, which might ( atleast theoretically) be avoided in future if we repeal them officially.

____________________________________________________________________
Those voters who do not have a voter code are asked to contact the Censors' office Censors@... to obtain one, as you will need it to log into the cista to vote.

Valete

---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.



---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42882 From: Gnaeus Cornelius Lentulus Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: MEGALESIA - Certamen Latinum
MEGALESIA - CERTAMEN LATINVM

Cn. Cornelius Lentulus, scriba ludorum Aedilis T. Juli Sabini, sodalibus SPD:

Dear citizens and foreigners! This Latin contest of the Ludi Megalenses will be an excellent opportunity to improve your classical erudition and to take part in a nice cultural event of the New Roman Community. I wholeheartedly encourage you to participate in this Latin contest, from the 4th of Aprile, during 7 days.

Thank you for your kind attention. More detailes can be read here:


http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/rules.htm

Ludi Megalenses Certamen Latinum Rules

During Ludi Megalenses there will be a dual Latin contest, the Certamen Latinum, with two questions each day (quiz 1-7). This contest is not for Latinists or Latin speakers: it is for those who know some Latin linguistics, some Latin expressions, phrases or just started to learn Latin or are about starting it.

1) One question level 1 will be for those who don't know Latin at all, and one question level 2 for the benefit of those who are beginners or a bit advanced.

2) The two questions of the two different levels will create two separate contests with the same rules and scoring. Every contestant can participate in both contests, but it's also possible to participate in only one.

3) If you'll answer correctly you'll receive 2 points for each question (2 pts for questions of level 1 and 2 pts for questions of level 2, too). 1 point for the answers not complete. 0 for the wrong answers.

4) In each level the winner will be that contestant who will gain the most points.

All the questions and the answers will be published on the web site of Aedilis T. Iulius Sabinus and on NR mailing list.

Before 22.00 (Roman time) of each day of Ludi Megalenses the question will be published; you have 24 hrs to answer; the correct answer will be published the following day, from the 4th April to the 10th April; the final results with the classification and the winner will be published the 11th April.

All your answer HAVE TO BE POSTED ONLY to this email address:

cnaeus_cornelius@...

ATTENTION: Posting answers to ANY NR list will disqualify the sender, and invalidate the question.


VALETE!

CN CORNELIVS LENTVLVS
SCRIBA LVDORVM AED T IVL SABINI


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

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42883 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA IS SUMMONED
A. Apollonius Pompejae Minuciae omnibusque sal.

The link given in the text under the heading "Lex
Arminia Equitia de sanctitate" does not link to the
lex of that name.



___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Photos – NEW, now offering a quality print service from just 8p a photo http://uk.photos.yahoo.com
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42884 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: De legibus Moraviis Minuciis
A. Apollonius M. Moravio Pompejae Minucia omnibusque
sal.

It won't surprise you to hear that my initial reaction
to these proposals is not favourable. They seem to me
to further complicate an area of law which already
unnecessarily complicated and can only be improved by
being drastically simplified. Perhaps more importantly
they take us still further away from the mos majorum
for no reason which I can readily perceive.

But I'm not writing to give a thorough critique of
these proposals. What I'm hoping is to understand some
of the thinking behind them. To that end, let me ask
you two questions:

1. Do you agree that the proposal published earlier by
Ti. Galerius would bring the law of Nova Roma
concerning resignation of citizenship and resignation
of office substantially into line with ancient Roman
practice?

2. If so, why have you decided to bring forward these
alternative proposals?



___________________________________________________________
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: 42885 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA IS SUMMONED
A. Apollonius Pompejae Minuciae omnibusque sal.

One further question, this time a procedural one:

Given that the two leges Moraviae Minuciae propose to
make detailed and substantial changes to an area of
law which has not been adequately clarified even after
two previous leges and three failed legislative
proposals, do you think that five days are sufficient
to allowing the populus to digest and debate these
proposals and to allow you to make any amendments you
may feel appropriate as a result of that debate?



___________________________________________________________
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: 42886 From: Sebastian José Molina Palacios Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
Salvete omnes:
A very curious thing this about romans in sci-fi. By the way, does anybody know anything about the Star Trek series (captain Kirk, Mr. Spock and company)? In these original series there is chapter titled "panem et circenses" in which starship Enterprise arrives at a planet inhabitated by romans. These romans where settled there by an alien civilization named "the preservers" who came to our planet Earth 2500 years ago in the days of the Roman Republic. The capital city of this planet is named Magna Roma and, apparently, the evolution of this magna-roman civilization is identical than terrestrial romans, including the rising of christianism for example.
So then, it looks like the "roma-mania" may go on for a long time and arrive to where no one else has been before. :-)

Greetings from Spain,

Quintus Livius Drusus

Gaius Domitius Cato <dcwnewyork2002@...> escribió:
Interesting that 'the new Roman Empire' was mentioned as period of
future earth history in the new Doctor Who episode 'The End of the
World'. Often science fiction goes beyond 'fanciful musings' and for
tells the actual future - humans going to the moon, other planets
around other stars, large practical submarines...

New Roman Empire, interesting idea...

Cato II





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


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




__________________________________________________
Correo Yahoo!
Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ¡gratis!
Regístrate ya - http://correo.espanol.yahoo.com/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42887 From: David Santo Orcero Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
Salvete Omnes!

> A very curious thing this about romans in sci-fi. By the way, does
> anybody know anything about the Star Trek series (captain Kirk, Mr.
Spock and company)? In these original series there is chapter titled
> "panem et circenses"
(...)
> years ago in the days of the Roman Republic. The capital city of this
> planet is named Magna Roma and, apparently, the evolution of this
> magna-roman civilization is identical than terrestrial romans, including
> the rising of christianism for example.

I have follow this series, and I disagree. The image of Roma that they
give is a fascist military regime were have blood spectacles that they
give at TV. The only relationship with Roma is the name, some logos, and
part of the spectacle of gladiators. It looks more that Musolini fascist
regime with strange clothes and with gladiators. :-(

Yours:

Lucius Cornelius Malacitanus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42888 From: Titus Iulius Sabinus Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: MEGALESIA - Cultural Award
SALVETE NOVI ROMANI !

Just a remind that Iulia Caesaris Cytheris Aege accept works in any
international language !
You have now a great possibility to express your roman feelings in
your native language.
Important is to PARTICIPATE, not to win. And is not necessary to be
a writer !
Take that as a challange with yourself.

Read the rules for Cultural Award :
http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/rules.htm

Write a short story or a poem inspired from Iulia Cytheris' subject
description :

" This year the Cultural Award has as a subject not just a simple
description of historical facts or military strategies of the Punic
Wars, but its goal is, besides encouraging everyone to participate,
to allow the participants to express their innermost believes and
expectations. Both poetry and short stories (no longer than 500
words) are welcomed no matter the style and fictional approach. The
subject in itself is rather vast and there are so many possible
perspectives as different individuals have different passions. Works
which talk about the setting of the roman camp or about the personal
thoughts of a simple soldier before the battle will be regarded by
the honorable jury with the same attention as for example the poems
which describe the road either back home or the road to the realm of
the heroes.
The challenge consists not only in proving one's literary talent but
it aims at one's both general and personal view of roman life."

Then send your work to : iulia.cytheris.aege@...

VALETE,
IVL SABINVS
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42889 From: Pompeia Minucia Strabo Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA IS SUMMONED (Corrected Link to Lex Armin
pompeia_minucia_tiberia <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@...> wrote: Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 18:57:58 -0000
From: "pompeia_minucia_tiberia" <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@...>
To: Pompeia_Minucia_Tiberia@...
Subject: Fwd: THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA IS SUMMONED

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Pompeia Minucia Strabo

wrote:

Pompeia Minucia Strabo Consul Quiritibus Novae Romae S.P.D.

The required auspices have been taken and deemed favourable by
Consul, Pontifex et Augur G. Fabius Buteo Modianus.

Schedule is as follows:

Contio shall being March 28 1800 Roman time and shall continue
Until April 2 1800.

Voting shall commence April 2 1801 Roman Time and shall continue
until April 4 2400. Roman Time. Voting shall be suspended until
April 24 2400 hours Roman Time due to nefasti where no voting is
permitted. Voting shall resume April 25 0001 Roman Time until April
28 1830 hrs Roman Time.

******

Matters of Election:


_____________________________________________________________________

Election of Editor Commentariorum:

Candidate seeking approval: Titus Marcius Felix, Citizen 8193,
Plebian, Assuidi, Citizen since 2004/11/18


_____________________________________________________________________
_


Lex Moravia Minucia de Civitate Eiuranda

I. The lex Cornelia et Maria De Civitate Eiuranda is hereby
repealed.

http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2001-05-20-iii.html

II. The Lex Equitia de Civitate Eiuranda is hereby repealed.

http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/letes/200410-07-v.html


III.A: Citizenship from Nova Roma, as stated in paragraph II.A.4.
in the Constitution of Nova Roma, may be voluntarily relinquished by
notification of the Censors or by public statement before 3 or more
witnesses. Messages posted to official Nova Roma e-mail lists or
electronic message boards, or statements of an intent to resign
citizenship that are made at a public function of Nova Roma meet the
requirement for three witnesses to a resignation if and only if
three witnesses to the resignation notify the Censors thereof within
72 hours of the initial proclamation. In accordance with the
Constitution
II.A.5 a parent or guardian, as above, may voluntarily rescind
citizenship of Impuberes.
B. The Censor(s) shall, at their earliest convenience, but no
later than within seven days, issue to the citizen in writing or by
electronic message an official acknowledgement of this intent to
resign citizenship. Resignation becomes effective within 48 hours
from the date and time the Censor(s) issue such acknowledgment.
C. Before such time that a resignation of citizenship would come
into effect, a citizen may rescind his or her intention to resign,
or a legal guardian may rescind the intention to resign of an
impubere, by writing or by sending an electronic message to the
Censors or to a Rogatoral designate of the Censors.

IV Failure to respond to a Nova Roma census, as per legal
obligation, places an individual's citizenship in temporary
suspension. A citizen under suspended citizenship may be given a
designation other than citizen, as prevailing law provides.
Suspended citizenship may be lifted by the individual notifying the
Censors of his or her intent to renew active citizenship, by
responding to the following census, or by paying annual dues within
the following year. Individuals who are under suspended citizenship
are not to be counted as assidui or as capiti censi, and thus
temporarily lose the right vote, but retain all other rights of
citizenship. If within a five-year period an individual member fails
to respond to two consecutive censuses, the Censors may rescind the
individual's citizenship and all its attendant rights.

V. A: If citizenship is resigned without also stating that public
offices are resigned, any and all public offices held by the citizen
at that time become vacated when a resignation of citizenship comes
into effect. No public offices, elected or appointed, carry over
into a new citizenship if a resigning citizen should later seek to
reacquire citizenship.

VI.A: A former citizen, in the event he or she desires to
reacquire citizenship must reapply for citizenship to the Censors
through prevailing legal procedures. Additionally, the former
citizen is directed to state in his or her application the reasons
behind the initial resignation of citizenship, and the nature of the
reasons influencing the desire to have it reinstated.
B: The Roman name of a returning citizen may be resumed if no
other citizen of Nova Roma has taken it in his or her absence

VII. When a former citizen applies for reinstatement of
citizenship (postliminium):

No office, religious or civil, held by the citizen at the time
of his or her resignation, is regained if that person is granted
citizenship once more. After ninety days of being reinstated into
citizenship, the returning citizen may apply to the Collegium
Pontificum for reappointment to any religious offices that he or she
may have previously held. Only the Collegium Pontificum, or
otherwise designated religious body, is authorized to reappoint a
returning citizen to a religious office.
Any titles, honors and/or effects of past public
administrative offices shall be restored to the returning citizen
only after a period of ninety days has passed from the date that
citizenship is regained. Century points that are due to a returning
citizen for any and all public and/or religious offices that he or
she may have previously held shall be restored at the end of ninety
days.
Senatorial status may be resumed at the discretion of the
Censors collegially


VIII. If a citizen resigns, is subsequently reinstated, and
resigns a second time, this former citizen is barred for two years
from reinstatement as a citizen of Nova Roma.

IX.A: This lex does not influence in itself a returning citizen's
lawfully established entitlements or restrictions to pursue official
positions (via election or appointment) for which he or she would
again become eligible. All rights of citizenship are restored in
full to a returning citizen after ninety (90) days from when a
censor re-enrolls a citizen. At the discretion of the Senate, the
normal waiting period may be waived and full rights of citizenship
restored prior to the ninety-day period.
B: Further, the language of this lex does not in itself serve to
influence those established lawful authorities or parameters by
which religious and/or legislative bodies may issue or fail to issue
appointments relative to their respective roles and functions, in
the consideration of any citizen's application.

X. The Censors will note the dates of submitted and withdrawn
resignations in the censorial album civium.

_____________________________________________________________________
_


Lex Moravia Minucia Abdicatone Magistratum
I This Lex pursues the constitutional language of Section IV,
headed 'Magistrates', which states that an office becomes vacant
when a magistrate resigns or dies.
II.This lex clarifies the legal definition of magisterial
resignation, consequences of resignation, and those procedures
legally necessary to validate and remedy magisterial vacancy due to
resignation of office.

III. The language of this lex is binding on resignation of
magisterial offices elected in the Comitia Centuriata, in the
Comitia Populi Tributa and in the Comitia Plebis Tributa.


IV. A tendered resignation from an elected office becomes legal
and binding once receipt of same is acknowledged to the resigning
Magistrate by an appropriate presiding official (defined below) of
the comitia by which he or she was elected.



A i. Resignation of an office elected in the Comitia Plebis
Tributa is tendered in writing to the Tribuni Plebii or tendered in
writing in the presence of three or more Plebian citizens, who shall
witness and communicate the resignation to the Tribunes. Once
advised of a resignation, the Tribuni Plebii shall respond in
writing to the resigning magistrate within 24 hours, in order to
acknowledge the tendered resignation, and a vacancy of that office
is legally established.

A. ii Elections shall be held in the Comitia Plebis Tributa within
45 days of the established vacancy for a suffect
magistrate,according to prevailing legal procedure governing
elections of this comitia.

Aiii
This lex does not in itself restrict a former magistrate from
standing for election in the Comitia Plebis Tributa to fill the
vacancy caused by his or her resignation.

B i Resignations of offices elected in the Comitia Populi Tributa
or the Comitia Centuriata are to be tendered in writing to the
Consuls, or in the presence of three or more citizens,who shall
acknowledge and communicate receipt of the resignation to the
Consuls. Once advised of the resignation, the Consuls shall respond
in writing within 24 hours to the resigning magistrate in order to
acknowledge the tendered resignation, and a vacancy of that office
is thereby legally established.

B.ii Elections shall be held in the appropriate comitia within 45
days of the established vacancy for a suffect magistrate, according
to the respective prevailing laws governing these comitia elections.

Biii This lex does not in itself restrict a former magistrate from
standing for election in the appropriate comitia to fill the vacancy
caused by his or her resignation.

V. Consuls may not accept resignations of offices elected of the
Comitia Plebis Tributa.


VI. The presiding comitia magistrate who lawfully acknowledges
receipt of a resignation of office to the tendering magistrate as
detailed in Ai and Bi, shall be responsible for communicating this
information to the Censors, the Magister Aranearius and the
citizenry via public fora within 48 hours.


VII. Accreditation of century points for partial service of a
term of office shall not be affected by this lex.




_____________________________________________________________________
__
Lex to Repeal Current Items of Legislation
I don't have a proper Latin name for this measure yet, but
comitia's
approval of this item will officially repeal the following
legislations:

Lex Arminia Equitia de Dignitate Curule
http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2004-06-30-ii.html

Lex Arminia Equitia de Sanctitate
http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2004-08-13-ii.html


The last lines of both these leges (above) nullify their
respective legal and binding forces. Further, there is no
corresponding constitutional language that I can see to clarify
their legal purpose. Although they are remarkable from an academic
standpoint, the language of these legislations has caused issues of
controversy, which might ( atleast theoretically) be avoided in
future if we repeal them officially.


____________________________________________________________________
Those voters who do not have a voter code are asked to contact the
Censors' office Censors@... to obtain one, as you will need it to
log into the cista to vote.

Valete

---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously
low rates.



---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC
and save big.

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

--- End forwarded message ---







---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42890 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
Salve Q Livius Drusus,

< A very curious thing this about romans in sci-fi. By the way, does anybody know anything about the
Star Trek series (captain Kirk, Mr. Spock and company)? <In these original series there is chapter
titled "panem et circenses" in which starship Enterprise arrives at a planet inhabitated by romans.

Sure do. It's the episode where Spock gets whipped and has green blood bleeding from his back. Gotta
love it!

< Greetings from Spain,
Greetings from Belgica!
Diana
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42891 From: pompeia_minucia_tiberia Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: De legibus Moraviis Minuciis
---Salvete A. Apollonius Cordus et Omnes:


In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "A. Apollonius Cordus"
<a_apollonius_cordus@...> wrote:
>
> A. Apollonius M. Moravio Pompejae Minucia omnibusque
> sal.
>
> It won't surprise you to hear that my initial reaction
> to these proposals is not favourable.

PMS: Cordus, I'm absolutely stunned.


They seem to me
> to further complicate an area of law which already
> unnecessarily complicated and can only be improved by
> being drastically simplified. Perhaps more importantly
> they take us still further away from the mos majorum
> for no reason which I can readily perceive.

PMS: That is why we are proposing the existing legislations
regarding resignations be repealed, and starting from scratch.
>
> But I'm not writing to give a thorough critique of
> these proposals. What I'm hoping is to understand some
> of the thinking behind them. To that end, let me ask
> you two questions:
>
> 1. Do you agree that the proposal published earlier by
> Ti. Galerius would bring the law of Nova Roma
> concerning resignation of citizenship and resignation
> of office substantially into line with ancient Roman
> practice?
>
> 2. If so, why have you decided to bring forward these
> alternative proposals?

PMS: We cannot mirror antiqua in every way. Nova Roma has two
important aspects to consider: For one, we are a voluntary
organization, with citizens of dual citizenship...our macronational
lineage and NR citizenship. Two, regarding the case of magisterial
resignations, we have to consider that we are dealing with
procedures of resignation of corporate executives, not
just 'magistrates within Nova Roma'. Let's agree on a process.
Granted, it can be said that resignation of citizenship was hardly
commonplace (but not totally unheard of) in antiqua.... neither was
the resignation of a magistrate. In this 21 Century, by virtue of
macronational rights which can't be extinguished by the NR
constitution or laws... citizens have the 'right' to resign...the
right to say "I know longer desire to be associated with Nova Roma
as a member/citizen". Or, "Remove my name from your membership
roster". It is perhaps not the way we 'prefer' it, but it is the
way it 'is'...and these pesky modern factors invariably influence
the direction of the Mos Maiorum in Nova Roma.

It isn't how close or how far away we are from the Ancient Mos that
has caused arguments about resignations here in the past...it is the
ambiguous, fragmented language of our current resignation
legislation.


All in all...we are never going to be able to make resignations 'go
away' because they lack historical precedent, be they tendered to a
few witnesses or to a crowd. So we need policies in place to
legally define how they are going to be handled.

Valete
Pompeia Minucia Strabo

>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> 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: 42892 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Salvete neighbours...
--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "A. Tullia Scholastica"
<fororom@...> wrote:
>
> > Salue, Cato II, et saluete, omnes!
> >
> > Glad you approve, was a little worried about being too close to
your
> > name, and we are in the same province too!
> >
> > ATS (the original one...) That makes three of us...not only
in the same
> > province, but the same state (if memory serves). There are
several people
> > with the same cognomen; Seuerus is very common, Caesar is
extremely common,
> > and Cicero is a close second. Cato isn¹t rare.
> >
> > Do you ever go to Roman
> > Days in Wells, Maine, Nova Brittanica? Maybe we could carpool
if I
> > can go this year... I am about halfway there for you (Maryland).
> >
> > ATS: Cato I lives in Manhattan, and, like most of the
tribe, doesn¹t
> > drive. Moreover, he doesn¹t like leaving Trantor. Secondly,
word has it that
> > Market Days will be cancelled this year, as will Roman Days
Northeast, so that
> > the only possibility even remotely close to the NE is Roman Days
in Maryland.
> > Are you in Maryland, or NYS?
> >

It seems there is a critical mass of citizens here in the province
would be nice to have some event. Need not be a full reactment,
maybe a picnic with some roman food or something fun and
inexpensive. I am in Albany, NY.

Nice parallel to the Foundation Series, itself a future reflection
of Roma. My company is called Trantor Development.

Depends when Roman Days Maryland is held, if I can go would be happy
to give you a ride and we could share fuel cost, the city is not out
of the way, usually drive I-88/81 south to avoid traffic and tolls,
but I know a few ways to get through Jersey toll free...

Was there tolls on roads in Roma Antigua?

> > There is an idea for other provinces too, maybe rent a van
together
> > to get to events if 6 or more people want to go, saves wear and
tear
> > on personal cars and fuel. Shared driving is nice too, I get
tired
> > after driving 12 hours...
> >
> > ATS: So do I‹even the nine or ten hours I have to put in
are very
> > exhausting.
> >
> > I have to admit I picked Gaius after Gaius Baltar in the New
> > Battlestar Galactica...
> >
> > Vale,
> > Cato II
> >
> > Vale, et ualete,
> >
> > A. Tullia Scholastica
> > Classicist and reenactor, inter alia

Battlestar Galactica is not Roman, but a classic future...

Do you make authentic looking roman clothes (not the bedsheet toga)
or is there an inexpensive place to get them? If you make them is
there a website with instructions and guidelines?

Valate bene,
C. Domitius Cato
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42893 From: pompeia_minucia_tiberia Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA IS SUMMONED
---Salve A. Apollonius Cordus et Salvete Omnes:


In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "A. Apollonius Cordus"
<a_apollonius_cordus@...> wrote:
>
> A. Apollonius Pompejae Minuciae omnibusque sal.
>
> One further question, this time a procedural one:
>
> Given that the two leges Moraviae Minuciae propose to
> make detailed and substantial changes to an area of
> law which has not been adequately clarified even after
> two previous leges and three failed legislative
> proposals, do you think that five days are sufficient
> to allowing the populus to digest and debate these
> proposals and to allow you to make any amendments you
> may feel appropriate as a result of that debate?

PMS: After large chunks of an entire year (2005) being chewed up
over the resignation issue, yep. I have faith in the cognitive,
reflective abilities of the people, and five days is an accepted
time for a contio in this comitia, according to prevailing law. I
also have faith that the people will ask pointed, applicable
questions if in doubt. I certainly wouldn't expect them to vote for
anything simply because I proposed it. Hopefully those who are
uncomfortable with any idea of mine will enlighten me accordingly.
On the flipside, I wouldn't want people to think I am being overly
critical or closeminded about a proposal of someone else, simply
because I wasn't its originator/author.

Valete
Pompeia Minucia Strabo
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> 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: 42894 From: CN•EQVIT•MARINVS (Gnaeus Equitius Mari Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA IS SUMMONED (Corrected Link to Lex A
Salve Consul Strabo, et salvete quirites,

Pompeia Minucia Strabo <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@...> writes:

[...]
> Lex Moravia Minucia de Civitate Eiuranda

> II. The Lex Equitia de Civitate Eiuranda is hereby repealed.
>
> http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/letes/200410-07-v.html

The correct URL is http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2004-10-07-v.html

Having read the text of the proposed law I intend to vote for it. When I
placed my law before the comitia two years ago it was an incremental step
forward. This is another incremental step that I don't think we could have
passed then, but might reasonably pass now.

[...]
> Lex Moravia Minucia Abdicatone Magistratum
[...]
> III. The language of this lex is binding on resignation of
> magisterial offices elected in the Comitia Centuriata, in the
> Comitia Populi Tributa and in the Comitia Plebis Tributa.

I don't think we can do this consul. I recommend three leges, similar to one
another, addressing the magistrates elected by the three different comitia.
While I could accept some argument that the vote of the tribes in the Comitia
Populi would approximate a vote of the plebeian members of the tribes in the
Concilium Plebis, I think the idea of conflating the two goes against Roman
custom and tradition. Certainly the Comitia Populi ought not be making
policy for the Comitia Centuriata.

[...]
> Lex to Repeal Current Items of Legislation
> I don't have a proper Latin name for this measure yet, but
> comitia's
> approval of this item will officially repeal the following
> legislations:
>
> Lex Arminia Equitia de Dignitate Curule
> http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2004-06-30-ii.html
>
> Lex Arminia Equitia de Sanctitate
> http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2004-08-13-ii.html
>
>
> The last lines of both these leges (above) nullify their
> respective legal and binding forces.

No they don't! They simply say that they don't define WHICH MAGISTRATES
possess the defined property.

What the two leges do is define the meaning of the term "curule dignity" and
"sanctitas" respectively, since those terms are undefined in the constitution
or any other law.

I strongly encourage the quirites to vote against this last proposal.

Vale, et valete,

CN•EQVIT•MARINVS
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42895 From: pompeia_minucia_tiberia Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA IS SUMMONED (Corrected Link to Lex A
---Salve Equitius Marinus Censor et Salvete Omnes:


In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "CN•EQVIT•MARINVS \(Gnaeus Equitius
Marinus\)" <gawne@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Consul Strabo, et salvete quirites,
>
> Pompeia Minucia Strabo <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@...> writes:
>
> [...]
> > Lex Moravia Minucia de Civitate Eiuranda
>
> > II. The Lex Equitia de Civitate Eiuranda is hereby repealed.
> >
> > http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/letes/200410-07-v.html
>
> The correct URL is http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2004-
10-07-v.html
>
> Having read the text of the proposed law I intend to vote for it.
When I
> placed my law before the comitia two years ago it was an
incremental step
> forward. This is another incremental step that I don't think we
could have
> passed then, but might reasonably pass now.

PMS: Thanks. None of us has a crystal ball and we make the needed
changes as we go. My thanks to Tribune Piscinus for his assistance
in this regard.
>
> [...]
> > Lex Moravia Minucia Abdicatone Magistratum
> [...]
> > III. The language of this lex is binding on resignation of
> > magisterial offices elected in the Comitia Centuriata, in the
> > Comitia Populi Tributa and in the Comitia Plebis Tributa.
>
> I don't think we can do this consul. I recommend three leges,
similar to one
> another, addressing the magistrates elected by the three different
comitia.
> While I could accept some argument that the vote of the tribes in
the Comitia
> Populi would approximate a vote of the plebeian members of the
tribes in the
> Concilium Plebis, I think the idea of conflating the two goes
against Roman
> custom and tradition. Certainly the Comitia Populi ought not be
making
> policy for the Comitia Centuriata.

PMS: I think we're ok with the Tribune/Consul copromulgating this
for both the Comitia Populi Tributa and the Comitia Plebis Tributa.
The Tribune in NR may influence policy for the plebs if the ratio
of patricians to plebs exceeds 10%, which you indicated to me it
does, and thanks BTW. The Tribune doesn't need auspices and I've had
them taken on my behalf.

Now, with respect to the Comitia Centuriata...you are quite
right. I need a slap for that one. That's got to go through the
Comtia Centuriata. I'll either defer that until another comitia
call or just delete the aspects involving the comitia centuriata for
now.
>
> [...]
> > Lex to Repeal Current Items of Legislation
> > I don't have a proper Latin name for this measure yet, but
> > comitia's
> > approval of this item will officially repeal the following
> > legislations:
> >
> > Lex Arminia Equitia de Dignitate Curule
> > http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2004-06-30-ii.html
> >
> > Lex Arminia Equitia de Sanctitate
> > http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2004-08-13-ii.html
> >
> >
> > The last lines of both these leges (above) nullify their
> > respective legal and binding forces.
>
> No they don't! They simply say that they don't define WHICH
MAGISTRATES
> possess the defined property.

PMS: Yes, but this is the rub Censor. They don't in the
constitution either. Yes, we know who had curule dignity and
sanctity in antiqua, but the Constitution is the highest ruling
document 'limiting' authority. No where does it state that any
specific magistrature has these designations and attendant powers in
the constitution, yet they are the basis for argument..."I have
curule dignity so I can do this", and "I am not accountable because
I have 'sanctity', just like in antiqua"...but the constitution is
silent on these things, and these leges state within themselves that
they are not the deciding factors in these matters. So if they are
by their own language legally inert, and the constitution is
silent...why are they on the books amongst laws with legal and
binding meaning ? I recommend putting them to bed until such time
as more clear language is adopted regarding these terms. I wonder if
they were not part of plan for future corresponding legislation, but
if so, this never came to pass and they are not doing very much
good...on the contrary, with the arguments they've caused, with
respect.
>
> What the two leges do is define the meaning of the term "curule
dignity" and
> "sanctitas" respectively, since those terms are undefined in the
constitution
> or any other law.
>
> I strongly encourage the quirites to vote against this last
proposal.

PMS: See above. I encourage you to reconsider. And I leave this
with the people.
>
> Vale, et valete,
>
> CN•EQVIT•MARINVS

Valete, and Gratias
Pompeia Minucia Strabo
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42896 From: Maxima Valeria Messallina Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Ludi Circenses
Salve, D. Octavia Aventina

Don't look now but it may cost you more. My handsome driver, Maximus, is back.
And he's been working out a lot lately.....

Vale bene in pace Deorum,

Maxima Valeria Messallina
The Vestal who LOVES chariot racing! ;)


Diana Octavia Aventina <diana@...> wrote:
Oh no, the Ludi are going to cost me a fortune... You know how my driver Latina Harmonia is these
days-- she's going to insist on new clothes and a makeover..

Vale,
Diana

---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42897 From: David Kling (Modianus) Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Calling Candidates for Censor
Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus S.P.D.

With the resignation of Gaius Minucius Hadrianus from the office of
Censor there is a vacancy. All persons interested in standing for the
office of Censor are now notified that I am accepting persons willing
to stand for office.

To qualify to stand for Censor you must:

Be at least 27 years old. Must already have served at least six months
as a consul, praetor, aedilis, quaestor, tribunus plebis, magister
aranearius (formerly curator araneae), editor commentariorum (formerly
curator differum), rogator, or provincial governor. Must be assiduus.

Those interested in standing for Censor please issue a statement to
the main list, and send me a copy of your statement to:
tau.athanasios@...

I will leave the call for candidates open until April 6th.

Valete:

Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42898 From: Pompeia Minucia Strabo Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Fwd: THE COMITIA CENTURIATA IS SUMMONED
The Comitia Centuriata is hereby summoned.


The required auspices have been taken and deemed favourable by Consul, Pontifex et Augur G. Fabius Buteo Modianus.

Schedule is as follows:

Contio shall begin March 28, 2400 hrs Roman time and shall continue until April 2, 2400.

Voting shall commence April 3, 0001 Roman Time and shall continue until April 4, 2400 Roman Time. Voting shall be suspended until April 24 2400 hours Roman Time due to nefasti where no voting is permitted. Voting shall resume April 25, 0001 Roman Time until April 30, 1800 hrs Roman Time.

******

Matters of Election:

_____________________________________________________________________






Lex Moravia Minucia Abdicatone Magistratum Comitium Centuriatum I This Lex pursues the constitutional language of Section IV, headed 'Magistrates', which states that an office becomes vacant when a magistrate resigns or dies.
II.This lex clarifies the legal definition of magisterial resignation, consequences of resignation, and those procedures legally necessary to validate and remedy magisterial vacancy due to resignation of office.

III. The language of this lex is binding on resignations of magisterial offices elected in the Comitia Centuriata.


IV. A tendered resignation from an elected office in the Comitia Centuriata becomes legal and binding once receipt of same is acknowledged to the resigning Magistrate by the appropriate presiding officials (defined below) of the comitia by which he or she was elected.



A i Resignations of offices elected in the Comitia Centuriata are to be tendered in writing to the Consuls, or tendered in writing in the presence of three or more citizens,who shall acknowledge and communicate receipt of the resignation to the Consuls. Once advised of the resignation, the Consuls shall respond in writing within 24 hours to the resigning magistrate in order to acknowledge the tendered resignation, and a vacancy of that office is thereby legally established.

A.ii Elections shall be held within 45 days of the established vacancy for a suffect magistrate, according to the prevailing legislation governing elections in the Comitia Centuriata.


V. This lex does not in itself restrict a former magistrate from standing for election in the Comitia Centuriata to fill the vacancy caused by his or her resignation.



VI. Once the Consuls lawfully acknowledge receipt of a resignation of office to the tendering magistrate as detailed in Ai above, they shall be responsible for communicating this information to the Censors, the Magister Aranearius and the citizenry via public fora within 48 hours.


VII Accreditation of century points for partial service of a term of office shall not be affected by this lex.

_________________________________________________________________

Those voters who do not have a voter code are asked to contact the Censors to obtain one as you will not be able to log into the Cista without this assigned code. Please write Censors@...


Valete



_______________________________________________________________________


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





---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.


---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42899 From: Pompeia Minucia Strabo Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Fwd: THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA IS SUMMONED (REVISED)
Pompeia Minucia Strabo <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@...> wrote: Pompeia Minucia Strabo Consul Quiritibus Novae Romae S.P.D.

The required auspices have been taken and deemed favourable by Consul, Pontifex et Augur G. Fabius Buteo Modianus.

Schedule is as follows:

Contio shall begin March 28, 2400 hrs Roman time and shall continue until April 2, 2400.

Voting shall commence April 3, 0001 Roman Time and shall continue until April 4, 2400 Roman Time. Voting shall be suspended until April 24 2400 hours Roman Time due to nefasti where no voting is permitted. Voting shall resume April 25, 0001 Roman Time until April 30, 1800 hrs Roman Time.

******

Matters of Election:

_____________________________________________________________________

Election of Editor Commentariorum:

Candidate seeking approval: Titus Marcius Felix, Citizen 8193, Plebian, Assuidi, Citizen since 2004/11/18

______________________________________________________________________


Lex Moravia Minucia de Civitate Eiuranda

I. The lex Cornelia et Maria De Civitate Eiuranda is hereby repealed.

http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2001-05-20-iii.html

II. The Lex Equitia de Civitate Eiuranda is hereby repealed.

http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/letes/2004-10-07-v.html


III.A: Citizenship from Nova Roma, as stated in paragraph II.A.4. in the Constitution of Nova Roma, may be voluntarily relinquished by notification of the Censors or by public statement before 3 or more witnesses. Messages posted to official Nova Roma e-mail lists or electronic message boards, or statements of an intent to resign citizenship that are made at a public function of Nova Roma meet the requirement for three witnesses to a resignation if and only if three witnesses to the resignation notify the Censors thereof within 72 hours of the initial proclamation. In accordance with the Constitution
II.A.5 a parent or guardian, as above, may voluntarily rescind citizenship of Impuberes.
B. The Censor(s) shall, at their earliest convenience, but no later than within seven days, issue to the citizen in writing or by electronic message an official acknowledgement of this intent to resign citizenship. Resignation becomes effective within 48 hours from the date and time the Censor(s) issue such acknowledgment.
C. Before such time that a resignation of citizenship would come into effect, a citizen may rescind his or her intention to resign, or a legal guardian may rescind the intention to resign of an impubere, by writing or by sending an electronic message to the Censors or to a Rogatoral designate of the Censors.

IV Failure to respond to a Nova Roma census, as per legal obligation, places an individualÂ’s citizenship in temporary suspension. A citizen under suspended citizenship may be given a designation other than citizen, as prevailing law provides. Suspended citizenship may be lifted by the individual notifying the Censors of his or her intent to renew active citizenship, by responding to the following census, or by paying annual dues within the following year. Individuals who are under suspended citizenship are not to be counted as assidui or as capiti censi, and thus temporarily lose the right vote, but retain all other rights of citizenship. If within a five-year period an individual member fails to respond to two consecutive censuses, the Censors may rescind the individualÂ’s citizenship and all its attendant rights.

V. A: If citizenship is resigned without also stating that public offices are resigned, any and all public offices held by the citizen at that time become vacated when a resignation of citizenship comes into effect. No public offices, elected or appointed, carry over into a new citizenship if a resigning citizen should later seek to reacquire citizenship.

VI.A: A former citizen, in the event he or she desires to reacquire citizenship must reapply for citizenship to the Censors through prevailing legal procedures. Additionally, the former citizen is directed to state in his or her application the reasons behind the initial resignation of citizenship, and the nature of the reasons influencing the desire to have it reinstated.
B: The Roman name of a returning citizen may be resumed if no other citizen of Nova Roma has taken it in his or her absence

VII. When a former citizen applies for reinstatement of citizenship (postliminium):

No office, religious or civil, held by the citizen at the time of his or her resignation, is regained if that person is granted citizenship once more. After ninety days of being reinstated into citizenship, the returning citizen may apply to the Collegium Pontificum for reappointment to any religious offices that he or she may have previously held. Only the Collegium Pontificum, or otherwise designated religious body, is authorized to reappoint a returning citizen to a religious office.
Any titles, honors and/or effects of past public administrative offices shall be restored to the returning citizen only after a period of ninety days has passed from the date that citizenship is regained. Century points that are due to a returning citizen for any and all public and/or religious offices that he or she may have previously held shall be restored at the end of ninety days.
Senatorial status may be resumed at the discretion of the Censors collegially


VIII. If a citizen resigns, is subsequently reinstated, and resigns a second time, this former citizen is barred for two years from reinstatement as a citizen of Nova Roma.

IX.A: This lex does not influence in itself a returning citizen's lawfully established entitlements or restrictions to pursue official positions (via election or appointment) for which he or she would again become eligible. All rights of citizenship are restored in full to a returning citizen after ninety (90) days from when a censor re-enrolls a citizen. At the discretion of the Senate, the normal waiting period may be waived and full rights of citizenship restored prior to the ninety-day period.
B: Further, the language of this lex does not in itself serve to influence those established lawful authorities or parameters by which religious and/or legislative bodies may issue or fail to issue appointments relative to their respective roles and functions, in the consideration of any citizen's application.

X. The Censors will note the dates of submitted and withdrawn resignations in the censorial album civium.

______________________________________________________________________


Lex Moravia Minucia Abdicatone Magistratum Comitium Plebium Tributum et Comitium Populum Tributum
I This Lex pursues the constitutional language of Section IV, headed 'Magistrates', which states that an office becomes vacant when a magistrate resigns or dies.
II.This lex clarifies the legal definition of magisterial resignation, consequences of resignation, and those procedures legally necessary to validate and remedy magisterial vacancy due to resignation of office.

III. The language of this lex is binding on resignations of magisterial offices elected in the Comitia Populi Tributa and in the Comitia Plebis Tributa.


IV. A tendered resignation from an elected office becomes legal and binding once receipt of same is acknowledged to the resigning Magistrate by an appropriate presiding official (defined below) of the comitia by which he or she was elected.



A i. Resignation of an office elected in the Comitia Plebis Tributa is tendered in writing to the Tribuni Plebii or tendered in writing in the presence of three or more Plebian citizens, who shall witness and communicate the resignation to the Tribunes. Once advised of a resignation, the Tribuni Plebii shall respond in writing to the resigning magistrate within 24 hours, in order to acknowledge the tendered resignation, and a vacancy of that office is legally established.

A. ii Elections shall be held in the Comitia Plebis Tributa within 45 days of the established vacancy for a suffect magistrate,according to prevailing legal procedure governing elections of this comitia.

Aiii
This lex does not in itself restrict a former magistrate from standing for election in the Comitia Plebis Tributa to fill the vacancy caused by his or her resignation.

B i Resignations of offices elected in the Comitia Populi Tributa are to be tendered in writing to the Consuls, or tendered in writing in the presence of three or more citizens,who shall acknowledge and communicate receipt of the resignation to the Consuls. Once advised of the resignation, the Consuls shall respond in writing within 24 hours to the resigning magistrate in order to acknowledge the tendered resignation, and a vacancy of that office is thereby legally established.

B.ii Elections shall be held in the appropriate comitia within 45 days of the established vacancy for a suffect magistrate, according to the respective prevailing laws governing elections in the Comitia Populi Tributa.

Biii This lex does not in itself restrict a former magistrate from standing for election in the Comitia Populi Tributa to fill the vacancy caused by his or her resignation.

V. Consuls may not accept resignations of offices elected of the Comitia Plebis Tributa.


VI. The presiding comitia magistrate who lawfully acknowledges receipt of a resignation of office to the tendering magistrate as detailed in Ai and Bi, shall be responsible for communicating this information to the Censors, the Magister Aranearius and the citizenry via public fora within 48 hours.


VII. Accreditation of century points for partial service of a term of office shall not be affected by this lex.



_______________________________________________________________________
Lex to Repeal Current Items of Legislation

I don't have a proper Latin name for this measure yet, but comitia's
approval of this item will officially repeal the following legislations:

Lex Arminia Equitia de Dignitate Curule
http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2004-06-30-ii.html

Lex Arminia Equitia de Sanctitate
http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2004-08-13-i.html


The last lines of both these leges (above) nullify their respective legal and binding forces. Further, there is no corresponding constitutional language that I can see to clarify their legal purpose. Although they are remarkable from an academic standpoint, the language of these legislations has caused issues of controversy, which might ( atleast theoretically) be avoided in future if we repeal them officially.

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


Those voters who do not have a voter code or who do not remember their voter code are asked to contact the Censor's office to obtain one as you will require this for voting.

Censors@...


Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.


---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC for low, low rates.


---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC for low, low rates.


---------------------------------
Blab-away for as little as 1¢/min. Make PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42900 From: A. Tullia Scholastica Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA IS SUMMONED
A. Tullia Scholastica Consuli Pompeiae Minuciae Straboni quiritibus S.P.D.

I have indicated some corrections (and minimal comments) below. I
trust that they will be accepted in the calm spirit in which they are
offered; the fewer errors are in the official text, the better. This may be
the only time the citizenry sees these texts; apparently the latest laws
passed have yet to see the Tabularium.

=========
>
> Pompeia Minucia Strabo Consul Quiritibus Novae Romae S.P.D.
>
> The required auspices have been taken and deemed favourable by Consul,
> Pontifex et Augur G. Fabius Buteo Modianus.
>
> Schedule is as follows:
>
> Contio shall being March 28 1800 Roman time and shall continue Until April 2
> 1800.
>
> Voting shall commence April 2 1801 Roman Time and shall continue until April
> 4 2400. Roman Time. Voting shall be suspended until April 24 2400 hours Roman
> Time due to nefasti where no voting is permitted. Voting shall resume April
> 25 0001 Roman Time until April 28 1830 hrs Roman Time.
>
> ******
>
> Matters of Election:
>
> _____________________________________________________________________
>
> Election of Editor Commentariorum:
>
> Candidate seeking approval: Titus Marcius Felix, Citizen 8193, Plebian,
> Assuidi, Citizen since 2004/11/18
>
> ATS: He¹s plebeian, assiduus. Assidui (the proper spelling) are plural.
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
>
> Lex Moravia Minucia de Civitate Eiuranda
>
> I. The lex Cornelia et Maria De Civitate Eiuranda is hereby repealed.
>
> http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2001-05-20-iii.html
>
> II. The Lex Equitia de Civitate Eiuranda is hereby repealed.
>
> http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/letes/200410-07-v.html
>
> ATS: This would be Œleges,¹ not Œletes.¹
>
>
> III.A: Citizenship from Nova Roma, as stated in paragraph II.A.4. in the
> Constitution of Nova Roma, may be voluntarily relinquished by notification of
> the Censors or by public statement before 3 or more
>
> ATS: Numbers, particularly small ones, should be spelled out.
>
> witnesses. Messages posted to official Nova Roma e-mail lists or electronic
> message boards, or statements of an intent to resign citizenship that are made
> at a public function of Nova Roma meet the requirement for three witnesses to
> a resignation if and only if three witnesses to the resignation notify the
> Censors thereof within 72 hours of the initial proclamation. In accordance
> with the Constitution
> II.A.5 a parent or guardian, as above, may voluntarily rescind citizenship
> of Impuberes.
> B. The Censor(s) shall, at their earliest convenience, but no later than
> within seven days, issue to the citizen in writing or by electronic message an
> official acknowledgement of this intent to resign citizenship. Resignation
> becomes effective within 48 hours from the date and time the Censor(s) issue
> such acknowledgment.
>
> ATS: Comment only: I take it that this removes the nundinum. Not a good
> idea, IMHO.
>
> C. Before such time that a resignation of citizenship would come into
> effect, a citizen may rescind his or her intention to resign, or a legal
> guardian may rescind the intention to resign of an impubere, by writing or by
> sending an electronic message to the Censors or to a Rogatoral designate of
> the Censors.
>
> IV Failure to respond to a Nova Roma census, as per legal obligation, places
> an individual¹s citizenship in temporary suspension. A citizen under suspended
> citizenship may be given a designation other than citizen, as prevailing law
> provides. Suspended citizenship may be lifted by the individual notifying the
> Censors of his or her intent to renew active citizenship, by responding to the
> following census, or by paying annual dues within the following year.
> Individuals who are under suspended citizenship are not to be counted as
> assidui or as capiti censi, and thus temporarily lose the right vote, but
> retain all other rights of citizenship. If within a five-year period an
> individual member fails to respond to two consecutive censuses, the Censors
> may rescind the individual¹s citizenship and all its attendant rights.
>
> V. A: If citizenship is resigned without also stating that public offices
> are resigned, any and all public offices held by the citizen at that time
> become vacated
>
> ATS: vacant would be better...
>
> when a resignation of citizenship comes into effect. No public offices,
> elected or appointed, carry over into a new citizenship if a resigning citizen
> should later seek to reacquire citizenship.
>
> VI.A: A former citizen, in the event he or she desires to reacquire
> citizenship must reapply for citizenship to the Censors through prevailing
> legal procedures. Additionally, the former citizen is directed to state in his
> or her application the reasons behind the initial resignation of citizenship,
> and the nature of the reasons influencing the desire to have it reinstated.
> B: The Roman name of a returning citizen may be resumed if no other citizen
> of Nova Roma has taken it in his or her absence
>
> VII. When a former citizen applies for reinstatement of citizenship
> (postliminium):
>
> No office, religious or civil, held by the citizen at the time of his or
> her resignation, is regained if that person is granted citizenship once more.
>
> ATS: I¹d reword this in the active voice, and add a bit: A citizen
> cannot immediately regain any office, religious or civil, if his or her
> citizenship is reinstated.
>
> After ninety days of being reinstated into citizenship, the returning citizen
> may apply to the Collegium Pontificum for reappointment to any religious
> offices that he or she may have previously held. Only the Collegium
> Pontificum, or otherwise designated religious body, is authorized to reappoint
> a returning citizen to a religious office.
> Any titles, honors and/or effects of past public administrative offices
> shall be restored to the returning citizen only after a period of ninety days
> has passed from the date that citizenship is regained. Century points that are
> due to a returning citizen for any and all public and/or religious offices
> that he or she may have previously held shall be restored at the end of ninety
> days.
> Senatorial status may be resumed at the discretion of the Censors
> collegially
>
>
> VIII. If a citizen resigns, is subsequently reinstated, and resigns a second
> time, this former citizen is barred for two years from reinstatement as a
> citizen of Nova Roma.
>
> IX.A: This lex does not influence in itself a returning citizen's lawfully
> established entitlements or restrictions to pursue official positions (via
> election or appointment) for which he or she would again become eligible. All
> rights of citizenship are restored in full to a returning citizen after ninety
> (90) days from when a censor re-enrolls a citizen. At the discretion of the
> Senate, the normal waiting period may be waived and full rights of citizenship
> restored prior to the ninety-day period.
> B: Further, the language of this lex does not in itself serve to influence
> those established lawful authorities or parameters by which religious and/or
> legislative bodies may issue or fail to issue appointments relative to their
> respective roles and functions, in the consideration of any citizen's
> application.
>
> X. The Censors will note the dates of submitted and withdrawn resignations
> in the censorial album civium.
>
> ATS: Comment: I take it that the current provision of permanent barring
> after a third resignation will be removed if this law is passed.
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
>
> Lex Moravia Minucia Abdicatone Magistratum
>
> ATS: Lex Moravia Minucia de Abdicatione Magistratuum...
>
>
> I This Lex pursues the constitutional language of Section IV, headed
> 'Magistrates', which states that an office becomes vacant when a magistrate
> resigns or dies.
> II.This lex clarifies the legal definition of magisterial resignation,
> consequences of resignation, and those procedures legally necessary to
> validate and remedy magisterial vacancy due to resignation of office.
>
> III. The language of this lex is binding on resignation of magisterial
> offices elected in the Comitia Centuriata, in the Comitia Populi Tributa and
> in the Comitia Plebis Tributa.
>
>
> IV. A tendered resignation from an elected office becomes legal and
> binding once receipt of same is acknowledged to the resigning Magistrate by
> an appropriate presiding official (defined below) of the comitia by which he
> or she was elected.
>
>
>
> A i. Resignation of an office elected in the Comitia Plebis Tributa is
> tendered in writing to the Tribuni Plebii or tendered in writing in the
> presence of three or more Plebian citizens, who shall witness and communicate
> the resignation to the Tribunes. Once advised of a resignation, the Tribuni
> Plebii shall respond in writing to the resigning magistrate within 24 hours,
> in order to acknowledge the tendered resignation, and a vacancy of that office
> is legally established.
>
> ATS: Plebeii, plebeian...
>
> A. ii Elections shall be held in the Comitia Plebis Tributa within 45 days
> of the established vacancy for a suffect magistrate,according to prevailing
> legal procedure governing elections of this comitia.
>
> ATS: periods should be inserted after the outlining designations, both
> here and below.
>
>
> Aiii
> This lex does not in itself restrict a former magistrate from standing for
> election in the Comitia Plebis Tributa to fill the vacancy caused by his or
> her resignation.
>
> B i Resignations of offices elected in the Comitia Populi Tributa or the
> Comitia Centuriata are to be tendered in writing to the Consuls, or in the
> presence of three or more citizens,who shall acknowledge and communicate
> receipt of the resignation to the Consuls. Once advised of the resignation,
> the Consuls shall respond in writing within 24 hours to the resigning
> magistrate in order to acknowledge the tendered resignation, and a vacancy of
> that office is thereby legally established.
>
> B.ii Elections shall be held in the appropriate comitia within 45 days of
> the established vacancy for a suffect magistrate, according to the respective
> prevailing laws governing these comitia elections.
>
> Biii This lex does not in itself restrict a former magistrate from standing
> for election in the appropriate comitia to fill the vacancy caused by his or
> her resignation.
>
> V. Consuls may not accept resignations of offices elected of the Comitia
> Plebis Tributa.
>
>
> VI. The presiding comitia magistrate who lawfully acknowledges receipt of a
> resignation of office to the tendering magistrate as detailed in Ai and Bi,
> shall be responsible for communicating this information to the Censors, the
> Magister Aranearius and the citizenry via public fora within 48 hours.
>
>
> VII. Accreditation of century points for partial service of a term of
> office shall not be affected by this lex.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Lex to Repeal Current Items of Legislation
> I don't have a proper Latin name for this measure yet, but comitia's
> approval of this item will officially repeal the following legislations:
>
> ATS: How about Lex (Minucia or whatever) de Legibus Tollendis?
>
> Lex Arminia Equitia de Dignitate Curule
> http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2004-06-30-ii.html
>
> ATS: Curuli...
>
> Lex Arminia Equitia de Sanctitate
> http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2004-08-13-i.html
>
>
> The last lines of both these leges (above) nullify their respective legal
> and binding forces. Further, there is no corresponding constitutional
> language that I can see to clarify their legal purpose. Although they are
> remarkable from an academic standpoint, the language of these legislations has
> caused issues of controversy, which might ( atleast theoretically) be avoided
> in future if we repeal them officially.
>
> ATS: Comment: Both of these may be rather abstruse, but they do establish
> important definitions.
>
> ____________________________________________________________________
> Those voters who do not have a voter code are asked to contact the Censors'
> office Censors@... to obtain one, as you will need it to log into the
> cista to vote.
>
> Valete
>
> Vale, et ualete,
>
> A. Tullia Scholastica
> Interpres Linguae Latinae
> Scriba praetoris T. Octavi Pii Ahenobarbe and semiofficial Tabularium
> proofreader of long standing
>
>
>




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42901 From: A. Tullia Scholastica Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Salvete neighbours...
> A. Tullia Scholastica C. Domitio Catoni quiritibus, sociis, peregrinisque
> omnibus S.P.D.
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "A. Tullia Scholastica"
> <fororom@...> wrote:
>> >
>>> > > Salue, Cato II, et saluete, omnes!
>>> > >
>>> > > Glad you approve, was a little worried about being too close to
> your
>>> > > name, and we are in the same province too!
>>> > >
>>> > > ATS (the original one...) That makes three of us...not only
> in the same
>>> > > province, but the same state (if memory serves). There are
> several people
>>> > > with the same cognomen; Seuerus is very common, Caesar is
> extremely common,
>>> > > and Cicero is a close second. Cato isn¹t rare.
>>> > >
>>> > > Do you ever go to Roman
>>> > > Days in Wells, Maine, Nova Brittanica? Maybe we could carpool
> if I
>>> > > can go this year... I am about halfway there for you (Maryland).
>>> > >
>>> > > ATS: Cato I lives in Manhattan, and, like most of the
> tribe, doesn¹t
>>> > > drive. Moreover, he doesn¹t like leaving Trantor. Secondly,
> word has it that
>>> > > Market Days will be cancelled this year, as will Roman Days
> Northeast, so that
>>> > > the only possibility even remotely close to the NE is Roman Days
> in Maryland.
>>> > > Are you in Maryland, or NYS?
>>> > >
>
> It seems there is a critical mass of citizens here in the province
> would be nice to have some event. Need not be a full reactment,
> maybe a picnic with some roman food or something fun and
> inexpensive. I am in Albany, NY.
>
> ATS: There is a decent sized group of citizens concentrated in the DC
> area and the NYC area. I used to correspond with one in the Albany area, but
> he has gone silent, and may have left us. I¹m in the other end of the
> state‹the one Georgie Boy sometimes visits with paltry handouts.
>
>
> There used to be a legion in the Albany area, but it seems to be moribund;
> its commander got a higher call to some charming place in the mideast, if
> memory serves.
>
>
> Nice parallel to the Foundation Series, itself a future reflection
> of Roma. My company is called Trantor Development.
>
>
> ATS: It would be hard to develop Trantor...as I recall, it was covered
> with metal, and the sky was unknown.
>
> Depends when Roman Days Maryland is held, if I can go would be happy
> to give you a ride and we could share fuel cost, the city is not out
> of the way, usually drive I-88/81 south to avoid traffic and tolls,
> but I know a few ways to get through Jersey toll free...
>
> ATS: Roman Days at the Marietta Mansion in Glenn Dale, Maryland, near DC,
> will be held the first weekend in June. I have to go to Syracuse and pick up
> I-81 (which I detest); maybe I could take Greyhound, but someone would have to
> meet me in Syracuse, or go about 160 miles (each way) out of the way.
>
>
> Was there tolls on roads in Roma Antigua?
>
> ATS: They definitely had them in colonial America...maybe they did! The
> Thruway has lovely tolls.
>
>>> > > There is an idea for other provinces too, maybe rent a van
> together
>>> > > to get to events if 6 or more people want to go, saves wear and
> tear
>>> > > on personal cars and fuel. Shared driving is nice too, I get
> tired
>>> > > after driving 12 hours...
>>> > >
>>> > > ATS: So do I‹even the nine or ten hours I have to put in
> are very
>>> > > exhausting.
>>> > >
>>> > > I have to admit I picked Gaius after Gaius Baltar in the New
>>> > > Battlestar Galactica...
>>> > >
>>> > > Vale,
>>> > > Cato II
>>> > >
>>> > > Vale, et ualete,
>>> > >
>>> > > A. Tullia Scholastica
>>> > > Classicist and reenactor, inter alia
>
> Battlestar Galactica is not Roman, but a classic future...
>
> Do you make authentic looking roman clothes (not the bedsheet toga)
> or is there an inexpensive place to get them? If you make them is
> there a website with instructions and guidelines?
>
> ATS: I can make tunicae (I make some of my own) and pallae/pallia, but
> haven¹t tried any togae. Both Merchant Adventurers and La Wren¹s Nest offer
> costumes, but I wouldn¹t characterize these as cheap...and armor is anything
> BUT cheap. At reenactment events, you can pick up military caligae for around
> $80, daggers (pugiones) for at least that much, or more; gladii...but civilian
> attire, and womens¹ shoes in particular, are hard to find. I used to give
> lectures on ancient clothing...
>
> Valate bene,
> C. Domitius Cato
>
> Vale, et ualete,
>
> A. Tullia Scholastica
>
>
>
>
>
>




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42903 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA IS SUMMONED
Cn. Iulius Caesar Consuli Pompeiae Minuciae Straboni quiritibus S.P.D.

I would like to draw the attention of the Consul and the voters to
the following points concerning this proposed Lex Moravia Minucia de
Civitate Eiuranda.

I agree with Cordus that anything that takes us further away from the
mos maiorum is very undesirable and should not be voted for. If that
argument alone does not convince one, then in the light of the above
points I would urge people to vote against this proposed lex on the
basis that it will just add to the existing confusion and chaos over
resignation, due to the imprecision of its wording, lack of clarity,
orphaned clauses and sections, potential for abuse and generally
impractical nature. Allow me to demonstrate a few areas of concern.

Firstly, the effect of section III.A of this proposed lex allows for
notification to be placed on any "official" Nova Roman email list or
message board, or in person at a "public" function of Nova Roma".

This section is too imprecise. A resignation notice could be posted
to a list where no one monitors by email and yet never checks the web
for posts. It could go undetected. Additionally the definition
of "official" isn't provided and this is necessary in order to avoid
debates over whether a list was "official".

As to relying on a public statement made at a public function of Nova
Roma, I can see all sorts of grounds for claims of collusion, fraud
and general malfeasance. It does indeed leave the door wide open for
improper allegations of resignation to be made and just the claim of
such would tie Nova Roma down in a morass of disputes for at least a
year. It is exceptionally unwise to allow unsupported claims of
resignation to be actionable. Lastly of course what is a "public
function of Nova Roma"? It is undefined and thus again this creates a
gap that a legal bus could be driven through.

As to the requirement for witnesses to actually be proactive in
acknowledging the resignation, as I mentioned above time could run
out (the 72 hours specified in this proposal) and then...what? The
resignation is invalid? This would be patently absurd. A person who
leaves Nova Roma, and who has no intention of remaining a citizen,
has not in fact resigned? If this section is to mean anything, then
the non-witnessing of such a resignation would stall the remainder of
the process one assumes.

Under Section V. resignation of public offices would only come into
effect once the resignation "comes into effect". In order for this to
happen 3 people have to witness it and then the Censors have to
acknowledge in writing that this has been received.

Therefore a citizen who is a magistrate and who posts their
resignation on some out of the way list, or even on a busy one, with
no 3 witnesses acknowledging it, would not have resigned as a
citizen. Resignation of public offices can't occur until the
resignation of citizenship comes into effect, which after 72 hours
would be never. The citizen would have left for good and the
resignation would have been invalidated and Nova Roma would have yet
another magistrate in name only, with no possibility of calling an
election until the expiration of that missing person's term of
office. The Constitution does not require this and just states that
it must be "before three or more witnesses". As long as the Main List
has a membership greater than three, the Constitution is satisfied.
Why complicate matters further?

Any law that actually prevents a person from resigning from Nova Roma
is patently absurd by the test of common sense, probably
macronationally illegal and is as pointless as it is unenforceable
and counterproductive.

Secondly, Section II.B is not linked to any preceding section and
thus simply saying that the Censors have 7 days makes no sense
without a frame of reference or starting point for the 7 days. It
simply isn't good enough to leave holes like this in a proposed lex
to close off what has been a very contentious issue. It is just
sloppy drafting. If you want to specify a time period then specify
when the clock starts ticking.

Also in respect of the 7-day requirement on the Censors, what happens
if they do not comply for some reason? Is the resignation invalid? Is
this some subtle way to stall someone "approved" of, while friends
desperately try to talk that person out of resignation? If so then be
honest and simply say that resignation depends on acceptance by the
Censors, without a time limit. If this was not the intent then define
the consequences, if any, of a failure of the Censors to comply. As
it stands, the Censors could accept that resignation 72 days later
and 48 hours later after that it could be in effect. Is this what was
intended? Just saying the Censors have to do this does not mean the
resignation process is terminated. A case could be made that it is
and that it isn't, which would produce another legal morass for us
all to wade through.

Thirdly, rescinding the resignation requires that a message be sent
to the Censors. Why? You have made it possible for people to resign
or for others to claim they have in all sorts of venues, yet you
require that the person resigning rescind by writing to the Censors.
Doesn't it have more symmetry with the preceding sections to allow
them to post the rescinding of their resignation in the same manner
(if possible)? What happens if the Censors say they never received
the email/letter/fax rescinding the resignation? Do we accept the
citizen's word? Do we require proof? Do the Censors have to
acknowledge this communication? Do the Censors have to acknowledge
AND approve this communication?

Fourthly Section IV references a process described in another lex and
unwittingly no doubt creates more room for disputes. This proposed
lex says "Failure to respond to a Nova Roma census, as per legal
obligation, places an individual's citizenship in temporary
suspension." Define what the legal obligation is, for as it stands
this is another orphaned clause that has no meaning but will create
gaps and confusion. Define "respond", for again this interferes with
the process under another lex and yet is imprecise to be of any use.
In general referencing other laws is a risky business unless you are
very precise in your language and specify the limitations that the
new law has on the old. This lex does none of that. It is, again,
sloppily worded.

Section IV also talks about "annual dues". Does this mean the dues
that are in arrears plus the ongoing amount for the current year,
just the arrears, or just the ongoing? Who knows, since it isn't
specified. What are annual dues? I assume you mean the tax, and if so
why not say so to create that desired symmetry of language and
terminolgy? Describing a process defined under other legal
authorities and then injecting different terminolgy that is undefined
and unlinked is very sloppy.

Section IV also says "Individuals who are under suspended citizenship
are not to be counted as assidui or as capiti censi, and thus
temporarily lose the right vote, but retain all other rights of
citizenship." Oh dear, what has been created here, an "almost
citizen"? Someone who can have access to all the rights pertaining to
citizenship under the constitution, except voting? Does this not
affect the class of socii? Again, if this was the intention should
this not have been addressed under a separate lex or at least more
clearly spelled out?

This proposed lex tries to do too much, muddles too many things and
achieves too little.

Vale
Caesar

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Pompeia Minucia Strabo
<pompeia_minucia_tiberia@...> wrote:
>
> Pompeia Minucia Strabo Consul Quiritibus Novae Romae S.P.D.
>
> The required auspices have been taken and deemed favourable by
Consul, Pontifex et Augur G. Fabius Buteo Modianus.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42904 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
In the days of Roma Antigua, livestock was more of a common asset so
animal sacrifice made a lot of sence. Now livestock is only an
asset for the less than 5% of the population that actually engages
in any farming. 95% of the population never spends much if any time
on a farm and can not stand the smell of feces let alone witness the
slaughtering of an animal. When most people think of animals they
think of Fido, Fluffy or that cute chipmunk they feed picnic scraps
to...

How can you in this day and age kill a creature (furry animal) that
is mainly an object of affection for the vast majority of the
population and not be seen as some sort of sick bastard by people
not familiar with nonchristian religion? Like certain other aspects
of Roma Antiqua (slavery, status of women), certain things must
change with the times. Unless you are a farmer, animal sacrifice is
inappropiate for modern practioners, and even then it should be done
in the least painful method possible. It would seem fitting for
those that want to sacrifice to do so with something of value in
their modern day to day lives. Walk or bicycle to work for a week
(if you you live a mile or two from work), volunteer your time to
hold a Roman themed event or academic seminar or give food to the
local food pantry. These sacrifices make us more healthy, honour
our ancestors, and are a help to our community. They cast eternal
Roma in favourable light and make us feel good.

I think sacrifice is a very important aspect in Via Romana, even for
our christian citizens. True sacrifice makes us strong and makes
makes us appreciate what we have. For those who like to follow the
traditional form of Roma Antigua, you can have an alter and offer
fruit and not offend anyone and still stay true to the original
intent, modern people still eat fruit and they rarely deal with
livestock...

Sacrifice does the most good when it is not wasted and is serves for
the good of all, at least that is my personal opinion. Everybody
makes different kinds of sacrifices but the farm owner sacrificing
the cow can donate the meat to the hungry, the fruit can be given to
a neighbour in good will (before it is rotten of course). Even
christians sacrifice money to the church and that sacrifice goes to
serve the greater good (the church runs relief efforts, etc.)

With proper practice and the right introduction, the larger
community can come to respect Religio Romana.

Valete Bene
C. Domitius Cato


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> M. Hortensia quiritibus spd;
> the point of incorporating in the U.S is that you get
treated
> as an 'official' religion, meaning a tax break & the gov't and no
> one else can interfere with you. The U.S Constitutional
> guarantee "Freedom of religion" is protected so if you let's say
> want to sacrifice to the gods, the ASPCA won't come & arrest you..
(I
> don't want to go there via animal sacrifice).
>
> Also for our cultores in Dacia, Romania, Iulia Caesaris is forced
to
> take a class in university in Orthodox Christianity, she only
wanted
> a certificate from NR saying she belonged to the Religio to try to
> get out of this. She also got a F in her religion class for
writing
> about her beliefs.
>
> As for the Hellenic polytheists, they've been fighting to get
> an 'official' place to worship, otherwise if they meet & worship
in
> a private home, the police could arrest them. So yes it is
extremely
> important. Under the EU religions have rights, cults do not.....
>
>
> So I'm with our esteemed Consul Fabius Buteo Modianus, he's an
> energetic member of the Religio & a pontiff. I know it's no big
deal
> to incorporate as a religion, having been a lawyer. Let the other
> pontiffs finally take some responsibility & get it done!!!
> bene valete in pacem deorum
> M. Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebis
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42905 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
Agreed that original Star Trek episode is not a very flattering
tale. It is anti-Roman and anti-Pagan. It was written and aired in
the 1960's so you can not really expect much...

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, David Santo Orcero <irbis@...>
wrote:
>
>
> Salvete Omnes!
>
> > A very curious thing this about romans in sci-fi. By the way,
does
> > anybody know anything about the Star Trek series (captain Kirk,
Mr.
> Spock and company)? In these original series there is chapter
titled
> > "panem et circenses"
> (...)
> > years ago in the days of the Roman Republic. The capital city of
this
> > planet is named Magna Roma and, apparently, the evolution of
this
> > magna-roman civilization is identical than terrestrial romans,
including
> > the rising of christianism for example.
>
> I have follow this series, and I disagree. The image of Roma that
they
> give is a fascist military regime were have blood spectacles that
they
> give at TV. The only relationship with Roma is the name, some
logos, and
> part of the spectacle of gladiators. It looks more that Musolini
fascist
> regime with strange clothes and with gladiators. :-(
>
> Yours:
>
> Lucius Cornelius Malacitanus
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42906 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: The Comitia Populi
C. Equitius Cato quirites S.P.D.

Salvete omnes.

This is the problem in a nutshell: we don't have any clear guidelines
that explain what the result of resignation is, or even when
resignation of a magistracy is actually effective.

What we need to do is simply (emphasis on SIMPLY) clarify what the lex
Constitutiva says.

I suggest something much simpler, along these lines:

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

I. The leges Cornelia et Maria De Civitate Eiuranda and Equitia de
Civitate Eiuranda are repealed.

II. A message posted to the "Forum" (or "Main List") shall constitute
a "public statement before three or more witnesses" for the purpose of
resigning citizenship and/or magistracies.

III. If citizenship is resigned, any and all public offices held by
the citizen at that time become vacated immediately, and elections
held to fill any resultant vacancies as defined by existing law. No
public offices, elected or appointed, shall carry over into a new
citizenship if a resigning citizen should later seek to reacquire
citizenship.

IV. If citizenship is reacquired, after ninety (90) days the
returning citizen

A. may apply to the Collegium Pontificum for reappointment to any
religious offices that he or she may have previously held. Only the
Collegium Pontificum is authorized to reappoint a returning citizen to
a religious office.

B. may be granted any titles, honors and/or effects of past public
administrative office (including century points) they held upon their
resignation.

V. Senatorial status may be resumed at the discretion of the Censors
collegially.

VI. If a citizen resigns more than once in a single calendar year,
and they reacquire citizenship a third time, they shall be barred from
running for any elected public office for one (1) year following
re-admission, with no exceptions under any circumstances whatsoever.

VI. The Censors will note the dates of resignations in the censorial
album civium.

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

Why this?

The lex Constitutiva already tells us how citizenship can be
voluntarily resigned. It's already there, in II.A.4, as clear as day.
They tell the censors or they announce it publicly.

The point of this whole thing is to define what happens if a
magistrate resigns; it's the magistracy that is important, not the
citizenship, for the purposes of the running of the Republic.

Otherwise, unless they specifically resign their citizenship, a
citizen remains a citizen. Forever. If they don't answer a census,
they don't answer a census. If they don't pay taxes, they don't pay
taxes. We already have processes in place to deal with those issues.
Let those processes work.


I strongly urge the lex proposed by the consul, as it stands, to be
rejected; I also ask for a magistrate with the authority to do so to
put my proposal before the People.

Valete bene,

Cato
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42907 From: Gnaeus Equitius Marinus Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: THE COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA IS SUMMONED (Corrected Link to Lex A
Salvete quirites, et salve Consul,

[snipping away things we agree on]

pompeia_minucia_tiberia wrote:

>>>Lex Arminia Equitia de Dignitate Curule
>>>http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2004-06-30-ii.html
>>>
>>>Lex Arminia Equitia de Sanctitate
>>>http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2004-08-13-ii.html
>>>
>>>
>>>The last lines of both these leges (above) nullify their
>>>respective legal and binding forces.
>>
>> No they don't! They simply say that they don't define WHICH
>> MAGISTRATES possess the defined property.
>
>
> PMS: Yes, but this is the rub Censor. They don't in the
> constitution either.

Then write a constitutional amendment specifying that definition. But
don't take away the definitions of what the terms mean.

> No where does it state that any
> specific magistrature has these designations and attendant powers in
> the constitution,

As you know, we have a long term goal of overhauling the Constitution
considerably. I have made you and your colleague moderators of the
NR_Constitution mailing list in order that you might pick up the
discussion that was active there during my consular year. Let's not go
backward here.

> So if they are
> by their own language legally inert, and the constitution is
> silent...why are they on the books amongst laws with legal and
> binding meaning ?

Because they are parts of an unfinished whole.

Valete,

-- Marinus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42908 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Calling Candidates for Censor
I, Marcus Octavius Germanicus, announce my candidacy for the office
of Censor.

I was elected to this position once before. I resigned that office
in the seventeenth month, a decision I now deeply regret. I left my
position as Censor in May of 2004 due both to complications in my
personal life (that same week, I quit the job I had held for seven
years), and my despair over events and attitudes in Nova Roma.

These circumstances are no longer present. I no longer work for a
soul-draining megacorporation. I also see Nova Roma's future as
brighter than it has been at any time in recent years. We have consuls
with vision; we have activity elsewhere in the community (such as
with the coin and calendar projects); and our web site has had more
editing activity in the past three months than in any full year
before.

As a consequence of this renewed hope, I myself have been more
active these past three months than in the two years before. I
completely rebuilt the citizen editor that the Censors and their
scribes use, providing a much more attractive, friendly, and sensible
interface. I created a new citizen search tool, allowing the Censors
to quickly locate and edit any record. I intend to further revise
these tools, as well as the public Album Civium, to make them more
flexible, maintainable, and attractive.

I have also installed the MediaWiki software for the public portion
of the web site, and participated in building consensus for editing
standards with a core team of volunteers. This has been the most
revolutionary change in the Nova Roma web site since the citizen
database was brought online in 2000, and the ease of citizen
involvement will reinvigorate our republic.

If offered a second chance to serve as Censor, I will not under any
circumstances abandon that post. I will complete the term.

Citizens, I ask for your support.

Valete,
Marcus Octavius Germanicus,
Senator (2753-present),
Curule Aedile (2753),
Magister Aranearius (2754, 2755, 2756, 2757),
Propraetor Lacus Magni (2754),
Consul (2755),
Censor (2756-2757).


--
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: 42909 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
M. Hortensia Catonis Malacitano spd;

agreed, but why then are Romans always so exciting when depicted in
sci-fi? I remember seeing that episode, wasn't there also an
interracial romance, very daring in those days. we need more Romans
in space;-)
Marca Hortensia Maior

> > >
A very curious thing this about romans in sci-fi. By the way,
> does
> > > anybody know anything about the Star Trek series (captain
Kirk,
> Mr.
> > Spock and company)? In these original series there is chapter
> titled
> > > "panem et circenses"
> > (...)
> > > years ago in the days of the Roman Republic. The capital city
of
> this
> > > planet is named Magna Roma and, apparently, the evolution of
> this
> > > magna-roman civilization is identical than terrestrial romans,
> including
> > > the rising of christianism for example.
> >
> > I have follow this series, and I disagree. The image of Roma
that
> they
> > give is a fascist military regime were have blood spectacles
that
> they
> > give at TV. The only relationship with Roma is the name, some
> logos, and
> > part of the spectacle of gladiators. It looks more that Musolini
> fascist
> > regime with strange clothes and with gladiators. :-(
> >
> > Yours:
> >
> > Lucius Cornelius Malacitanus
> >
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42910 From: P. Dominus Antonius Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
I'm sorry but I think I may disagree. My knowledge however somewhat
limited. The sort of personal deprivations you speak of were certainly
available more or less to the ancients, Rome itself was hardly an
agricultural center, and besides often the animals sacrificed were not
agricultural animals. Yet the ancients felt a need for animal sacrifice.
It is difficult enough to fully discern the details of worship practiced
millennia ago without the additional burden of abandoning some of the most
central practices that are known, especially when such abandonment is
primarily for the purpose of alleviating modern squeamishness. Somehow
biking to work just isn't the same. Besides with my luck I'd probably have
a heart attack or get hit by and car and then there truly would be a blood
sacrifice. :-(

For the record, I oppose child/human sacrifice. So please let's not raise
that red herring, shall we.

IMHO - If you want to practice an ancient religion then do so. Half
measures just seem so much like only going half way.
--
>|P. Dominus Antonius|<
Tony Dah m

Oderint dum metuant - Cicero
Si vis pacem, para bellum - Vegetius



On 3/28/06, Gaius Domitius Cato <dcwnewyork2002@...> wrote:
>
> In the days of Roma Antigua, livestock was more of a common asset so
> animal sacrifice made a lot of sence. Now livestock is only an
> asset for the less than 5% of the population that actually engages
> in any farming. 95% of the population never spends much if any time
> on a farm and can not stand the smell of feces let alone witness the
> slaughtering of an animal. When most people think of animals they
> think of Fido, Fluffy or that cute chipmunk they feed picnic scraps
> to...
>
> How can you in this day and age kill a creature (furry animal) that
> is mainly an object of affection for the vast majority of the
> population and not be seen as some sort of sick bastard by people
> not familiar with nonchristian religion? Like certain other aspects
> of Roma Antiqua (slavery, status of women), certain things must
> change with the times. Unless you are a farmer, animal sacrifice is
> inappropiate for modern practioners, and even then it should be done
> in the least painful method possible. It would seem fitting for
> those that want to sacrifice to do so with something of value in
> their modern day to day lives. Walk or bicycle to work for a week
> (if you you live a mile or two from work), volunteer your time to
> hold a Roman themed event or academic seminar or give food to the
> local food pantry. These sacrifices make us more healthy, honour
> our ancestors, and are a help to our community. They cast eternal
> Roma in favourable light and make us feel good.
>
> I think sacrifice is a very important aspect in Via Romana, even for
> our christian citizens. True sacrifice makes us strong and makes
> makes us appreciate what we have. For those who like to follow the
> traditional form of Roma Antigua, you can have an alter and offer
> fruit and not offend anyone and still stay true to the original
> intent, modern people still eat fruit and they rarely deal with
> livestock...
>
> Sacrifice does the most good when it is not wasted and is serves for
> the good of all, at least that is my personal opinion. Everybody
> makes different kinds of sacrifices but the farm owner sacrificing
> the cow can donate the meat to the hungry, the fruit can be given to
> a neighbour in good will (before it is rotten of course). Even
> christians sacrifice money to the church and that sacrifice goes to
> serve the greater good (the church runs relief efforts, etc.)
>
> With proper practice and the right introduction, the larger
> community can come to respect Religio Romana.
>
> Valete Bene
> C. Domitius Cato
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42911 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
C. Equitius Cato C. Domitio Catoni P. Domino Antonio quiritibusque S.P.D.

Salvete omnes.

An interesting discussion, and one that pops up regularly :-)

I would offer one note: blood sacrifice is a part of many ancient
traditions, including Judaism; even Christianity has a mirror in the
"sacrifice" of Christ on the Cross.

The pertinent fact is, I think, found in the answer to this question:
"Why did the Jews offer blood sacrifices?"

It wasn't because of dietary practice, or availability of stock, or
any other human construct or restriction. They did it for one reason,
and only one: because God Himself demanded that they do so.

We might very well first ask the same question of the religio Romana:
why did the Romans offer sacrifices?

Valete bene,

Cato
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42912 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
M. Hortensia omnibus spd;
first let me say Cato, I'm a vegetarian, an ethical one, so this
repulses me.
Secondly, Antonius, you seem to forget the Pythagoreans of
Ancient Greece and Rome, they abhorred animal sacrifice..and espoused
a vegetarian diet, viz Apollonius of Tyana
bene valete
M. Hortensia Maior

especially when such abandonment is
> primarily for the purpose of alleviating modern squeamishness. >
> Oderint dum metuant - Cicero
> Si vis pacem, para bellum - Vegetius
>
>
>
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42913 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-28
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
M. Hortensia G. Equitio Catoni spd;
King Numa who is regarded as the founder of the Religio
did not offer blood sacrifice. This was memorialized by Ovid in his
Fasti.
I do not wish to argue that practices did indeed change, but at
shrines in the temple of Carmenta animal sacrifice was prohibited and
so also at the shrine of Apollo at Delos and Aphrodite in Cyprus.
So the gods did not command it.

As for the Ancient Hebrews, they committed child sacrifice & also
worshipped Asherah, so the idea of a singular God is a later
creation.

If one is of a mind to take the words of the Hebrew Scriptures as
those of God, well the story of Cain and Abel is understood by Rabbis
about the purity of heart, not anything to do with YHWH needing blood
on the altars.
Of course this idea is important to Christianity as they claim
Jesus was the ultimate blood sacrifice. But this has nothing to do
with Judaism.

Now as for modern day Judaism, of which I am by birth a member,
vegetarianism is regarded as an especial mitzvah -blessing and was
practiced by some of the most famous Orthodox head Rabbis of Israel.
I hope this clears up some mistaken ideas,
bene valete in pacem deorum
M. Hortensia Maior



> The pertinent fact is, I think, found in the answer to this question:
> "Why did the Jews offer blood sacrifices?"
>
> It wasn't because of dietary practice, or availability of stock, or
> any other human construct or restriction. They did it for one reason,
> and only one: because God Himself demanded that they do so.
>
> We might very well first ask the same question of the religio Romana:
> why did the Romans offer sacrifices?
>
> Valete bene,
>
> Cato
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42914 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: The Lex Moravia Minucia Abdicatone Magistratum: (Was: THE COMITIA P
Cn. Iulius Caesar Consuli Pompeiae Minuciae Straboni quiritibus
S.P.D.

The above-proposed lex should be opposed simply on the grounds that
it moves us further away from the mos maiorum. If that, again, is
insufficient grounds for some citizens, then consider what appears
to me to be glaring errors, omissions and inconsistencies within it.
Again, allow me to demonstrate some of my concerns.

There are a number of inconsistencies when the proposed Lex Moravia
Minucia Abdicatone Magistratum is read in conjunction with the
proposed Lex Moravia Minucia de Civitate Eiuranda, which is
inevitable as the latter affects the former, whether intentionally
or not.

Section IV of the proposed Lex Moravia Minucia Abdicatone
Magistratum states that "A tendered resignation from an elected
office becomes legal and binding once receipt of same is
acknowledged to the resigning Magistrate by an appropriate presiding
official (defined below) of the comitia by which he or she was
elected." Section IV.A.i then defines the presiding official for a
person resigning an "an office elected in the Comitia Plebis
Tributa" as the Tribuni Plebii, or to three Plebian citizens in
writing".

Under Section B.i, resignations "of offices elected in the Comitia
Populi Tributa or the Comitia Centuriata are to be tendered in
writing to the Consuls, or in the presence of three or more
citizens, who shall acknowledge and communicate receipt of the
resignation to the Consuls"

Let us now examine the interaction of these two leges when for
instance a plebeian consul stated in writing on an "official"
(remember from my previous post that there is no definition in the
Lex Moravia Minucia de Civitate Eiuranda as to what "official"
means) Nova Roman message board that he resigns his citizenship, and
then disappears from contact.

In the above example under the Lex Moravia Minucia de Civitate
Eiuranda three or more citizens would have to acknowledge the
resignation of citizenship to the Censors in writing within 72
hours. If they fail to do that then the citizenship resignation is
(we assume) invalid and Section V of the Lex Moravia Minucia de
Civitate Eiuranda would not come into effect. If 3 citizens do
perform this function and the Censors acknowledge receipt of this
resignation within the 7 day period under Section II.B of the Lex
Moravia Minucia de Civitate Eiuranda then the resignation of
citizenship is valid from the point the Censors play their part. As
to the resignation of the office of Consul that too becomes de-facto
effective the moment the citizenship resignation is valid.

Now under the Section IV.A.i of the Lex Moravia Minucia Abdicatone
Magistratum three plebeian citizens have to write to the Tribuni
Plebii before the resignation under this scenario can be considered
valid under the Lex Moravia Minucia Abdicatone Magistratum, and they
have an indefinite amount of time to do this, but once they perform
this task the Tribuni Plebii have 24 hours to write to the resigning
magistrate before a vacancy can be legally established. Does this
mean that the Tribunes have to be in complete agreement to accept
this resignation, are they allowed to ignore it, do they have to
vote on acknowledging it, do all of them have to be made aware
before the acknowledgement is sent? Who knows? Nothing is defined.
This is the first of a number of loopholes.

So if our Consul above resigns at 12.00 AM on Monday three citizens
have to write to the Censors by no later than 12.00 AM Wednesday.
The Censors then have until 12.00 AM the following Tuesday to
acknowledge this resignation of citizenship. At this point he ceases
to be a citizen AND Consul. So much is clear from the Lex Moravia
Minucia de Civitate Eiuranda. Under the Lex Moravia Minucia
Abdicatone Magistratum 3 plebeian citizens can take any amount of
time they wish to inform the Tribunes, who then only have 24 hours
to acknowledge this resignation. So which law takes precedence? Can
someone rescind resignation of citizenship and then three weeks
later have the 3 plebeian citizens inform the Tribunes they
resigned? Well clearly under these disjointed proposals that is
quite possible as no mention is made as to when which lex applies
and when it doesn't. This is exceptionally dangerous and of course
very silly.

What provision is made under the Lex Moravia Minucia Abdicatone
Magistratum for these resignations at a public Nova Roman event (of
unknown definition) under the Lex Moravia Minucia de Civitate
Eiuranda? None it appears, so if our plebeian Consul above resigns
his citizenship at this nebulous public event to three non-plebeian
citizens does Section Lex Moravia Minucia de Civitate Eiuranda of
the Lex Moravia Minucia de Civitate Eiuranda take precedence or not?
Who knows, since there is nothing stated in either lex. Does this
mean that the Consul has only resigned his citizenship and since no
plebs happened to be around has not resigned his office? Who knows?

Oh, what happens if under the Lex Moravia Minucia Abdicatone
Magistratum the presiding magistrate does not "inform the Censors,
the Magister Aranearius and the citizenry via public fora within 48
hours"? Does this make the resignation invalid or not? Also when
does this 48 hours start from? Who knows?

In short, the interaction of the Lex Moravia Minucia Abdicatone
Magistratum and the Lex Moravia Minucia de Civitate Eiuranda
absolutely has to work hand in hand for any of this to make sense.
In order for that to happen each must contain provisions detailing
when each law takes precedence or when they have to be read in
conjunction with the other.

This has not happened. This is, again, very sloppy drafting and lays
the groundwork for lots of debates over meanings, intentions, common
sense, copious amounts of interpretation and haggling and possibly
the odd provocatio appeal here and there.

The lack of interaction and the issues above add further grounds to
rejecting the Lex Moravia Minucia Abdicatone Magistratum as well as
the Lex Moravia Minucia de Civitate Eiuranda. I would strongly
recommend that the citizens vote against both of these proposals.

Vale et valete.
Caesar


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Pompeia Minucia Strabo
<pompeia_minucia_tiberia@...> wrote:
>
> Pompeia Minucia Strabo Consul Quiritibus Novae Romae S.P.D.
>
> The required auspices have been taken and deemed favourable by
Consul, Pontifex et Augur G. Fabius Buteo Modianus.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42915 From: Kirsteen Wright Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
On 3/29/06, Maior <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> M. Hortensia G. Equitio Catoni spd;
> King Numa who is regarded as the founder of the Religio
> did not offer blood sacrifice. This was memorialized by Ovid in his
> Fasti.


Yes but Ovid's Fasti is in no way an accurate historical document the way we
would class one today. The Romans whole idea of history was slightly
different from ours.

Also the whole idea of sacrifice as 'doing without', 'giving something up'
or 'doing good works' is much more Christian than Roman. Surely the whole
Roman idea of sacrifice is 'making sacred' giving something directly to the
Gods or sharing it with them.

Not everyone will be happy with this. I agree some people may find it
repulsive but, personally speaking, I think the answer's very simple - If
you find what a god asks repulsive, then don't consort with that god. If you
do wish to deal with that god then I find it highly impolite, to say the
least, to immediately start telling them what they want by way of sacrifice.
It reminds me of my ex-husband who would always insist on telling me what I
wanted for my birthday so that I got gifts that suited him rather than me.

Note he's now ex :-)

Merula


> --
> Chaos, confusion, disorder - my work here is done


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42916 From: G. Aurelia Falconis Silvana Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: MEGALESIA - Ludi Circenses
C. Aurelia Falco* Silvana D. Octaviae Aventinae, Maximae Valeriae
Messallinae omnibusque salutem plurimam dicit.

Um . . . Spandex is back.

With horses too. (No, make that four.) Quadriga Velociraptor.
Remember them?

There was someone in the dim and distant past who
threatened to beam himself in as a T. Rex. Wha' hoppen, pal?
And howso that three feminae/mulieres have entered chariots . . .
what news of the other gender?

See y'all in the Circus Maximus.



Valete bene in pace Deorum.

C. Aurelia Falco* Silvana, owner
SPANDEX THE VANDAL
(Flexible, resiliant, brilliant--st r e t c h i n g
far beyond the ordinary)

& QUADRIGA VELOCIRAPTOR
(The rapt raptors run rapidly in victorious rapture)



(*Name adjustment: This seems to be my name now, following
a censorial revision. Of which 'nuff said.)
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42917 From: Titus Iulius Sabinus Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: MEGALESIA - Call for Munera Gladiatoria & Venationes
SALVETE OMNES !

Only two days for yours subscriptions !!!

Munera Gladiatoria :
http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/ludi/ludi_form_gladiatoria.php

Venationes :
http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/ludi/ludi_form_venationes.php

Subscriptions are admitted until March 31th (24.00 roman time) . Try
to describe better your fighter : from where he comes, where he was
trained, in which gladiatorial school, who was his lanista, which
are his fight abilities and more - in a word - impresse the peoples
with your gladiator or animal story !!!, and, maybe you will
receive one more point in the fights times..

VALE BENE,
IVL SABINVS
Curule Aedile
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42918 From: Titus Iulius Crassus Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Ludi Circenses
Salve et salvete,

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "G. Aurelia Falconis Silvana"
<silvanatextrix@...> wrote:
> There was someone in the dim and distant past who
> threatened to beam himself in as a T. Rex. Wha' hoppen, pal?>>>

Look twice in Circus Maximus ! I'm in trainings times. Lap by lap
with more good results. Yesterday I was looking only to the Latina
and of course my results wasn't to a top level. You didn't saw ?
http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/fun.htm

But today is different. I'm more motivate and day by day I revert to
my originally combative spirit. So...take care Velociraptor, even if
you are a raptor, you are a small one.

Regards,
Iulius Crassus
Owner and driver of Aprilis
Factio Russata.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42919 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Octavia for Censor!
Salvete,

Bet you all thought for a second that I was running for Censor :-)Not a
chance! There must be a Yahoo problem because a few words seem to have
fallen away from my subject line...

It should have read
"I wish the best of luck to the Paterfamilias of Gens Octavia -- Marcus
Octavius Germanicus-- in his bid for Censor".

Valete,
Diana Octavia
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42920 From: QFabiusMaxmi@aol.com Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
In a message dated 3/28/2006 4:49:17 PM Pacific Standard Time,
marsvigilia@... writes:
In the days of Roma Antigua, livestock was more of a common asset so
animal sacrifice made a lot of sence. Now livestock is only an
asset for the less than 5% of the population that actually engages
in any farming. 95% of the population never spends much if any time
on a farm and can not stand the smell of feces let alone witness the
slaughtering of an animal. When most people think of animals they
think of Fido, Fluffy or that cute chipmunk they feed picnic scraps
to...


I've head this argument before, and it doesn't fly. Rome's creatures for
sacrifice were specially bred and raised. A white Ox was rather expensive. One
does not grab it off a dairy farm. Fido who is polluted, Fluffy who was
venerated, and chipmunk, would have nothing to do with Roman Religio.

Q. Fabius Maximus


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42921 From: Caius Curius Saturninus Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: roman wine set or similar, help requested
Salvete omnes,

I wonder if anyone could help me with this problem. Couple of years
ago I found a website which sold replicas of Roman pottery. In their
collection there was Roman wine jug with two cups. My parents are
having their 30th anniversary together in the beginning of May and I
thought to buy such set for them and make mulsum. But it seems that I
cannot find bookmark for this site nor find it from Google. Would
anyone have it bookmarked or know any site where I could buy such a
set or some other nice Roman pottery?

Valete,

Caius Curius Saturninus

Propraetor Provinciae Thules
Rector Academia Thules ad Studia Romana Antiqua et Nova

e-mail: c.curius@...
www.academiathules.org
gsm: +358-50-3315279
fax: +358-9-8754751





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42922 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
C. Equitius Cato M. Hortensiae Maiori quiritibusqe S.P.D.

Salve et salvete omnes.

Marca Horensia, your personally being a vegetarian really has no
connection whatsoever to the practices of historical Judaism --- and
vegetarianism is not more "ethical" in and of itself than any other
dietary practice; ethics are embedded in the practitioner, not the
practice.

"Every creature that lives shall be yours to eat; as with the green
grasses, I give you all these." (Genesis 9:3)

Judaism upholds the eating of meat provided that the animal is a
species permitted by the Torah (Leviticus 11); is ritually slaughtered
(shechita) (Deuteronomy 12:21); has the non-kosher elements (blood and
certain fats and sinews) removed (Leviticus 3:17; Genesis 32:33); is
prepared without mixing meat and milk (Exodus 34:26); and that
appropriate blessings are recited (Deuteonomy 8:10).


I eat meat, and will continue to do so, but that does not make me any
more or less ethical than you :-)

The fact is that Judaism practiced animal sacrifice as commanded by
God; some ultra-Orthodox are even now preparing for the eventual re-
building of the Temple in Jerusalem so that sacrifices can once again
be offered in obedience to the commands of God.


But back to the question I asked: why did the Romans sacrifice
animals? When we answer this, then we will have a stepping stone
towards understanding the place (or lack thereof) of animal sacrifice
within the religio Romana.

Vale et valete,

Cato
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42923 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: a.d. IV Kal. Apr.
OSD C. Equitius Cato

Salvete omnes!

Hodie est ante diem IV Kalendas Aprilis; haec dies comitialis est.

"The study of rhetoric was introduced into our country in about the
same way as that of grammar, but with somewhat greater difficulty,
since, as is well known, its practice was at times actually
prohibited. To remove any doubt on this point, I shall append an
ancient decree of the Senate, as well as an edict of the Censors: "In
the consulship of Gaius Fannius Strabo and Marcus Valerius Messala
[161 B.C.] the praetor Marcus Pomponius laid a proposition before the
Senate. As the result of a discussion about philosophers and
rhetoricians, the Senate decreed that Marcus Pomponius, the praetor,
should take heed and provide, in whatever way seemed in accord with
the interests of the State and his oath of office, that they be not
allowed to live in Rome." Some time afterward the censors Gnaeus
Domitius Ahenobarbus and Lucius Licinius Crassus [92 B.C.] issued the
following edict about the same class of men: "It has been reported to
us that there be men who have introduced a new kind of training, and
that our young men frequent their schools; that these men have assumed
the title of Latin rhetoricians, and that young men spend whole days
with them in idleness. Our forefathers determined what they wished
their children to learn and what schools they desired them to attend.
These innovations in the customs and principles of our forefathers do
not please us nor seem proper. Therefore it appears necessary to make
our opinion known, both to those who have such schools and to those
who are in the habit of attending them, that they are displeasing to
us." By degrees rhetoric itself came to seem useful and honorable, and
many devoted themselves to it as a defense and for glory. Cicero
continued to declaim in Greek as well as Latin up to the time of his
praetorship, and in Latin even when he was getting on in years; and
that too in company with the future consuls Hirtius and Pansa, whom he
calls "his pupils and his big boys." Some historians assert that
Gnaeus Pompeius resumed the practice of declaiming just before the
civil war, that he might be the better able to argue against Gaius
Curio, a young man of very ready tongue, who was espousing Caesar's
cause; and that Marcus Antonius, and Augustus as well, did not give it
up even during the war at Mutina. The emperor Nero declaimed in the
first year of his reign, and had also done so in public twice before.
Furthermore, many even of the orators published declamations. In this
way general enthusiasm was aroused, and a great number of masters and
teachers flocked to Rome, where they were so well received that some
advanced from the lowest estate to senatorial dignity and to the
highest magistracies. But they did not all follow the same method of
teaching, and the individual teachers also varied in their practice,
since each one trained his pupils in various ways. For they would
explain fine speeches with regard to their figures, incidents and
illustrations, now in one way and now in another, and compose
narratives sometimes in a condensed and brief form, again with greater
detail and flow of words. Sometimes they would translate Greek works,
and praise or censure distinguished men. They would show that some
practices in everyday life were expedient and essential, others
harmful and superfluous. Frequently they defended or assailed the
credibility of myths, an exercise which the Greeks call "destructive"
and "constructive" criticism. But finally all these exercises went out
of vogue and were succeeded by the debate. The earlier debates were
based either upon historical narrative, as indeed is sometimes the
case at present, or upon some event of recent occurrence in real life.
Accordingly they were usually presented with even the names of the
localities included. At any rate that is the case with the published
collections, from which it may be enlightening to give one or two
specimens word for word. "Some young men from the city went to Ostia
in the summer season, and arriving at the shore, found some fishermen
drawing in their nets. They made a bargain to give a certain sum for
the haul. The money was paid and they waited for some time until the
nets were drawn ashore. When they were at last hauled out, no fish was
found in them, but a closed basket of gold. Then the Purchasers said
that the catch belonged to them, the fishermen that it was theirs."
"When some dealers were landing a cargo of slaves from a ship at
Brundisium, they dressed a handsome and high-priced young slave in the
amulet and fringed toga for fear of the collectors of customs, and
their fraud easily escaped detention. When they reached Rome, the case
was taken to court and a claim was made for the slave's liberty, on
the ground that his master had voluntarily freed him." Such
discussions they formerly called by their Greek name of "syntheses,"
but afterwards "debates"; but they might be either fictitious or
legal. The eminent teachers of the subject, of whom any account is to
be found, are limited pretty closely to those whom I shall mention." -
Seutonius, De Rhetoribus 1

In ancient Greece, today was the celebration of the Delphinia, a
festival of Apollo Delphinius held annually at Athens. All that is
known of the ceremonies is that a number of girls proceeded to his
temple (the Delphinium) carrying suppliants' branches and seeking to
propitiate Apollo, probably as a god having influence on the sea. It
was at this time of year that navigation began again after the storms
of winter. According to the story in Plutarch (Theseus, 18) Theseus,
before setting out to Crete to slay the Minotaur, repaired to the
Delphinium and deposited, on his own behalf and that of his companions
on whom the lot had fallen, an offering to Apollo, consisting of a
branch of consecrated olive, bound about with white wool; after which
he prayed to the god and set sail. The sending of the maidens to
propitiate the god during the Delphinia commemorates this event in the
life of Theseus.

Valete bene!

Cato



SOURCES

Seutonius, Plutarch, the Delphinia (http://encyclopedia.jrank.org/
DAH_DEM/DELPHINIA.html)
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42924 From: Phil Perez Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: roman wine set or similar, help requested
Salve Saturnine,


http://venetiancat.com/ is where you want to go to for your Roman ceramic needs.


Vires et honos,
Marcus Cassius Philippus
----- Original Message -----
From: Caius Curius Saturninus
To: nova-roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 7:24 AM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] roman wine set or similar, help requested


Salvete omnes,

I wonder if anyone could help me with this problem. Couple of years
ago I found a website which sold replicas of Roman pottery. In their
collection there was Roman wine jug with two cups. My parents are
having their 30th anniversary together in the beginning of May and I
thought to buy such set for them and make mulsum. But it seems that I
cannot find bookmark for this site nor find it from Google. Would
anyone have it bookmarked or know any site where I could buy such a
set or some other nice Roman pottery?

Valete,

Caius Curius Saturninus

Propraetor Provinciae Thules
Rector Academia Thules ad Studia Romana Antiqua et Nova

e-mail: c.curius@...
www.academiathules.org
gsm: +358-50-3315279
fax: +358-9-8754751





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



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

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

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

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


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



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42925 From: P. Dominus Antonius Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Wait a minute!!! I didn't write that. That was written by Gaius Domitius
Cato.

I was responding to him. I actually more closely agree with you.
--
>|P. Dominus Antonius|<
Tony Dah m

Oderint dum metuant - Cicero
Si vis pacem, para bellum - Vegetius



On 3/29/06, QFabiusMaxmi@... <QFabiusMaxmi@...> wrote:
>
> In a message dated 3/28/2006 4:49:17 PM Pacific Standard Time,
>
> marsvigilia@... writes:
> In the days of Roma Antigua, livestock was more of a common asset so
> animal sacrifice made a lot of sence. Now livestock is only an
> asset for the less than 5% of the population that actually engages
> in any farming. 95% of the population never spends much if any time
> on a farm and can not stand the smell of feces let alone witness the
> slaughtering of an animal. When most people think of animals they
> think of Fido, Fluffy or that cute chipmunk they feed picnic scraps
> to...
>
>
> I've head this argument before, and it doesn't fly. Rome's creatures for
> sacrifice were specially bred and raised. A white Ox was rather
> expensive. One
> does not grab it off a dairy farm. Fido who is polluted, Fluffy who was
> venerated, and chipmunk, would have nothing to do with Roman Religio.
>
> Q. Fabius Maximus
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42926 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: In leges Moravias Minucias
A. Apollonius omnibus sal.

I thank the consul for her replies to my earlier
questions. I understand from them that although she
may be prepared to consider some changes to these
proposals, she is entirely happy with the basic
policies they contain and will not be changing those.
In my opinion it is those basic policies which are
flawed, and I feel it would be a waste of the three or
four days which remain of this contio if I were to
attempt to persuade the tribune and the consul of
that, so I shall simply explain to you, fellow
citizens, why I think we should reject these
proposals.

First it may be useful to note the various practical
problems with these two proposals. To illustrate
these, let me tell you a story. I'll interrupt the
story from time to time to explain how it relates to
the proposals before us.

- - In A.D. 2010 there is a citizen of Nova
- - Roma called C. Marius. Marius has a son
- - who is also a citizen of Nova Roma and whom,
- - in traditional Roman fashion, he has named
- - C. Marius. Marius (the father) is a
- - quaestor. He sends a message to this list,
- - and to the announcements list, and to every
- - other list he subscribes to, saying "I
- - resign my office of quaestor effective
- - immediately".

Now, in ancient Rome he would, of course, have been
regarded as immediately losing his office. An election
would have been organized as soon as possible to
replace him. Under the lex Moravia Minucia, however,
things would be different...

- - Nobody informs the consules that this has
- - happened. Marius stops doing his job
- - collecting and recording payments of tax.
- - After several weeks, people begin to
- - complain that their payments have not been
- - acknowledged. The consules explain that,
- - according to the lex Moravia Minucia article
- - IV, they cannot hold an election to replace
- - Marius until three people inform them that
- - he has resigned. "But," say sensible
- - citizens, "you *know* he's resigned". "Yes,"
- - they say, "but he didn't inform us directly,
- - so we have to wait until three witnesses
- - inform us directly". Three exasperated people
- - duly do so. An election is held.

This is, indeed, the position under the proposals
before us. The idea that a resignation cannot be
legally valid unless it complies with certain
formalities is an old one in Nova Roma. It is
enshrined in the lex constitutiva itself, and also in
the lex Cornelia Maria de civitate ejuranda.
Presumably at some point someone thought there was a
good reason for having this rule. And apparently the
tribune and the consul still think it's a good idea,
because they have adopted it from the area of
resignation of citizenship and brought it into the law
on resignation of office. This is in spite of the
possible consequences, such as we have in the story.
Well, back to Marius...

- - Marius is getting fed up with Nova Roma. He
- - writes again to all the lists he subscribes
- - to, saying "I immediately resign my
- - citizenship". Three conscientious people
- - write to the consules to inform them of
- - this. Unfortunately in this case it is the
- - censores who need to be informed. Nobody
- - informs them.

This is not a great novelty. It is what happens at the
moment under the lex Cornelia Maria. Or, rather, it's
what doesn't happen. The law says it should happen.
But the censores are sensible people. Only current and
former censores can tell us the precise number of
times they have actually received written notification
from three witnesses that a person has resigned, but I
can make a guess: zero. Certainly I've worked in
censorial offices several times and I've never seen it
happen. During the last two censuses a significant
number of people contacted by the censorial offices
responded asking, even demanding, to be removed from
the list of citizens. These responses were generally
addressed to provincial governors or censorial
scribes, not to the censores personally. Under the
strict legal rule of notification to three witnesses,
the censores would have had no power to register these
resignations as legally valid, but of course they used
their common sense and registered them.

This is an outstandingly clear example of a rule which
is so impractical that it has been completely ignored.
And yet these proposals seek not only to perpetuate it
but to expand it into new areas of law and to place
icnreasing reliance upon it. I cannot see the sense of
that. Our law, surely, should recognize the current
reality and give the relevant magistrates the
discretion - to be exercised, of course, collegially,
as all censorial powers are - to decide what
constitutes a resignation and what does not.

- - Meanwhile, the census is going on. Marius
- - is contacted by the scribes doing the census.
- - He responds and says that he does not want
- - to be considered a citizen of Nova Roma any
- - more. The scribe who receives his message
- - passes it the censores. The censores say,
- - "have you got two other witnesses?" "No,"
- - says the scribe. The censores do not register
- - Marius' resignation as valid.

Well, this just illustrates the problem I mentioned
above. Of course in reality the censores might well
ignore the lex Moravia Minucia as they currently
ignore the lex Cornelia Maria, but there's not much
point proposing a lex and then saying "it's okay,
people will ignore the stupid parts". But now there
arises a further problem, newly introduced by these
proposals...

- - Marius' resignation has not been registered
- - as valid by the censores. But he has also not
- - responded to the census in a way which would
- - allow him to be registered as a full citizen
- - according to the lex Fabia de censu. The
- - censores check the leges. The lex Fabia says
- - that a citizen who is not registered at the
- - census becomes a socius; the lex Moravia
- - Minucia also says that a citizen who does not
- - respond to the census has his citizenship
- - placed "in temporary suspension".

Now, what are the censores to do with Marius? Is he a
socius? A "suspended" citizen? Both? The lex Moravia
Minucia does not explicitly repeal the "socius"
clauses of the lex Fabia, so presumably it does not
intend to abolish the socii. Can a person be both a
socius and a "suspended" citizen? It would be very
strange. A socius is, as the lex Fabia makes clear,
not a citizen. He enjoys none of the rights of
citizenship. A "suspended" citizen under the lex
Moravia Minucia, however, enjoys all the rights of
citizenship except the right to vote. This means he
actually enjoys greater rights than a probationary
citizen during his 90-day probationary period. So
presumably a "suspended" citizen is still a type of
citizen, like a probationary one. And yet it seems
that someone who fails to be registered at the census
is to be classed as both a socius (non-citizen with no
citizen rights) and a "suspended" citizen (a type of
citizen with almost full rights). How is this
possible? If it is not, how do the censores choose
which status to give a person?

This is important not only because a socius and a
"suspended" citizen have very different rights, but
also because they have very different ways of
reacquiring citizenship. "Suspended" citizens have a
bewildering array of different ways in which they can
resume their citizenship, each with a different time
limit. They can do it by asking the censores: this can
be done until the beginning of the next census (which
under current law would be two years but could vary in
the future) or until five years have passed, whichever
is earlier. They can do it by paying their taxes: this
can only be done within a year of being placed in
suspension. They can do it by responding to the
following census: this of course depends entirely on
when the next census happens. A socius, on the other
hand, has only one way to do it: he can write to the
censores at *any* time, however long after he ceased
to be a citizen, and ask to be reinstated. The
censores can then reinstate him.

So we have a strange situation. A person who fails to
respond to the census may be a "suspended" citizen, or
a socius, or possibly both. If he is a "suspended"
citizen he has almost all the rights of citizenship;
if he is a socius, he has none at all. On the other
hand, if he is a "suspended" citizen he can only
become a full citizen again within certain time
limits, whereafter he loses his citizenship completely
and becomes a plain old non-citizen; if he is a
socius, however, he can regain full citizenship even
many, many years after he lost it.

Well, on with the story...

- - The censores decide to categorize Marius as
- - a "suspended" citizen. He remains involved
- - with some Nova Roma projects, however. He
- - is elected aedile of his local oppidum. A
- - few people object, but he points out that,
- - as a "suspended" citizen, he has all the
- - citizen rights except the right to vote, so
- - he is legally competent to hold this office.
- - After a while he starts selling Roman food
- - through the Macellum, which as a "suspended"
- - citizen he is allowed to do. Some of his
- - customers experience unacceptable delays in
- - delivery and complain to the aediles curules.
- - The aediles remove Marius from the Macellum,
- - but he appeals using provocatio, which is a
- - right he still possesses as a "suspended"
- - citizen. He is given a trial in the comitia.

This part of the story just illustrates some of the
rights which "suspended" citizens would enjoy under
the Moravian Minucian proposals. You may think it
slightly odd that someone who has twice attempted to
resign his citizenship and has failed to answer the
census is still able to exercise all these rights.
Well, yes, I suppose it is odd, but that's the lex
Moravia Minucia for you. But now here's a twist:

- - During the trial, the census - the second
- - census since Marius tried to resign
- - originally - is coming to an end. In fact,
- - it comes to an end before the trial does.
- - Marius, of course, has not bothered to
- - respond, and indeed he has not even been
- - asked, because the censores don't bother
- - to contact "suspended" citizens. At the
- - end of the census, the censores, in
- - obedience to the lex Moravia Minucia,
- - revoke Marius' citizenship entirely.
- - The prosecutor in the trial notices this
- - and announces it to the praetor who is
- - presiding over the trial. The praetor
- - immediately throws the case out of the
- - comitia because Marius no longer has the
- - right of provocatio or the right to appear
- - in the comitia. The aediles curules throw
- - Marius out of the Macellum because he no
- - longer has a right to sell his wares there.
- - Rather upset, he asks the censores how to
- - stop all this happening. They tell him that
- - now he is a non-citizen, and the only way
- - he can resume his lost rights is to apply
- - to become a "new" citizen. So he fills in
- - the application form. In accordance with
- - the lex Moravia Minucia article VI.A, the
- - censores ask him why he resigned and why he
- - returned. He says, "Why? Does it affect
- - whether I'm allowed to return?" "No," they
- - reply, "it makes no difference at all, but
- - we are obliged by the lex Moravia Minucia
- - to ask you." "Am I obliged to answer?" The
- - censores check their text of the lex Moravia
- - Minucia and tell him that he is not. So he
- - doesn't.

Yes, indeed, this is what the proposed lex says: "the
former citizen is directed to state in his or her
application the reasons behind the initial resignation
of citizenship, and the nature of the reasons
influencing the desire to have it reinstated". It
doesn't say, however, that the person concerned is
obliged to give this information, only that he is
directed to do so; nor does it give the censores the
power to take any action based on the answer, or even
require them to keep any record of the answer for
statistical purposes. What fun. And now the final act
in the drama...

- - Marius asks to be given his old name, C.
- - Marius. The censores explain that there is
- - already a C. Marius in Nova Roma, so
- - according to the lex Moravia Minucia he
- - cannot have that name. He explains that this
- - is his son. The censores say that makes no
- - difference: he cannot have the name.

That's right, citizens. Although there is no general
rule in our law saying that two citizens cannot have
the same name, there is a specific rule - it is in the
lex Cornelia Maria and look, here it is too in this
radical new written-from-scratch lex Moravia Minucia -
that a citizen who has resigned and then returned
cannot have the same name as any existing citizen.
Why? Who on earth knows?

And what becomes of our hero Marius? He probably gives
up and goes away forever, or at least until Nova Roma
has some more sensible procedures for dealing with
citizenship.

I think that story illustrates most of the practical
problems with these proposals. But the problems are
deeper than that. The problems are, essentially, the
same problems that exist under the current system, but
worse. The consul said that "we are proposing the
existing legislations [sic] regarding resignations be
repealed, and starting from scratch". If this is
"starting from scratch" then I am a pink elephant.
These proposals do not depart in any way from the
fundamental ideas behind the lex Cornelia Maria, the
lex that has caused all the problems so far. It even
contains several of the same clauses.

Before the lex Cornelia Maria, no one had any real
problem identifying what was a valid resignation.
True, the lex constitutiva had the rule about three
witnesses, but that wasn't a big problem because there
was no rule that those three witnesses had to report
to the censores. As long as three witnesses witnessed
the resignation, it was valid. Since almost all
resignations happened on big e-mail lists, that wasn't
a problem. The problem was just that there were quite
a lot of valid resignations. The purpose of the lex
Cornelia Maria was to stop people resigning. To this
end, it adopted two main strategies. First, it made it
harder to resign in the first place. This was mainly
achieved by saying that what a reasonable human being
would recognize as a resignation is not recognized by
the law as a valid resignation unless it is
communicated in a certain way and not revoked within a
certain time. Secondly, it made it harder for people
who successfully resigned to come back.

Both of these strategies were radical departures from
the ancient Roman rule that a citizen could give up
Roman citizenship without going through any formal
procedure and could, thereafter, resume that same
citizenship with ease. And, surprise surprise, both
caused seriously problems. The second was quickly
recognized as a problem and was eventually whittled
down by the lex Equitia, but some of it still remains
in these proposals: notice that a citizen who leaves,
comes back, and leaves again cannot come back for a
further two years. Why? Who knows? But the real
problem is the first of the two strategies: the
divergence between what common sense recognizes as a
resignation and what the law recognizes as a
resignation.

Do the proposed leges abandon this strategy? They do
not; on the contrary, they take it even further. They
create extra administrative hoops which must be jumped
through before on can successfully resign, some of
them entirely outside one's own control. Under these
proposals, a resignation of citizenship will only be
valid if *someone else*, namely a censor, issues an
"official acknowledgement" of the resignation. Anyone
can see that this is absurd. If you leave an
organization and the organization then writes to you
and says "we officially acknowledge your departure",
what do you think? I would think, "you acknowledge
what you like, chum, but I've left and that's a fact
whether you acknowledge it or not". If we insist on
maintaining a distinction between what any sensible
human being would regard as a resignation and what the
law regards as a resignation, we only succeed in
making the law look stupid.

And not only do these proposals adopt the same basic
strategy of creating a discrepancy between legal and
factual resignations, they actually export this
discrepancy to an area of law previously unaffected by
it. At the moment, at least, common sense prevails
with regard to resignation of magistracies: if someone
says "I resign my office with immediate effect", he
loses his office with immediate effect. The only
problem arises when he resigns his citizenship while
holding office. Why does this problem arise? Because
his resignation of citizenship is not recognized as
having immediate legal validity, but his resignation
of office is. This creates inconsistency because
citizenship is governed by a stupid rule and public
office is not. The proposed solution? The consul and
the tribune proposed to have both citizenship and
public office covered by the stupid rule. Well, sure,
it solves the inconsistency, but it means we now have
two stupid rules in stead of one. Under these
proposals a resignation from office, like a
resignation from citizenship, would not be legally
valid unless communicated to a certain person in a
certain way and then acknowledged by that person in a
certain way. This is total madness.

No, these proposals do not "start from scratch".
Repealing one lex and replacing it with another lex
based on the same fundamental ideas (and in fact
containing several identical clauses) is not "starting
from scratch". It is the act of someone who believes
that there is really no fundamental problem with the
current system, we just need more of the same.

That is what these proposals give us: more of the
same. More discrepancy between what a reasonable human
being would recognize as a resignation and what the
law will recognize as a resignation. More hoops to
jump through before you can successfully leave Nova
Roma or lay down your office. More obstacles when you
return. More different and overlapping sub-categories
of citizenship. More administrative work for
magistrates. More complexity. More of the same.

And finally, and most importantly, more divergence
from what the Romans did. It constantly baffles me
that we claim to admire Roman culture and yet when any
practical problem arises nobody seems to stop to ask
how the Romans solved it. The vast majority of our
legislation is based on the arrogant assumption that
we, with our total of eight years experience of
running a Roman republic, can come up with better
solutions than the people who did it successfully for
half a millennium (or, at best, based on a total
failure by legislators to actually find out what the
Romans did and try to apply it). These proposals
attempt to solve a problem relating to resignations of
citizenship and of office. We know how the Romans
solved these problems. We know how to put their
solution into practice. It could be easily done. Yet
the consul and the tribune have chosen not to do that.
They have chosen, in stead, to go in the opposite
direction, taking the un-Roman elements of the current
system and significantly increasing them.

Why? Here is the consul's answer:

"We cannot mirror antiqua [sic] in every way. Nova
Roma has two important aspects to consider: For one,
we are a voluntary organization, with citizens of dual
citizenship...our macronational lineage and NR
citizenship. Two, regarding the case of magisterial
resignations, we have to consider that we are dealing
with procedures of resignation of corporate
executives, not just 'magistrates within Nova Roma'."

She does not explain why either of these facts
prevents us from adopting the Roman practice. We are
voluntary organization, she says. So was the Roman
republic: people did not have to be citizens if they
didn't want to be. They could give up their
citizenship with remarkable ease. They did not have to
inform any particular magistrate, or state their
intentions in any particular venue. They just had to
leave. Which is more in keeping with a voluntary
organization: the Roman system, which allows people to
leave very easily and return equally easily, or the
lex Moravia Minucia, which puts huge administrative
hurdles in the way of anyone going out or coming back?

Magistrates are corporate executives, she says. And
this is a reason for setting up a system which could
result in an executive resigning his post but not
being accepted as having done so unless three other
people inform a fourth person who actually already
knows? In the ancient republic, a magistrate who said
"I resign my office" immediately lost his office. Is
there some rule of corporate law in the state of Maine
which says that the secretary of a non-profit
corporation who says "I resign as secretary of this
corporation" cannot be taken to have resigned?

The consul goes on to say, "Granted, it can be said
that resignation of citizenship was hardly
commonplace (but not totally unheard of) in antiqua
[sic] .... neither was the resignation of a
magistrate. In this 21 Century, by virtue of
macronational rights which can't be extinguished by
the NR constitution or laws... citizens have the
'right' to resign...the right to say "I know longer
desire to be associated with Nova Roma as a
member/citizen". Or, "Remove my name from your
membership roster"." She later adds, "we are never
going to be able to make resignations 'go away'
because they lack historical precedent".

These comments tell us nothing about why the Roman
practice is unsuitable for Nova Roma; they tell us
only that the consul does not understand the Roman
practice. The ancient Romans did not forbid people to
give up their citizenship: on the contrary, they made
it very easy for them to do so, much easier than these
proposals do. The fact that the consul doesn't
understand this is a sign that she never seriously
investigated the possibility that ancient Roman
practice might be suitable for Nova Roma. She cannot
have investigated it, or else she would at least know
what that practice was. She has, as most of our
legislators have done over the years, made up a
"solution" out of thin air and then stuck a few Latin
words on top of it.

Let me quote you one final sentence from the consul,
one which encapsulates almost every reason why we
should vote against these proposals:

"It isn't how close or how far away we are from the
Ancient Mos that has caused arguments about
resignations here in the past...it is the ambiguous,
fragmented language of our current resignation
legislation."

Well, there you have it. She doesn't understand how
the Romans handled these issues, and yet she
confidently asserts that ancient tradition is totally
irrelevant to the situation. She considers that the
problem with the existing legislation is not any
fundamental strategic flaw but merely ambiguous
language: in other words, the solution is more of the
same. She criticises the current legislation as
"ambiguous" and "fragmented", and yet she proposes to
expand those ambiguities and fragmentations to new
areas of law and to introduce a few new ones as well.

Citizens, these proposals are based on two fundamental
failures of understanding. They are based on a failure
to understand what is wrong with the current system,
and they are based on a failure to understand the
proper Roman solution. We should have no hesitation in
voting them down.



___________________________________________________________
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: 42927 From: David Kling (Modianus) Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Cato:

There is a movement advocated by several rabbis to encourage Jews to
become vegetarians. Jewish law places demands on the Jewish community
to treat animals in a specific fashion, as well as to take care of the
land in which they live and to live according to several rules. There
are Rabbis who find it irreconcilable to entertain the idea of
consuming meat that has been produced in factory farms, as the
majority of meat is, were animal waste is unregulated an
environmentally damaging.

To refuse to eat meat that was raised in a brutal fashion, and in
horrible and filthy conditions is a moral decision. The Rabbis that
advocate for vegetarianism based on the conditions of the animal are
making moral decisions based on Jewish legal codes.

Additionally, within the context of animal sacrifice the animals that
are digested from McDonalds would probably be unacceptable as
sacrificial animals as well. Animals were not sacrificed to the Gods
by the Romans that were less than perfect specimens of their kind.
There is a reason why animals are doped up on antibiotics, because
they live in filthy and unhealthy conditions. And people eat these
animals.

I believe that abstaining from meat is a higher moral ground than
eating meat. Most of my family, including my wife eats meat, however
I still consider them good people. But that does not take away that
abstention from some things IS a higher moral ground than partaking in
them.

It is not against civil law to drink alcohol. But it is not a wise
choice to spend all of your money drinking at the local pub until 2
AM, and then tryin to go to work the next day. Statistically, your
work will suffer and your ability to privide for yourself and your
family will decline. But alcohol is not against any law.

Additionally, spending all your free time looking up pornography on
the internet is not against the law. But I would say that abstaining
from it is a taking a higher moral ground than spending all your free
time surfing porn websites.

Its not against the law to use profanity. But I believe those that
abstain from it are taking a higher moral ground than those who use it
as readily as they would everyday speech.

So I think it can be said that abstaining from eating other beings
that were once alive and breathing is a higher moral ground. This
does not make meat eaters evil, it simply means they live by a
different moral code.

Vale:

Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus

On 3/29/06, gaiusequitiuscato <mlcinnyc@...> wrote:
> C. Equitius Cato M. Hortensiae Maiori quiritibusqe S.P.D.
>
> Salve et salvete omnes.
>
> Marca Horensia, your personally being a vegetarian really has no
> connection whatsoever to the practices of historical Judaism --- and
> vegetarianism is not more "ethical" in and of itself than any other
> dietary practice; ethics are embedded in the practitioner, not the
> practice.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42928 From: CN•EQVIT•MARINVS (Gnaeus Equitius Mari Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Airatarianism?
"David Kling (Modianus)" <tau.athanasios@...> writes:

> So I think it can be said that abstaining from eating other beings
> that were once alive and breathing is a higher moral ground.

Plants live and breathe.

I think your point, Consul, is that animals are possessed of a central nervous
system, and have the ability to sense the world around them as we do. This is
called sentience. You seem to be suggesting that sentient creatures ought not
to eat other sentient creatures. Is that correct?

Without entering into the dispute one way or the other, I will ask what the
basis for your morality is. I personally follow a practical morality which
can be summarized as "that which promotes species survival." In my morality
those practices which promote the overall survival of humanity are moral (and
ethical).

Vale,

CN•EQVIT•MARINVS
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42929 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Calling Candidates for Censor
I, Marcus Octavius Germanicus, announce my candidacy for the office
of Censor.

I was elected to this position once before. I resigned that office
in the seventeenth month, a decision I now deeply regret. I left my
position as Censor in May of 2004 due both to complications in my
personal life (that same week, I quit the job I had held for seven
years), and my despair over events and attitudes in Nova Roma.


If offered a second chance to serve as Censor, I will not under any
circumstances abandon that post. I will complete the term.

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

FGA: Would you be willing to swear an oath to this effect & vowing never to seek public office again if you violate it? If so, I will offer you my support.

F. Galerius Aurelianus,
flamen Cerialis


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42930 From: Matt Hucke Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Calling Candidates for Censor
Salve Flavi Galeri,

> FGA: Would you be willing to swear an oath to this effect & vowing
> never to seek public office again if you violate it? If so, I
> will offer you my support.

I hereby swear, on my personal honour, in the presence of the gods
and citizens of Rome, that if elected Censor that I will not voluntarily
leave that office before the natural end of the term, and that if I
violate this oath I will never seek any office in Nova Roma again.

Vale,
M. Octavius Germanicus,
candidate for Censor.

--
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: 42931 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
F. Galerius Aurelianus flamen Cerialis S.P.D.

The subject of animal sacrifice in the posts lately seen on this list should be viewed as an academic discussion only. The Pontifex Maximus published a notice concerning the official viewpoint on animal sacrifice some time ago and it can be found in the archives. There have been a number of heated discussions over the past five years on this topic but it still comes down to doing what you believe Dii Immortales have required you to do.
Please remember to remain civil and polite in all discussions dealing with a matter concerning faith or piety as these these are not subjects that can be held to logical progression of debate.
Vadete in pacem Cereri.

-----Original Message-----
From: Maior <rory12001@...>
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 04:29:30 -0000
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice


M. Hortensia G. Equitio Catoni spd;
King Numa who is regarded as the founder of the Religio
did not offer blood sacrifice. This was memorialized by Ovid in his
Fasti.
I do not wish to argue that practices did indeed change, but at
shrines in the temple of Carmenta animal sacrifice was prohibited and
so also at the shrine of Apollo at Delos and Aphrodite in Cyprus.
So the gods did not command it.

As for the Ancient Hebrews, they committed child sacrifice & also
worshipped Asherah, so the idea of a singular God is a later
creation.

If one is of a mind to take the words of the Hebrew Scriptures as
those of God, well the story of Cain and Abel is understood by Rabbis
about the purity of heart, not anything to do with YHWH needing blood
on the altars.
Of course this idea is important to Christianity as they claim
Jesus was the ultimate blood sacrifice. But this has nothing to do
with Judaism.

Now as for modern day Judaism, of which I am by birth a member,
vegetarianism is regarded as an especial mitzvah -blessing and was
practiced by some of the most famous Orthodox head Rabbis of Israel.
I hope this clears up some mistaken ideas,
bene valete in pacem deorum
M. Hortensia Maior



> The pertinent fact is, I think, found in the answer to this question:
> "Why did the Jews offer blood sacrifices?"
>
> It wasn't because of dietary practice, or availability of stock, or
> any other human construct or restriction. They did it for one reason,
> and only one: because God Himself demanded that they do so.
>
> We might very well first ask the same question of the religio Romana:
> why did the Romans offer sacrifices?
>
> Valete bene,
>
> Cato
>








Yahoo! Groups Links






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42932 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
C. Equitius Cato C. Fabio Buteoni Modiano quiritibusque S.P.D.

Salve et salvete.

Woot, consul, you are opening up a can of worms!

First of all, the "movement" of vegetarian rabbis in Judaism is
miniscule; I know that numbers do not create authority, but to act as
if it is a significant portion of educated Jewish thought is
misleading in the extreme. The point is that historically Judaism
practiced animal sacrifices, and did so by the direct command of God.

Second, your idea of what constitutes "higher" moral ground is subject
to so many religious, philosophical, ethical, societal, and temporal
contingencies that I do not know even where to start. What happens
if/when scientists discover evidence of intelligence in vegetables?

Now, did you have something to add about the historical/theological
basis for the sacrifice of animals under the religio Romana?

Vale et valete,

Cato
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42933 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Airatarianism?
F. Galerius Aurelianus S.P.D.

One's eating habits do not necessarily constitute a higher or lower moral ground as much as it may be a reflection of one's ethnic, social, religious, or other background. I do not eat cats, dogs, or horses but do not believe a Korean is my moral inferior because he or she may choose to eat such. I do not favor the consumption of human flesh under any circumstances. However, history has shown that some societies do or did and those societies were very moral and ethical within their own social system.
Humans consider themselves the top of the food chain but I would not want to put this to the test in the ocean with a great white shark or on the veldt with a lioness armed with only what the Creator and Dii Immortales gave me.
I will think further on this subject over lunch. Corn chowder or hamburger? Hmmm, decisions, decisions.

Vadete in pacem Cereri.

<snip>

"David Kling (Modianus)" <tau.athanasios@...> writes:

> So I think it can be said that abstaining from eating other beings
> that were once alive and breathing is a higher moral ground.

Plants live and breathe.

I think your point, Consul, is that animals are possessed of a central nervous
system, and have the ability to sense the world around them as we do. This is
called sentience. You seem to be suggesting that sentient creatures ought not
to eat other sentient creatures. Is that correct?

Without entering into the dispute one way or the other, I will ask what the
basis for your morality is. I personally follow a practical morality which
can be summarized as "that which promotes species survival." In my morality
those practices which promote the overall survival of humanity are moral (and
ethical).

Vale,

CN?EQVIT?MARINVS



Yahoo! Groups Links






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42934 From: S Ullerius Venator Piperbarbus Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Calling Candidates for Censor
Avete Omnes;

Marcus Octavius Germanicus has been a guest in my home. Although I
will claim no close relationship, I do consider him a friend.

Having gained a bit of the temper of the man; I speak out in support
of his candidacy.

His willingness to almost immediately make a vow to never again seek
an elected public office in Nova Roma just proves to me that I am
right in this support.

I know that he has had some time of woe here in the New City, but I
likewise take him at his word that his hope for the future has been
renewed. I take him at his word that he does want to be a part of
helping that future come to pass.

I shall cast my vote for Marcus Octavius that he will enter the office
of Censor.

I ask my fellow Cives to consider doing likewise.

=========================================
In amicitia quod fides -
Stephanus Ullerius Venator Piperbarbus
Civis, Patrician, et Paterfamilias
Religio Septentrionalis - Poet

http://anheathenreader.blogspot.com/
http://www.catamount-grange-hearth.org/
http://www.cafepress.com/catamountgrange
--
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: 42935 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: In leges Moravias Minucias--A Response to A. Apollonius Cordus
F. Galerius Aurelianus flamen Cerialis A. Apollonio Cordo and the SPQNR. Salvete.

<snip>

I have commented in the past that Cordus writes as if he were being paid by the word but he corrected me on why he writes so. However, I must now say to him that he has written just what I have been thinking while following these posts on the Comitia. Well Done, Cordus!!! I could never have put it so well as you have just done.

Citizens, the current proposed changes to not simplify; they comfuscate! They do not clarify; they pull up the dregs and cloud the wine! It is typical of the pattern of that has been developing in our organization for several years to move away from simplicity and well-thought out rules and by-laws and to just slap another coat of whitewash on the crumbling edifice of Nova Roma.

Why do we need suspended citizens or socii? We do not. Why do we need complicated by-laws for resignation of citizens or magistrates? We do not. We need to recognize that Nova Roma can have simple amendments to our original Constitution and well-framed by-laws. If a magistrate uses his or her entire term to make one meaningful change to our Constitution or by-laws, it is worth far more than many patches of the wall or our organization.

There is nothing wrong with simply allowing a person to post on the Main List, "I, Nunc Biberius, immediately resign all my offices, public and religious, along with my citizenship for [good/bad] reasons," then let the person have nine days to reconsider and cancel it. If he doesn't, strike him from the rolls of citizens and magistrates, call for an election to replace him, and go on. If he reapplies in the future, make him go through the procedure for a new citizen, if he wants his old name back (and no one with the same name objects) let him have it, and tell him he cannot run for public office or apply for a religious office for one year from the date his citizenship is approved.

If a magistrate resigns his office for good reasons or just because he is sick of it, he or she cannot run for public office for one year from the date of the end of his original term. Period. If a magistrate chooses good assistants, he can still delegate duties of the office as long as he is responsible for seeing they are carried out. Resignation of office or citizenship should be the last action considered, not the first.

As flamen Cerialis and a Plebeian citizen of Nova Roma, I add my hand and voice to Cordus' and say vote NO to these changes in the upcoming Comitia. I say that we should demand that our magistrates do more than slap a coat of plaster on the face of Nova Roma and offer changes that allow the citizens to vote to fundamentally correct the flaws to our Constitution and by-laws. I say we need to purge ourselves of the leges dealing with the Socii and suspended citizens. I say we need to purge ourselves of a ridiculous legal actions & trials and let the Praetores moderate the lists as they are meant to do. I say we need to encourage Nova Romans to stay in our organization by offering real world activities, events, and celebration of the public and private rites of the Religio Romana.

I ask Dii Immortales to grant our magistrates and citizens to strength, character, and will to help Nova Roma now and in the future.

*******************************************************************************
A. Apollonius omnibus sal.

I thank the consul for her replies to my earlier
questions. I understand from them that although she
may be prepared to consider some changes to these
proposals, she is entirely happy with the basic
policies they contain and will not be changing those.
In my opinion it is those basic policies which are
flawed, and I feel it would be a waste of the three or
four days which remain of this contio if I were to
attempt to persuade the tribune and the consul of
that, so I shall simply explain to you, fellow
citizens, why I think we should reject these
proposals.

First it may be useful to note the various practical
problems with these two proposals. To illustrate
these, let me tell you a story. I'll interrupt the
story from time to time to explain how it relates to
the proposals before us.

- - In A.D. 2010 there is a citizen of Nova
- - Roma called C. Marius. Marius has a son
- - who is also a citizen of Nova Roma and whom,
- - in traditional Roman fashion, he has named
- - C. Marius. Marius (the father) is a
- - quaestor. He sends a message to this list,
- - and to the announcements list, and to every
- - other list he subscribes to, saying "I
- - resign my office of quaestor effective
- - immediately".

Now, in ancient Rome he would, of course, have been
regarded as immediately losing his office. An election
would have been organized as soon as possible to
replace him. Under the lex Moravia Minucia, however,
things would be different...

- - Nobody informs the consules that this has
- - happened. Marius stops doing his job
- - collecting and recording payments of tax.
- - After several weeks, people begin to
- - complain that their payments have not been
- - acknowledged. The consules explain that,
- - according to the lex Moravia Minucia article
- - IV, they cannot hold an election to replace
- - Marius until three people inform them that
- - he has resigned. "But," say sensible
- - citizens, "you *know* he's resigned". "Yes,"
- - they say, "but he didn't inform us directly,
- - so we have to wait until three witnesses
- - inform us directly". Three exasperated people
- - duly do so. An election is held.

This is, indeed, the position under the proposals
before us. The idea that a resignation cannot be
legally valid unless it complies with certain
formalities is an old one in Nova Roma. It is
enshrined in the lex constitutiva itself, and also in
the lex Cornelia Maria de civitate ejuranda.
Presumably at some point someone thought there was a
good reason for having this rule. And apparently the
tribune and the consul still think it's a good idea,
because they have adopted it from the area of
resignation of citizenship and brought it into the law
on resignation of office. This is in spite of the
possible consequences, such as we have in the story.
Well, back to Marius...

- - Marius is getting fed up with Nova Roma. He
- - writes again to all the lists he subscribes
- - to, saying "I immediately resign my
- - citizenship". Three conscientious people
- - write to the consules to inform them of
- - this. Unfortunately in this case it is the
- - censores who need to be informed. Nobody
- - informs them.

This is not a great novelty. It is what happens at the
moment under the lex Cornelia Maria. Or, rather, it's
what doesn't happen. The law says it should happen.
But the censores are sensible people. Only current and
former censores can tell us the precise number of
times they have actually received written notification
from three witnesses that a person has resigned, but I
can make a guess: zero. Certainly I've worked in
censorial offices several times and I've never seen it
happen. During the last two censuses a significant
number of people contacted by the censorial offices
responded asking, even demanding, to be removed from
the list of citizens. These responses were generally
addressed to provincial governors or censorial
scribes, not to the censores personally. Under the
strict legal rule of notification to three witnesses,
the censores would have had no power to register these
resignations as legally valid, but of course they used
their common sense and registered them.

This is an outstandingly clear example of a rule which
is so impractical that it has been completely ignored.
And yet these proposals seek not only to perpetuate it
but to expand it into new areas of law and to place
icnreasing reliance upon it. I cannot see the sense of
that. Our law, surely, should recognize the current
reality and give the relevant magistrates the
discretion - to be exercised, of course, collegially,
as all censorial powers are - to decide what
constitutes a resignation and what does not.

- - Meanwhile, the census is going on. Marius
- - is contacted by the scribes doing the census.
- - He responds and says that he does not want
- - to be considered a citizen of Nova Roma any
- - more. The scribe who receives his message
- - passes it the censores. The censores say,
- - "have you got two other witnesses?" "No,"
- - says the scribe. The censores do not register
- - Marius' resignation as valid.

Well, this just illustrates the problem I mentioned
above. Of course in reality the censores might well
ignore the lex Moravia Minucia as they currently
ignore the lex Cornelia Maria, but there's not much
point proposing a lex and then saying "it's okay,
people will ignore the stupid parts". But now there
arises a further problem, newly introduced by these
proposals...

- - Marius' resignation has not been registered
- - as valid by the censores. But he has also not
- - responded to the census in a way which would
- - allow him to be registered as a full citizen
- - according to the lex Fabia de censu. The
- - censores check the leges. The lex Fabia says
- - that a citizen who is not registered at the
- - census becomes a socius; the lex Moravia
- - Minucia also says that a citizen who does not
- - respond to the census has his citizenship
- - placed "in temporary suspension".

Now, what are the censores to do with Marius? Is he a
socius? A "suspended" citizen? Both? The lex Moravia
Minucia does not explicitly repeal the "socius"
clauses of the lex Fabia, so presumably it does not
intend to abolish the socii. Can a person be both a
socius and a "suspended" citizen? It would be very
strange. A socius is, as the lex Fabia makes clear,
not a citizen. He enjoys none of the rights of
citizenship. A "suspended" citizen under the lex
Moravia Minucia, however, enjoys all the rights of
citizenship except the right to vote. This means he
actually enjoys greater rights than a probationary
citizen during his 90-day probationary period. So
presumably a "suspended" citizen is still a type of
citizen, like a probationary one. And yet it seems
that someone who fails to be registered at the census
is to be classed as both a socius (non-citizen with no
citizen rights) and a "suspended" citizen (a type of
citizen with almost full rights). How is this
possible? If it is not, how do the censores choose
which status to give a person?

This is important not only because a socius and a
"suspended" citizen have very different rights, but
also because they have very different ways of
reacquiring citizenship. "Suspended" citizens have a
bewildering array of different ways in which they can
resume their citizenship, each with a different time
limit. They can do it by asking the censores: this can
be done until the beginning of the next census (which
under current law would be two years but could vary in
the future) or until five years have passed, whichever
is earlier. They can do it by paying their taxes: this
can only be done within a year of being placed in
suspension. They can do it by responding to the
following census: this of course depends entirely on
when the next census happens. A socius, on the other
hand, has only one way to do it: he can write to the
censores at *any* time, however long after he ceased
to be a citizen, and ask to be reinstated. The
censores can then reinstate him.

So we have a strange situation. A person who fails to
respond to the census may be a "suspended" citizen, or
a socius, or possibly both. If he is a "suspended"
citizen he has almost all the rights of citizenship;
if he is a socius, he has none at all. On the other
hand, if he is a "suspended" citizen he can only
become a full citizen again within certain time
limits, whereafter he loses his citizenship completely
and becomes a plain old non-citizen; if he is a
socius, however, he can regain full citizenship even
many, many years after he lost it.

Well, on with the story...

- - The censores decide to categorize Marius as
- - a "suspended" citizen. He remains involved
- - with some Nova Roma projects, however. He
- - is elected aedile of his local oppidum. A
- - few people object, but he points out that,
- - as a "suspended" citizen, he has all the
- - citizen rights except the right to vote, so
- - he is legally competent to hold this office.
- - After a while he starts selling Roman food
- - through the Macellum, which as a "suspended"
- - citizen he is allowed to do. Some of his
- - customers experience unacceptable delays in
- - delivery and complain to the aediles curules.
- - The aediles remove Marius from the Macellum,
- - but he appeals using provocatio, which is a
- - right he still possesses as a "suspended"
- - citizen. He is given a trial in the comitia.

This part of the story just illustrates some of the
rights which "suspended" citizens would enjoy under
the Moravian Minucian proposals. You may think it
slightly odd that someone who has twice attempted to
resign his citizenship and has failed to answer the
census is still able to exercise all these rights.
Well, yes, I suppose it is odd, but that's the lex
Moravia Minucia for you. But now here's a twist:

- - During the trial, the census - the second
- - census since Marius tried to resign
- - originally - is coming to an end. In fact,
- - it comes to an end before the trial does.
- - Marius, of course, has not bothered to
- - respond, and indeed he has not even been
- - asked, because the censores don't bother
- - to contact "suspended" citizens. At the
- - end of the census, the censores, in
- - obedience to the lex Moravia Minucia,
- - revoke Marius' citizenship entirely.
- - The prosecutor in the trial notices this
- - and announces it to the praetor who is
- - presiding over the trial. The praetor
- - immediately throws the case out of the
- - comitia because Marius no longer has the
- - right of provocatio or the right to appear
- - in the comitia. The aediles curules throw
- - Marius out of the Macellum because he no
- - longer has a right to sell his wares there.
- - Rather upset, he asks the censores how to
- - stop all this happening. They tell him that
- - now he is a non-citizen, and the only way
- - he can resume his lost rights is to apply
- - to become a "new" citizen. So he fills in
- - the application form. In accordance with
- - the lex Moravia Minucia article VI.A, the
- - censores ask him why he resigned and why he
- - returned. He says, "Why? Does it affect
- - whether I'm allowed to return?" "No," they
- - reply, "it makes no difference at all, but
- - we are obliged by the lex Moravia Minucia
- - to ask you." "Am I obliged to answer?" The
- - censores check their text of the lex Moravia
- - Minucia and tell him that he is not. So he
- - doesn't.

Yes, indeed, this is what the proposed lex says: "the
former citizen is directed to state in his or her
application the reasons behind the initial resignation
of citizenship, and the nature of the reasons
influencing the desire to have it reinstated". It
doesn't say, however, that the person concerned is
obliged to give this information, only that he is
directed to do so; nor does it give the censores the
power to take any action based on the answer, or even
require them to keep any record of the answer for
statistical purposes. What fun. And now the final act
in the drama...

- - Marius asks to be given his old name, C.
- - Marius. The censores explain that there is
- - already a C. Marius in Nova Roma, so
- - according to the lex Moravia Minucia he
- - cannot have that name. He explains that this
- - is his son. The censores say that makes no
- - difference: he cannot have the name.

That's right, citizens. Although there is no general
rule in our law saying that two citizens cannot have
the same name, there is a specific rule - it is in the
lex Cornelia Maria and look, here it is too in this
radical new written-from-scratch lex Moravia Minucia -
that a citizen who has resigned and then returned
cannot have the same name as any existing citizen.
Why? Who on earth knows?

And what becomes of our hero Marius? He probably gives
up and goes away forever, or at least until Nova Roma
has some more sensible procedures for dealing with
citizenship.

I think that story illustrates most of the practical
problems with these proposals. But the problems are
deeper than that. The problems are, essentially, the
same problems that exist under the current system, but
worse. The consul said that "we are proposing the
existing legislations [sic] regarding resignations be
repealed, and starting from scratch". If this is
"starting from scratch" then I am a pink elephant.
These proposals do not depart in any way from the
fundamental ideas behind the lex Cornelia Maria, the
lex that has caused all the problems so far. It even
contains several of the same clauses.

Before the lex Cornelia Maria, no one had any real
problem identifying what was a valid resignation.
True, the lex constitutiva had the rule about three
witnesses, but that wasn't a big problem because there
was no rule that those three witnesses had to report
to the censores. As long as three witnesses witnessed
the resignation, it was valid. Since almost all
resignations happened on big e-mail lists, that wasn't
a problem. The problem was just that there were quite
a lot of valid resignations. The purpose of the lex
Cornelia Maria was to stop people resigning. To this
end, it adopted two main strategies. First, it made it
harder to resign in the first place. This was mainly
achieved by saying that what a reasonable human being
would recognize as a resignation is not recognized by
the law as a valid resignation unless it is
communicated in a certain way and not revoked within a
certain time. Secondly, it made it harder for people
who successfully resigned to come back.

Both of these strategies were radical departures from
the ancient Roman rule that a citizen could give up
Roman citizenship without going through any formal
procedure and could, thereafter, resume that same
citizenship with ease. And, surprise surprise, both
caused seriously problems. The second was quickly
recognized as a problem and was eventually whittled
down by the lex Equitia, but some of it still remains
in these proposals: notice that a citizen who leaves,
comes back, and leaves again cannot come back for a
further two years. Why? Who knows? But the real
problem is the first of the two strategies: the
divergence between what common sense recognizes as a
resignation and what the law recognizes as a
resignation.

Do the proposed leges abandon this strategy? They do
not; on the contrary, they take it even further. They
create extra administrative hoops which must be jumped
through before on can successfully resign, some of
them entirely outside one's own control. Under these
proposals, a resignation of citizenship will only be
valid if *someone else*, namely a censor, issues an
"official acknowledgement" of the resignation. Anyone
can see that this is absurd. If you leave an
organization and the organization then writes to you
and says "we officially acknowledge your departure",
what do you think? I would think, "you acknowledge
what you like, chum, but I've left and that's a fact
whether you acknowledge it or not". If we insist on
maintaining a distinction between what any sensible
human being would regard as a resignation and what the
law regards as a resignation, we only succeed in
making the law look stupid.

And not only do these proposals adopt the same basic
strategy of creating a discrepancy between legal and
factual resignations, they actually export this
discrepancy to an area of law previously unaffected by
it. At the moment, at least, common sense prevails
with regard to resignation of magistracies: if someone
says "I resign my office with immediate effect", he
loses his office with immediate effect. The only
problem arises when he resigns his citizenship while
holding office. Why does this problem arise? Because
his resignation of citizenship is not recognized as
having immediate legal validity, but his resignation
of office is. This creates inconsistency because
citizenship is governed by a stupid rule and public
office is not. The proposed solution? The consul and
the tribune proposed to have both citizenship and
public office covered by the stupid rule. Well, sure,
it solves the inconsistency, but it means we now have
two stupid rules in stead of one. Under these
proposals a resignation from office, like a
resignation from citizenship, would not be legally
valid unless communicated to a certain person in a
certain way and then acknowledged by that person in a
certain way. This is total madness.

No, these proposals do not "start from scratch".
Repealing one lex and replacing it with another lex
based on the same fundamental ideas (and in fact
containing several identical clauses) is not "starting
from scratch". It is the act of someone who believes
that there is really no fundamental problem with the
current system, we just need more of the same.

That is what these proposals give us: more of the
same. More discrepancy between what a reasonable human
being would recognize as a resignation and what the
law will recognize as a resignation. More hoops to
jump through before you can successfully leave Nova
Roma or lay down your office. More obstacles when you
return. More different and overlapping sub-categories
of citizenship. More administrative work for
magistrates. More complexity. More of the same.

And finally, and most importantly, more divergence
from what the Romans did. It constantly baffles me
that we claim to admire Roman culture and yet when any
practical problem arises nobody seems to stop to ask
how the Romans solved it. The vast majority of our
legislation is based on the arrogant assumption that
we, with our total of eight years experience of
running a Roman republic, can come up with better
solutions than the people who did it successfully for
half a millennium (or, at best, based on a total
failure by legislators to actually find out what the
Romans did and try to apply it). These proposals
attempt to solve a problem relating to resignations of
citizenship and of office. We know how the Romans
solved these problems. We know how to put their
solution into practice. It could be easily done. Yet
the consul and the tribune have chosen not to do that.
They have chosen, in stead, to go in the opposite
direction, taking the un-Roman elements of the current
system and significantly increasing them.

Why? Here is the consul's answer:

"We cannot mirror antiqua [sic] in every way. Nova
Roma has two important aspects to consider: For one,
we are a voluntary organization, with citizens of dual
citizenship...our macronational lineage and NR
citizenship. Two, regarding the case of magisterial
resignations, we have to consider that we are dealing
with procedures of resignation of corporate
executives, not just 'magistrates within Nova Roma'."

She does not explain why either of these facts
prevents us from adopting the Roman practice. We are
voluntary organization, she says. So was the Roman
republic: people did not have to be citizens if they
didn't want to be. They could give up their
citizenship with remarkable ease. They did not have to
inform any particular magistrate, or state their
intentions in any particular venue. They just had to
leave. Which is more in keeping with a voluntary
organization: the Roman system, which allows people to
leave very easily and return equally easily, or the
lex Moravia Minucia, which puts huge administrative
hurdles in the way of anyone going out or coming back?

Magistrates are corporate executives, she says. And
this is a reason for setting up a system which could
result in an executive resigning his post but not
being accepted as having done so unless three other
people inform a fourth person who actually already
knows? In the ancient republic, a magistrate who said
"I resign my office" immediately lost his office. Is
there some rule of corporate law in the state of Maine
which says that the secretary of a non-profit
corporation who says "I resign as secretary of this
corporation" cannot be taken to have resigned?

The consul goes on to say, "Granted, it can be said
that resignation of citizenship was hardly
commonplace (but not totally unheard of) in antiqua
[sic] .... neither was the resignation of a
magistrate. In this 21 Century, by virtue of
macronational rights which can't be extinguished by
the NR constitution or laws... citizens have the
'right' to resign...the right to say "I know longer
desire to be associated with Nova Roma as a
member/citizen". Or, "Remove my name from your
membership roster"." She later adds, "we are never
going to be able to make resignations 'go away'
because they lack historical precedent".

These comments tell us nothing about why the Roman
practice is unsuitable for Nova Roma; they tell us
only that the consul does not understand the Roman
practice. The ancient Romans did not forbid people to
give up their citizenship: on the contrary, they made
it very easy for them to do so, much easier than these
proposals do. The fact that the consul doesn't
understand this is a sign that she never seriously
investigated the possibility that ancient Roman
practice might be suitable for Nova Roma. She cannot
have investigated it, or else she would at least know
what that practice was. She has, as most of our
legislators have done over the years, made up a
"solution" out of thin air and then stuck a few Latin
words on top of it.

Let me quote you one final sentence from the consul,
one which encapsulates almost every reason why we
should vote against these proposals:

"It isn't how close or how far away we are from the
Ancient Mos that has caused arguments about
resignations here in the past...it is the ambiguous,
fragmented language of our current resignation
legislation."

Well, there you have it. She doesn't understand how
the Romans handled these issues, and yet she
confidently asserts that ancient tradition is totally
irrelevant to the situation. She considers that the
problem with the existing legislation is not any
fundamental strategic flaw but merely ambiguous
language: in other words, the solution is more of the
same. She criticises the current legislation as
"ambiguous" and "fragmented", and yet she proposes to
expand those ambiguities and fragmentations to new
areas of law and to introduce a few new ones as well.

Citizens, these proposals are based on two fundamental
failures of understanding. They are based on a failure
to understand what is wrong with the current system,
and they are based on a failure to understand the
proper Roman solution. We should have no hesitation in
voting them down.



___________________________________________________________
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo!
Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com



Yahoo! Groups Links






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42936 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Calling Candidates for Censor
F. Galerius Aurelianus flamen Cerialis S.P.D.

I offer my support to M. Octavius Germanicus in his run for the office of Censor of Nova Roma and encourage the Plebs to vote for him. I witness his oath before the Goddess in the Grain as the flamen Cerialis and will call him to honor his vow should it be necessary.

Vadete in pacem Cereri.

-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Hucke <hucke@...>
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 09:45:20 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Calling Candidates for Censor


Salve Flavi Galeri,

> FGA: Would you be willing to swear an oath to this effect & vowing
> never to seek public office again if you violate it? If so, I
> will offer you my support.

I hereby swear, on my personal honour, in the presence of the gods
and citizens of Rome, that if elected Censor that I will not voluntarily
leave that office before the natural end of the term, and that if I
violate this oath I will never seek any office in Nova Roma again.

Vale,
M. Octavius Germanicus,
candidate for Censor.

--
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






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42937 From: Patrick D. Owen Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Ludi Cerialia et Ludi Floralia
F. Galerius Aurelianus flamen Cerialis S.P.D.

I announce that the Ludi Cerialia (April 12-19) will be combined
with the Ludi Floralia (April 27-30) and will be held at the Pagan
Unity Festival in Burns, Tennessee on Friday, April 29, and
Saturday, April 30, 2006. Details will be posted on the NR ML,
Religio Romana list, or at paganunityfestival.org.

I have made several efforts to contact the flamen Floralis to ask
his aid in this event but have not received a response. However, I
would still welcome his assistance if he would contact me. Any Nova
Romans or cultores may help or participate if they choose to attend
the Pagan Unity Festival. This is NOT an officially sanctioned
Nova Roma event.

I will post the Cerialia rite on the NR ML and RR list as usual on
April 19.

The games will consist of athletic events and a poetry event. The
athletic events will be held in three age groups: 7-12 years old, 13-
17 years old, and 18 and older.

Events will include individual & team races, discus, javelin throw,
armored race (shields & staves provided), long jump, team tug of
war, ball games of various sorts, and some age appropriate games.
Anyone may participate in the poetry competition for the best short
work done in any style on the subject of Ceres, Flora, Tellus, Ops,
Bona Dea, Maia, Demeter, Persephone, or any other Goddess of the
Earth.

An opening ritual will be conducted on Friday morning and the
closing ritual will be late Saturday night followed by dancing and
celebration. Prizes will be awarded at dinner on Saturday night.

For more information, contact me at padruigtheuncle@....

Vadete in pacem Cereri.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42938 From: Stefanie Beer Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Betreff: [Nova-Roma] roman wine set or similar, help requested
Salve Saturnine!
Try this link! I bought my set from there and it is terrific!
http://www.roemer-mosaik-kelten-shop.de/oxid
php/sid/5b46860525671af8569da15909269ed2/cl/alist/cnid/bfc4099eb1f917476
23060175
Vale!
L.Flavia Lectrix

-------Originalmeldung-------

Von: Caius Curius Saturninus
Datum: 03/29/06 14:35:11
An: nova-roma@yahoogroups.com
Betreff: [Nova-Roma] roman wine set or similar, help requested

Salvete omnes,

I wonder if anyone could help me with this problem. Couple of years
ago I found a website which sold replicas of Roman pottery. In their
collection there was Roman wine jug with two cups. My parents are
having their 30th anniversary together in the beginning of May and I
thought to buy such set for them and make mulsum. But it seems that I
cannot find bookmark for this site nor find it from Google. Would
anyone have it bookmarked or know any site where I could buy such a
set or some other nice Roman pottery?

Valete,

Caius Curius Saturninus

Propraetor Provinciae Thules
Rector Academia Thules ad Studia Romana Antiqua et Nova

e-mail: c.curius@...
www.academiathules.org
gsm: +358-50-3315279
fax: +358-9-8754751





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




Yahoo! Groups Links







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42939 From: Tita Artoria Marcella Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: MEGALESIA --Certamen Historicum
Salvete omnes,

The Ludi Megalesia fast approaches, and with it the opportunity to show off your knowledge of the Cult of the Magna Mater and/or your skills as a researcher. How? By competing in the Certamen Historicum!

Each day of the ludi (April 4th-10th) there will be two questions posted between the hours of 1600 and 2400 Rome time.. Some of the questions will consist of two or three parts, giving them a higher point value. The contestant with the highest point total at the end of the ludi will be declared the victor. Provisional citizens are more than welcome to compete.

Answers must be submitted within twenty-four hours and only to the following e-mail address: icehunter@... . Answers posted to the list or to any other e-mail address will be invalid. The correct answers will be posted the following day, along with the next two questions. On April 11th, the final answers will be revealed, along with the winner of the certamen.

Any citizen is capable of winning this contest, so do not think you must be a historian or scholar to compete successfully. No question will be asked that cannot be answered by use of the Google search engine.

Come celebrate the religion and culture of ancient Rome! Participate in the Certamen Historicum and bring honor to yourself, to Nova Roma, and to the Magna Mater, in whose name these games are held.


Valete,
Tita Artoria Marcella

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42940 From: QFabiusMaxmi@aol.com Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Lex Moravia Minucia de Civitate Eiuranda & Lex Moravia Minucia
Salvete Consules

Re: Lex Moravia Minucia de Civitate Eiuranda & Lex Moravia Minucia
Abdicatone Magistratum

I have to say, you have taken the language of incomprehension, and
obstructed it even further! You have also taken us one step away from our mos
maiorum. Leges were not repealed unless they were being removed completely. They
were supplemented if changes were to be made...

I've come to the reluctant conclusion, that in here, people do not know how
to write laws.

How long have the writers been laboring on this? A week, a month, a day?
It shows. You should start work on a lex in Ianus and present it in November.
Our tax lex was three years
in preparation. Leges are not written in a fortnight and revealed to be
rubber stamped into existence.
Not once was the Senate consulted to help avoid this embarrassment.

Citizens, strike down this mess of counter dictions and demand that our
leadership takes their time and write a comprehensible law! One that will
work....

Valete

Q. Fabius Maximus


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42941 From: dicconf Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
On Tue, 28 Mar 2006, Gaius Domitius Cato wrote:

> In the days of Roma Antigua, livestock was more of a common asset so
> animal sacrifice made a lot of sence. Now livestock is only an
> asset for the less than 5% of the population that actually engages
> in any farming. 95% of the population never spends much if any time
> on a farm and can not stand the smell of feces let alone witness the
> slaughtering of an animal. When most people think of animals they
> think of Fido, Fluffy or that cute chipmunk they feed picnic scraps
> to...
>
> How can you in this day and age kill a creature (furry animal) that
> is mainly an object of affection for the vast majority of the
> population and not be seen as some sort of sick bastard by people
> not familiar with nonchristian religion? Like certain other aspects
> of Roma Antiqua (slavery, status of women), certain things must
> change with the times.

[snippety]

The gods also gladly accepted "bloodless sacrifices" -- Vesta, IIRC,
insisted on them. It might be a good idea should the Pontifices stipulate
what ones were acceptable and, should there be variations, which were
acceptable to which of the gods.

Your later suggestion of active service as honoring the gods reminds me
that to this day there are non-christian religions that look favorably on
this kind of "sacrifice", sometimes calling it "Karma Yoga". One group in
the Washington area does voluntary work at food banks, wearing their
pentacles visibly so that the beneficiaries can also be aware that they
are doing this to honor their gods.

-- Publius Livius Triarius
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42942 From: dicconf Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Ludi Circenses
On Tue, 28 Mar 2006, Maxima Valeria Messallina wrote:

> Salve, D. Octavia Aventina
>
> Don't look now but it may cost you more. My handsome driver, Maximus, is back.
> And he's been working out a lot lately.....
>
> Vale bene in pace Deorum,
>
> Maxima Valeria Messallina
> The Vestal who LOVES chariot racing! ;)
>
>
> Diana Octavia Aventina <diana@...> wrote:
> Oh no, the Ludi are going to cost me a fortune... You know how my driver Latina Harmonia is these
> days-- she's going to insist on new clothes and a makeover..

Just wait until you find out how she feels about the wind of a high-speed
chariot race wrecking her hair-do.

-- P. Livius Triarius
ducking and running...
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42943 From: dicconf Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
On Tue, 28 Mar 2006, David Santo Orcero wrote:

>
> Salvete Omnes!
>
>> A very curious thing this about romans in sci-fi. By the way, does
>> anybody know anything about the Star Trek series (captain Kirk, Mr.
> Spock and company)? In these original series there is chapter titled
>> "panem et circenses"
> (...)
>> years ago in the days of the Roman Republic. The capital city of this
>> planet is named Magna Roma and, apparently, the evolution of this
>> magna-roman civilization is identical than terrestrial romans, including
>> the rising of christianism for example.
>
> I have follow this series, and I disagree. The image of Roma that they
> give is a fascist military regime were have blood spectacles that they
> give at TV. The only relationship with Roma is the name, some logos, and
> part of the spectacle of gladiators. It looks more that Musolini fascist
> regime with strange clothes and with gladiators. :-(

Or perhaps the other way around. Mussolini consciously aped Roman manners
and titles, just as the Nazi regime in Germanhy aped Guido von List's
fantastic notions of the manners of the ancient Teutons.

-- Publius Livius Triarius
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42944 From: dicconf Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA --Certamen Historicum
Is it necessary to put ourselves forward as wishing to participate, or is
simple participation enough to be recognized?

-- Publius Livius Triarius
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42945 From: QFabiusMaxmi@aol.com Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
In a message dated 3/28/2006 4:18:56 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
rory12001@... writes:

The image of Roma
that they give is a fascist military regime were have blood spectacles
that they give at TV. The only relationship with Roma is the name, some
logos, and part of the spectacle of gladiators. It looks more that
Mussolini's
fascist regime with strange clothes and with gladiators. :-(

Surely you cannot be this naive. Mussolini worshiped the Roman empire. His
designs,
his building projects and his medals were all imitations of Rome. His
aircraft markings
were the rods and ax heads of Imperium. He removed the name "Royal" from
the Italian
army. His "Empire" was the new Roman, his army, the new legions.
Had non Christianized Rome endured, what do you think it would look like
today?
Why the USA today except with slaves, spectacles, and excess. Much like
Caesar's Palace.




Q. Fabius Maximus


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42946 From: Appius Iulius Priscus Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Appius Iulius Priscus omnibus S.P.D.

I) Weren´t all the sacrificed animals those who belong to normal carnivorous human diet? Dogs, cats and son complety excluded.

II) I always had in mind that religious animal sacrifice was "just" a festive way to eat meat in a time when refrigerators were not available, and being meat scarce, it was a way for many people to share a happy moment together eating. In Portugal we can still can find big parties with a pig being slaghtered in loco and immeadiately roasted and eaten amidst a lot of frolic and alcohol ingestion. Of course this is completely devoid of religious meanings, but presumably has its roots on ancient sacrifices.

III) I think that, sometimes, the divine nature of ancient sacrificial meal times could inspire imagination and ecstatic feelings in a fashion very remote from an "atheistic" dinner.

Valete

Ap. Iul. Priscus

gaiusequitiuscato <mlcinnyc@...> wrote:
C. Equitius Cato M. Hortensiae Maiori quiritibusqe S.P.D.

Salve et salvete omnes.

Marca Horensia, your personally being a vegetarian really has no
connection whatsoever to the practices of historical Judaism --- and
vegetarianism is not more "ethical" in and of itself than any other
dietary practice; ethics are embedded in the practitioner, not the
practice.

"Every creature that lives shall be yours to eat; as with the green
grasses, I give you all these." (Genesis 9:3)

Judaism upholds the eating of meat provided that the animal is a
species permitted by the Torah (Leviticus 11); is ritually slaughtered
(shechita) (Deuteronomy 12:21); has the non-kosher elements (blood and
certain fats and sinews) removed (Leviticus 3:17; Genesis 32:33); is
prepared without mixing meat and milk (Exodus 34:26); and that
appropriate blessings are recited (Deuteonomy 8:10).


I eat meat, and will continue to do so, but that does not make me any
more or less ethical than you :-)

The fact is that Judaism practiced animal sacrifice as commanded by
God; some ultra-Orthodox are even now preparing for the eventual re-
building of the Temple in Jerusalem so that sacrifices can once again
be offered in obedience to the commands of God.


But back to the question I asked: why did the Romans sacrifice
animals? When we answer this, then we will have a stepping stone
towards understanding the place (or lack thereof) of animal sacrifice
within the religio Romana.

Vale et valete,

Cato









SPONSORED LINKS
Roman empire Ancient history Citizenship test 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! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42947 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Ludi Circenses
> Just wait until you find out how she feels about the wind of a high-speed
> chariot race wrecking her hair-do.
>
> -- P. Livius Triarius
> ducking and running...

LOL! Dear me, Luckily Latina can't read, so she doesn't know what I'm laughing about. She's been to
the haridresser everyday this week trying out new hairstyles...
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42948 From: Caeso Fabius Buteo Quintilianus Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Calling Candidates for Censor
Salvete Quirites!

I stand before You here to support Marcus Octavius Germanicus in his
candidacy as Censor!

I have worked closely with Marcus Octavius Germanicus during his
terms as Magister Aranearius and Consul. I have had the best
experience of him as a person, his willingness and capacity to work
for the Res Publica and his loyalty to certain values. He was also
the Senior Censor when I began my term as Censor 2758 and our
cooperation was very good until he resigned. He has many skills that
will be valuable to the office as Censor. I should know as when I
became Censor I started a reform of the office of Censor of Nova Roma
that never will allow it to once again become the clerk job that it
was. During the whole of my Censorship, Marcus Octavius Germanicus
worked as my Scriba behind the scenes to see to it that many of my
reforms were implemented or supported in our data base or at our
web-site. Marcus Octavius Germanicus has all the necessary knowledge
and skills to be a Censor for Nova Roma that will make the office
continue to take care of its new burdens and allow the Res Publica to
grow.

I have no doubt in my heart that Marcus Octavius Germanicus will stay
the full term and do a better job than most. As a result of my
conviction that Marcus Octavius Germanicus is the best available
candidate for the Censorship I ask all citizens to vote for Marcus
Octavius Germanicus as Censor in the coming election in Comitia
Centuriata.

>I, Marcus Octavius Germanicus, announce my candidacy for the office
>of Censor.

--

Vale

Caeso Fabius Buteo Quintilianus

Senator, Censorius et Consularis
Accensus GFBM, Scriba Censoris GEM
Praeses, Triumvir et Praescriptor Academia Thules ad S.R.A. et N.
Editor-in-Chief, Publisher and Owner of "Roman Times Quarterly"
Sodalitas Egressus Beneficarius et Praefectus Provincia Thules
Civis Romanus sum
************************************************
Aut inveniam viam aut faciam
"I'll either find a way or make one"
************************************************
Dignitas, Iustitia, Fidelitas et Pietas
Dignity, Justice, Loyalty and Dutifulness
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42949 From: Diana Octavia Aventina Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Ludi Circenses
> Maxima Valeria Messallina
> The Vestal who LOVES chariot racing! ;)

Huh! No doubt you'll get a great seat too just becuase you're a Vestal!
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42950 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Airatarianism? - Religio and living today...
Corn chowder is is good...

I do not eat mammals or birds, but primarily for health reasons.
The meat and poultry in todays shoppes is filled with hormones and
naturally contain a lot fat and bad cholesterol. I do not not want
a stroke or heartattack in my 50's like many members of my family so
I eat differently and do not smoke or drink much at all. It I were
starving and nothing else to eat I would certainly eat anything to
stay alive - but would not kill another human except in self defense.

I have no moral problem with people eating meat or drinking or
smoking (as long as it is not around me - no second hand smoke
please). Those things are not good for them but that is their
liberty and freedom. I like junk food and do not want people
telling me not to eat Snickers Bars or telling me not to look at
porn or whatnot. The only moral issue I see is that animals the
animals be slaughtered as painlessly as possible, and nothing be
wasted, yes, because they are sentiant and should be respected if
there lives are to be taken for our benefit. I consume quite a bit
of fish and marine life, my body needs protein and their flesh is
not harmful to me so I have no qualms eating them, yet I do not want
to see their environment polluted and do not want to see them suffer
unnecessarly even their brains are very simple.

I worship Ceres every morning with a bowl or two of her generous
bounty, I wonder what sacrifice she would prefer? A healthy respect
for the land, a decent wage for those that till the land, action to
prevent wasteful practices or encourage recycling?

Religio Romana is extremely relevent to todays issues... I wonder
what the religio says about these historically?

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@... wrote:
>
> F. Galerius Aurelianus S.P.D.
>
> One's eating habits do not necessarily constitute a higher or
lower moral ground as much as it may be a reflection of one's
ethnic, social, religious, or other background. I do not eat cats,
dogs, or horses but do not believe a Korean is my moral inferior
because he or she may choose to eat such. I do not favor the
consumption of human flesh under any circumstances. However,
history has shown that some societies do or did and those societies
were very moral and ethical within their own social system.
> Humans consider themselves the top of the food chain but I would
not want to put this to the test in the ocean with a great white
shark or on the veldt with a lioness armed with only what the
Creator and Dii Immortales gave me.
> I will think further on this subject over lunch. Corn chowder or
hamburger? Hmmm, decisions, decisions.
>
> Vadete in pacem Cereri.
>
> <snip>
>
> "David Kling (Modianus)" <tau.athanasios@...> writes:
>
> > So I think it can be said that abstaining from eating other
beings
> > that were once alive and breathing is a higher moral ground.
>
> Plants live and breathe.
>
> I think your point, Consul, is that animals are possessed of a
central nervous
> system, and have the ability to sense the world around them as we
do. This is
> called sentience. You seem to be suggesting that sentient
creatures ought not
> to eat other sentient creatures. Is that correct?
>
> Without entering into the dispute one way or the other, I will ask
what the
> basis for your morality is. I personally follow a practical
morality which
> can be summarized as "that which promotes species survival." In
my morality
> those practices which promote the overall survival of humanity are
moral (and
> ethical).
>
> Vale,
>
> CN?EQVIT?MARINVS
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42951 From: Sebastian José Molina Palacios Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
Salve Diana and all nova romans.
Yes, that´s right. I agree it´s a disaster what was done with romans in that Star Trek chapter. But I think that it´s no worst than the historical movies in the 50´s and 60´s (Ben Hur, King of Kings, ....). In the most of them, we only can watch the christians point of view and Romans only appear like monsters thirsty of blood. And we all know how many great things Rome brought to the world. If Rome was not the best civilization, it was, in my opinion, the less bad.
So, in this chapter of Star Trek we could see the worst face of Rome and who knows if one day another Gene Rodemberry will show us a better face of Rome into space. Or a historical film where Romans are not monsters at all (remember Seneca, Adrian, Antoninus Pius, for example).
Valete,
Quintus Livius Drusus

dicconf <dicconf@...> escribió:

On Tue, 28 Mar 2006, David Santo Orcero wrote:

>
> Salvete Omnes!
>
>> A very curious thing this about romans in sci-fi. By the way, does
>> anybody know anything about the Star Trek series (captain Kirk, Mr.
> Spock and company)? In these original series there is chapter titled
>> "panem et circenses"
> (...)
>> years ago in the days of the Roman Republic. The capital city of this
>> planet is named Magna Roma and, apparently, the evolution of this
>> magna-roman civilization is identical than terrestrial romans, including
>> the rising of christianism for example.
>
> I have follow this series, and I disagree. The image of Roma that they
> give is a fascist military regime were have blood spectacles that they
> give at TV. The only relationship with Roma is the name, some logos, and
> part of the spectacle of gladiators. It looks more that Musolini fascist
> regime with strange clothes and with gladiators. :-(

Or perhaps the other way around. Mussolini consciously aped Roman manners
and titles, just as the Nazi regime in Germanhy aped Guido von List's
fantastic notions of the manners of the ancient Teutons.

-- Publius Livius Triarius




SPONSORED LINKS
Roman empire Ancient history Citizenship test 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.


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




__________________________________________________
Correo Yahoo!
Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ¡gratis!
Regístrate ya - http://correo.espanol.yahoo.com/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42952 From: Tita Artoria Marcella Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA --Certamen Historicum
Salve Livi Triari,

>Is it necessary to put ourselves forward >as wishing to participate, or is
>simple participation enough to be >recognized?

There is no need to pre-register for the certamen. If you send in your answers to the correct address within the time alloted, you will automatically become a recognized contestant.

Vale bene,
Tita Artoria Marcella








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42953 From: Diana (Pagan Federation International) Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Ludi Circenses
Salve C. Aurelia Falco Silvana

> owner SPANDEX THE VANDAL
> (Flexible, resiliant, brilliant--st r e t c h i n g
> far beyond the ordinary)

Oh my, I'm blushing... will all that extraordinary s t r e t c h i n g be appropriate in front of so
many proper Roman matrons?
Vale,
Diana Octavia Aventina
(who won't be owning anything if Latina loses again!)
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42954 From: Titus Iulius Sabinus Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: MEGALESIA - in spanish ( translation by Ivl Severus ).
SALVETE !

I want to thank to Iulius Severus. He translated the rules of
Megalesia in spanish and posted it in all the spanish mailing lists.
Because he done that from his own will, I consider him an
exceptional man, dedicated, and concerned in our organization
development.
Thank you Severe !

This is the message in spanish :

SALVETE NOVI ROMANI!

Inmortales son los Dioses. Estamos aquí para servir. Una gran
ocasión para ello la celebración de los Ludi (juegos). Se acerca la
Megalesia, uno de nuestros grandes festivales en honor de nuestra
Gran Madre, la Magna Mater. La historia permite suponer que la
celebración de la Magbna Mater es el culto religioso más antiguo del
mundo.

Ella trasciende la historia universal; Sus misterios y muchas
representaciones han inspirado a poetas y artistas, mortales comunes
y reyes; muchos monarcas han consagrado los numerosos templos de la
Magna Mater.

El 11 de abril del año 191 antes de nuestra era (cuando Su templo en
la Colina del Palatino fue inaugurado por el pretor Marcus Iunius
Brutus), fueron instituidos y celebrados los Ludi Megalenses. Desde
entonces, durante muchísimos años, esos magnos juegos se llevaron a
cabo en Su honor.

En esta ocasión, es nuestro deber continuar con la tradición. Por
tanto, yo y mi co-edil, Equitius Cato, invitamos a todos ustedes a
participar en este importante y maravilloso festival, para honrar a
la Magna Mater, a los Dioses y a nuestros antepasados.

Las siguientes serán nuestras actividades.

El primer periodo, entre el 25 y el 31 de marzo, se dedica a las
inscripciones en los juegos:



Certamen Historicum: organizado y coordinado por Tita Artoria
Marcella, una dedicada integrante de mi Cohors, con importantes
conocimientos históricos y magnífica escritora, de la Provincia
Lacus Magni.

Los temas principales de este concurso serán de la historia romana,
particularmente la historia de estos Ludi, el Culto de la Magna
Mater y las Guerras Púnicas.

Pueden ver las reglas en:

http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/rules.htm



Certamen Latinum: organizado y coordinado por Gnaeus Cornelius
Lentulus, nuestro Quaestor y Propraetor de Pannonia, excelente
latinista, en su segundo año a cargo del concurso, con un gran
éxito, por supuesto.

Como dijo él mismo: "Este concurso no es para latinistas o quienes
hablan latín, sino para todos aquellos que conocen algo de latín,
algunas expresiones o frases, acaban de comenzar a aprender el
idioma, o piensan hacerlo".

Las reglas se encuentran asimismo en:

http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/rules.htm



Presea Cultural de la Megalesia: organizada y coordinada por Iulia
Iulia Cytheris Aege, la Sacerdotisa de Dacia y Legatus Internis
Rebus, con un tema original. ¿Cómo lo planteaste, amica? "El desafío
consiste no solamente en demostrar el talento literario propio, sino
que se encamina a exponer la visión general y personal que cada
quien tiene de la vida romana". Interesante, ¿no? Ven al Forum y
explícales a nuestros ciudadanos más acerca de este concurso. ¿En
cualquier idioma? ¡Magnífico! Aún recuerdo la felicidad de Iulius
Pertinax cuando ganó el año pasado con su extraordinario poema en
español.

El web site de los Aediles fue creado para ayudar:

http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/rules.htm



Ludi Scaenici: coordinados por Cornelius Lentulus. Una excelente
obra se presentará por primera vez en la Megalesia, escrita hace más
de dos mil años:

Hecyra, the P. Terentius Afer.



Ludi Circenses: coordinados por Aula Tullia Scholastica. ¿Es
necesario añadir algo más a su nombre? Creo que no. Nuestra gran
latinista, pero no sólo esto… ya lo verán en sus narraciones. Mi
agradecimiento al ilustre Curius Saturninus por los cálculos acerca
de las carreras.

Albata, Praesina, Veneta y Russata.

Tácticas, juego sucio, accidentes en algunas ocsiones y, por
supuesto, la gloria para el vencedor.

Les invito a participar en las carreras. Su nombre aparecerá aquí:

http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/albata.htm
http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/veneta.htm
http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/praesina.htm
http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/russata.htm


Tengan cuidado con sus sestercios y lean muy bien las reglas:

http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/rules.htm



Munera Gladiatoria y Venationes: coordinados por Iulius Probus,
Legatus Militum de Dacia y Cassius Philippus, Legatus Regio de Maine.

Munera Gladiatoria entre gladiadores y Venationes entre gladiadores
y animales, o animal contra animal. Tenemos algo completamente nuevo
aquí. En primer lugar, ustedes deben llenar una solicitud con los
datos indispensables. Pero, finalmente, escribirán algo acerca de su
gladiador o su animal. ¿Qué, por ejemplo? De dónde procede, dónde
fue entrenado, en qué escuela gladiatoria, quién fue su lanista,
cuáles son sus habilidades en el combate… y más. En una palabra: se
trata de impresionar al pueblo con la historia de su gladiador o su
animal… Quizá reciban un punto adicional durante el combate.

Créanme, su historia es muy importante, porque nuestros ciudadanos,
a partir del 1 de abril, votarán por la popularidad de cada
gladiador o animal. Participen en los Munera Gladiatoria:

http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/ludi/ludi_form_gladiatoria.php

O en las Venationes:

http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/ludi/ludi_form_venationes.php



Rostros en cuerpos romanos. Este es un concurso sencillo, pero con
mucha diversión. Envíenme su imagen en formato jpg con una buena
resolución y verán los resultados. Las reglas se encuentran asimismo
en la página:

http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/rules.htm

y, por supuesto, pueden ver algunos ejemplos en:

http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/face%20to%20roman%20body.htm

Visiten nuestro sitio web. Hay algunos artículos interesantes:

http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/index.htm



No olviden la página de la Magna Mater:

http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/magnamater.htm

Y apoyen el proyecto, por favor:

http://www.magnamaterproject.org/en/home.php

Finalmente: ¡PARTICIPEN!

http://www.crystalwebvision.com/aedil/participate.htm

INSCRIPCIONES ABIERTAS



El segundo periodo, entre el 1 y el 3 de abril, todos ustedes,
novarromanos, pueden votar por su gladiador y/o su animal preferido
del Circus Maximus. Vendrá más información…

Celebremos, pues. Es tiempo de la Megalesia. Los Ludi van a
comenzar. Conoceremos los resultados el 11 de abril.


VALETE,
IVL SABINVS
Curule Aedile
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42955 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Airatarianism? - Religio and living today...
F. Galerius Aurelianus flamen Cerialis Gai Domitio Cato. Salve.

The Goddess in the Grain prefers mola salsa, fars cake, beans cooked with bacon, bread, cheese, milk, wine, mead, and incense as the principal sacrifices at Her shrine. I do believe she would enjoy a bit of your Cere-al as the morning offering at your lararium. The sacrifices you offer strengthen and enrich her power. The Goddess doesn't ask you to be moral or upright just that you remain aware of Her and grant her offerings. Any first fruits, vegetables, or herbs from your garden or window box please and enrich her as offerings. She also appreciates the sacred fast that is practiced by Her devotees in October. I have not so far found it necessary to offer Her a pregnant sow to insure her bounty. The Protectress of the Plebs has always been most generous in Her bounty and blessings to Her children.

Vadite in pace Cereris.

-----Original Message-----
From: Gaius Domitius Cato <dcwnewyork2002@...>
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 21:09:18 -0000
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Airatarianism? - Religio and living today...


Corn chowder is is good...

I do not eat mammals or birds, but primarily for health reasons.
The meat and poultry in todays shoppes is filled with hormones and
naturally contain a lot fat and bad cholesterol. I do not not want
a stroke or heartattack in my 50's like many members of my family so
I eat differently and do not smoke or drink much at all. It I were
starving and nothing else to eat I would certainly eat anything to
stay alive - but would not kill another human except in self defense.

I have no moral problem with people eating meat or drinking or
smoking (as long as it is not around me - no second hand smoke
please). Those things are not good for them but that is their
liberty and freedom. I like junk food and do not want people
telling me not to eat Snickers Bars or telling me not to look at
porn or whatnot. The only moral issue I see is that animals the
animals be slaughtered as painlessly as possible, and nothing be
wasted, yes, because they are sentiant and should be respected if
there lives are to be taken for our benefit. I consume quite a bit
of fish and marine life, my body needs protein and their flesh is
not harmful to me so I have no qualms eating them, yet I do not want
to see their environment polluted and do not want to see them suffer
unnecessarly even their brains are very simple.

I worship Ceres every morning with a bowl or two of her generous
bounty, I wonder what sacrifice she would prefer? A healthy respect
for the land, a decent wage for those that till the land, action to
prevent wasteful practices or encourage recycling?

Religio Romana is extremely relevent to todays issues... I wonder
what the religio says about these historically?

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@... wrote:
>
> F. Galerius Aurelianus S.P.D.
>
> One's eating habits do not necessarily constitute a higher or
lower moral ground as much as it may be a reflection of one's
ethnic, social, religious, or other background. I do not eat cats,
dogs, or horses but do not believe a Korean is my moral inferior
because he or she may choose to eat such. I do not favor the
consumption of human flesh under any circumstances. However,
history has shown that some societies do or did and those societies
were very moral and ethical within their own social system.
> Humans consider themselves the top of the food chain but I would
not want to put this to the test in the ocean with a great white
shark or on the veldt with a lioness armed with only what the
Creator and Dii Immortales gave me.
> I will think further on this subject over lunch. Corn chowder or
hamburger? Hmmm, decisions, decisions.
>
> Vadete in pacem Cereri.
>
> <snip>
>
> "David Kling (Modianus)" <tau.athanasios@...> writes:
>
> > So I think it can be said that abstaining from eating other
beings
> > that were once alive and breathing is a higher moral ground.
>
> Plants live and breathe.
>
> I think your point, Consul, is that animals are possessed of a
central nervous
> system, and have the ability to sense the world around them as we
do. This is
> called sentience. You seem to be suggesting that sentient
creatures ought not
> to eat other sentient creatures. Is that correct?
>
> Without entering into the dispute one way or the other, I will ask
what the
> basis for your morality is. I personally follow a practical
morality which
> can be summarized as "that which promotes species survival." In
my morality
> those practices which promote the overall survival of humanity are
moral (and
> ethical).
>
> Vale,
>
> CN?EQVIT?MARINVS









Yahoo! Groups Links






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42956 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
Salve Druse,

Whilst I like many of Gene Rodenbery's works, this episode was
shallow and pandering to christians. Before the christians throw
stones at the Romans, they should remember their own bloody history:
The murder of Hypatia by the bishop of Alexandria, the crusades, the
annilation of the pagan Prussians by the Teutonic Knights, the
Spanish Inquisition, the killing of their follow christians in the
endless religous wars between the Protestants and Catholics after
the reformation, modern Northern Ireland, I could go on and on...

So who is the blood thirsty monsters?

C. Domitius Cato

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Sebastian José Molina Palacios
<sebastian_andaluz@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Diana and all nova romans.
> Yes, that´s right. I agree it´s a disaster what was done with
romans in that Star Trek chapter. But I think that it´s no worst
than the historical movies in the 50´s and 60´s (Ben Hur, King of
Kings, ....). In the most of them, we only can watch the christians
point of view and Romans only appear like monsters thirsty of blood.
And we all know how many great things Rome brought to the world. If
Rome was not the best civilization, it was, in my opinion, the less
bad.
> So, in this chapter of Star Trek we could see the worst face of
Rome and who knows if one day another Gene Rodemberry will show us a
better face of Rome into space. Or a historical film where Romans
are not monsters at all (remember Seneca, Adrian, Antoninus Pius,
for example).
> Valete,
> Quintus Livius Drusus
>
> dicconf <dicconf@...> escribió:
>
> On Tue, 28 Mar 2006, David Santo Orcero wrote:
>
> >
> > Salvete Omnes!
> >
> >> A very curious thing this about romans in sci-fi. By the
way, does
> >> anybody know anything about the Star Trek series (captain Kirk,
Mr.
> > Spock and company)? In these original series there is chapter
titled
> >> "panem et circenses"
> > (...)
> >> years ago in the days of the Roman Republic. The capital city
of this
> >> planet is named Magna Roma and, apparently, the evolution of
this
> >> magna-roman civilization is identical than terrestrial romans,
including
> >> the rising of christianism for example.
> >
> > I have follow this series, and I disagree. The image of Roma
that they
> > give is a fascist military regime were have blood spectacles
that they
> > give at TV. The only relationship with Roma is the name, some
logos, and
> > part of the spectacle of gladiators. It looks more that Musolini
fascist
> > regime with strange clothes and with gladiators. :-(
>
> Or perhaps the other way around. Mussolini consciously aped Roman
manners
> and titles, just as the Nazi regime in Germanhy aped Guido von
List's
> fantastic notions of the manners of the ancient Teutons.
>
> -- Publius Livius Triarius
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42957 From: P. Dominus Antonius Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Airatarianism? - Religio and living today...
Perhaps I am missing something. Even if Ceres shares your political
objectives, I fail to see how these things constitute a sacred sacrifice to
her.
--
>|P. Dominus Antonius|<
Tony Dah m

Oderint dum metuant - Cicero
Si vis pacem, para bellum - Vegetius

On 3/29/06, Gaius Domitius Cato <dcwnewyork2002@...> wrote:
>
> I worship Ceres every morning with a bowl or two of her generous bounty, I
> wonder what sacrifice she would prefer? A healthy respect for the land, a
> decent wage for those that till the land, action to prevent wasteful
> practices or encourage recycling?
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42958 From: Lucius Equitius Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Digest Number 2399
LEquitiusCincinatusAugur CCurioSaturnino salutem dicit

Julia is a wonderful artist and person.

http://venetiancat.com/

Vale

> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 15:24:39 +0300
> From: Caius Curius Saturninus <c.curius@...>
> Subject: roman wine set or similar, help requested
>
> Salvete omnes,
>
> I wonder if anyone could help me with this problem. Couple of years
> ago I found a website which sold replicas of Roman pottery. In their
> collection there was Roman wine jug with two cups. My parents are
> having their 30th anniversary together in the beginning of May and I
> thought to buy such set for them and make mulsum. But it seems that I
> cannot find bookmark for this site nor find it from Google. Would
> anyone have it bookmarked or know any site where I could buy such a
> set or some other nice Roman pottery?
>
> Valete,
>
> Caius Curius Saturninus
>
> Propraetor Provinciae Thules
> Rector Academia Thules ad Studia Romana Antiqua et Nova
>
> e-mail: c.curius@...
> www.academiathules.org
> gsm: +358-50-3315279
> fax: +358-9-8754751
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42959 From: Patrick D. Owen Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
F. Galerius Aurelianus S.P.D.

About 1989, there was a Next Generation novel about the Enterprise
and another Federation starship, the Centurion (the title of the
novel was The Captain's Honor), which was crewed by citizens from
the Roman world. The Captain of the Centurion was a descendent of
Sejanus, the Praetorian Prefect during the time of Tiberius.
According to the novel, that Lucius Aelius Sejanus accomplished his
goal of overthrowing the Julian-Claudian line and became the ruler
of the Principate. In the novel, it makes mention that the line of
Sejanus (perhaps the character Claudius Marcus) ruled down to the
time of the visit of Jim Kirk but afterwards was overthrown by a
popular rising led by the Worshippers of the Son and the Plebeians
which restored a Republic & abolished slavery. During TNG novel,
the Romans were part of the Federation but there was a movement
among the old Patrician families to re-establish the Empire under
Captain Sejanus' rule. TNG Sejanus was a decorated Starfleet
Officer who was noted for courage, quick thinking, and daring but he
was also endowed with a huge ego and total ruthlessness. Eventually
he murdered his own First Officer, a Pleb, who found out about his
plans and Sejanus fled in the Centurion after a short battle with
the Enterprise. Picard thought that Sejanus had gone mad but still
admired him despite that.
Among the thing I found interesting was that during a training
exercise on the holodeck, a member of the Enterprise's crew (who is
becoming involved with the Roman First Officer) discovers the Romans
have disabled computer and allowed the holocharacters to actually
wound or kill crewmembers. The program depicts Romans armed as
legionnaires against German barbarian in the Teutoberger Wald. So
the author apparently still felt that the Federation Romans still
tested themselves to the utmost and had little distaste for blood or
death.

Valete.

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Sebastian José Molina Palacios
<sebastian_andaluz@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Diana and all nova romans.
> Yes, that´s right. I agree it´s a disaster what was done with
romans in that Star Trek chapter. But I think that it´s no worst
than the historical movies in the 50´s and 60´s (Ben Hur, King of
Kings, ....). In the most of them, we only can watch the christians
point of view and Romans only appear like monsters thirsty of blood.
And we all know how many great things Rome brought to the world. If
Rome was not the best civilization, it was, in my opinion, the less
bad.
> So, in this chapter of Star Trek we could see the worst face of
Rome and who knows if one day another Gene Rodemberry will show us a
better face of Rome into space. Or a historical film where Romans
are not monsters at all (remember Seneca, Adrian, Antoninus Pius,
for example).
> Valete,
> Quintus Livius Drusus
>
> dicconf <dicconf@...> escribió:
>
> On Tue, 28 Mar 2006, David Santo Orcero wrote:
>
> >
> > Salvete Omnes!
> >
> >> A very curious thing this about romans in sci-fi. By the
way, does
> >> anybody know anything about the Star Trek series (captain Kirk,
Mr.
> > Spock and company)? In these original series there is chapter
titled
> >> "panem et circenses"
> > (...)
> >> years ago in the days of the Roman Republic. The capital city
of this
> >> planet is named Magna Roma and, apparently, the evolution of
this
> >> magna-roman civilization is identical than terrestrial romans,
including
> >> the rising of christianism for example.
> >
> > I have follow this series, and I disagree. The image of Roma
that they
> > give is a fascist military regime were have blood spectacles
that they
> > give at TV. The only relationship with Roma is the name, some
logos, and
> > part of the spectacle of gladiators. It looks more that Musolini
fascist
> > regime with strange clothes and with gladiators. :-(
>
> Or perhaps the other way around. Mussolini consciously aped Roman
manners
> and titles, just as the Nazi regime in Germanhy aped Guido von
List's
> fantastic notions of the manners of the ancient Teutons.
>
> -- Publius Livius Triarius
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
> Roman empire Ancient history Citizenship test 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.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Correo Yahoo!
> Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ¡gratis!
> Regístrate ya - http://correo.espanol.yahoo.com/
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42960 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Calling Candidates for Censor
I, Marcus Octavius Germanicus, announce my candidacy for the office
of Censor.

I was elected to this position once before. I resigned that office
in the seventeenth month, a decision I now deeply regret. I left my
position as Censor in May of 2004 due both to complications in my
personal life (that same week, I quit the job I had held for seven
years), and my despair over events and attitudes in Nova Roma.


If offered a second chance to serve as Censor, I will not under any
circumstances abandon that post. I will complete the term.

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

FGA: Would you be willing to swear an oath to this effect & vowing never to seek public office again if you violate it? If so, I will offer you my support.

F. Galerius Aurelianus,
flamen Cerialis


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42961 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
M. Hortensia Catoni spd;
please do not talk about Judaism as your ignorance is a
veritable chasm:
the laws of kosher follwed since the Babylonian diaspora
forbid the ingesting of milk and meat together in a meal for 12
hours. Practially this means, observant Jews eat either a meat meal
or a 'dairy' meal. Eggs and fish are considered 'parev' neutral. So
until the Enlightenment of 1780's all Jews were observant and all
ate dairy vegetarian meals. (fish was considered expensive).

Jains of India have already discussed and made decisions about
vegetable life, thousands of years ago as they consider them
sentient. I suggest you pick up a book on Jain philosophy. There are
many vegetables they will not eat.
Interestingly, the Jains had so many taboos they could not be
farmers or have anything to do with accidentally killing. The result-
they became merchants and bankers & one of the richest and best
educated minority groups in India.
vale
Maior

> Woot, consul, you are opening up a can of worms!
>
> First of all, the "movement" of vegetarian rabbis in Judaism is
> miniscule; I know that numbers do not create authority, but to act
as
> if it is a significant portion of educated Jewish thought is
> misleading in the extreme. The point is that historically Judaism
> practiced animal sacrifices, and did so by the direct command of
God.
>
> Second, your idea of what constitutes "higher" moral ground is
subject
> to so many religious, philosophical, ethical, societal, and
temporal
> contingencies that I do not know even where to start. What
happens
> if/when scientists discover evidence of intelligence in vegetables?
>
> Now, did you have something to add about the historical/theological
> basis for the sacrifice of animals under the religio Romana?
>
> Vale et valete,
>
> Cato
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42962 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
M. Hortensia Catonis spd;
of course it does, from a Jewish point of view I am practicing
extra mizvot. I am certainly more ethical than you!

Judaism is primarily a religion of laws and ethics, and choices.
Jews are instructed to study the Torah and the Talmud, the
scholastic commentary and then argue. You would be laughed right out
of a study group by just quoting the bare Bible with no Rabbinic
commentary.

As for the small sect who think they will rebuild the temple, they
are not the mainstream who are represented by the Chief Rabbis of
Israel. A very saintly one Kook advocated vegetarianism strenuously.

Cato, I suggest you talk to a rabbi or read a book about Judaism
written by Jews, not Christians.
vale
Maior



> Salve et salvete omnes.
>
> Marca Horensia, your personally being a vegetarian really has no
> connection whatsoever to the practices of historical Judaism ---
and
> vegetarianism is not more "ethical" in and of itself than any
other
> dietary practice; ethics are embedded in the practitioner, not the
> practice.
>
> "Every creature that lives shall be yours to eat; as with the
green
> grasses, I give you all these." (Genesis 9:3)
>
> Judaism upholds the eating of meat provided that the animal is a
> species permitted by the Torah (Leviticus 11); is ritually
slaughtered
> (shechita) (Deuteronomy 12:21); has the non-kosher elements (blood
and
> certain fats and sinews) removed (Leviticus 3:17; Genesis 32:33);
is
> prepared without mixing meat and milk (Exodus 34:26); and that
> appropriate blessings are recited (Deuteonomy 8:10).
>
>
> I eat meat, and will continue to do so, but that does not make me
any
> more or less ethical than you :-)
>
> The fact is that Judaism practiced animal sacrifice as commanded
by
> God; some ultra-Orthodox are even now preparing for the eventual
re-
> building of the Temple in Jerusalem so that sacrifices can once
again
> be offered in obedience to the commands of God.
>
>
> But back to the question I asked: why did the Romans sacrifice
> animals? When we answer this, then we will have a stepping stone
> towards understanding the place (or lack thereof) of animal
sacrifice
> within the religio Romana.
>
> Vale et valete,
>
> Cato
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42963 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Roma Futura - Roma in the ages
Salvete Omnes!

Mussolini had proclaimed the second Roman Empire when he conquered
Ethoipia (Axum) and Albania. The Second Roman Empire (though never
widely called that) under Mussolini was not particularly racist and
to a large extent sheided the Jewish minority in Italy and
elsewhere, there was no slavery and its treated its prisoners of war
with a modicum of honour. Its military tactics were at times brutal
in but so were those of the Russians (remember how our russian
allies slaughtered the ukrainians and allied polish army).
Mussolini was strategically foolhardy (Franco was more prudent) and
his bigest sin was losing the war by teaming up with a overly ballsy
then insane (not to mention murderous) german barbarian.

Looking at Mussolini apart from the Nazis involvement near the end
of the war it was a positively humane regime compared to Roma
Antigua.

Mussolini was not a true heir to Roma - mainly becuase he was a
loser, romans do not lose so easily, though they do not always win
they learn and adapt quickly and win in the strategic long term.

True heirs to Roma in my view:

Byzantium Empire (Constantinople), centuria V a XV AD
Spanish Empire (Madrid), centuria XV a XVIII AD
British Empire (London), centuria XVIII a XX AD
American 'Empire' (New York), centuria XX a ?

Excess is the attendant of greatness, it can not be avoided but must
be kept in check to keep greatness.

Vale bene,
C. Domititius Cato

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, QFabiusMaxmi@... wrote:
>
> In a message dated 3/28/2006 4:18:56 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
> rory12001@... writes:
>
> The image of Roma
> that they give is a fascist military regime were have blood
spectacles
> that they give at TV. The only relationship with Roma is the
name, some
> logos, and part of the spectacle of gladiators. It looks more
that
> Mussolini's
> fascist regime with strange clothes and with gladiators. :-(
>
> Surely you cannot be this naive. Mussolini worshiped the Roman
empire. His
> designs,
> his building projects and his medals were all imitations of
Rome. His
> aircraft markings
> were the rods and ax heads of Imperium. He removed the
name "Royal" from
> the Italian
> army. His "Empire" was the new Roman, his army, the new
legions.
> Had non Christianized Rome endured, what do you think it would
look like
> today?
> Why the USA today except with slaves, spectacles, and excess.
Much like
> Caesar's Palace.
>
>
>
>
> Q. Fabius Maximus
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42964 From: P. Dominus Antonius Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Alternatively, by eating that meat, I am helping to remove that poor animal
from its brutal, horrible and filthy conditions. That is a higher moral
decision. Besides they're tasty. Join PETA today: People Eating Tasty
Animals.
;-)
--
>|P. Dominus Antonius|<
Tony Dah m

Oderint dum metuant - Cicero
Si vis pacem, para bellum - Vegetius

On 3/29/06, David Kling (Modianus) <tau.athanasios@...> wrote:
>
> To refuse to eat meat that was raised in a brutal fashion, and in horrible
> and filthy conditions is a moral decision.
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42965 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> M. Hortensia Catonis Malacitano spd;
>
> agreed, but why then are Romans always so exciting when depicted in
> sci-fi? I remember seeing that episode, wasn't there also an
> interracial romance, very daring in those days. we need more Romans
> in space;-)
> Marca Hortensia Maior

Salve Maie

Well at he got at least one bit right... The Romans were progressive
compared to 1950's/1960's USA...

The shade of skin or shape of eye matters not, this roman always
appreciates a beautiful female...

C. Domitius Cato
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42966 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Airatarianism? - Religio and living today...
--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "P. Dominus Antonius"
<marsvigilia@...> wrote:
>
> Perhaps I am missing something. Even if Ceres shares your
political
> objectives, I fail to see how these things constitute a sacred
sacrifice to
> her.
> --
> >|P. Dominus Antonius|<
> Tony Dah m
>

Salve Antone,

I do not think of such ideals in a general sence as political,
though a healthy political debate ensures a good balance in
government policies regarding issues in agriculture and the
environment. I doubt a godess would take a specific political
stand. As a fair minded citizen I like to see a healthy balence and
policy that serves the Respublica and its citizens first and
formost. Whilst in a purely religious sence as our good authorities
mentioned what is important is providing the godess with offerings
and recognition.

Having observed the lands of Roma Antigua, it is a logical extention
that a balenced agricultural/environment policy makes sence and will
magnify the harvest. Many once lush and productive lands have
turned to desert and properous harbours silted over and useless, a
sad sight...

Valete,
C. Domitius Cato
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42967 From: P. Dominus Antonius Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
My ignorance is only bounded by my arrogance and my willingness to share.
;-)
--
>|P. Dominus Antonius|<
Tony Dah m

Oderint dum metuant - Cicero
Si vis pacem, para bellum - Vegetius


On 3/29/06, Maior <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> M. Hortensia Catoni spd;
> please do not talk about Judaism as your ignorance is a
> veritable chasm:
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42968 From: P. Dominus Antonius Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
General Rules of Contra-Indication:
1. If someone volunteers that they have a good sense of humor... Prepare
to be bored to tears.
2. If someone volunteers that they would never steal from you... Watch
you're wallet.
3. If someone volunteers that they are humble... Know that their ego is
huge.
4. If someone volunteers that they are more ethical than you... Laugh.
--
>|P. Dominus Antonius|<
Tony Dah m

Oderint dum metuant - Cicero
Si vis pacem, para bellum - Vegetius


On 3/29/06, Maior <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> M. Hortensia Catonis spd;
> of course it does, from a Jewish point of view I am practicing
> extra mizvot. I am certainly more ethical than you!
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42969 From: David Kling (Modianus) Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Cato:

Orthodox Judaism is a minority compared to the larger number of
secular or liberal Jews. Does that mean we should ignore Orthodox
Judaism, and only acknowledge the Orthodox Jews? No it doesn't.

In fact you cannot be an Orthodox Jew and eat burgers from McDonalds,
as it is not kosher. While I am no expert of Jewish law I believe I
can make the logical assumption that most Orthodox Jews are either
vegetarian, or purchase their meat from kosher groceries. However, if
an animal is kosher then its not going to be raised in a disgusting
factory farm.

Your argument about eating plants is "reductio ad absurdum" and as a
result I will completely disregard it as a waste of my time to
elaborate on.

"Now, did you have something to add about the historical/theological
basis for the sacrifice of animals under the religio Romana?"

My opinion on animal sacrifice in relation to the Religio Romana is
that it is not necessary, nor essential to peform them. However, if
they are done -- and done in the name of the Nova Roma -- they need to
be done in a humane way, with an animal that is without deformity, and
blemish. This would necessitate an animal that was raised without the
aid of antibiotics, and was fed a good diet. Many factory farmed
animals are fed manure to supplement their diet.

Meat consumption in the ancient world was not as common a practice as
it is now (at least within the USA). The consumption of meat was
first made a sacred event, and then the meat consumed. The consent of
the animal had to be obtained through ritualized actions by the
priest, the animal would typically comply -- but there was a chance
that it might not.

Additionally, I believe that Neoplationism, Stoicism, et al would have
had a profound effect on the Religio and would have had the same
effect on the Religio as the Upanisads had on Hinduism (in contrast to
the Vedas as an earlier form of Hinduism). This being said many of
the Philosophers were vegetarian.

Porphyry wrote:

"But to deliver animals to be slaughtered and cooked, and thus be
filled with murder, not for the sake of nutriment and satisfying the
wants of nature, but making pleasure and gluttony the end of such
conduct, is transcendently iniquitous and dire.

He who abstains from anything animate ... will be much more careful
not to injure those of his own species. For he who loves the genus
will not hate any species of animals."

Plutarch wrote:

"Why do you belie the earth, as if it were unable to feed and nourish
you? Does it not shame you to mingle murder and blood with her
beneficent fruits? Other carnivora you call savage and ferocious -
lions and tigers and serpents - while yourselves come behind them in
no species of barbarity. And yet for them murder is the only means of
sustenance! Whereas to you it is superfluous luxury and crime!"

Iamblichus wrote:

"Pythagoras enjoined abstinence from the flesh of animals because this
was conducive to Peace. Those who are accustomed to abominate the
slaughter of other animals, as iniquitous and unnatural, will think it
still more unlawful and unjust to kill a man or to engage in war.
Especially he exhorted the politicians and legislators to abstain, for
if they were willing act justly, in the highest degree, it was
indubitably incumbent upon them to not injure any of the lower
animals, since how could they persuade others to act justly, if they
themselves proved to be indulging an insatiable avidity by devouring
those animals allied to us, since through the communion of life and
the same elements, and the sympathy existing, they are as it were
conjoined to us by a fraternal alliance."

Theologically speaking... I think it is better not to engage in animal
sacrifice. I think it is unnecessary. However, I acknowledge that it
was a practice that was done and that it was historically more common
for some Gods over others. This being the case I agree with the
decretum in place on Animal Sacrifice. If it is going to be done it
needs to be done correctly. I don't suspect it will be common
practice within Nova Roma anytime soon.

Vale:

Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus

On 3/29/06, gaiusequitiuscato <mlcinnyc@...> wrote:
> C. Equitius Cato C. Fabio Buteoni Modiano quiritibusque S.P.D.
>
> Salve et salvete.
>
> Woot, consul, you are opening up a can of worms!
>
> First of all, the "movement" of vegetarian rabbis in Judaism is
> miniscule; I know that numbers do not create authority, but to act as
> if it is a significant portion of educated Jewish thought is
> misleading in the extreme. The point is that historically Judaism
> practiced animal sacrifices, and did so by the direct command of God.
>
> Second, your idea of what constitutes "higher" moral ground is subject
> to so many religious, philosophical, ethical, societal, and temporal
> contingencies that I do not know even where to start. What happens
> if/when scientists discover evidence of intelligence in vegetables?
>
> Now, did you have something to add about the historical/theological
> basis for the sacrifice of animals under the religio Romana?
>
> Vale et valete,
>
> Cato
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42970 From: David Kling (Modianus) Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
This wonderful use of logic could also be used to justify beating
one's wife to death, because it would be better that she die then live
the rest of her life in a brutal relationship. No mention of her
getting out of the bad relationship, simply kill her.

Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus

On 3/29/06, P. Dominus Antonius <marsvigilia@...> wrote:
> Alternatively, by eating that meat, I am helping to remove that poor animal
> from its brutal, horrible and filthy conditions. That is a higher moral
> decision. Besides they're tasty. Join PETA today: People Eating Tasty
> Animals.
> ;-)
> --
> >|P. Dominus Antonius|<
> Tony Dah m
>
> Oderint dum metuant - Cicero
> Si vis pacem, para bellum - Vegetius
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42971 From: pompeia_minucia_tiberia Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: In leges Moravias Minucias--A Response to A. Apollonius Cordus
---Salvete F. Galerius Aurelianus Quiritibus:


In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@... wrote:
>
> F. Galerius Aurelianus flamen Cerialis A. Apollonio Cordo and the
SPQNR. Salvete.
>
> <snip>
>
> > (snippage)
> There is nothing wrong with simply allowing a person to post on
the Main List, "I, Nunc Biberius, immediately resign all my offices,
public and religious, along with my citizenship for [good/bad]
reasons," then let the person have nine days to reconsider and
cancel it. If he doesn't, strike him from the rolls of citizens and
magistrates, call for an election to replace him, and go on.

Pompeia Respondeo: I guess you weren't around much of last year
when a citizen/magistrate did just that...resigned his citizenship,
and his officers...and it was vehemently objected to when he wanted
to come back within the 9 days....It is a matter of public record
that some were at best critical and at worst furious with the
Tribunes, for exercizing their sacrosainct judgement by allowing
this citizen to continue as Tribune. Why? Because the legislation
allowing this 9 days, the Lex Cornelia Maria Civitate Eiuranda, was
fragmented by a more recent lex, which repealed certain sections of
this Lex Cornelia Maria, severely weakening its statements regarding
Magisterial resignations...and...a further fly in the ointment: an
added consitutional clause which states that an office becomes
vacant when a magistrate resigns or dies. Period. End of story. It
was not placed there for resignations I don't believe, but that is
what it 'says'. So the whole thing was a terrible mess. But other
language in the constitution clarified the liberties of the Tribunes
to my satisfaction, and that of others. Anyway....

If the Lex Cornelia Maria was such a fine law, and really I didn't
have a problem with it..why were the amendments to it made by the
lex Equitia approved by comitia? Did you vote for this change?...I
think the Lex Cornelia Maria was probably the best resignation law
we had until key sections of it were removed... leaving it rather
open ended when it comes to magisterial resignations. I am not
saying this was done on purpose...it just happened and we have to
deal with it.

So I am not adding to the ambiguity....I am asking for the existing
laws to be repealed and the consideration of the new proposals. I
am not going to fall apart if they are not approved...they are
proposals only...not decreta.

I am not sure who it was, but someone mentioned last night that it
should be specified re how many Tribunes have to acknowledge a
magisterial resignation in the current proposals...or one or both
Consuls...whatever the comitia we're talking about. Good question,
but not hard to answer. The answer lies in the constitution.... the
manner in which these magistrates can administer the law and their
being subject to collegial veto are constitutional mandates which a
comitia lex cannot supercede. One Tribune of course can acknowledge
a resignation, or all of them... doesn't matter...in 'anything' they
do ex officium, they are subject to collegial veto....see the
constitution. Same with the Consuls. If one Consul accepts on behalf
of both, which is inevitable during summer holiday absentiae...then
this is fine. If they accept together this is fine too. I can't
take away their constitutional right to act independently, subject
to a veto of one another...no matter how much I hyperword a proposed
lex. There is an instance or two in the constitution where the
Consuls must sing collegially, but resignations isn't one of them.

I think some of the objections to these proposals are based, with
respect, on an innocent lack of understanding of the relationship
between the constitutional language and the leges which 'pursue'
it... The leges pursue the constitutional mandates...they don't
trump them. So I don't worry about this aspect leading to any major
dilemnae. Another thing we cannot legislate...for myself, for you,
the next guy...is common sense.

I wonder again though...how many people voted in the Lex
Equitia...which took a section out of the Lex Cornelia Maria, which
was the only section on our books at the time dealing with
magisterial resignations? And how many of these people now think
the original Lex Cornelia Maria was maybe not so bad after all? You
seem to like the 9 days for everything...citizenship, magistracies,
religious positions, and so did I. Many hated it last year, and
demanded stricter language, particularily for resigned
magistrates....I am somewhat confused...which is it? Have we come
full circle in our quest for solutions...losing site of where we
started and the fact that we've ended right back at the starting
gates? Hmm



For the moment, all we have now are the undefined "an office becomes
vacant when a magistrate resigns or dies"...what currently
constitutes a legally tendered and accepted resignation of a
magistrate or officer of a micronation and U.S. corporation,
respectively? We have no procedure.

I would love to take responsibility for this confusion, if this
would make it go away, but for the moment all I can do is help
propose solutions to the best of my ability. So far, those from
whom I am receiving objections are those who rarely agree with me on
anything...so it is difficult for me to tell if their feedback is
objective, and so I don't worry. I am looking at the elements
presented and taking in what I think is helpful. It is up to the
people...all of the people. And I will not apologize for trying to
ameliorate confusion I did not author.

Again, I never disliked the Lex Cornelia Maria...in its full
form...but these seemed to be too much of a carte blanc for some
people last year, and we were split about 50/50 at the end of 2005
on allowing a grace period or not allowing a grace period for
resignations.

(snip)


> If a magistrate resigns his office for good reasons or just
because he is sick of it, he or she cannot run for public office for
one year from the date of the end of his original term. Period.

Pompeia: The element above was covered in Caesar Consul's proposal
last year, which unfortunately didn't pass. I will take your word
regarding the content of Cordus' post, and I do thank you for your
prayers on behalf of us all (below). We are in agreement regarding
the importance of good intentions, indeed, the most important aspect
of any undertaking.

Valete
Pompeia Minucia Strabo
Consul



>
> I ask Dii Immortales to grant our magistrates and citizens to
strength, character, and will to help Nova Roma now and in the
future.
>
>
*********************************************************************
**********
> A. Apollonius omnibus sal.
>
> I thank the consul for her replies to my earlier
> questions. I understand from them that although she
> may be prepared to consider some changes to these
> proposals, she is entirely happy with the basic
> policies they contain and will not be changing those.
> In my opinion it is those basic policies which are
> flawed, and I feel it would be a waste of the three or
> four days which remain of this contio if I were to
> attempt to persuade the tribune and the consul of
> that, so I shall simply explain to you, fellow
> citizens, why I think we should reject these
> proposals.
>
> First it may be useful to note the various practical
> problems with these two proposals. To illustrate
> these, let me tell you a story. I'll interrupt the
> story from time to time to explain how it relates to
> the proposals before us.
>
> - - In A.D. 2010 there is a citizen of Nova
> - - Roma called C. Marius. Marius has a son
> - - who is also a citizen of Nova Roma and whom,
> - - in traditional Roman fashion, he has named
> - - C. Marius. Marius (the father) is a
> - - quaestor. He sends a message to this list,
> - - and to the announcements list, and to every
> - - other list he subscribes to, saying "I
> - - resign my office of quaestor effective
> - - immediately".
>
> Now, in ancient Rome he would, of course, have been
> regarded as immediately losing his office. An election
> would have been organized as soon as possible to
> replace him. Under the lex Moravia Minucia, however,
> things would be different...
>
> - - Nobody informs the consules that this has
> - - happened. Marius stops doing his job
> - - collecting and recording payments of tax.
> - - After several weeks, people begin to
> - - complain that their payments have not been
> - - acknowledged. The consules explain that,
> - - according to the lex Moravia Minucia article
> - - IV, they cannot hold an election to replace
> - - Marius until three people inform them that
> - - he has resigned. "But," say sensible
> - - citizens, "you *know* he's resigned". "Yes,"
> - - they say, "but he didn't inform us directly,
> - - so we have to wait until three witnesses
> - - inform us directly". Three exasperated people
> - - duly do so. An election is held.
>
> This is, indeed, the position under the proposals
> before us. The idea that a resignation cannot be
> legally valid unless it complies with certain
> formalities is an old one in Nova Roma. It is
> enshrined in the lex constitutiva itself, and also in
> the lex Cornelia Maria de civitate ejuranda.
> Presumably at some point someone thought there was a
> good reason for having this rule. And apparently the
> tribune and the consul still think it's a good idea,
> because they have adopted it from the area of
> resignation of citizenship and brought it into the law
> on resignation of office. This is in spite of the
> possible consequences, such as we have in the story.
> Well, back to Marius...
>
> - - Marius is getting fed up with Nova Roma. He
> - - writes again to all the lists he subscribes
> - - to, saying "I immediately resign my
> - - citizenship". Three conscientious people
> - - write to the consules to inform them of
> - - this. Unfortunately in this case it is the
> - - censores who need to be informed. Nobody
> - - informs them.
>
> This is not a great novelty. It is what happens at the
> moment under the lex Cornelia Maria. Or, rather, it's
> what doesn't happen. The law says it should happen.
> But the censores are sensible people. Only current and
> former censores can tell us the precise number of
> times they have actually received written notification
> from three witnesses that a person has resigned, but I
> can make a guess: zero. Certainly I've worked in
> censorial offices several times and I've never seen it
> happen. During the last two censuses a significant
> number of people contacted by the censorial offices
> responded asking, even demanding, to be removed from
> the list of citizens. These responses were generally
> addressed to provincial governors or censorial
> scribes, not to the censores personally. Under the
> strict legal rule of notification to three witnesses,
> the censores would have had no power to register these
> resignations as legally valid, but of course they used
> their common sense and registered them.
>
> This is an outstandingly clear example of a rule which
> is so impractical that it has been completely ignored.
> And yet these proposals seek not only to perpetuate it
> but to expand it into new areas of law and to place
> icnreasing reliance upon it. I cannot see the sense of
> that. Our law, surely, should recognize the current
> reality and give the relevant magistrates the
> discretion - to be exercised, of course, collegially,
> as all censorial powers are - to decide what
> constitutes a resignation and what does not.
>
> - - Meanwhile, the census is going on. Marius
> - - is contacted by the scribes doing the census.
> - - He responds and says that he does not want
> - - to be considered a citizen of Nova Roma any
> - - more. The scribe who receives his message
> - - passes it the censores. The censores say,
> - - "have you got two other witnesses?" "No,"
> - - says the scribe. The censores do not register
> - - Marius' resignation as valid.
>
> Well, this just illustrates the problem I mentioned
> above. Of course in reality the censores might well
> ignore the lex Moravia Minucia as they currently
> ignore the lex Cornelia Maria, but there's not much
> point proposing a lex and then saying "it's okay,
> people will ignore the stupid parts". But now there
> arises a further problem, newly introduced by these
> proposals...
>
> - - Marius' resignation has not been registered
> - - as valid by the censores. But he has also not
> - - responded to the census in a way which would
> - - allow him to be registered as a full citizen
> - - according to the lex Fabia de censu. The
> - - censores check the leges. The lex Fabia says
> - - that a citizen who is not registered at the
> - - census becomes a socius; the lex Moravia
> - - Minucia also says that a citizen who does not
> - - respond to the census has his citizenship
> - - placed "in temporary suspension".
>
> Now, what are the censores to do with Marius? Is he a
> socius? A "suspended" citizen? Both? The lex Moravia
> Minucia does not explicitly repeal the "socius"
> clauses of the lex Fabia, so presumably it does not
> intend to abolish the socii. Can a person be both a
> socius and a "suspended" citizen? It would be very
> strange. A socius is, as the lex Fabia makes clear,
> not a citizen. He enjoys none of the rights of
> citizenship. A "suspended" citizen under the lex
> Moravia Minucia, however, enjoys all the rights of
> citizenship except the right to vote. This means he
> actually enjoys greater rights than a probationary
> citizen during his 90-day probationary period. So
> presumably a "suspended" citizen is still a type of
> citizen, like a probationary one. And yet it seems
> that someone who fails to be registered at the census
> is to be classed as both a socius (non-citizen with no
> citizen rights) and a "suspended" citizen (a type of
> citizen with almost full rights). How is this
> possible? If it is not, how do the censores choose
> which status to give a person?
>
> This is important not only because a socius and a
> "suspended" citizen have very different rights, but
> also because they have very different ways of
> reacquiring citizenship. "Suspended" citizens have a
> bewildering array of different ways in which they can
> resume their citizenship, each with a different time
> limit. They can do it by asking the censores: this can
> be done until the beginning of the next census (which
> under current law would be two years but could vary in
> the future) or until five years have passed, whichever
> is earlier. They can do it by paying their taxes: this
> can only be done within a year of being placed in
> suspension. They can do it by responding to the
> following census: this of course depends entirely on
> when the next census happens. A socius, on the other
> hand, has only one way to do it: he can write to the
> censores at *any* time, however long after he ceased
> to be a citizen, and ask to be reinstated. The
> censores can then reinstate him.
>
> So we have a strange situation. A person who fails to
> respond to the census may be a "suspended" citizen, or
> a socius, or possibly both. If he is a "suspended"
> citizen he has almost all the rights of citizenship;
> if he is a socius, he has none at all. On the other
> hand, if he is a "suspended" citizen he can only
> become a full citizen again within certain time
> limits, whereafter he loses his citizenship completely
> and becomes a plain old non-citizen; if he is a
> socius, however, he can regain full citizenship even
> many, many years after he lost it.
>
> Well, on with the story...
>
> - - The censores decide to categorize Marius as
> - - a "suspended" citizen. He remains involved
> - - with some Nova Roma projects, however. He
> - - is elected aedile of his local oppidum. A
> - - few people object, but he points out that,
> - - as a "suspended" citizen, he has all the
> - - citizen rights except the right to vote, so
> - - he is legally competent to hold this office.
> - - After a while he starts selling Roman food
> - - through the Macellum, which as a "suspended"
> - - citizen he is allowed to do. Some of his
> - - customers experience unacceptable delays in
> - - delivery and complain to the aediles curules.
> - - The aediles remove Marius from the Macellum,
> - - but he appeals using provocatio, which is a
> - - right he still possesses as a "suspended"
> - - citizen. He is given a trial in the comitia.
>
> This part of the story just illustrates some of the
> rights which "suspended" citizens would enjoy under
> the Moravian Minucian proposals. You may think it
> slightly odd that someone who has twice attempted to
> resign his citizenship and has failed to answer the
> census is still able to exercise all these rights.
> Well, yes, I suppose it is odd, but that's the lex
> Moravia Minucia for you. But now here's a twist:
>
> - - During the trial, the census - the second
> - - census since Marius tried to resign
> - - originally - is coming to an end. In fact,
> - - it comes to an end before the trial does.
> - - Marius, of course, has not bothered to
> - - respond, and indeed he has not even been
> - - asked, because the censores don't bother
> - - to contact "suspended" citizens. At the
> - - end of the census, the censores, in
> - - obedience to the lex Moravia Minucia,
> - - revoke Marius' citizenship entirely.
> - - The prosecutor in the trial notices this
> - - and announces it to the praetor who is
> - - presiding over the trial. The praetor
> - - immediately throws the case out of the
> - - comitia because Marius no longer has the
> - - right of provocatio or the right to appear
> - - in the comitia. The aediles curules throw
> - - Marius out of the Macellum because he no
> - - longer has a right to sell his wares there.
> - - Rather upset, he asks the censores how to
> - - stop all this happening. They tell him that
> - - now he is a non-citizen, and the only way
> - - he can resume his lost rights is to apply
> - - to become a "new" citizen. So he fills in
> - - the application form. In accordance with
> - - the lex Moravia Minucia article VI.A, the
> - - censores ask him why he resigned and why he
> - - returned. He says, "Why? Does it affect
> - - whether I'm allowed to return?" "No," they
> - - reply, "it makes no difference at all, but
> - - we are obliged by the lex Moravia Minucia
> - - to ask you." "Am I obliged to answer?" The
> - - censores check their text of the lex Moravia
> - - Minucia and tell him that he is not. So he
> - - doesn't.
>
> Yes, indeed, this is what the proposed lex says: "the
> former citizen is directed to state in his or her
> application the reasons behind the initial resignation
> of citizenship, and the nature of the reasons
> influencing the desire to have it reinstated". It
> doesn't say, however, that the person concerned is
> obliged to give this information, only that he is
> directed to do so; nor does it give the censores the
> power to take any action based on the answer, or even
> require them to keep any record of the answer for
> statistical purposes. What fun. And now the final act
> in the drama...
>
> - - Marius asks to be given his old name, C.
> - - Marius. The censores explain that there is
> - - already a C. Marius in Nova Roma, so
> - - according to the lex Moravia Minucia he
> - - cannot have that name. He explains that this
> - - is his son. The censores say that makes no
> - - difference: he cannot have the name.
>
> That's right, citizens. Although there is no general
> rule in our law saying that two citizens cannot have
> the same name, there is a specific rule - it is in the
> lex Cornelia Maria and look, here it is too in this
> radical new written-from-scratch lex Moravia Minucia -
> that a citizen who has resigned and then returned
> cannot have the same name as any existing citizen.
> Why? Who on earth knows?
>
> And what becomes of our hero Marius? He probably gives
> up and goes away forever, or at least until Nova Roma
> has some more sensible procedures for dealing with
> citizenship.
>
> I think that story illustrates most of the practical
> problems with these proposals. But the problems are
> deeper than that. The problems are, essentially, the
> same problems that exist under the current system, but
> worse. The consul said that "we are proposing the
> existing legislations [sic] regarding resignations be
> repealed, and starting from scratch". If this is
> "starting from scratch" then I am a pink elephant.
> These proposals do not depart in any way from the
> fundamental ideas behind the lex Cornelia Maria, the
> lex that has caused all the problems so far. It even
> contains several of the same clauses.
>
> Before the lex Cornelia Maria, no one had any real
> problem identifying what was a valid resignation.
> True, the lex constitutiva had the rule about three
> witnesses, but that wasn't a big problem because there
> was no rule that those three witnesses had to report
> to the censores. As long as three witnesses witnessed
> the resignation, it was valid. Since almost all
> resignations happened on big e-mail lists, that wasn't
> a problem. The problem was just that there were quite
> a lot of valid resignations. The purpose of the lex
> Cornelia Maria was to stop people resigning. To this
> end, it adopted two main strategies. First, it made it
> harder to resign in the first place. This was mainly
> achieved by saying that what a reasonable human being
> would recognize as a resignation is not recognized by
> the law as a valid resignation unless it is
> communicated in a certain way and not revoked within a
> certain time. Secondly, it made it harder for people
> who successfully resigned to come back.
>
> Both of these strategies were radical departures from
> the ancient Roman rule that a citizen could give up
> Roman citizenship without going through any formal
> procedure and could, thereafter, resume that same
> citizenship with ease. And, surprise surprise, both
> caused seriously problems. The second was quickly
> recognized as a problem and was eventually whittled
> down by the lex Equitia, but some of it still remains
> in these proposals: notice that a citizen who leaves,
> comes back, and leaves again cannot come back for a
> further two years. Why? Who knows? But the real
> problem is the first of the two strategies: the
> divergence between what common sense recognizes as a
> resignation and what the law recognizes as a
> resignation.
>
> Do the proposed leges abandon this strategy? They do
> not; on the contrary, they take it even further. They
> create extra administrative hoops which must be jumped
> through before on can successfully resign, some of
> them entirely outside one's own control. Under these
> proposals, a resignation of citizenship will only be
> valid if *someone else*, namely a censor, issues an
> "official acknowledgement" of the resignation. Anyone
> can see that this is absurd. If you leave an
> organization and the organization then writes to you
> and says "we officially acknowledge your departure",
> what do you think? I would think, "you acknowledge
> what you like, chum, but I've left and that's a fact
> whether you acknowledge it or not". If we insist on
> maintaining a distinction between what any sensible
> human being would regard as a resignation and what the
> law regards as a resignation, we only succeed in
> making the law look stupid.
>
> And not only do these proposals adopt the same basic
> strategy of creating a discrepancy between legal and
> factual resignations, they actually export this
> discrepancy to an area of law previously unaffected by
> it. At the moment, at least, common sense prevails
> with regard to resignation of magistracies: if someone
> says "I resign my office with immediate effect", he
> loses his office with immediate effect. The only
> problem arises when he resigns his citizenship while
> holding office. Why does this problem arise? Because
> his resignation of citizenship is not recognized as
> having immediate legal validity, but his resignation
> of office is. This creates inconsistency because
> citizenship is governed by a stupid rule and public
> office is not. The proposed solution? The consul and
> the tribune proposed to have both citizenship and
> public office covered by the stupid rule. Well, sure,
> it solves the inconsistency, but it means we now have
> two stupid rules in stead of one. Under these
> proposals a resignation from office, like a
> resignation from citizenship, would not be legally
> valid unless communicated to a certain person in a
> certain way and then acknowledged by that person in a
> certain way. This is total madness.
>
> No, these proposals do not "start from scratch".
> Repealing one lex and replacing it with another lex
> based on the same fundamental ideas (and in fact
> containing several identical clauses) is not "starting
> from scratch". It is the act of someone who believes
> that there is really no fundamental problem with the
> current system, we just need more of the same.
>
> That is what these proposals give us: more of the
> same. More discrepancy between what a reasonable human
> being would recognize as a resignation and what the
> law will recognize as a resignation. More hoops to
> jump through before you can successfully leave Nova
> Roma or lay down your office. More obstacles when you
> return. More different and overlapping sub-categories
> of citizenship. More administrative work for
> magistrates. More complexity. More of the same.
>
> And finally, and most importantly, more divergence
> from what the Romans did. It constantly baffles me
> that we claim to admire Roman culture and yet when any
> practical problem arises nobody seems to stop to ask
> how the Romans solved it. The vast majority of our
> legislation is based on the arrogant assumption that
> we, with our total of eight years experience of
> running a Roman republic, can come up with better
> solutions than the people who did it successfully for
> half a millennium (or, at best, based on a total
> failure by legislators to actually find out what the
> Romans did and try to apply it). These proposals
> attempt to solve a problem relating to resignations of
> citizenship and of office. We know how the Romans
> solved these problems. We know how to put their
> solution into practice. It could be easily done. Yet
> the consul and the tribune have chosen not to do that.
> They have chosen, in stead, to go in the opposite
> direction, taking the un-Roman elements of the current
> system and significantly increasing them.
>
> Why? Here is the consul's answer:
>
> "We cannot mirror antiqua [sic] in every way. Nova
> Roma has two important aspects to consider: For one,
> we are a voluntary organization, with citizens of dual
> citizenship...our macronational lineage and NR
> citizenship. Two, regarding the case of magisterial
> resignations, we have to consider that we are dealing
> with procedures of resignation of corporate
> executives, not just 'magistrates within Nova Roma'."
>
> She does not explain why either of these facts
> prevents us from adopting the Roman practice. We are
> voluntary organization, she says. So was the Roman
> republic: people did not have to be citizens if they
> didn't want to be. They could give up their
> citizenship with remarkable ease. They did not have to
> inform any particular magistrate, or state their
> intentions in any particular venue. They just had to
> leave. Which is more in keeping with a voluntary
> organization: the Roman system, which allows people to
> leave very easily and return equally easily, or the
> lex Moravia Minucia, which puts huge administrative
> hurdles in the way of anyone going out or coming back?
>
> Magistrates are corporate executives, she says. And
> this is a reason for setting up a system which could
> result in an executive resigning his post but not
> being accepted as having done so unless three other
> people inform a fourth person who actually already
> knows? In the ancient republic, a magistrate who said
> "I resign my office" immediately lost his office. Is
> there some rule of corporate law in the state of Maine
> which says that the secretary of a non-profit
> corporation who says "I resign as secretary of this
> corporation" cannot be taken to have resigned?
>
> The consul goes on to say, "Granted, it can be said
> that resignation of citizenship was hardly
> commonplace (but not totally unheard of) in antiqua
> [sic] .... neither was the resignation of a
> magistrate. In this 21 Century, by virtue of
> macronational rights which can't be extinguished by
> the NR constitution or laws... citizens have the
> 'right' to resign...the right to say "I know longer
> desire to be associated with Nova Roma as a
> member/citizen". Or, "Remove my name from your
> membership roster"." She later adds, "we are never
> going to be able to make resignations 'go away'
> because they lack historical precedent".
>
> These comments tell us nothing about why the Roman
> practice is unsuitable for Nova Roma; they tell us
> only that the consul does not understand the Roman
> practice. The ancient Romans did not forbid people to
> give up their citizenship: on the contrary, they made
> it very easy for them to do so, much easier than these
> proposals do. The fact that the consul doesn't
> understand this is a sign that she never seriously
> investigated the possibility that ancient Roman
> practice might be suitable for Nova Roma. She cannot
> have investigated it, or else she would at least know
> what that practice was. She has, as most of our
> legislators have done over the years, made up a
> "solution" out of thin air and then stuck a few Latin
> words on top of it.
>
> Let me quote you one final sentence from the consul,
> one which encapsulates almost every reason why we
> should vote against these proposals:
>
> "It isn't how close or how far away we are from the
> Ancient Mos that has caused arguments about
> resignations here in the past...it is the ambiguous,
> fragmented language of our current resignation
> legislation."
>
> Well, there you have it. She doesn't understand how
> the Romans handled these issues, and yet she
> confidently asserts that ancient tradition is totally
> irrelevant to the situation. She considers that the
> problem with the existing legislation is not any
> fundamental strategic flaw but merely ambiguous
> language: in other words, the solution is more of the
> same. She criticises the current legislation as
> "ambiguous" and "fragmented", and yet she proposes to
> expand those ambiguities and fragmentations to new
> areas of law and to introduce a few new ones as well.
>
> Citizens, these proposals are based on two fundamental
> failures of understanding. They are based on a failure
> to understand what is wrong with the current system,
> and they are based on a failure to understand the
> proper Roman solution. We should have no hesitation in
> voting them down.
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all
new Yahoo!
> Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42972 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
M. Hortensia Buteoni Modiano spd;
I just don't want to subsidize his health insurance;-) Oh
would that we vegetarians could join together & get a good rate. Let
the meat-eaters pay for their by-passes.
nifty quotes from the ancients!
tua amica, Maior

ps even super liberal Jews like myself grew up on kosher meat, we
never ate the other stuff...

No mention of her
> getting out of the bad relationship, simply kill her.
>
> Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
>
> On 3/29/06, P. Dominus Antonius <marsvigilia@...> wrote:
> > Alternatively, by eating that meat, I am helping to remove that
poor animal
> > from its brutal, horrible and filthy conditions. That is a
higher moral
> > decision. Besides they're tasty. Join PETA today: People
Eating Tasty
> > Animals.
> > ;-)
> > --
> > >|P. Dominus Antonius|<
> > Tony Dah m
> >
> > Oderint dum metuant - Cicero
> > Si vis pacem, para bellum - Vegetius
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42973 From: Gnaeus Equitius Marinus Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Salve Appi Iuli,

Appius Iulius Priscus wrote:

> I) Weren´t all the sacrificed animals those who belong to
> normal carnivorous human diet? Dogs, cats and son complety excluded.

No. The Romans regularly sacrificed dogs.

Vale,

-- Marinus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42974 From: P. Dominus Antonius Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Thanks be to Jupiter, I see the light. All these cows should be given a few
weeks at the Ritz-Carlton before slaughtering them, after asking them to
sign permission slips of course. Then it would be ethical for me to eat
them. Hmmm. Barbecue sounds good tonight.

Oh, by the by, I just love the argument that medicine should be
universalized and then argue this gives the state an interest in every
aspect of peoples lives that might (or might not) affect their health.

By the way I think that publicly proclaiming oneself to ethically superior
to another as part of an argument is evidence of an ethical flaw.

That having been said, pass the A1, my steak is getting cold.
--
>|P. Dominus Antonius|<
Tony Dah m

Oderint dum metuant - Cicero
Si vis pacem, para bellum - Vegetius


On 3/29/06, David Kling (Modianus) <tau.athanasios@...> wrote:
>
> This wonderful use of logic could also be used to justify beating
> one's wife to death, because it would be better that she die then live
> the rest of her life in a brutal relationship. No mention of her
> getting out of the bad relationship, simply kill her.
>
> Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
>
>
> On 3/29/06, P. Dominus Antonius <marsvigilia@...> wrote:
> > Alternatively, by eating that meat, I am helping to remove that poor
> animal
> > from its brutal, horrible and filthy conditions. That is a higher moral
> > decision. Besides they're tasty. Join PETA today: People Eating Tasty
> > Animals.
> > ;-)
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42975 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
M. Hortensia Antonio spd;
the only way people eat meat is that they are shielded from
the cruelty of driving the cattle to the slaughterhouse & then
killing them, stripping the skin & sinews off etc...
I've seen cows & sheep in the field herded in trucks off to
the big kill in Ireland. And no they aren't happy. But what does it
matter? Would it, if they had the capacity to speak & say 'I want to
live, just like you?"
Maior

> By the way I think that publicly proclaiming oneself to ethically
superior
> to another as part of an argument is evidence of an ethical flaw.
>
> That having been said, pass the A1, my steak is getting cold.
> --
> >|P. Dominus Antonius|<
> Tony Dah m
>
> Oderint dum metuant - Cicero
> Si vis pacem, para bellum - Vegetius
>
>
> On 3/29/06, David Kling (Modianus) <tau.athanasios@...> wrote:
> >
> > This wonderful use of logic could also be used to justify
beating
> > one's wife to death, because it would be better that she die
then live
> > the rest of her life in a brutal relationship. No mention of her
> > getting out of the bad relationship, simply kill her.
> >
> > Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
> >
> >
> > On 3/29/06, P. Dominus Antonius <marsvigilia@...> wrote:
> > > Alternatively, by eating that meat, I am helping to remove
that poor
> > animal
> > > from its brutal, horrible and filthy conditions. That is a
higher moral
> > > decision. Besides they're tasty. Join PETA today: People
Eating Tasty
> > > Animals.
> > > ;-)
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42976 From: Timothy P. Gallagher Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Please vote no
Salve Romans

A. Apollonius Cordus has already written a masterful essay on why
we should all vote against the current proposals but I will add my
two cents.

"Pompeia Respondeo: I guess you weren't around much of last year
when a citizen/magistrate did just that...resigned his citizenship,
and his officers...and it was vehemently objected to when he wanted
to come back within the 9 days"

Which as a citizen he was free to do but not as a magistrate as the
constitution states, for those who have missed the last ten thousand
times I have quoted it

"An office becomes vacant if the magistrate resigns or dies."

Simple and clear except for those who will not or can not see it.

The section of the law that the Tribunes relied on to "reinstate
him" had been repealed but I guess that legal nicety is as
unimportant now as it was then. The fact that the Roman people and
only the Roman people can award an office is also unimportant.

These new proposals will only add confusion to the current
resignation mess.

There is a better way and I posted it here a few weeks ago.

Please vote no on both Lex Moravia Minucia de Civitate Eiuranda ,
Lex Moravia Minucia Abdicatone Magistratum .


I have informed the Consuls, the Senate and my staff that I will
be away from the 30th of March until April 4th.


Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
Praetor
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42977 From: dicconf Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
On Thu, 30 Mar 2006, Maior wrote:

> M. Hortensia Buteoni Modiano spd;
> I just don't want to subsidize his health insurance;-) Oh
> would that we vegetarians could join together & get a good rate. Let
> the meat-eaters pay for their by-passes.

I think this is a wrong deduction from the idea that vegetarianism is
healthier. On a vegetarian diet it is more necessary to consider the
balance of the intake of essential food elements. That's what does it.
Vegetarians aren't healthy because vegetables are healthy; vegetarians are
healthy because they pay attention to what they're putting in their
stomachs.

-- Publius Livius Triarius
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42978 From: P. Dominus Antonius Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Wouldn't matter. Not to me. Now where is that mint jelly?

Look bottom line either we are better than the beasts or we're equal,
possibly inferior.

If we're better then what's the problem? We are just feeding on a lower
form of life. I know you say they are sentient. I think that gets thrown
around too widely. I would hardly grant that status to some people I know.
And if you're going to grant it to every furry/feathered little thing then
the term is effectively meaningless anyway.

If we're equal then what's the problem? We are just doing what beasts do.
Eating other beasts.

If we're inferior then what's the problem? You can hardly expect better of
us.

Now, I'm still looking for the mint jelly. I can never find anything in
this refrigerator it's so stuffed with the carcasses of yummy critters.

Them's good eats.
--
>|P. Dominus Antonius|<
Tony Dah m

Oderint dum metuant - Cicero
Si vis pacem, para bellum - Vegetius

On 3/29/06, Maior <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> And no they (sheep) aren't happy. But what does it matter? Would it, if
> they had the capacity to speak & say 'I want to live, just like you?"
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42979 From: P. Dominus Antonius Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
Kirk was progressive. Didn't he always get the green girl?
--
>|P. Dominus Antonius|<
Tony Dah m

Oderint dum metuant - Cicero
Si vis pacem, para bellum - Vegetius

On 3/29/06, Gaius Domitius Cato <dcwnewyork2002@...> wrote:
>
> Well at he got at least one bit right... The Romans were progressive
> compared to 1950's/1960's USA...
>
> The shade of skin or shape of eye matters not, this roman always
> appreciates a beautiful female...
>
> C. Domitius Cato
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42980 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-29
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
M. Hortensia Catoni quiritibus que sdd;
Lol..of course it does Cato, I was raised in a family that
has passed on Jewish ethics and virtues I'm sure for over a 1,000
years. Jewish Rabbis pronounced that it is an especial blessing to
be a vegetarian and spare animal suffering. Ethics are tremendously
important in Judaism. There are books written "Judaism and
Vegetarianism" But it's a choice!

Christians do not understand that Jews are free to intellectually
explore (even deny God) and make their own ethical choices - no
priests or high whoever telling Jews what to do.

According to the Jewish view Cato, I am more ethical than you. And
this is the sticking point: you know 0 about Judaism or it's
practitioners probably just what a priest tells you. I am a Jew,
come from an unbroken line of Jewish ancestors, went to Jewish
Sunday school until I was 17. Read a lot of Jewish books....

There indeed may be 20 ultra crazies waiting to rebuild the Temple &
sacrifice animals, I'm sure there are. They are not the mainstream
of Orthodox Jews, those are the head Rabbis of Israel, scholars as
well as extremely holy men.

As for King Numa, Plutarch, Ovid & more sources comment that there
were not animal sacrifices in those days. The PM commented in the
forum that the Roman pov was to attract the gods attention!

You are attached to sacrifice as it ties in with the idea of Jesus
the blood atonement. If I the Jew don't believe it, where does the
theory go?
bene valete in pacem deorum
Marca Hortensia Maior
>
> Marca Horensia, your personally being a vegetarian really has no
> connection whatsoever to the practices of historical Judaism ---
and
> vegetarianism is not more "ethical" in and of itself than any
other
> dietary practice; ethics are embedded in the practitioner, not the
> practice.
>
> "Every creature that lives shall be yours to eat; as with the
green
> grasses, I give you all these." (Genesis 9:3)
>
> Judaism upholds the eating of meat provided that the animal is a
> species permitted by the Torah (Leviticus 11); is ritually
slaughtered
> (shechita) (Deuteronomy 12:21); has the non-kosher elements (blood
and
> certain fats and sinews) removed (Leviticus 3:17; Genesis 32:33);
is
> prepared without mixing meat and milk (Exodus 34:26); and that
> appropriate blessings are recited (Deuteonomy 8:10).
>
>
> I eat meat, and will continue to do so, but that does not make me
any
> more or less ethical than you :-)
>
> The fact is that Judaism practiced animal sacrifice as commanded
by
> God; some ultra-Orthodox are even now preparing for the eventual
re-
> building of the Temple in Jerusalem so that sacrifices can once
again
> be offered in obedience to the commands of God.
>
>
> But back to the question I asked: why did the Romans sacrifice
> animals? When we answer this, then we will have a stepping stone
> towards understanding the place (or lack thereof) of animal
sacrifice
> within the religio Romana.
>
> Vale et valete,
>
> Cato
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42981 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
M. Hortensia P. Livio Triario spd;
Some vegetarians eat pizza, eggs,ice cream, potato chips and
have a terrible diet.
Actually fruits and vegetables are very chemically complex & have
cancer-fighting properties, fiber, tomatoes the famous lycopeine which
fights prostate disorders & on & on. I had read the 50 year study of
7th Day Adventists (Christian vegetarians) and their death, cancer&
stroke rates are are indeed much lower than the general population.
After reading that I could never go back...
vale
Maior

ps Sorry for the double post to Equitius Cato, this morning's just
appeared..

> I think this is a wrong deduction from the idea that vegetarianism
is
> healthier. On a vegetarian diet it is more necessary to consider
the
> balance of the intake of essential food elements. That's what does
it.
> Vegetarians aren't healthy because vegetables are healthy;
vegetarians are
> healthy because they pay attention to what they're putting in their
> stomachs.
>
> -- Publius Livius Triarius
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42982 From: Caius Curius Saturninus Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Digest Number 2399
Salvete Marce et Lucia et omnes,

Thank you so much for these links! I think I will order them from the
German shop as it is so much closer to where I live, but also
Venetian Cat had very nice documentation about their wares.

Valete,


On 29.3.2006, at 23:36, Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com wrote:

> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 08:12:04 -0500
> From: "Phil Perez" <senseiphil@...>
> Subject: Re: roman wine set or similar, help requested
>
> Salve Saturnine,
>
>
> http://venetiancat.com/ is where you want to go to for your Roman
> ceramic needs.
>
>
> Vires et honos,
> Marcus Cassius Philippus
> ______________________________________________________________________
> __
> ______________________________________________________________________
> __
>
> Message: 18
> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 20:24:40 +0200 (Westeuropäische Normalzeit)
> From: "Stefanie Beer" <sbeer@...>
> Subject: Betreff: roman wine set or similar, help requested
>
> Salve Saturnine!
> Try this link! I bought my set from there and it is terrific!
> http://www.roemer-mosaik-kelten-shop.de/oxid
> php/sid/5b46860525671af8569da15909269ed2/cl/alist/cnid/
> bfc4099eb1f917476
> 23060175
> Vale!
> L.Flavia Lectrix

Caius Curius Saturninus

Propraetor Provinciae Thules
Rector Academia Thules ad Studia Romana Antiqua et Nova

e-mail: c.curius@...
www.academiathules.org
gsm: +358-50-3315279
fax: +358-9-8754751
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42983 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
M. Hortensia Domitio Catoni spd;
indeed, what were Roman racial attitudes? All I know is
concerning my own people;they were annoyed perplexed by the Iudaeans,
but admired them for their conservatism.
Yes we are all Romans:) I like that too.
Maior
>
Salve Maie
>
> Well at he got at least one bit right... The Romans were
progressive
> compared to 1950's/1960's USA...
>
> The shade of skin or shape of eye matters not, this roman always
> appreciates a beautiful female...
>
> C. Domitius Cato
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42984 From: A. Tullia Scholastica Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Digest Number 2399
> Salue, Saturnine, et saluete, omnes!
>
> Salvete Marce et Lucia et omnes,
>
> Thank you so much for these links! I think I will order them from the
> German shop as it is so much closer to where I live, but also
> Venetian Cat had very nice documentation about their wares.
>
> ATS: Julia from Venetian Cat is a wonderful person, and a fine and
> accommodating potter. The problems of dealing with transatlantic commerce for
> fragile objects and the obnoxious details of the financial arrangements may
> make a European provider a better choice for you, but I recommend her heartily
> to those who can overcome those obstacles.
>
> I wasn¹t able to access the site for the European potter...I got a 404
> error. Might be interesting to see...
>
> Valete,
>
>
> On 29.3.2006, at 23:36, Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com wrote:
>
>> > Message: 4
>> > Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 08:12:04 -0500
>> > From: "Phil Perez" <senseiphil@...>
>> > Subject: Re: roman wine set or similar, help requested
>> >
>> > Salve Saturnine,
>> >
>> >
>> > http://venetiancat.com/ is where you want to go to for your Roman
>> > ceramic needs.
>> >
>> >
>> > Vires et honos,
>> > Marcus Cassius Philippus
>> > ______________________________________________________________________
>> > __
>> > ______________________________________________________________________
>> > __
>> >
>> > Message: 18
>> > Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 20:24:40 +0200 (Westeuropäische Normalzeit)
>> > From: "Stefanie Beer" <sbeer@...>
>> > Subject: Betreff: roman wine set or similar, help requested
>> >
>> > Salve Saturnine!
>> > Try this link! I bought my set from there and it is terrific!
>> > http://www.roemer-mosaik-kelten-shop.de/oxid
>> > php/sid/5b46860525671af8569da15909269ed2/cl/alist/cnid/
>> > bfc4099eb1f917476
>> > 23060175
>> > Vale!
>> > L.Flavia Lectrix
>
> Caius Curius Saturninus
>
> Propraetor Provinciae Thules
> Rector Academia Thules ad Studia Romana Antiqua et Nova
>
> e-mail: c.curius@...
> www.academiathules.org
> gsm: +358-50-3315279
> fax: +358-9-8754751
>
>
> Vale, et ualete,
>
> A. Tullia Scholastica
>
>
>
>




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42985 From: M. Lucretius Agricola Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Digest Number 2399
> >
> > I wasn¹t able to access the site for the European potter...I
got a 404
> > error. Might be interesting to see...
> >

Salvete

Just use

http://www.roemer-mosaik-kelten-shop.de/

and navigate from there

Optime valete

M. Lucr. Agricola
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42986 From: QFabiusMaxmi@aol.com Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
In a message dated 3/29/2006 7:17:20 PM Pacific Standard Time,
marsvigilia@... writes:
That having been said, pass the A1, my steak is getting cold.
Was that a white Ox?

Q. Fabius Maximus


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42987 From: Appius Iulius Priscus Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Salue, Gnae Equiti

I) Anyway, wasn't it an exception?

II) Did they eat them?

Vale

Appius

Gnaeus Equitius Marinus <gawne@...> wrote:
Salve Appi Iuli,

Appius Iulius Priscus wrote:

> I) Weren´t all the sacrificed animals those who belong to
> normal carnivorous human diet? Dogs, cats and son complety excluded.

No. The Romans regularly sacrificed dogs.

Vale,

-- Marinus


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


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

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

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


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





---------------------------------
Blab-away for as little as 1¢/min. Make PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42988 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
C. Equitius Cato Hortensiae Maiori quiritibusque S.P.D.

Salve et salvete.

Marca Hortensia, you wrote:

"So until the Enlightenment of 1780's all Jews were observant and all
ate dairy vegetarian meals. (fish was considered expensive)."

and

"I suggest you talk to a rabbi or read a book about Judaism written by
Jews, not Christians."


This is simply untrue on several levels. The "dating" of the
Enlightenment is just the beginning.


According to the Society for Jewish Culture (written by Jews):

"'Ethical Vegetarianism' is rejected because it is G-d who allows
us to eat animals. The laws of shechita (ritual slaughter) are
designed to provide a compassionate way to kill the animals for
eating....according to most halachic authorities, when the Temple is
rebuilt, all Jewish men will be obligated to partake of the paschal
lamb with their families. Nothing short of a severe lamb allergy
permits abstaining from this sacrificial meal (of course, it is
believed that when the Temple is built, G-d will heal the sick, so the
allergies will go away)...the Torah states that 'eating meat and
drinking wine give a man pleasure.' All festive and holiday meals
have both components: they bring us gladness and enhance our simcha."

Maimonides (a Jew) writes in Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Melakhim 11:1, the
sacrificial order - including animal sacrifices - will be reinstated
when the Temple is rebuilt.

Rabbi J. David Bleich (a Jew) writes:

"Some cite the precedent of Adam and Eve as indication that in a
perfect world, i.e. in the future time of the Messiah, humans will
return to universal vegetarianism. The vast majority of rabbinic
scholars, however, maintain that animal offerings will be resumed in
the Messianic era. Indeed, the Talmud (Baba Batra 75a) declares that
when the Messiah arrives, God will prepare a flesh-based feast for the
righteous. The Talmud says that at the end of one's life, the first
question God asks is: 'Did you taste every fruit that I put on Earth?'
We are enjoined to appreciate all of life's bounty...in conclusion,
Judaism accepts the idea of a vegetarian diet, though dependent on
one's intention: Vegetarianism based on the idea that we have no
moral right to kill animals is not an acceptable Jewish view."

The Jewish Virtual Library (written by Jews) says:

"Rabbi Hayim Halevy Donin suggests that the dietary laws are designed
as a call to holiness. The ability to distinguish between right and
wrong, good and evil, pure and defiled, the sacred and the profane, is
very important in Judaism. Imposing rules on what you can and cannot
eat ingrains that kind of self control. In addition, it elevates the
simple act of eating into a religious ritual. The Jewish dinner table
is often compared to the Temple altar in rabbinic literature...The
short answer to why we observe these laws is: because the Torah says
so. The Torah does not specify any reason for these laws, and for a
Torah-observant, traditional Jew, there is no need for any other
reason. Some have suggested that the laws of kashrut fall into the
category of "chukkim," laws for which there is no reason. We show our
obedience to G-d by following these laws even though we do not know
the reason."

Rabbi Yossi Levertov (a Jew) says:

"Anyone who is worried about the animal has to look in the Torah to
see the facts...the Torah is also filled with the meat offerings we
had in biblical times...the same God that says you shouldn't torture
animals says you should do certain things (such as ritual
slaughtering) in a very particular way. ... The discussions with
regard to (kashrut) say it's the most humane way of killing...we have
to look at it from God's perspective, not from man's perspective.
Then we are following (God) and connecting to Him. If we are worried
only about how we perceive it, then we're not believing in God and
we're not relating to God. We're relating to ourselves."

And, finally, the Rabbi Yisrael Baal Shem Tov (a Jew who lived from
A.D. 1698-1760):

"The Baal Shem Tov, in the years that he was a hidden mystic, would
make his livelihood slaughtering chickens and beef for Jewish
communities before a festival. When he left this occupation, a new
slaughterer took his place. One day, the gentile helper of one of the
Jewish villagers brought a chicken to the new slaughterer. As the new
man began to sharpen his knife, the gentile watched and began to
laugh. 'You wet your knife with water before you sharpen it!" he
exclaimed, "And then you just start to cut?'

'And how else?' the slaughterer asked.

'Yisroelik (the Baal Shem Tov) would cry until he had tears enough to
wet the knife. Then he would cry as he sharpened the knife. Only then
would he cut!'

So, apparently NOT "all Jews" before your date of A.D. 1780 ate "dairy
vegetarian meals".


Vale et valete,

Cato
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42989 From: Gnaeus Equitius Marinus Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Salve Appi Iuli,

Appius Iulius Priscus wrote:

[asking about Roman sacrifices of dogs]
> I) Anyway, wasn't it an exception?

In what sense? It's true that most of the animals Romans sacrificed
were food animals, but that's because they sacrificed domesticated
animals, and most of those are food animals.

> II) Did they eat them?

No. Not officially anyway.

Vale,

-- Marinus
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42990 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Ludi Cerialia et Ludi Floralia
A. Apollonius Flavio Galerio omnibusque sal.

This sounds like a great event, and I wish you the
best of luck with it. I'm a little confused, though,
when you say:

> I announce that the Ludi Cerialia (April 12-19) will
> be combined
> with the Ludi Floralia (April 27-30) and will be
> held at the Pagan
> Unity Festival in Burns, Tennessee on Friday, April
> 29, and
> Saturday, April 30, 2006.

This could give people the impression that you are
unilaterally changing the official religious calendar
of Nova Roma and taking over the organization of these
two sets of official ludi. I'm sure that can't be what
you're saying, because of course the flamen Cerealis
has no power to change the calendar (the pontifices do
that) or to organize public ludi (the aediles do
that). I guess what you're really saying is something
like:

"I will be holding some unofficial private ludi to
celebrate the Cerealia and the Floralia at this time
and place, but of course the official ludi of Nova
Roma will take place at the usual times and will be
organized by their respective aediles."

Is that about right?


P.S. Thanks for your kind praise of my recent lengthy
message. :)



___________________________________________________________
Win a BlackBerry device from O2 with Yahoo!. Enter now. http://www.yahoo.co.uk/blackberry
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42991 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
C. Equitius Cato G. Fabio Buteoni Modiano M. Hortensiae Maiori
quiritibusque S.P.D.

Salvete omnes.

Modianus, thank you for your response, as it came closer to the
question that I asked, although it too became a kind of apologetic for
vegetarianism as well. But the question I actually *asked* was left
unaddressed. I did not ask *if* the Romans sacrificed; we know they
did from countless sources. What I asked was *why* did they sacrifice?

To be a little more precise: did the Romans believe that the gods had
commanded them to do so, as the God of the Jews did for His people?

In the same vein, if the gods of the religio *command* practitioners
to offer animals as sacrifices, then we should take a very close look
at that. The College of Pontiffs has (wisely) made it clear that the
State per se will not subsidize such activity; but it cannot be
dismissed simply because of the squeamishness of those who dislike the
concept.

On a side note: Marca Hortensia, you seem to be under the impression
that I am necessarily looking for animal sacrifices to be brought back
into practice by the religio. I am not. I am opposed to animal
sacrifices, but on a theological level that involves my own religio
privata and has nothing to do with vegetarianism, PETA, animal
"rights", &c. Denying, or pretending to ignore, the fact that the
Jews sacrificed animals on the direct order of God because you do not
like the idea is not only ludicrous but academically dishonest.

"And will make an offering by fire unto the LORD, a burnt-offering, or
a sacrifice, in fulfilment of a vow clearly uttered, or as a
freewill-offering, or in your appointed seasons, to make a sweet
savour unto the LORD, of the herd, or of the flock...And when thou
preparest a bullock for a burnt-offering, or for a sacrifice, in
fulfilment of a vow clearly uttered, or for peace-offerings unto the
LORD."- Numbers 15:3, 8

"Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as
in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than
sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams." - I Samuel 15:22

To obey is indeed better than sacrifice --- but the catch-22 is that
sacrifice forms a part of that obedience under Jewish Law.

Valete bene,

Cato
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42992 From: M•IVL•SEVERVS Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: TRYING TO SERVE...
Severus Sabino omnibusque sal.

Plurimas gratias for your kind words, T. Iulius Sabinus, amice. I am only trying to fulfill my duties and serve Nova Roma and the Nova Romans.

Vale, et valete optime,

M•IVL•SEVERVS

PROPRÆTOR•PROVINCIƕMEXICO
ROGATOR
INTERPRETER
SCRIBA•CENSORIS•GEM
MVSÆVS•COLLEGII•ERATOVS•SODALITATIS•MVSARVM
SOCIVS•CHORI•MVSARVM


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

Powered by Outblaze
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42993 From: Caius Moravius Brutus Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
Salve Equiti Cato!

My gut feeling about this is that they carried out animal sacrifices for a couple of different reasons. From time to time the ancestors were divinely instructed to institute particular cults - for example as a result of consulting the Sybylline books. These cults were generally of Greek or, in the case of the Great Mother, Asian origin and already involved the sacrifice of animals. Obviously these post-dated both Pythagorean influence and the Numa tradition. As Italic Deities became more and more identified with Hellenic ones it would have seemed natural to adapt the rites accordingly.

It also occurs to me that a simpler explanation might be that sacrifices took place because individual worshippers offered up animals on their own initiative for whatever purpose - gratitude or great need etc., - and found that the ritual worked. It would then be completely in keeping with Roman practice to repeat the operation whenever appropriate. As we know the state religion developed out of older more rustic rites.

For my own part I do eat meat although I do recognize that there is an ethical element to this which I am not entirely comfortable with. I have worked in the catering industry and have some limited experience of abbatoirs in the UK - which I assume are similar to those in other developed countries. They are appalling places and deeply unnatural. I cannot imagine that a humanely administered animal sacrifice could possibly be any worse.

Vale

Caius Moravius Brutus

gaiusequitiuscato <mlcinnyc@...> wrote:
C. Equitius Cato G. Fabio Buteoni Modiano M. Hortensiae Maiori
quiritibusque S.P.D.

Salvete omnes.

Modianus, thank you for your response, as it came closer to the
question that I asked, although it too became a kind of apologetic for
vegetarianism as well. But the question I actually *asked* was left
unaddressed. I did not ask *if* the Romans sacrificed; we know they
did from countless sources. What I asked was *why* did they sacrifice?

To be a little more precise: did the Romans believe that the gods had
commanded them to do so, as the God of the Jews did for His people?

In the same vein, if the gods of the religio *command* practitioners
to offer animals as sacrifices, then we should take a very close look
at that. The College of Pontiffs has (wisely) made it clear that the
State per se will not subsidize such activity; but it cannot be
dismissed simply because of the squeamishness of those who dislike the
concept.

On a side note: Marca Hortensia, you seem to be under the impression
that I am necessarily looking for animal sacrifices to be brought back
into practice by the religio. I am not. I am opposed to animal
sacrifices, but on a theological level that involves my own religio
privata and has nothing to do with vegetarianism, PETA, animal
"rights", &c. Denying, or pretending to ignore, the fact that the
Jews sacrificed animals on the direct order of God because you do not
like the idea is not only ludicrous but academically dishonest.

"And will make an offering by fire unto the LORD, a burnt-offering, or
a sacrifice, in fulfilment of a vow clearly uttered, or as a
freewill-offering, or in your appointed seasons, to make a sweet
savour unto the LORD, of the herd, or of the flock...And when thou
preparest a bullock for a burnt-offering, or for a sacrifice, in
fulfilment of a vow clearly uttered, or for peace-offerings unto the
LORD."- Numbers 15:3, 8

"Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as
in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than
sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams." - I Samuel 15:22

To obey is indeed better than sacrifice --- but the catch-22 is that
sacrifice forms a part of that obedience under Jewish Law.

Valete bene,

Cato







SPONSORED LINKS
Roman empire Ancient history Citizenship test 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! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42994 From: PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
F. Galerius Aurelianus S.P.D.

Dogs were sacrificed during the Lupercalia and Robrigalia. Cats were uncommon in Rome. Goats, pigs, sheep, cows, bulls, oxen, foxes, hares, chicken, and other fowl were the most common living sacrifices but fish were offered to Volcanus once per year.
Living sacrifices to the chthonic gods were buried entirely in the earth and no part of them were consumed nor were any of the small fish offered to Volcanus eaten. Color, sex, and fecundity were also factors in the sacrifice as was the physical perfection of the animal and its willingness to stand still for the whole rite. The majority of the animals sacrified to celestial and fertility gods was profaned and eaten while only the exta and portions of the flesh were burned to Dii Immortales.
I can't speak for the Portugese but when we butchered a hog and a calf down in Mississippi, we usually had a barbeque and all the brown cracklins we could eat while stirring the souse pot, making sausage, putting the hams and the feet in to pickle. Gross in certain ways but it could be fun.

Valete.

-----Original Message-----
From: Appius Iulius Priscus <ap.priscus@...>
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 12:27:14 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice


Appius Iulius Priscus omnibus S.P.D.

I) Weren´t all the sacrificed animals those who belong to normal carnivorous
human diet? Dogs, cats and son complety excluded.

II) I always had in mind that religious animal sacrifice was "just" a festive
way to eat meat in a time when refrigerators were not available, and being meat
scarce, it was a way for many people to share a happy moment together eating. In
Portugal we can still can find big parties with a pig being slaghtered in loco
and immeadiately roasted and eaten amidst a lot of frolic and alcohol ingestion.
Of course this is completely devoid of religious meanings, but presumably has
its roots on ancient sacrifices.

III) I think that, sometimes, the divine nature of ancient sacrificial meal
times could inspire imagination and ecstatic feelings in a fashion very remote
from an "atheistic" dinner.

Valete

Ap. Iul. Priscus

gaiusequitiuscato <mlcinnyc@...> wrote:
C. Equitius Cato M. Hortensiae Maiori quiritibusqe S.P.D.

Salve et salvete omnes.

Marca Horensia, your personally being a vegetarian really has no
connection whatsoever to the practices of historical Judaism --- and
vegetarianism is not more "ethical" in and of itself than any other
dietary practice; ethics are embedded in the practitioner, not the
practice.

"Every creature that lives shall be yours to eat; as with the green
grasses, I give you all these." (Genesis 9:3)

Judaism upholds the eating of meat provided that the animal is a
species permitted by the Torah (Leviticus 11); is ritually slaughtered
(shechita) (Deuteronomy 12:21); has the non-kosher elements (blood and
certain fats and sinews) removed (Leviticus 3:17; Genesis 32:33); is
prepared without mixing meat and milk (Exodus 34:26); and that
appropriate blessings are recited (Deuteonomy 8:10).


I eat meat, and will continue to do so, but that does not make me any
more or less ethical than you :-)

The fact is that Judaism practiced animal sacrifice as commanded by
God; some ultra-Orthodox are even now preparing for the eventual re-
building of the Temple in Jerusalem so that sacrifices can once again
be offered in obedience to the commands of God.


But back to the question I asked: why did the Romans sacrifice
animals? When we answer this, then we will have a stepping stone
towards understanding the place (or lack thereof) of animal sacrifice
within the religio Romana.

Vale et valete,

Cato









SPONSORED LINKS
Roman empire Ancient history Citizenship test 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! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.

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




Yahoo! Groups Links






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42995 From: Stefanie Beer Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Betreff: Re: [Nova-Roma] Digest Number 2399
Salve Aula Tullia Scholastica!
You might try it under http://www.roemer-mosaik-kelten-shop.de/ Perhaps the
direct link was too long for your browser to accept... I am quite sure that
you can find your way through this website from there on! I like it very
much, but my bank account most of all the times keeps me from shopping
instead of just gazing. ;-)
Vale!
Flavia

-------Originalmeldung-------

Von: A. Tullia Scholastica
Datum: 03/30/06 10:56:16
An: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Betreff: Re: [Nova-Roma] Digest Number 2399

> Salue, Saturnine, et saluete, omnes!
>
> Salvete Marce et Lucia et omnes,
>
> Thank you so much for these links! I think I will order them from the
> German shop as it is so much closer to where I live, but also
> Venetian Cat had very nice documentation about their wares.
>
> ATS: Julia from Venetian Cat is a wonderful person, and a fine and
> accommodating potter. The problems of dealing with transatlantic commerce
for
> fragile objects and the obnoxious details of the financial arrangements
may
> make a European provider a better choice for you, but I recommend her
heartily
> to those who can overcome those obstacles.
>
> I wasn¹t able to access the site for the European potter...I got a 404
> error. Might be interesting to see...
>
> Valete,
>
>
> On 29.3.2006, at 23:36, Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com wrote:
>
>> > Message: 4
>> > Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 08:12:04 -0500
>> > From: "Phil Perez" <senseiphil@...>
>> > Subject: Re: roman wine set or similar, help requested
>> >
>> > Salve Saturnine,
>> >
>> >
>> > http://venetiancat.com/ is where you want to go to for your Roman
>> > ceramic needs.
>> >
>> >
>> > Vires et honos,
>> > Marcus Cassius Philippus
>> > ______________________________________________________________________
>> > __
>> > ______________________________________________________________________
>> > __
>> >
>> > Message: 18
>> > Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 20:24:40 +0200 (Westeuropäische Normalzeit)
>> > From: "Stefanie Beer" <sbeer@...>
>> > Subject: Betreff: roman wine set or similar, help requested
>> >
>> > Salve Saturnine!
>> > Try this link! I bought my set from there and it is terrific!
>> > http://www.roemer-mosaik-kelten-shop.de/oxid
>> > php/sid/5b46860525671af8569da15909269ed2/cl/alist/cnid/
>> > bfc4099eb1f917476
>> > 23060175
>> > Vale!
>> > L.Flavia Lectrix
>
> Caius Curius Saturninus
>
> Propraetor Provinciae Thules
> Rector Academia Thules ad Studia Romana Antiqua et Nova
>
> e-mail: c.curius@...
> www.academiathules.org
> gsm: +358-50-3315279
> fax: +358-9-8754751
>
>
> Vale, et ualete,
>
> A. Tullia Scholastica
>
>
>
>




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




Yahoo! Groups Links







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42996 From: Stefanie Beer Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Betreff: [Nova-Roma] Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Mod
Salve Hortensia Maior, Salvete omnes,
actually there is no need to eat either meat from unhappy animals stuffed
with antibiotics and fed on fish meal and other disgusting stuff or eat
kosher meat or eat none at all. At least in Germany - and spreading I think
- is a movement of "Bio-Farmers", i.e. farmers that raise their cattle (or
vegetables, grain whatever) the way it´s supposed to be: cattle actually
gets to run on a meadow, and is fed with hay and grain (also biologically
raised) additionally; stables are big and open, there´s no prophylactic use
of antibiotics, no chemicals on the fields etc. Of course the meat is MUCH
more expensive than the plastic-wrapped pale stuff in the self-serving
department of the local supermarket, but the taste is worth every cent of it

What you say about people not seeing the way the animals are butchered has
some value, though it might not apply to all. I have lived in a very small
village in Bavaria when I was a kid and we kids often helped butchering a
pig or a cow - holding the buckets for the blood etc and I still like to eat
meat. But I prefer the tasty sort. ;-) No need to drown everything in some
strangecoloured sauce squeezed from a plastic bottle - rather marinated with
fresh herbs, lavender honey, dijon mustard, fresh ground black pepper, white
wine and good olive oil for two days before wrapping it up in bread dough
and put it in the oven.... excellent when served with fresh
tomato-and-rucola-salad - but I digress! ;-) (Guess you all know my hobby,
now!)
Valete!
Lucia Flavia Lectrix

-------Originalmeldung-------

Von: Maior
Datum: 03/30/06 05:37:17
An: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Betreff: [Nova-Roma] Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern
Sacrifice

M. Hortensia Antonio spd;
the only way people eat meat is that they are shielded from
the cruelty of driving the cattle to the slaughterhouse & then
killing them, stripping the skin & sinews off etc...
I've seen cows & sheep in the field herded in trucks off to
the big kill in Ireland. And no they aren't happy. But what does it
matter? Would it, if they had the capacity to speak & say 'I want to
live, just like you?"
Maior


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42997 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
Yes, the man certainly has good taste in women... hehe

To boldly go where no man has gone before... and spread love across
the galaxy??? (But those ungroovy bad guys better watch out, we got
phasers too...)

Not bad for its time... Except for its portrayal of Magna Roma...

C. Domitius Cato

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "P. Dominus Antonius"
<marsvigilia@...> wrote:
>
> Kirk was progressive. Didn't he always get the green girl?
> --
> >|P. Dominus Antonius|<
> Tony Dah m
>
> Oderint dum metuant - Cicero
> Si vis pacem, para bellum - Vegetius
>
> On 3/29/06, Gaius Domitius Cato <dcwnewyork2002@...> wrote:
> >
> > Well at he got at least one bit right... The Romans were
progressive
> > compared to 1950's/1960's USA...
> >
> > The shade of skin or shape of eye matters not, this roman always
> > appreciates a beautiful female...
> >
> > C. Domitius Cato
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42998 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> M. Hortensia P. Livio Triario spd;
> Some vegetarians eat pizza, eggs,ice cream, potato chips
and
> have a terrible diet.
> Actually fruits and vegetables are very chemically complex &
have
> cancer-fighting properties, fiber, tomatoes the famous lycopeine
which
> fights prostate disorders & on & on. I had read the 50 year study
of
> 7th Day Adventists (Christian vegetarians) and their death,
cancer&
> stroke rates are are indeed much lower than the general
population.
> After reading that I could never go back...
> vale
> Maior
>

Salve Maie,

Seventh Day Adventists do not drink or smoke either if I remember
correctly? That will definately effect things. I will bet they eat
pizza with mushrooms or cake made with some egg on occasion too...
Vegetarian diet does not mean perfect diet but still cutting out the
more harmful stuff has a big impact.

That being said an occasional steak or beer will not knock off years
in an average humans life. Wine is good for the health, but you can
get the same beneficial effect from unfermented grape juice - which
I drink quite a bit - can drink a gallon of the stuff and still
safely drive home. And you can get complex proteins from fish as
easily as beef, but without the cholesterol and fat.

Vale
Cato II
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 42999 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Diet and the State
The majority of the population does eat meat, though I do not, I would
not condemn them on a moral basis. Though I do encourage people to
partake of a healther diet, it is their liberty to eat, drink or smoke
things that are bad for their health, as long as it does not affect
me.

I respect other's personal freedoms, it is typical of fanatical
christians to try to force their moral standards on others and try to
outlaw 'vices', if adults want to do stupid or self harmful things
like gamble, engage in prostitution or whatnot, that is their
business, as long as it does not effect me, I could care less. It is
not the state's role to be a nanny and make us be good, it is the
state's role to intervene when one persons behaviour impinges on a
anothers freedoms. Note the attempts in Roma Antigua to ban
extravogant events, even dormouse! all total failures, in recent
modern times we have the prohibtion...

The state can not regulate individual morality or make people live
better. It however owes a duty to insure lesser sentiant beings are
slaughtered humanely and allowing those who wish to lead healther
lives to do so - proper labeling on products, listing ingrediants and
potential health risks. Obviously when people drink and drive, harm
children or do dangerous or harmful things that effect the public
then 'public morality' is invoked. If adults choose to eat or do
things that is bad for them, they have been warned - no sueing the
tobacco company because you choose to smoke and got cancer... No
sueing Oscar Mayer because you had a heartattack from eating their
factory produced fat wieners for decades...

If our meat loving friend wants to eat his hamburger, let him, but
when he gets a stroke, it was not because he did not know the
dangers...

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> M. Hortensia Antonio spd;
> the only way people eat meat is that they are shielded from
> the cruelty of driving the cattle to the slaughterhouse & then
> killing them, stripping the skin & sinews off etc...
> I've seen cows & sheep in the field herded in trucks off to
> the big kill in Ireland. And no they aren't happy. But what does it
> matter? Would it, if they had the capacity to speak & say 'I want to
> live, just like you?"
> Maior
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43000 From: A. Tullia Scholastica Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Betreff: Re: [Nova-Roma] Digest Number 2399
> Salue, L. Flauia Lectrix, et saluete, omnes!
>
> Salve Aula Tullia Scholastica!
> You might try it under http://www.roemer-mosaik-kelten-shop.de/ Perhaps the
> direct link was too long for your browser to accept... I am quite sure that
> you can find your way through this website from there on! I like it very
> much, but my bank account most of all the times keeps me from shopping
> instead of just gazing. ;-)
>
> ATS: I seem to have a similar problem with that...I doubt I¹m alone.
>
> Vielen Dank! One of our diligent cybernauts suggested the same thing to me
> privately, but it¹s always helpful to have that sort of information posted for
> the benefit of others. I won¹t say that the English translation is terribly
> complete, but I can read enough Deutsch that I could understand most of it, if
> not the wonders of the Euro, whose value I don¹t know.
>
> Vale!
> Flavia
>
> Vale, et ualete,
>
> A. Tullia Scholastica
>
> -------Originalmeldung-------
>
> Von: A. Tullia Scholastica
> Datum: 03/30/06 10:56:16
> An: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Betreff: Re: [Nova-Roma] Digest Number 2399
>
>> > Salue, Saturnine, et saluete, omnes!
>> >
>> > Salvete Marce et Lucia et omnes,
>> >
>> > Thank you so much for these links! I think I will order them from the
>> > German shop as it is so much closer to where I live, but also
>> > Venetian Cat had very nice documentation about their wares.
>> >
>> > ATS: Julia from Venetian Cat is a wonderful person, and a fine and
>> > accommodating potter. The problems of dealing with transatlantic commerce
> for
>> > fragile objects and the obnoxious details of the financial arrangements
> may
>> > make a European provider a better choice for you, but I recommend her
> heartily
>> > to those who can overcome those obstacles.
>> >
>> > I wasn¹t able to access the site for the European potter...I got a 404
>> > error. Might be interesting to see...
>> >
>> > Valete,
>> >
>> >
>> > On 29.3.2006, at 23:36, Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com wrote:
>> >
>>>> >> > Message: 4
>>>> >> > Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 08:12:04 -0500
>>>> >> > From: "Phil Perez" <senseiphil@...>
>>>> >> > Subject: Re: roman wine set or similar, help requested
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > Salve Saturnine,
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > http://venetiancat.com/ is where you want to go to for your Roman
>>>> >> > ceramic needs.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > Vires et honos,
>>>> >> > Marcus Cassius Philippus
>>>> >> > ______________________________________________________________________
>>>> >> > __
>>>> >> > ______________________________________________________________________
>>>> >> > __
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > Message: 18
>>>> >> > Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 20:24:40 +0200 (Westeuropäische Normalzeit)
>>>> >> > From: "Stefanie Beer" <sbeer@...>
>>>> >> > Subject: Betreff: roman wine set or similar, help requested
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > Salve Saturnine!
>>>> >> > Try this link! I bought my set from there and it is terrific!
>>>> >> > http://www.roemer-mosaik-kelten-shop.de/oxid
>>>> >> > php/sid/5b46860525671af8569da15909269ed2/cl/alist/cnid/
>>>> >> > bfc4099eb1f917476
>>>> >> > 23060175
>>>> >> > Vale!
>>>> >> > L.Flavia Lectrix
>> >
>> > Caius Curius Saturninus
>> >
>> > Propraetor Provinciae Thules
>> > Rector Academia Thules ad Studia Romana Antiqua et Nova
>> >
>> > e-mail: c.curius@...
>> > www.academiathules.org
>> > gsm: +358-50-3315279
>> > fax: +358-9-8754751
>> >
>> >
>> > Vale, et ualete,
>> >
>> > A. Tullia Scholastica
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>
>
>




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43001 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Romana Diet
Salve Flavia Lectrix,

I think you have precisely correct the idea of Roman Diet, when they
ate meat, and most Romani en Rona Antigua were NOT vegetarians by
intent, they ate more healthy animals. As this is Nova Roma not
Nove Iudea, it is the Roman practices that count as far as NR is
concerned. I choose to be vegetarian for health reasons and in NR
have no objection to the slaughter of animals as it is lawful and
historically accurate. From a moral point of view I would only
stipulate that the slaughter be done humanely and ideally nothing be
wasted.

I as most urban people of this day am a bit squeamish and I would
not care to witness a slaughtering, but I would not oppose a humane
slaughtering on ethical grounds. Personally I think the PETA group
have discredited their own moral purposes by going to far with their
extremist rhetoric. Milking a cow does not harm it and I am a happy
milk drinker and cheese/ice cream eater with no reservations
whatsoever. I do not want to be associated with crazy extremists
like PETA or ELF simply because I advocate humane practices with
animals or sensible management of agiculture/environment. If Roma
Antigua maintained a continuous political nation-state to this day
it too would have to adapt to modern knowledge and conditions...

NR as an organisation and possible state will naturally have to sort
out what things are at the core of Via Romana and what things must
change with the times. Naturally there will be some debate as to
what elements should adapt and what should be faithfully preserved.
Just like the Assemblies and Senate witnessed great debate about
such things (greek influence, other cultural influences) in Roma
Antigua it is proper and correct that like debate happen here in NR.

Vale,
C. Domitius Cato

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Stefanie Beer" <sbeer@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Hortensia Maior, Salvete omnes,
> actually there is no need to eat either meat from unhappy animals
stuffed
> with antibiotics and fed on fish meal and other disgusting stuff
or eat
> kosher meat or eat none at all. At least in Germany - and
spreading I think
> - is a movement of "Bio-Farmers", i.e. farmers that raise their
cattle (or
> vegetables, grain whatever) the way it´s supposed to be: cattle
actually
> gets to run on a meadow, and is fed with hay and grain (also
biologically
> raised) additionally; stables are big and open, there´s no
prophylactic use
> of antibiotics, no chemicals on the fields etc. Of course the meat
is MUCH
> more expensive than the plastic-wrapped pale stuff in the self-
serving
> department of the local supermarket, but the taste is worth every
cent of it
>
> What you say about people not seeing the way the animals are
butchered has
> some value, though it might not apply to all. I have lived in a
very small
> village in Bavaria when I was a kid and we kids often helped
butchering a
> pig or a cow - holding the buckets for the blood etc and I still
like to eat
> meat. But I prefer the tasty sort. ;-) No need to drown everything
in some
> strangecoloured sauce squeezed from a plastic bottle - rather
marinated with
> fresh herbs, lavender honey, dijon mustard, fresh ground black
pepper, white
> wine and good olive oil for two days before wrapping it up in
bread dough
> and put it in the oven.... excellent when served with fresh
> tomato-and-rucola-salad - but I digress! ;-) (Guess you all know
my hobby,
> now!)
> Valete!
> Lucia Flavia Lectrix
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43002 From: Stefanie Beer Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Betreff: [Nova-Roma] Romana Diet
Salve Gai Domiti Cato,salvete omnes,
well spoken. I respect everybody´s eating habits and restrictions be they
based on religion, personal convictions or health reasons. I used to have
fellow students over for brunch at least once a month and there were
vegetarians, muslims, diabetics.... and we never had any trouble. Just don´t
fry ham and egg in the same pan and my muslim friends had no problems eating
the egg, place salami and the other stuff on a different plate than the
smoked chicken breast and cheese on another one, have marmalade and
sweetening for diabetics ready, too - we always had a great time.
I agree totally with you that the Romans ate healthier than most folks today
do. The main dishes were beans and lentils and pulsum, which in the
descriptions sounds like a kind of porridge, aside with cheese and fruits
and eggs. If I remember correctly the Roman dinner started with eggs and
ended with fruit, thus the saying "from eggs to apples" for from the
beginning to the end.
From todays medical view too much meat is bad for you - likewise too much
alcohol, saturated fat in general or sugar.
But meat in itself is not unhealthy, nor is cholesterol, whatever you might
think. The latter is of the utmost importance for the upkeep of cell
membranes, the building of gall acids and other things, for example. As the
famous 16th century physician Theophrast von Hohenheim, aka. Paracelsus
said: "Dosis sola facit venenum."- only the dosage makes a poison poisonous.
You can poison yourself with simple salt: 10 g can kill you. But to return
to the subject of meat and diet, physicians encourage eating meat once and
fish about twice a week.
My personal opinion is that no matter what you prefer to eat the quality
should be high. So for me it´s meat in form of ham or salami or the like
about once a week and something like steak or schnitzel every two or three
weeks, most of the stuff I eat I could share with every vegetarian except
the few very extreme ones that eat neither milk/ cheese or eggs.
I think we should think our eating and buying habits over. Do we really need
strawberries on New Year´s Eve? Do I need asparagus in September? Do my
apples have to travel all around the world? Can´t I buy the ones grown
locally?I try to buy my stuff locally and in its proper season. Aside from
that I enjoy exotic fruit from time to time, but I neither need bananas,
ananas, mango and the like the whole year round.

Another thing that´s good for your health is getting enough sleep - and it
seems I´m having quite a deficite of that these days, so I´ll grab the
chance, disconnect the phone line, turn of the computer and go to bed right
now - it´s already midnight again, alas!
Vale et valete!
L.Flavia Lectrix

-------Originalmeldung-------

Von: Gaius Domitius Cato
Datum: 03/30/06 23:24:46
An: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Betreff: [Nova-Roma] Romana Diet

Salve Flavia Lectrix,

I think you have precisely correct the idea of Roman Diet, when they
ate meat, and most Romani en Rona Antigua were NOT vegetarians by
intent, they ate more healthy animals. As this is Nova Roma not
Nove Iudea, it is the Roman practices that count as far as NR is
concerned. I choose to be vegetarian for health reasons and in NR
have no objection to the slaughter of animals as it is lawful and
historically accurate. From a moral point of view I would only
stipulate that the slaughter be done humanely and ideally nothing be
wasted.

I as most urban people of this day am a bit squeamish and I would
not care to witness a slaughtering, but I would not oppose a humane
slaughtering on ethical grounds. Personally I think the PETA group
have discredited their own moral purposes by going to far with their
extremist rhetoric. Milking a cow does not harm it and I am a happy
milk drinker and cheese/ice cream eater with no reservations
whatsoever. I do not want to be associated with crazy extremists
like PETA or ELF simply because I advocate humane practices with
animals or sensible management of agiculture/environment. If Roma
Antigua maintained a continuous political nation-state to this day
it too would have to adapt to modern knowledge and conditions...

NR as an organisation and possible state will naturally have to sort
out what things are at the core of Via Romana and what things must
change with the times. Naturally there will be some debate as to
what elements should adapt and what should be faithfully preserved.
Just like the Assemblies and Senate witnessed great debate about
such things (greek influence, other cultural influences) in Roma
Antigua it is proper and correct that like debate happen here in NR.

Vale,
C. Domitius Cato

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Stefanie Beer" <sbeer@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Hortensia Maior, Salvete omnes,
> actually there is no need to eat either meat from unhappy animals
stuffed
> with antibiotics and fed on fish meal and other disgusting stuff
or eat
> kosher meat or eat none at all. At least in Germany - and
spreading I think
> - is a movement of "Bio-Farmers", i.e. farmers that raise their
cattle (or
> vegetables, grain whatever) the way it´s supposed to be: cattle
actually
> gets to run on a meadow, and is fed with hay and grain (also
biologically
> raised) additionally; stables are big and open, there´s no
prophylactic use
> of antibiotics, no chemicals on the fields etc. Of course the meat
is MUCH
> more expensive than the plastic-wrapped pale stuff in the self-
serving
> department of the local supermarket, but the taste is worth every
cent of it
>
> What you say about people not seeing the way the animals are
butchered has
> some value, though it might not apply to all. I have lived in a
very small
> village in Bavaria when I was a kid and we kids often helped
butchering a
> pig or a cow - holding the buckets for the blood etc and I still
like to eat
> meat. But I prefer the tasty sort. ;-) No need to drown everything
in some
> strangecoloured sauce squeezed from a plastic bottle - rather
marinated with
> fresh herbs, lavender honey, dijon mustard, fresh ground black
pepper, white
> wine and good olive oil for two days before wrapping it up in
bread dough
> and put it in the oven.... excellent when served with fresh
> tomato-and-rucola-salad - but I digress! ;-) (Guess you all know
my hobby,
> now!)
> Valete!
> Lucia Flavia Lectrix
>







Yahoo! Groups Links







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43003 From: pompeia_minucia_tiberia Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: In leges Moravias Minucias
---Pompeia Minucia Strabo A. Apollonio Cordo Quiritibus S.P.D.

I've been advised I should read this, and I did, but I didn't have
the time to reply to it last night due to its rather lengthy format.
Besides, I'm always game for a point of view, and I like
stories...this one has some interesting twists.


In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "A. Apollonius Cordus"
<a_apollonius_cordus@...> wrote:
>
> A. Apollonius omnibus sal.
>
> I thank the consul for her replies to my earlier
> questions. I understand from them that although she
> may be prepared to consider some changes to these
> proposals, she is entirely happy with the basic
> policies they contain and will not be changing those.
> In my opinion it is those basic policies which are
> flawed, and I feel it would be a waste of the three or
> four days which remain of this contio if I were to
> attempt to persuade the tribune and the consul of
> that, so I shall simply explain to you, fellow
> citizens, why I think we should reject these
> proposals.

Pompeia: Now, I'm afraid you didn't give me much of a chance
to 'change' anything, as you didn't give me any concrete
criticisms...just generalizations. In Message 42884 and 42885 you
said that your 'inital reaction was not favourable'. To that you
added some generalized comments citing apparent confusion about the
proposals, but didn't elaborate on what those elements of confusion
were, other than you found them complicated, that they didn't
parallel the Mos to your satisfaction (but again, you didn't
indicate how), and you suggested the contio was not long enough, and
you didn't feel the people could absorb all this in so short a
time...not to mention that the voting time is in itself quite long
and allows lots of time for thinking. I think the people are alot
smarter than you give them credit for. But, all in all, you did not
give me any specific changes 'to' think about... mostly empty
criticisms...so no, I didn't make any. Maybe...you were saving
these elements all for the story below, were you? At any rate, it
is your opinion that I wasn't open to suggestions, or that the
Tribune wasn't....this doesn't make it so.
>
> First it may be useful to note the various practical
> problems with these two proposals. To illustrate
> these, let me tell you a story. I'll interrupt the
> story from time to time to explain how it relates to
> the proposals before us.
>
> - - In A.D. 2010 there is a citizen of Nova
> - - Roma called C. Marius. Marius has a son
> - - who is also a citizen of Nova Roma and whom,
> - - in traditional Roman fashion, he has named
> - - C. Marius. Marius (the father) is a
> - - quaestor. He sends a message to this list,
> - - and to the announcements list, and to every
> - - other list he subscribes to, saying "I
> - - resign my office of quaestor effective
> - - immediately".

Pompeia: Was this Quaestor serving in a legal capacity, or was he
one who was holding a Quaestorship illegally after being asked by
the Consuls and I believe another magistrate to please correct his
oath of office, yet adamantly refusing, for this reason or that?

http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/1999-10-19-ii.html

http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2001-12-04-iii.html

Said Quaestor was very upset that he was approached privately
regarding this, as if it were some kind of harassment, rather than
quiet courtesy.....

The old 'do as I say, not as I do'...and I'm still not quite sure
what to do about that...Any suggestions?....But let us continue:




>
> Now, in ancient Rome he would, of course, have been
> regarded as immediately losing his office. An election
> would have been organized as soon as possible to
> replace him. Under the lex Moravia Minucia, however,
> things would be different...
>
> - - Nobody informs the consules that this has
> - - happened.

Pompeia: No way! Not a soul? Not even the Praetors who mind the
mainlist and the announce list...no Scriba would inform the Consuls
or Praetors? I hope we never get that disjointed in our
relations...because no law will do...it would be time to pack it
in. Further, I am hardpressed to conceive a Consul, Praetor, Censor
who never atleast reads the announce list. The odds of this causing
a problem aren't worth calculating Cordus, but it makes for an
interesting read as you comb for the worst case scenerios. To
continue...


Marius stops doing his job
> - - collecting and recording payments of tax.
> - - After several weeks, people begin to
> - - complain that their payments have not been
> - - acknowledged.

Pompeia: Yes, this 'could' happen, if nobody, including the
magistrates read the announce list, Nova Roma forum...yes, it could
well happen. How would they know they were calling comitia? ...had
to think about that one, eh?

The consules explain that,
> - - according to the lex Moravia Minucia article
> - - IV, they cannot hold an election to replace
> - - Marius until three people inform them that
> - - he has resigned.

Pompeia: Oh, Cordus, puleeze

In the first place, the proposals regarding the magisterial
resignations...the witness are an option. That's what 'OR' means.


Secondly,the chances of the Consuls not knowing by that point, via
themselves or via third party witnessing or via other magistrates,
is indeed a 'story'....and the Consuls acknowledge receipt of the
resignation in this comitia by this proposal... Why would the
Consuls opt to wait for the optional intervention of three
witnesses if they know about the magisterial resignation already?.
They acknowledge the resignation and create the vacancy..not the
witnesses...it is you who is creating controversy here. You are
confusing the magistrates resignation proposals with the citizenship
proposals.


"But," say sensible
> - - citizens, "you *know* he's resigned". "Yes,"
> - - they say, "but he didn't inform us directly,
> - - so we have to wait until three witnesses
> - - inform us directly". Three exasperated people
> - - duly do so. An election is held.

Pompeia: Read the proposals before you criticize them, Cordus.
>
> This is, indeed, the position under the proposals
> before us. The idea that a resignation cannot be
> legally valid unless it complies with certain
> formalities is an old one in Nova Roma. It is
> enshrined in the lex constitutiva itself, and also in
> the lex Cornelia Maria de civitate ejuranda.
> Presumably at some point someone thought there was a
> good reason for having this rule. And apparently the
> tribune and the consul still think it's a good idea,
> because they have adopted it from the area of
> resignation of citizenship and brought it into the law
> on resignation of office. This is in spite of the
> possible consequences, such as we have in the story.
> Well, back to Marius...
>
> - - Marius is getting fed up with Nova Roma. He
> - - writes again to all the lists he subscribes
> - - to, saying "I immediately resign my
> - - citizenship". Three conscientious people
> - - write to the consules to inform them of
> - - this. Unfortunately in this case it is the
> - - censores who need to be informed. Nobody
> - - informs them.

Pompeia: The Consuls *no doubt* would not be responsible enough to
inform the Censor. No doubt. <s> You are assuming that the elected
magistrates of NR are of remarkable cognitive impairment, and that
the magistrates are incapable of the teensiest morsel of
responsibility. You must be, Cordus if you really think the above is
going to be a worry of disastrous consequence. But lets' move
on.....
>
> This is not a great novelty. It is what happens at the
> moment under the lex Cornelia Maria. Or, rather, it's
> what doesn't happen. The law says it should happen.
> But the censores are sensible people. Only current and
> former censores can tell us the precise number of
> times they have actually received written notification
> from three witnesses that a person has resigned, but I
> can make a guess: zero. Certainly I've worked in
> censorial offices several times and I've never seen it
> happen.

Pompeia: The need for witnesses in citizenship resignation has a
twofold advantage. It validates that a resignation of citizenship
is indeed from the person resigning, and it gives the citizen some
time to think about what they are doing. This surely isn't any more
absurd than the scenerios you present as prime fears. If public fora
are used (and the constitution says that's ok), so be it; I am not
aware of any Consul to date, now that you mention it, who totally
ignored the mainlist, or the announce list...certainly no Praetor,
Tribunes...they in themselves could be considered witnesses to
resignations of citizenship or in some cases, resignation of
magistracies. I dare say that your arguments are far fetched, worst
case scenerios, and based on a poor read of the proposals.


During the last two censuses a significant
> number of people contacted by the censorial offices
> responded asking, even demanding, to be removed from
> the list of citizens. These responses were generally
> addressed to provincial governors or censorial
> scribes, not to the censores personally. Under the
> strict legal rule of notification to three witnesses,
> the censores would have had no power to register these
> resignations as legally valid, but of course they used
> their common sense and registered them.
>
> This is an outstandingly clear example of a rule which
> is so impractical that it has been completely ignored.
> And yet these proposals seek not only to perpetuate it
> but to expand it into new areas of law and to place
> icnreasing reliance upon it. I cannot see the sense of
> that. Our law, surely, should recognize the current
> reality and give the relevant magistrates the
> discretion - to be exercised, of course, collegially,
> as all censorial powers are - to decide what
> constitutes a resignation and what does not.
>
> - - Meanwhile, the census is going on. Marius
> - - is contacted by the scribes doing the census.
> - - He responds and says that he does not want
> - - to be considered a citizen of Nova Roma any
> - - more. The scribe who receives his message
> - - passes it the censores. The censores say,
> - - "have you got two other witnesses?" "No,"
> - - says the scribe. The censores do not register
> - - Marius' resignation as valid.
>
> Well, this just illustrates the problem I mentioned
> above. Of course in reality the censores might well
> ignore the lex Moravia Minucia as they currently
> ignore the lex Cornelia Maria, but there's not much
> point proposing a lex and then saying "it's okay,
> people will ignore the stupid parts". But now there
> arises a further problem, newly introduced by these
> proposals...

Pompeia: A slightly different story. If he fails to answer the
census, that's good enough...stating that you dont want to be a
citizen is like not answering the census. It's like voting 'no' in a
write-in...it's not necessary but its done.

Additionally, if all this is a way of saying 'your stupid', I
already know what you think of my intellect. But, others will read
the way you've gotten your facts twisted in an attempt to defeat
these proposals. You make the mistake in supposing that others dont
have reading and reasoning abilities, simply because they don't
posess a degree in history or law. That might be close to a
quasiintellectual elitism, Cordus, and a trap which can ensnare and
leave one drowning alone in a sea of regret, if such a trend goes
unrecognized and unchecked.
>
> - - Marius' resignation has not been registered
> - - as valid by the censores. But he has also not
> - - responded to the census in a way which would
> - - allow him to be registered as a full citizen
> - - according to the lex Fabia de censu. The
> - - censores check the leges. The lex Fabia says
> - - that a citizen who is not registered at the
> - - census becomes a socius; the lex Moravia
> - - Minucia also says that a citizen who does not
> - - respond to the census has his citizenship
> - - placed "in temporary suspension".
>
> Now, what are the censores to do with Marius? Is he a
> socius? A "suspended" citizen? Both? The lex Moravia
> Minucia does not explicitly repeal the "socius"
> clauses of the lex Fabia, so presumably it does not
> intend to abolish the socii. Can a person be both a
> socius and a "suspended" citizen? It would be very
> strange. A socius is, as the lex Fabia makes clear,
> not a citizen. He enjoys none of the rights of
> citizenship. A "suspended" citizen under the lex
> Moravia Minucia, however, enjoys all the rights of
> citizenship except the right to vote. This means he
> actually enjoys greater rights than a probationary
> citizen during his 90-day probationary period. So
> presumably a "suspended" citizen is still a type of
> citizen, like a probationary one. And yet it seems
> that someone who fails to be registered at the census
> is to be classed as both a socius (non-citizen with no
> citizen rights) and a "suspended" citizen (a type of
> citizen with almost full rights). How is this
> possible? If it is not, how do the censores choose
> which status to give a person?
>
> This is important not only because a socius and a
> "suspended" citizen have very different rights, but
> also because they have very different ways of
> reacquiring citizenship. "Suspended" citizens have a
> bewildering array of different ways in which they can
> resume their citizenship, each with a different time
> limit. They can do it by asking the censores: this can
> be done until the beginning of the next census (which
> under current law would be two years but could vary in
> the future) or until five years have passed, whichever
> is earlier. They can do it by paying their taxes: this
> can only be done within a year of being placed in
> suspension. They can do it by responding to the
> following census: this of course depends entirely on
> when the next census happens. A socius, on the other
> hand, has only one way to do it: he can write to the
> censores at *any* time, however long after he ceased
> to be a citizen, and ask to be reinstated. The
> censores can then reinstate him.

Pompeia: This is the first legitimate concern you have
raised..whew...I was beginning to lose faith. Now this would be
something which might require some clarification before the next
census. I did not work on the Census but Tribune Piscinus did, and
I trust that he knows likely more than both of us about the dynamics
of the Census. Suffice it that they are not 'full' citizens, and
that line could use some clarification re the rights, yes. My
thinking at the time was that if they are not answering the Census
they likely dont pay taxes either, and are not considerable as
citizens in good standing. Unfortunate you were not concerned
enough to bring this to my attention at the outset of the comitia
call...for everyone's benefit....not just for the theoretics of
pointing out flaws...as this is the only point, again, that I can
see you have of any worry, really.


> So we have a strange situation. A person who fails to
> respond to the census may be a "suspended" citizen, or
> a socius, or possibly both. If he is a "suspended"
> citizen he has almost all the rights of citizenship;
> if he is a socius, he has none at all. On the other
> hand, if he is a "suspended" citizen he can only
> become a full citizen again within certain time
> limits, whereafter he loses his citizenship completely
> and becomes a plain old non-citizen; if he is a
> socius, however, he can regain full citizenship even
> many, many years after he lost it.
>
> Well, on with the story...
>
> - - The censores decide to categorize Marius as
> - - a "suspended" citizen. He remains involved
> - - with some Nova Roma projects, however. He
> - - is elected aedile of his local oppidum. A
> - - few people object, but he points out that,
> - - as a "suspended" citizen, he has all the
> - - citizen rights except the right to vote, so
> - - he is legally competent to hold this office.
> - - After a while he starts selling Roman food
> - - through the Macellum, which as a "suspended"
> - - citizen he is allowed to do. Some of his
> - - customers experience unacceptable delays in
> - - delivery and complain to the aediles curules.
> - - The aediles remove Marius from the Macellum,
> - - but he appeals using provocatio, which is a
> - - right he still possesses as a "suspended"
> - - citizen. He is given a trial in the comitia.
>
> This part of the story just illustrates some of the
> rights which "suspended" citizens would enjoy under
> the Moravian Minucian proposals. You may think it
> slightly odd that someone who has twice attempted to
> resign his citizenship and has failed to answer the
> census is still able to exercise all these rights.
> Well, yes, I suppose it is odd, but that's the lex
> Moravia Minucia for you. But now here's a twist:
>
> - - During the trial, the census - the second
> - - census since Marius tried to resign
> - - originally - is coming to an end. In fact,
> - - it comes to an end before the trial does.
> - - Marius, of course, has not bothered to
> - - respond, and indeed he has not even been
> - - asked, because the censores don't bother
> - - to contact "suspended" citizens. At the
> - - end of the census, the censores, in
> - - obedience to the lex Moravia Minucia,
> - - revoke Marius' citizenship entirely.
> - - The prosecutor in the trial notices this
> - - and announces it to the praetor who is
> - - presiding over the trial. The praetor
> - - immediately throws the case out of the
> - - comitia because Marius no longer has the
> - - right of provocatio or the right to appear
> - - in the comitia. The aediles curules throw
> - - Marius out of the Macellum because he no
> - - longer has a right to sell his wares there.
> - - Rather upset, he asks the censores how to
> - - stop all this happening. They tell him that
> - - now he is a non-citizen, and the only way
> - - he can resume his lost rights is to apply
> - - to become a "new" citizen. So he fills in
> - - the application form. In accordance with
> - - the lex Moravia Minucia article VI.A, the
> - - censores ask him why he resigned and why he
> - - returned. He says, "Why? Does it affect
> - - whether I'm allowed to return?" "No," they
> - - reply, "it makes no difference at all, but
> - - we are obliged by the lex Moravia Minucia
> - - to ask you." "Am I obliged to answer?" The
> - - censores check their text of the lex Moravia
> - - Minucia and tell him that he is not. So he
> - - doesn't.
>
> Yes, indeed, this is what the proposed lex says: "the
> former citizen is directed to state in his or her
> application the reasons behind the initial resignation
> of citizenship, and the nature of the reasons
> influencing the desire to have it reinstated". It
> doesn't say, however, that the person concerned is
> obliged to give this information, only that he is
> directed to do so; nor does it give the censores the
> power to take any action based on the answer, or even
> require them to keep any record of the answer for
> statistical purposes. What fun. And now the final act
> in the drama...

Pompeia: The Lex Equitia pretty much said the same thing...you must
state reasons behind your resignation and those influencing your
return. No, it didn't insist on them, or assign as consequence to
them directly. If you lie about your citizenship details your
citizenship is in jeopardy. Be careful...you are critizing the
wording of the Lex Equitia which was adopted into this lex. And for
information on the power of the Censors over citizenship, I suggest
you consult the Tabularium and the constitution. You are nitpicking
the work of former Consuls...good work.
>
> - - Marius asks to be given his old name, C.
> - - Marius. The censores explain that there is
> - - already a C. Marius in Nova Roma, so
> - - according to the lex Moravia Minucia he
> - - cannot have that name. He explains that this
> - - is his son. The censores say that makes no
> - - difference: he cannot have the name.
>
> That's right, citizens. Although there is no general
> rule in our law saying that two citizens cannot have
> the same name, there is a specific rule - it is in the
> lex Cornelia Maria and look, here it is too in this
> radical new written-from-scratch lex Moravia Minucia -
> that a citizen who has resigned and then returned
> cannot have the same name as any existing citizen.
> Why? Who on earth knows?

Pompeia: They could only have same under the Lex Equitia if it
wasn't taken. Again, this was adopted into the lex from the Lex
Equitia...I hope you didn't help write it. If you did, or had any
input, you should have voiced your concerns in 2004. Hmmmm....I
know you weren't 'employed' by Marinus Consul in 2004 but you had
input into a great many leges during that year.
>
> And what becomes of our hero Marius? He probably gives
> up and goes away forever, or at least until Nova Roma
> has some more sensible procedures for dealing with
> citizenship.
>
> I think that story illustrates most of the practical
> problems with these proposals. But the problems are
> deeper than that. The problems are, essentially, the
> same problems that exist under the current system, but
> worse. The consul said that "we are proposing the
> existing legislations [sic] regarding resignations be
> repealed, and starting from scratch". If this is
> "starting from scratch" then I am a pink elephant.
> These proposals do not depart in any way from the
> fundamental ideas behind the lex Cornelia Maria, the
> lex that has caused all the problems so far. It even
> contains several of the same clauses.
>
> Before the lex Cornelia Maria, no one had any real
> problem identifying what was a valid resignation.
> True, the lex constitutiva had the rule about three
> witnesses, but that wasn't a big problem because there
> was no rule that those three witnesses had to report
> to the censores. As long as three witnesses witnessed
> the resignation, it was valid. Since almost all
> resignations happened on big e-mail lists, that wasn't
> a problem. The problem was just that there were quite
> a lot of valid resignations. The purpose of the lex
> Cornelia Maria was to stop people resigning. To this
> end, it adopted two main strategies. First, it made it
> harder to resign in the first place. This was mainly
> achieved by saying that what a reasonable human being
> would recognize as a resignation is not recognized by
> the law as a valid resignation unless it is
> communicated in a certain way and not revoked within a
> certain time. Secondly, it made it harder for people
> who successfully resigned to come back.
>
> Both of these strategies were radical departures from
> the ancient Roman rule that a citizen could give up
> Roman citizenship without going through any formal
> procedure and could, thereafter, resume that same
> citizenship with ease. And, surprise surprise, both
> caused seriously problems. The second was quickly
> recognized as a problem and was eventually whittled
> down by the lex Equitia, but some of it still remains
> in these proposals: notice that a citizen who leaves,
> comes back, and leaves again cannot come back for a
> further two years. Why? Who knows? But the real
> problem is the first of the two strategies: the
> divergence between what common sense recognizes as a
> resignation and what the law recognizes as a
> resignation.
>
> Do the proposed leges abandon this strategy? They do
> not; on the contrary, they take it even further. They
> create extra administrative hoops which must be jumped
> through before on can successfully resign, some of
> them entirely outside one's own control. Under these
> proposals, a resignation of citizenship will only be
> valid if *someone else*, namely a censor, issues an
> "official acknowledgement" of the resignation. Anyone
> can see that this is absurd. If you leave an
> organization and the organization then writes to you
> and says "we officially acknowledge your departure",
> what do you think? I would think, "you acknowledge
> what you like, chum, but I've left and that's a fact
> whether you acknowledge it or not". If we insist on
> maintaining a distinction between what any sensible
> human being would regard as a resignation and what the
> law regards as a resignation, we only succeed in
> making the law look stupid.
>
> And not only do these proposals adopt the same basic
> strategy of creating a discrepancy between legal and
> factual resignations, they actually export this
> discrepancy to an area of law previously unaffected by
> it. At the moment, at least, common sense prevails
> with regard to resignation of magistracies: if someone
> says "I resign my office with immediate effect", he
> loses his office with immediate effect. The only
> problem arises when he resigns his citizenship while
> holding office. Why does this problem arise? Because
> his resignation of citizenship is not recognized as
> having immediate legal validity, but his resignation
> of office is. This creates inconsistency because
> citizenship is governed by a stupid rule and public
> office is not. The proposed solution? The consul and
> the tribune proposed to have both citizenship and
> public office covered by the stupid rule. Well, sure,
> it solves the inconsistency, but it means we now have
> two stupid rules in stead of one. Under these
> proposals a resignation from office, like a
> resignation from citizenship, would not be legally
> valid unless communicated to a certain person in a
> certain way and then acknowledged by that person in a
> certain way. This is total madness.
>
> No, these proposals do not "start from scratch".
> Repealing one lex and replacing it with another lex
> based on the same fundamental ideas (and in fact
> containing several identical clauses) is not "starting
> from scratch". It is the act of someone who believes
> that there is really no fundamental problem with the
> current system, we just need more of the same.
>
> That is what these proposals give us: more of the
> same. More discrepancy between what a reasonable human
> being would recognize as a resignation and what the
> law will recognize as a resignation. More hoops to
> jump through before you can successfully leave Nova
> Roma or lay down your office. More obstacles when you
> return. More different and overlapping sub-categories
> of citizenship. More administrative work for
> magistrates. More complexity. More of the same.
>
> And finally, and most importantly, more divergence
> from what the Romans did. It constantly baffles me
> that we claim to admire Roman culture and yet when any
> practical problem arises nobody seems to stop to ask
> how the Romans solved it. The vast majority of our
> legislation is based on the arrogant assumption that
> we, with our total of eight years experience of
> running a Roman republic, can come up with better
> solutions than the people who did it successfully for
> half a millennium (or, at best, based on a total
> failure by legislators to actually find out what the
> Romans did and try to apply it). These proposals
> attempt to solve a problem relating to resignations of
> citizenship and of office. We know how the Romans
> solved these problems. We know how to put their
> solution into practice. It could be easily done. Yet
> the consul and the tribune have chosen not to do that.
> They have chosen, in stead, to go in the opposite
> direction, taking the un-Roman elements of the current
> system and significantly increasing them.
>
> Why? Here is the consul's answer:
>
> "We cannot mirror antiqua [sic] in every way. Nova
> Roma has two important aspects to consider: For one,
> we are a voluntary organization, with citizens of dual
> citizenship...our macronational lineage and NR
> citizenship. Two, regarding the case of magisterial
> resignations, we have to consider that we are dealing
> with procedures of resignation of corporate
> executives, not just 'magistrates within Nova Roma'."
>
> She does not explain why either of these facts
> prevents us from adopting the Roman practice. We are
> voluntary organization, she says. So was the Roman
> republic: people did not have to be citizens if they
> didn't want to be.

Pompeia: Yes, they resigned and packed off in droves....


They could give up their
> citizenship with remarkable ease.

Pompeia: But did not as commonplace behaviour. And it involved
more than the press of a delete key...likely that's why.

They did not have to
> inform any particular magistrate, or state their
> intentions in any particular venue. They just had to
> leave. Which is more in keeping with a voluntary
> organization: the Roman system, which allows people to
> leave very easily and return equally easily, or the
> lex Moravia Minucia, which puts huge administrative
> hurdles in the way of anyone going out or coming back?
>
> Magistrates are corporate executives, she says. And
> this is a reason for setting up a system which could
> result in an executive resigning his post but not
> being accepted as having done so unless three other
> people inform a fourth person who actually already
> knows? In the ancient republic, a magistrate who said
> "I resign my office" immediately lost his office. Is
> there some rule of corporate law in the state of Maine
> which says that the secretary of a non-profit
> corporation who says "I resign as secretary of this
> corporation" cannot be taken to have resigned?
>
> The consul goes on to say, "Granted, it can be said
> that resignation of citizenship was hardly
> commonplace (but not totally unheard of) in antiqua
> [sic] .... neither was the resignation of a
> magistrate. In this 21 Century, by virtue of
> macronational rights which can't be extinguished by
> the NR constitution or laws... citizens have the
> 'right' to resign...the right to say "I know longer
> desire to be associated with Nova Roma as a
> member/citizen". Or, "Remove my name from your
> membership roster"." She later adds, "we are never
> going to be able to make resignations 'go away'
> because they lack historical precedent".
>
> These comments tell us nothing about why the Roman
> practice is unsuitable for Nova Roma; they tell us
> only that the consul does not understand the Roman
> practice. The ancient Romans did not forbid people to
> give up their citizenship: on the contrary, they made
> it very easy for them to do so, much easier than these
> proposals do. The fact that the consul doesn't
> understand this is a sign that she never seriously
> investigated the possibility that ancient Roman
> practice might be suitable for Nova Roma. She cannot
> have investigated it, or else she would at least know
> what that practice was. She has, as most of our
> legislators have done over the years, made up a
> "solution" out of thin air and then stuck a few Latin
> words on top of it.
>
> Let me quote you one final sentence from the consul,
> one which encapsulates almost every reason why we
> should vote against these proposals:
>
> "It isn't how close or how far away we are from the
> Ancient Mos that has caused arguments about
> resignations here in the past...it is the ambiguous,
> fragmented language of our current resignation
> legislation."
>
> Well, there you have it. She doesn't understand how
> the Romans handled these issues, and yet she
> confidently asserts that ancient tradition is totally
> irrelevant to the situation. She considers that the
> problem with the existing legislation is not any
> fundamental strategic flaw but merely ambiguous
> language: in other words, the solution is more of the
> same. She criticises the current legislation as
> "ambiguous" and "fragmented", and yet she proposes to
> expand those ambiguities and fragmentations to new
> areas of law and to introduce a few new ones as well.

Pompeia: The current resignation language is ambiguous and
fragmented in my view...and the ambiguities you cite are largely
your lack of ability to read the proposals correctly. And now, we
cannot by symmetrical to ancient Rome, no matter how much we love
the culture.
>
> Citizens, these proposals are based on two fundamental
> failures of understanding.

Pompeia: Mostly yours, I'm afraid.


They are based on a failure
> to understand what is wrong with the current system,
> and they are based on a failure to understand the
> proper Roman solution. We should have no hesitation in
> voting them down.

Pompeia: You didn't have to write all this to tell me that you
won't vote for them. You didn't even have to read them I
wonder... :>)

Valete
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> 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: 43004 From: S Ullerius Venator Piperbarbus Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: You are what you eat ,-)
Avete;

Venator scripsit:

I am a vegetarian.

I just let the mammals, piscoids and avians upon which I feast process
the greenage for me ,-)

I mostly stick to the British Imperial Army Diet: beer, beef. bread and beans.

I eat very few vegetables and fruits, and my cholesterol, heartrate,
blood pressure, lung capacity and such are fully in the normal range.

I do not exercise and am past my 49th year.

I have killed and processed many of the animals, which I and my
family have eaten.

In my Faithway, there is a form of worship called Husel. It is a
Sacral Feast, most usually following the Hallowed - Ritual slaying of
a food beast.

This is the type of Blood Sacrifice, which I can support.

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

Religio Septentrionalis - Poet

Dominus Sodalitas Coquuorum et Cerevisiae Coctorum
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sodalis_Coq_et_Coq/


http://anheathenreader.blogspot.com/
http://www.catamount-grange-hearth.org/

--
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: 43005 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Betreff: [Nova-Roma] Romana Diet
>
> M. Hortensia L.Flaviae G. Domitio Catonis spd:
I am in full agreement with you both! What was the treatment by
the ancient asclepions..fresh air, simple food, rest etc...
I enjoy cooking and have a terrific book that Propraetrix Livia of
Britannia recommended Mark Grant's "Roman Cookery" it's easy and fun
to recreate these dishes.
I admit I love a cigarette, so I keep it to maybe 4 a month:)
Moderation is the key.
bene valete
Marca Hortensia Maior

> well spoken.> I agree totally with you that the Romans ate healthier
than most folks today
> do. The main dishes were beans and lentils and pulsum, which in the
> descriptions sounds like a kind of porridge, aside with cheese and
fruits
> and eggs. If I remember correctly the Roman dinner started with eggs
and
> ended with fruit, thus the saying "from eggs to apples" for from the
> beginning to the end.
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43006 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Nova Roma as Nation State
I particularly find fascinating the prospect of Nova Roma becoming a
terra firma state.

I submit to the citizens the following examples of States:

Vatican: Microstate created in 1920's by treaty in settlement of the
dispute between the Papal States (including Roma and a swath of
Central Italy) and the Republic of Italy then headed by Prime
Minister Benito Mussolini. The treaty was concluded after the
entire territory of the Papal States were seized and intergrated by
the Republic of Italy and resulted in the recognition of the Holy
See and a revived 'power' with nation-state status and independent
of Italy. Most modern nation-states recognise the Holy See as an
independent nation-state with Vactican City making up its
borders... Today the Holy See plays an important role in as a
diplomatic neutral state in the international stage. It mints its
own coins, issues postage, issues passports, has repressentation on
many international bodies, the ITU recognises its broadcast
licences. Population about 1,000 (Vatican City residents)

Sovereign Military Order of the Knights of Malta: The second,
lesser known, microstate in Roma, consisting of a collection of
buildings. Is recognised by about a number of modern nation-
states. It mostly carries out humanitarian work today and up until
recently claimed the now Republic of Malta as its soveriegn
territory. Issues coins and postage and passports, ITU recognises
its broadcast licences. Population 4 (living in Compound, tens of
thousands of members worldwide)

Sealand: Principality located on an abandoned sea fortress off the
coast of the United Kingdom, created by an excentric former british
navy officer in the 1960's (Prince Roy). Defacto independent from
the UK, it is not recognised by any modern nation-state, though a
british court ruled that Sealand is not UK territory. Fought
a 'war' with some british patrol boats for independence, the UK
decided not to press claims. Later had a 'civil war' when one
faction (loyal to Prince Michael) exiled the other faction to
continental Europe by force of arms. Issues coins and postage, no
international bodies recognise it. Population 5 to 10 (living on
Roughs Tower, few hundered citizens carring Sealand Passports,
thousands of phoney Sealand Passports in cirulation)

Conch Republic: Created on manmade atolls in international waters
in the South Pacific in the 1970's. Was claimed and militarily
defeated by the neighbouring Kingdom of Tonga two years after its
creation and cleared of all population. Currently uninhabited.

Sarawak: Now independent within Malaysian Federation, formally
ruled by the Brooke dynasty and was internationally recognised as an
independent nation-state till 1947. Conquered much of the
neighbouring Sultanate of Brunei, Brunei only survives today because
of a British Protectorate (till 1982).

Republic of Singapore: Bought by a British merchant in the 1820's
and a universally recognised nation-state since 1965. Now mostly
inhabited and controlled by ethnic Chinese imported by colonial
administrators. Increased its land area substantially by
landfilling.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43007 From: Gaius Domitius Cato Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "P. Dominus Antonius"
<marsvigilia@...> wrote:
>
> I'm sorry but I think I may disagree. My knowledge however
somewhat
> limited. The sort of personal deprivations you speak of were
certainly
> available more or less to the ancients, Rome itself was hardly an
> agricultural center, and besides often the animals sacrificed were
not
> agricultural animals. Yet the ancients felt a need for animal
sacrifice.
> It is difficult enough to fully discern the details of worship
practiced
> millennia ago without the additional burden of abandoning some of
the most
> central practices that are known, especially when such abandonment
is
> primarily for the purpose of alleviating modern squeamishness.
Somehow
> biking to work just isn't the same. Besides with my luck I'd
probably have
> a heart attack or get hit by and car and then there truly would be
a blood
> sacrifice. :-(
>
> For the record, I oppose child/human sacrifice. So please let's
not raise
> that red herring, shall we.
>
> IMHO - If you want to practice an ancient religion then do so.
Half
> measures just seem so much like only going half way.
> --
> >|P. Dominus Antonius|<
> Tony Dah m
>
> Oderint dum metuant - Cicero
> Si vis pacem, para bellum - Vegetius
>

Salve Antone,

I am by no means an authority in Religio Romana, those were my ideas
only. I can agree to differ on interpretion.

C. Domititius Cato
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43008 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: In leges Moravias Minucias
Cn. Iulius Caesar Consuli Pompeiae Minuciae Straboni quiritibus
S.P.D.

Consul, both Cordus and I have indicated quite clearly the
circumstances under which this law will fail to meet the objectives
of bringing order and clarity to the mechanism of resignation.

You brushed aside these posts with an observation to the effect that
since we rarely agree with you on anything you have your doubts as
to the objectivity of our observations. This appears to be in effect
establishing the principle that for you to take note of posts the
posters must first, as a prerequisite to even giving them serious
consideration, have already established some form of sympathetic
position with stances you take on issues. Then presumably some form
of evaluation follows based on the degree of support the poster has
accorded you in the past. In other words your logic appears to be:

IF Support = 0 THEN click_next_post ELSE evaluate_friend_score

This is hardly the way to ensure that good legislation is produced.
It matters not whether someone agrees with you or not, what should
concern you are the issues they raise. You also don't appear to have
considered the possibility that in the past when people disagreed
with you, they could have been right and you wrong.

Your response appears to indicate that as long as someone who thinks
like you is reading and applying these proposed leges, then there
will be no concerns or issues. The fact that they are self-
contradictory, unnecessarily convoluted and at times preposterously
silly in concept and execution obviously doesn't disturb you.

There are only nine more months left of your term Consul and after
that, bereft of the exercise of your imperium to fill in the blanks
and make sense of them, subsequent magistrates will have to struggle
to administer an even messier set of leges relating to resignation
than we currently suffer under. Nova Roma really should have had
quite enough by now of amateurish and bungled attempts at writing
laws. The consequences are all too clear to see on this list.

Many people before you justified obviously sub-standard laws on the
basis that "I know what it means", with the implication that
everyone else should. You just simply wave away the issues by saying
to Cordus <snipped>

"and the ambiguities you cite are largely your lack of ability to
read the proposals correctly."

No, his concerns are based on a factual evaluation Consul and you
are not convincing in trying to paint Cordus out as incapable of
that analytical evaluation. Huge parts of your proposals are simply
and hopelessly flawed, and if you wish to ignore that it won't make
them any less flawed or the people any less literate and incapable
of recognizing muddle and mess.

You also said to Cordus

"Unfortunate you were not concerned enough to bring this to my
attention at the outset of the comitia call...for everyone's
benefit....not just for the theoretics of pointing out flaws...as
this is the only point, again, that I can see you have of any worry,
really."

Again, no Consul, you cannot shift the blame onto Cordus. You set
the Contio at such a very short period, due I suspect to your desire
to limit the amount of questions and concerns you would have to
address, in an effort to ram this home into the Tabularium as fast
as possible. It is your responsibility as the magistrate sponsoring
this legislation to make sure that it is coherent and effective. You
can't blame Cordus for the fact that your law is a mess and he
should have been faster in bringing this to your attention. That,
frankly, is nonsensical.

Well here we have it. A scrappy and scruffy set of laws pushed under
our noses for a brief moment of time before we have to vote on them,
riddled with flaws, errors and irrelevancies and utterly divorced
from the mos maiorum, presented by a Consul who, it appears to me,
judges input into her Contio on the basis of whether someone has
said nice and supportive things to her in the past. A Consul who
furthermore tries to shift the responsibility for the only issue
(one out of many) that she reluctantly admits maybe a concern onto
the citizen who pointed this out.

So much for debate. Citizens, please vote these laws down.


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
<pompeia_minucia_tiberia@...> wrote:
>
> ---Pompeia Minucia Strabo A. Apollonio Cordo Quiritibus S.P.D.
>
> I've been advised I should read this, and I did, but I didn't have
> the time to reply to it last night due to its rather lengthy
format.
> Besides, I'm always game for a point of view, and I like
> stories...this one has some interesting twists.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43009 From: Maior Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
M. Hortensia G. Equitio spd;
eheu, the point I was making is that since meat & milk could
not be eaten together, at some time during the day, week Jews ate
vegetarian dairy meals...
please read this worthwile site to learn something:
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ in 'search' put in 'sacrifice'
also look under 'substitutes for sacrifice' there is a very long
learned article quoting the Talmud, Mishnah etc which will give you an
idea.
As for quoting the Baal Shem Tov, don't. He was excommunicated by
the Gaon of Vilna, the most erudite Rabbi of his day. Hasidism is a
Christian influenced sect, see Rapael Patai
> vale
Maior
>
> 'Yisroelik (the Baal Shem Tov) would cry until he had tears enough to
> wet the knife. Then he would cry as he sharpened the knife. Only then
> would he cut!'
>
> So, apparently NOT "all Jews" before your date of A.D. 1780
ate "dairy
> vegetarian meals".
>
>
> Vale et valete,
>
> Cato
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43010 From: pompeia_minucia_tiberia Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: In leges Moravias Minucias
---Salvete G. Iulius Caesar et Salvete Omnes:

I addressed what I thought were the crux of your concerns in a post
last night to Galerius Flamen and the People, although I couldn't
recall just who initially raised them...but it was you, so it is
rather presumptuous on your part that they were not addressed.
Perhaps you leaped before your looked when reading the posts.

I addressed Cordus' concerns at length tonight....I maintain that
aside from one valid point he raised, his 'concerns' are either
based on longshot, worst-case scenerios, or they are based on a
misreading of the proposals.

Again, you post tonight with suggestions that I have not addressed
concerns, (and I have), or that I am trying to 'slip' something
under the ability of the people to read and ponder the legislation
in 5 days contio allowed by the Lex Fabia regarding this comitia's
procedures (for what purpose?). I just don't happen to think that
people need all year to make a decision that's been haggled already
for the majority of a year already; nor do I think they are as
cognitively maladroit as some (not I) might suppose. Now if 5 days
were not generally realized as an appropriate time length, then the
people who adopted this lex have theoretically made a dreadful
mistake, in keeping with your analysis. I do not believe a
reasonably prudent human being, citizen of Nova Roma, smart as you
or I, would adopt a lex which made a time length of 5 days law, if
he or she found this totally off the wall. I am merely going by the
basic outline of the same stuff former Consuls had to adopt as it is
lawful procedure.

Again, I'll contemplate the element Cordus raised...and as for the
rest, I leave it to the people. I have faith that they can reason
and think for themselves...but I am sure they nonetheless appreciate
your input tonight, given on behalf of yourself and Cordus, to aid
their contemplation.

All this fuss...over resignation laws...what power could be gained
over this, pray tell...that I would purposely deceive the citizens?
None that I can see...atleast for myself...not that power
hungry...and if nobody else loves me, I have a wonderful husband,
and a cat :>)

On a personal note, I think you are in a paperthin position to
accuse me of trying to slip something over on alot of people I
pledged to do my best for. Otherwise you'd tag your blog URL for
all to see! How delicious...if it were not about NR.
Innovator of the Go Roman! program...Oh, they'll Go!
alright...someplace else. Nobody knows what you are talking about
out there in the www Caesar, and the one who stands the greatest
chance of appearing off the wall are not those within NR who
disagree with hyperconservative policies beloved of the ExBoni or
whomever.... or those who have earned your wrath for some unknown
reason.....it is *you*...you admit to being part of us, yet air our
politics and opinions about this person and that to the world....so
people question....why are you still in NR?....or...who is this
masked man? Is this a role playing game?
http://gnaeusiuliuscaesar.blogspot.com

Sadly, extra, extra read all about it...but perhaps this is the mos
maiorum which is evolving...hopefully not beyond hope of repair.



Pompeia Minucia Strabo
Consul








In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gnaeus Iulius Caesar"
<gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:
>
> Cn. Iulius Caesar Consuli Pompeiae Minuciae Straboni quiritibus
> S.P.D.
>
> Consul, both Cordus and I have indicated quite clearly the
> circumstances under which this law will fail to meet the
objectives
> of bringing order and clarity to the mechanism of resignation.
>
> You brushed aside these posts with an observation to the effect
that
> since we rarely agree with you on anything you have your doubts as
> to the objectivity of our observations. This appears to be in
effect
> establishing the principle that for you to take note of posts the
> posters must first, as a prerequisite to even giving them serious
> consideration, have already established some form of sympathetic
> position with stances you take on issues. Then presumably some
form
> of evaluation follows based on the degree of support the poster
has
> accorded you in the past. In other words your logic appears to be:
>
> IF Support = 0 THEN click_next_post ELSE evaluate_friend_score
>
> This is hardly the way to ensure that good legislation is
produced.
> It matters not whether someone agrees with you or not, what should
> concern you are the issues they raise. You also don't appear to
have
> considered the possibility that in the past when people disagreed
> with you, they could have been right and you wrong.
>
> Your response appears to indicate that as long as someone who
thinks
> like you is reading and applying these proposed leges, then there
> will be no concerns or issues. The fact that they are self-
> contradictory, unnecessarily convoluted and at times
preposterously
> silly in concept and execution obviously doesn't disturb you.
>
> There are only nine more months left of your term Consul and after
> that, bereft of the exercise of your imperium to fill in the
blanks
> and make sense of them, subsequent magistrates will have to
struggle
> to administer an even messier set of leges relating to resignation
> than we currently suffer under. Nova Roma really should have had
> quite enough by now of amateurish and bungled attempts at writing
> laws. The consequences are all too clear to see on this list.
>
> Many people before you justified obviously sub-standard laws on
the
> basis that "I know what it means", with the implication that
> everyone else should. You just simply wave away the issues by
saying
> to Cordus <snipped>
>
> "and the ambiguities you cite are largely your lack of ability to
> read the proposals correctly."
>
> No, his concerns are based on a factual evaluation Consul and you
> are not convincing in trying to paint Cordus out as incapable of
> that analytical evaluation. Huge parts of your proposals are
simply
> and hopelessly flawed, and if you wish to ignore that it won't
make
> them any less flawed or the people any less literate and incapable
> of recognizing muddle and mess.
>
> You also said to Cordus
>
> "Unfortunate you were not concerned enough to bring this to my
> attention at the outset of the comitia call...for everyone's
> benefit....not just for the theoretics of pointing out flaws...as
> this is the only point, again, that I can see you have of any
worry,
> really."
>
> Again, no Consul, you cannot shift the blame onto Cordus. You set
> the Contio at such a very short period, due I suspect to your
desire
> to limit the amount of questions and concerns you would have to
> address, in an effort to ram this home into the Tabularium as fast
> as possible. It is your responsibility as the magistrate
sponsoring
> this legislation to make sure that it is coherent and effective.
You
> can't blame Cordus for the fact that your law is a mess and he
> should have been faster in bringing this to your attention. That,
> frankly, is nonsensical.
>
> Well here we have it. A scrappy and scruffy set of laws pushed
under
> our noses for a brief moment of time before we have to vote on
them,
> riddled with flaws, errors and irrelevancies and utterly divorced
> from the mos maiorum, presented by a Consul who, it appears to me,
> judges input into her Contio on the basis of whether someone has
> said nice and supportive things to her in the past. A Consul who
> furthermore tries to shift the responsibility for the only issue
> (one out of many) that she reluctantly admits maybe a concern onto
> the citizen who pointed this out.
>
> So much for debate. Citizens, please vote these laws down.
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
> <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@> wrote:
> >
> > ---Pompeia Minucia Strabo A. Apollonio Cordo Quiritibus S.P.D.
> >
> > I've been advised I should read this, and I did, but I didn't
have
> > the time to reply to it last night due to its rather lengthy
> format.
> > Besides, I'm always game for a point of view, and I like
> > stories...this one has some interesting twists.
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43011 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: In leges Moravias Minucias
Salve Consul.

I don't think you addressed any of the specific issues I raised
concerning your proposed leges.

As to my blog, it is "tagged" as you put it on my Yahoo profile and
has been for a rather long time. Thank you for circulating the url
though.

Vale
Caesar


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
<pompeia_minucia_tiberia@...> wrote:
>
> ---Salvete G. Iulius Caesar et Salvete Omnes:
>
> I addressed what I thought were the crux of your concerns in a
post
> last night to Galerius Flamen and the People, although I couldn't
> recall just who initially raised them...but it was you, so it is
> rather presumptuous on your part that they were not addressed.
> Perhaps you leaped before your looked when reading the posts.
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43012 From: dicconf Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: Roma Futura
On Thu, 30 Mar 2006, Gaius Domitius Cato wrote:

> Yes, the man certainly has good taste in women... hehe
>
> To boldly go where no man has gone before... and spread love across
> the galaxy??? (But those ungroovy bad guys better watch out, we got
> phasers too...)
>
> Not bad for its time... Except for its portrayal of Magna Roma...
>
> C. Domitius Cato
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "P. Dominus Antonius"
> <marsvigilia@...> wrote:
>>
>> Kirk was progressive. Didn't he always get the green girl?

I thought that was because experienced women wouldn't have anything to do
with him.

-- Publius Livius Triarius
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43013 From: pompeia_minucia_tiberia Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: In leges Moravias Minucias
---Salve Caesar:


In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gnaeus Iulius Caesar"
<gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Consul.
>
> I don't think you addressed any of the specific issues I raised
> concerning your proposed leges.
>
> As to my blog, it is "tagged" as you put it on my Yahoo profile
and
> has been for a rather long time. Thank you for circulating the url
> though.

Pompeia: ahhh,a place where everyone is sure to look <wink>


>
> Vale
> Caesar
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
> <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@> wrote:
> >
> > ---Salvete G. Iulius Caesar et Salvete Omnes:
> >
> > I addressed what I thought were the crux of your concerns in a
> post
> > last night to Galerius Flamen and the People, although I
couldn't
> > recall just who initially raised them...but it was you, so it is
> > rather presumptuous on your part that they were not addressed.
> > Perhaps you leaped before your looked when reading the posts.
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43014 From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Date: 2006-03-30
Subject: Re: In leges Moravias Minucias
Salve Consul.

One of the wonders of this modern age is the statistics that sites
like this accumulate.

From those stats I am well aware that you, the Senior Consul and
many others in your respective Cohors have been dipping in and out
of my blog on a very regular basis for a long time. Clearly it
wasn't a secret if it was on my Yahoo profile and you had all been
such regular visitors, and continue to be so. Of course I also have
had many other visitors from NR to the site already, but I am quite
comfortable with you increasing its circulation base. Once again, my
thanks.

If it wouldn't trouble you too much, perhaps you could find some
time to specifically address in a post the flaws Cordus and I
identified in your proposed leges, rather than limiting yourself to
sweeping generalities and expressions of confidence in the end
result. The clock is ticking after all, but then you know that
already don't you?

Vale
Caesar


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
<pompeia_minucia_tiberia@...> wrote:
>
> ---Salve Caesar:
>
>
>
> Pompeia: ahhh,a place where everyone is sure to look <wink>
>
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43015 From: A. Tullia Scholastica Date: 2006-03-31
Subject: ANNOUNCEMENTS LIST: MIA POSTS?
A. Tullia Scholastica quiritibus, sociis, peregrinisque omnibus S.P.D.

Lately it seems that items which should have gone to the Announcements
list either didn¹t get cross posted there (though the addresses sometimes
indicated that they were), that the scribae rejected these, or that Yahoo
has Done It Again. I, at least, haven¹t received any copies of the proposed
laws, instructions on contio and voting, candidacies or any other material
via the Announcements list, to which I also subscribe. Many citizens do not
subscribe to the ML due to the volume or the often-endless arguments or some
other reason, so it is important that these matters be sent to the
Announcements list and arrive at the subscribers¹ mailboxes. I hope that
it¹s only Yahoo (again...), not that the scribae are rejecting any important
governmental material. Material on laws and elections, and the magisterial
oaths of office, are among the things which should be posted to
announcements, and be accepted.

This may indeed be Yahoo again, for at least two or three posts to the
ML (some by the same persons, C. Moravius Brutus and C. Domitius Cato) which
were approved have yet to find my mailbox, though at least one did land on
the website. Many and various are the posts I don¹t receive...until someone
else quotes them verbatim. Good thing I get the moderation
notices...they¹re my only source of information on these lost messages.

Valete,

A. Tullia Scholastica


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43016 From: G. Aurelia Falconis Silvana Date: 2006-03-31
Subject: Re: MEGALESIA - Ludi Circenses
C. Aurelia Falco Silvana D. Octaviae Aventinae omnibusque SPD.

My dear Diana, it seems you have been paying more attention to
hairdressers and couturiers for Latina, than to the simple
vocabulary of the track. A few notes therefore:

The track of the circus is comprised of curves at each end, and
relatively long straight sections on the sides. These straight
sections are called STRETCHES.

In particular, the last straight segment before the finish is
called the HOME STRETCH.

In some very strange lands where the spectators all sit on
one side of the circus, the straight segment on the far side
is called the BACK STRETCH. In a circus where spectators watch
from all sides of the track, it is reasonable to call the
straight segment immediately before the last turn, the BACK
STRETCH.

In any of these STRETCHES, the horses have a better chance to
run full-out, to STRETCH FOR VICTORY, leaving all the ordinary
teams far behind.

My dear Diana . . . whatever else did you have in mind that
made you blush so? Perhaps thoughts suited neither to a
"proper Roman matron" nor to this modest public forum?

Tut tut.

But gratias tibi ago for your fine risk-taking spirit in
entering Latina yet again, at (yet again) such exorbitant
personal cost to you.

PS: Did she go for that purple hair job I suggested last time?

Vale et valete bene in pace Deorum.

C. Aurelia Falco Silvana



In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Diana" <diana@...> wrote:
>
> Salve C. Aurelia Falco Silvana
>
> > owner SPANDEX THE VANDAL
> > (Flexible, resiliant, brilliant--st r e t c h i n g
> > far beyond the ordinary)
>
> Oh my, I'm blushing... will all that extraordinary
> s t r e t c h i n g be appropriate in front of so
> many proper Roman matrons?
> Vale,
> Diana Octavia Aventina
> (who won't be owning anything if Latina loses again!)
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43017 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-03-31
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
A. Apollonius C. Equitio omnibusque sal.

> What I asked was *why* did they sacrifice?

I'm inclined to agree with C. Moravius on this. Roman
ritual developed by trial and error. Unlike followers
of the Abrahamic religions, the Romans didn't really
know what their gods demanded because their gods were
not in the habit of telling them (though there are
some stories like this, for instance the story of Numa
and the sacrifice of hair, onions, and sprats - a
sacrifice which was so bizarre it clearly demanded
some sort of historical / mythological explanation).
When they were asking the gods to do something for
them, or thanking them for something, they made a
guess at what sort of gift a god might find pleasing,
and tried giving that. If it seemed to work, then this
was evidently a ritual which was worth repeating.

What sorts of things the Romans thought of as being
suitable gifts for the gods must of course have been
influenced by various factors. Three probable ones
come to mind. First, they will have known what sorts
of things had tended to be sacrificed in the past - by
their parents, by their neighbours, by the public
priests, and so on. Clearly at some point relatively
early on the Romans, like the Greeks and probably
other contemporary peoples, had got the idea of
sacrificing animals, and this was commonly done. So
when a Roman thought of sacrificing something, an
animal is something which would naturally come to
mind. Secondly, they will have tended to assume that
the gods like similar things to humans, or at least to
living creatures. Animals were expensive and in the
early days were the very basis of wealth (Latin
"pecunia", money, comes from "pecus", cattle), and
many of the more intelligent animals known to the
Romans (wolves, dogs, bears, lions) also enjoyed
eating other animals, so it seems fairly natural for a
Roman to think that the gods might appreciate the gift
of an animal. Thirdly, one might be influenced by the
nature of the god: Mars might like warlike gifts such
as armour and horses; Ceres, on the other hand, might
prefer something more agricultural.

Also, of all the gifts you might give to a god, food
is in many ways the most theologically convincing.
Imagine yourself in the shoes of an early Roman
sacrificing at a little rural shrine or sacred grove.
If you offer a sword, the sword will still be there
the next time you visit, and it may be hard to see
what benefit or satisfaction the god can possibly have
derived from having a sword sitting in the same place
for a long time. Food, however, has a natural goodness
which goes away: when fresh it is appetizing, but
after a while it becomes inedible and you throw it
away. One can quite easily imagine that the goodness
escapes from it somehow and goes somewhere else, and
perhaps if you offer it to the god then the god gets
the goodness. Thus the ancient Greeks tended to
explain animal sacrifice by saying that the god
enjoyed the vapours given off when the meat was
cooked, and then whatever was left over could be eaten
or thrown away. At every meal the Romans would put a
small part of the meal in the lararium; at the end of
the day they would probably clear the remnants away.
If you went back to a shrine and took your offering of
a sword away again, you would feel rather sheepish
about doing it; but one could remove scraps of food
from a lararium when the food has patently passed its
best and feel satisfied that the god has had the full
benefit and has no further use for what's left.

Those are some speculative thoughts about the
psychology of the thing. I'm sure there are some
suriving Roman writings about the theology of
sacrifice, but at the moment I haven't the time to dig
them out for you. Perhaps someone on the religio list
might know.

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43018 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-31
Subject: Re: Greek polytheists have court victory - Modern Sacrifice
C. Equitius Cato M. Hortensiae Maiori sal.

Salve Marca Hortensia.

You wrote:

"As for quoting the Baal Shem Tov, don't. He was excommunicated by
the Gaon of Vilna, the most erudite Rabbi of his day. Hasidism is a
Christian influenced sect, see Rapael Patai"

The first excommunications of the Hasidim in Vilna were in A.D. 1777,
17 years after the Baal Shem Tov died. And I wouldn't simply dismiss
the founder of Hasidism so lightly in any case, or the Hasidim.

The point of the story was that there were Jewish butchers plying
their trade well before your date of 1780, during a period you claimed
was exclusively vegetarian.

But I think we've run this into the ground.

Vale bene,

Cato
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43019 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-31
Subject: Re: In leges Moravias Minucias
C. Equitius Cato P. Tiberiae Straboni sal.

Salve Tiberia Strabo.

The laws are a mess, and should be defeated soundly. You continually
use fallacies and personal attack to try to bolster an ill-thought,
ill-executed, contradictory, and aimless amalgamation of some of the
most obfuscatory legislation it has ever been my delight to slog through.

You are correct in one thing: the People are intelligent enough to
give this thing the heave-ho it deserves.

Vale,

Cato
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43020 From: Stephen Gallagher Date: 2006-03-31
Subject: Trojan War: The Palace of Ajax
Salve Romans

FYI

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
*************************************************************************

Remains of 3,500-year-old palace are found Source: UPI

ATHENS, Greece (UPI) -- Archaeologists report finding the remains of the
3,500-year-old palace of Ajax -- a warrior-king said to have been a
revered Trojan War fighter.

The discovery, reported on a small Greek island, is being hailed by
classicists as proof Homer's Iliad was based on historical fact, The
Times of London reported Tuesday.

Yannos Lolos, a Greek archaeologist, said the ruins include a large
palace, measuring about 8,000 square feet and believed to have been at
least four stories high with more than 30 rooms.
Lolos says the city of Troy is believed to have fallen about 1180 B.C.
-- about the same time the palace he discovered was abandoned. Ajax (or
Aias), therefore, would have been the last king to have lived there
before setting off on the 10-year Trojan expedition, Lolos told The
Times.

"This is one of the few cases in which a Mycenaean-era palace can be
almost certainly attributed to a Homeric hero," Lolos said. "The complex
was found beneath a virgin tract of pine woods on two heights by the
coast. All the finds so far corroborate what we see in the Homeric
epics."

Copyright 2006 by United Press International


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43021 From: gaiusequitiuscato Date: 2006-03-31
Subject: prid. Kal. Apr.
OSD C. Equitius Cato

Salvete omnes!

Hodie est pridie Kalendas Aprilis; haec dies comitialis est.

"The Moon rules the months: this month's span ends
With the worship of the Moon on the Aventine Hill." - Ovid, Fasti III

"Muses, sweet-speaking daughters of Zeus Kronides
and mistresses of song, sing next of long-winged Moon!
From her immortal head a heaven-sent glow
envelops the earth and great beauty arises
under its radiance. From her golden crown the dim air
is made to glitter as her rays turn night to noon,
whenever bright Selene, having bathed her beautiful skin
in the Ocean, put on her shining rainment
and harnessed her proud-necked and glittering steeds,
swiftly drives them on as their manes play
with the evening, dividing the months. Her great orbit is full
and as she waxes a most brilliant light appears
in the sky. Thus to mortals she is a sign and a token...
Hail, white-armed goddess, bright Selene, mild, bright-tressed queen!
And now I will leave you and sing the glories of men half-divine,
whose deeds minstrels, the servants of the Muses, celebrate with
lovely lips." - Homer, Hymn to Selene II.1-13, 17-20

"Luna the Moon's course also has a sort of winter and summer solstice;
and she emits many streams of influence, which supply animal creatures
with nourishment and stimulate their growth and which cause plants to
flourish and attain maturity." - Cicero, De Natura Deorum, 2.14

"Luna in her rosy chariot was climbing to the height of mid-heaven,
when drowsy Somnus glided down with full sweep of his pinions to earth
and gathered a silent world to his embrace." - Statius, Achilleid, 1.619

"Cynthia, queen of the mysteries of the night, if as they say thou
dost vary in threefold wise the aspect of thy godhead, and in
different shape comest down into the woodland...The goddess stooped
her horns and made bright her kindly star, and illumined the
battle-field with near-approaching chariot." - Statius, Thebaid, 10.365

Today is the festival of Luna, in Greek mythology the moon goddess,
known to the Romans as Selene. Selene was the daughter of Hyperion and
Theia, sister of Helios the Sun and Eos the Dawn. Unlike Diana, Selene
was not known for her chastity. She bore three daughters to Zeus, and
was seduced by Pan for a piece of fleece. There was no known moon
cult among the Greeks, but Selene was a significant figure in Greek
poetry and sorcery and was often identified with Hecate and Artemis.
Apollonius of Rhodes tells how Selene loved a mortal, the handsome
male prostitute —-- or, in the version Pausanias knew, a king --— of
Elis, or otherwise called a hunter, named Endymion, from Asia Minor.
He was so beautiful that Selene asked Zeus to grant him eternal life
so he would never leave her: her asking permission of Zeus reveals
itself as an Olympian transformation of an older myth: Cicero
recognized that the moon goddess had acted autonomously.
Alternatively, Endymion made the decision to live forever in sleep.
Every night, Selene slipped down behind Mount Latmus near Miletus.
Selene had fifty daughters from Endymion, including Naxos. The
sanctuary of Endymion at Heracleia on the southern slope of Latmus is
a horseshoe-shaped chamber with an entrance hall and pillared forecourt.

The Romans later associated Diana with Selene. From Selene we get the
metal Selenium, the electrical conductivity of which varies with the
intensity of the light, like the changing Moon. As Phoebus was the
Sun, Selene was also known as Phoebe, the Moon. In this capacity She
represented the evening and the night, and was depicted carrying a
torch and wearing long robes and a veil on the back of her head.
Phoebe and Selene - the sister of Helios - were both Titans and of the
older gods, whereas Artemis was of the next generation.


"It is lucky to say, 'Hares, Hares,' aloud as you go to bed on the
last day of the month (any month), and to say 'Rabbits, Rabbits,' as
soon as you awaken the following morning. This is true for any month,
but it seems especially appropriate during this month of the mad hare.
And why are hares mad in March? Because this is when hares breed, and
apparently leaping, cavorting, dancing and frolicking are part of
their mating ritual." - Waverly Fitzgerald, School of The Seasons

Valete bene!

Cato



SOURCES

Ovid, Homer, Cicero, Statius,
Selene (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luna_(goddess))
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43022 From: marcushoratius Date: 2006-03-31
Subject: Re: In leges Minucia Moravia
Salvete mi Corde et Quirites omnes

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "A. Apollonius Cordus"
<a_apollonius_cordus@...> wrote:
>
<snipped>
> 1. Do you agree that the proposal published earlier by
> Ti. Galerius would bring the law of Nova Roma
> concerning resignation of citizenship and resignation
> of office substantially into line with ancient Roman
> practice?
>

What Tiberius Galerius posted was largely written by yourself,
Corde. Perhaps you didn't see the discussion between the
magistrates? Your radical policy change was considered and
discussed, and rejected as impractical and unsuitable for Nova Roma.

What you proposed through Galerius imposes citizenship on people
even when they no longer want it. You would mandate that people
have to write a special request in order to have their file expunged
from Nova Roma records. Sorry, but it just does not work that way.

What Nova Roma has at the moment is a problem, one that has arisen
incidentally through a gap in our laws. At the end of last year's
census, Nova Roma retained files on 4332 applicants for
citizenship. Less than 850 of these were people who could be
construed in any sense as cives. They were assidui, capiti censi,
or probationary cives. We therefore had 2535 files on people who
were not cives. Of those, my guess is that less than 100 had ever
given any notice of their departure from Nova Roma. Most people
simply walk away from Nova Roma, and as you found out yourself, some
can become very upset to later receive emails from an organization
that they thought they had left. What your proposal would do is
write into law that Nova Roma continue to accumulate files on non-
citizens, without any way of clearing out the space. This produces
a lot of work, involving a great deal of time and effort, for a lot
of people who don't even exist in Nova Roma. As it is at the
moment, a special measure has to be passed – presumably by the
Senate – each time the censores wish to clear out some of the wasted
space used to hold these files on non-citizens.

Another problem you seem to have overlooked is one of liability.
During the census two people threatened to sue Nova Roma because we
retained files on them with personal information. So long as Nova
Roma retains files with personal information, there is always a
possibility that that information could be misused to spam these non-
citizens, and Nova Roma could be held liable.

One small provision that was included in the proposed lex Minucia
Moravia addresses the incidental problem. From now on, when a
citizen does not register with the census, his or her citizenship
would go into suspension. We considered your proposal, and this is
how we incorporated it into the proposed lex. After a person had
not registered in any two consecutive censuses within a five period,
the censores will now have authority under the law to remove a
person's citizenship. In practical terms I imagine that this will
mean that the censores will periodically clear space in our record
keeping system. What is changed is that they will no longer have to
ask the consules to place a measure on the Senate agenda to do what
is essentially their job in the first place, maintain Nova Roma's
album civium.

The other side of this is that from now on citizens will have to
maintain their citizenship in order to retain full citizenship
rights. One must register with the census in order to retain the
right to vote. There is already provision under Nova Roma law that
a civis must be an assiduus in order to hold any office in Nova
Roma. The one objection that sees suspended cives running for
office simply cannot occur. If citizenship is suspended under the
lex Minucia Moravia it would be because a person would already be
ineligible to run for office, or even to vote in the elections.

What happened earlier during the census is that our proconsules and
propraetores were asked to go looking for people who were still in
our files but from whom no one had any contact. These were the 500
or so "Disappeared" citizens. Not only did we waste a good deal of
time and effort on this, it was also expensive as our provincial
magistrates tried to contact people by phone and regular mail. Nova
Roma is liable to reimburse any costs incurred in that effort. And
you would have us accumulating how many people, over how many years,
with bad email addresses? What would be the cost? And then also all
the time and effort you would have our magistrates go through. For
what practical purpose? So, alright, we shifted some of the burden,
and potentially a great deal of burden form our provincial
magistrates and the staffs of our censores. Who knows, maybe next
time the sheer scope of counting so many non-citizens won't cause us
to lose a Magister Aranearius in the middle of a census. And maybe
some of our other magistrates and scriba won't get a little stressed
from chasing after people who don't want to be citizens. We shifted
the burden over to citizens to maintain their citizenship. It saves
time, it saves on a lot of needless effort, it saves valuable web
space, and it also saves Nova Roma money. So my question to you is
who should the burden be placed on when it comes to individual
citizens maintaining their citizenship?

> 2. If so, why have you decided to bring forward these
> alternative proposals?
>

You neglect one of the most salient features of the mos maiorum, its
evolutionary nature to deal with new situations as they arose.
Your proposal amounts to a radical shift in thinking about Nova Roma
citizenship, one that would become burdensome and impractical to
administer, one that over time become costly, and one that also
poses a potential liability problem. Whatever you may think was the
mos maiorum of Roma antiqua is not applicable to Nova Roma in this
regard, and thus we rejected your policy changes.

Valete bene
Moravius Piscinus
Tribunus Plebis
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43023 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-03-31
Subject: Re: In leges Moravias Minucias (details)
A. Apollonius Pompejae Minuciae omnibusque sal.

As you note, this started long and is getting longer,
so I'll reply selectively and at some points summarize
rather than quote. For the benefit of other readers, I
note that the message that I'm replying to can be
found in full at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/message/43003

Now, your first move was, as I'm sad to say is fairly
typical of your style of debate, to impugn the good
faith of your interlocutor. Specifically, you
complained that I haven't given you a fair chance to
adopt any changes I might suggest before declaring my
opposition to these proposals. I assure you that I
would have done so if I had believed that you had
allowed a sufficiently long period of debate before
the beginning of voting. (Your argument that there is
plenty of time for discussion *during* voting is
misplaced, because once a person has voted he cannot
change his mind regardless of what he hears in debate
afterwards. All debate after the beginning of voting
is directed at persuading an increasingly small number
of people who haven't voted yet.)

I haven't been around for as long as you have, but I
have seen a fair number of legislative proposals go
from start to finish, and I know how long it takes to
debate and amend a piece of legislation. You say that
you allowed the five days required by statute. Indeed
you did, and I have never suggested that you have made
this debate so short that it is illegal. But each
proposal is different and requires a different length
of time for debate. If a proposal addresses a general
topic which has been well argued over many months,
it's certainly true that people may have made up their
minds already about the general topic, but they may
still need some time to discuss and consider the
specific proposals at hand. Resignations have been
discussed many times before, but the particular
solutions you are proposing have never received any
substantial discussion in this forum.

The length of time appropriate for discussion of a
proposal depends on many things, and it can sometimes
be hard to judge. One may feel that a proposal if
fairly uncontroversial and unobjectionable, and
therefore allow only a short period of discussion, but
it may turn out that in fact it is much more hotly
debated than one expected. This happened last year to
C. Laenas. Having aired his lex senatoria in the
senate and received general support for it there, he
presented it for a fairly short contio. It was met
with unexpectedly strong opposition on a number of
fronts, and none of the senatores who had supported it
in the senate did so in the forum. Accordingly the
consul saw that he had misjudged, and withdrew the
proposal. When he reintroduced it later he allowed an
open-ended period of discussion.

Also last year P. Memmius put forward a number of
proposals. In one case I had various items of feedback
for him, some concerning the technical language and
some concerning the substance. I started by discussing
the language with him, intending to come on to the
substance later. Here I had misjudged, for by the time
we had finished discussing the language there was no
time left in which he could possibly have given
adequate consideration to the substantive changes I
was suggesting, and I was forced rather abruptly to
oppose the whole thing.

Those are two examples of the trials and errors by
which I have been learning the fine art of judging how
long a certain proposal needs for debate and
amendment. I may not yet be an expert, but I have some
instinct for it, and my instinct is that a magistrate
who presents a never-before-seen proposal of some
reasonable length addressing a subject which has
aroused much disagreement in the past and who allows
only five days for it to be debated is not going to
have time to adopt any significant amendments which
may arise from that debate. I don't know how long you
take to draft a lex - maybe you are quicker than I am.
I take about two or three days for a proposal of this
length. For a substantial amendment, maybe two days.
So. I publish a proposal on day one. People think
about it for a day or so. By the end of day three two
or three different amendments may have been suggested.
If I accept any of those, I'll be lucky if I can
publish the amended proposal before the end of day
five. And then there's no further time for debate or
consideration of the amended proposal: we go straight
to voting. This, to me, is not enough time.

So when I see a magistrate like yourself publishing
proposals like this on this sort of time-scale, I can
only come to two conclusions. Either you do not intend
to accept any significant amendments, or you have
badly miscalculated the length of time needed for
discussion. My father used to say "don't put down to
conspiracy what could be a simple mistake", so I
guessed perhaps you had miscalculated. Hence my
question about the timing, which was intended to
prompt you to consider the matter. You replied
confidently that the time was ample. My only option
therefore was to conclude that you did not intend to
make any substantial amendments to these proposals. If
that was incorrect, and you are amenable to
substantial amendments, then I invite you to postpone
voting for a week or more so that I and others can
suggest some substantial amendments for your
consideration.

You complain further that my intial feedback was too
vague. My initial feedback was constructed as an
invitation for you to explain the rationale behind
these proposals, and in particular the rationale
behind your decision not to follow Roman practice.
According to you, I said that the proposals "didn't
parallel the Mos to your satisfaction (but again, you
didn't indicate how)". I believe I did indicate
precisely how. I asked you whether you accepted that
the proposed lex Galeria was an accurate
representation of Roman practice. You did not answer
this clearly, but you implied that you did accept
that. I think that should have indicated to you quite
clearly the way in which your proposals "didn't
parallel" Roman tradition. They don't parallel Roman
tradition in every respect in which they significantly
differ from the lex Galeria. In effect I invited you,
in effect, to explain, point by point, why you had
decided to depart from the lex Galeria, which you seem
to accept is an accurate rendition of Roman practice.
You declined to do so. In stead you offered the same
vague platitudes that we always hear from magistrates
who have not bothered to give adequate consideration
to Roman practice: times have changed, we can't always
do the same thing as the Romans. The fact that we
can't always do the same thing as the Romans does not,
however, explain why we should not do the same thing
as the Romans whenever we can. In this case we can: we
can adopt the lex Galeria or something like it. You
have chosen not to do that. I think the burden is on
you to explain why we should depart from Roman
practice, not on me to explain why we should not.

I omit to respond to your questions about my fictional
quaestor and his oath of office, which of course were
not about my fictional quaestor at all but about me.
If you want to depose me from my office, please feel
free to do so, but it has nothing at all to do with
the debate on your proposals. By raising the issue
here you give me the very clear impression that you
are more interested in attacking me personally than in
justifying your own proposed legislation.

I pointed out at several points in my little story
that problems could arise if three witnesses fail to
inform the relevant magistrate about a resignation.
You complain that this is an unfair criticism: these
problems would not arise in practice because in
practice three witnesses would, if necessary, inform
the relevant magistrate. I can only repeat what I said
before (which you failed to reply to): it has for many
years been a requirement of the law that resignations
be notified to the censores by three witnesses, and to
my knowledge (and I have worked in censorial offices
for several years now) this *never* happens. Censores
routinely accept as legally valid resignations which
are not attested by three witnesses. I have seen it
happen. I have asked questions about it. I have been
told about it. If you think that it is a "worst case
scenario" to suggest that when someone resigns in this
forum without notifying the censores directly there
will not be three people who have the diligence to
write to the censores about it, I can only respond
that in that case we are currently *in* a worst case
scenario and we have been in it for years.

When was the last time *you* saw someone announce his
resignation on this list and then diligently wrote to
the censores to inform them about it?

When it comes to resignation from office, you give
another reason why this problem would not arise:
because, you say, "the witness [sic] are an option".
Yes, they are an option in precisely the same way as
they are in resignations of citizenship. In order to
be valid, according to your proposals, a resignation
from office must be "tendered in writing to" the
relevant magistrate or must be "tendered in writing in
the presence of three or more [witnesses], who shall
witness and communicate the resignation to" the
relevant magistrate. So a resignation is not valid
unless either the resigning person tells the relevant
magistrate directly (not merely by announcing it on a
list which the magistrate happens to read) or three
witnesses tell the relevant magistrate about it. It
is, in short, precisely the same system as applies
currently to resignations of citizenship, and it will
create precisely the same problem. The vast majority
of people who resign will not bother to inform the
relevant magistrate directly but will just announce it
on some list or other, just as they currently do.
Nobody will bother to write to tell the relevant
magistrate, just as they currently don't. In order to
regard the resignation as valid the relevant
magistrates will have to use their common sense of
overrule the absurd technical requirements of your
proposal, as they currently do.

You say that the chances of the relevant magistrate
"not knowing by that point, via themselves or via
third party witnessing or via other magistrates, is
indeed a 'story'". Yes, I agree. Of course the
relevant magistrates will find out. But that's not
enough to satisfy your proposed wording. Your wording
requires a magistrate to regard a resignation as
invalid unless it is either "tendered in writing to"
him or notified to him by three witnesses. The most
likely event is that he will know about it himself
because he will have read the announcement on some
relevant e-mail list. But announcing something on an
e-mail list is not, by any stretch of the imagination,
"tender[ing] in writing to" a specific magistrate. If
I enter a market square where there are fifty other
people and shout "I resign", can I be said to have
told each of those fifty people individually that I
resign? I doubt it. A general written notice is not a
"tender in writing to" anyone in particular, and that
is what your wording requires. If that's not what you
intend, then you need to change the wording, not blame
me for failing to guess that what you wrote is not
what you meant.

But if that is not what you intend, then I think you
have not researched your own proposal very carefully.
You say, "If public fora are used (and the
constitution says that's ok), so be it", suggesting
that a magistrate who reads an announcement of a
resignation in a public forum should be considered to
have had the resignation tendered directly to him.
Indeed that is a sensible interpretation of the
constitutional wording, and it is the interpretation
which was used before the lex Cornelia Maria. That
lex, however, contained a clause which said, "Messages
posted to official Nova Roma e-mail lists or
electronic message boards, or statements of an intent
to resign citizenship that are made at a public
function of Nova Roma meet the requirement for three
witnesses to a resignation *if and only if* three
witnesses to the resignation notify the censors
thereof within 72 hours of the initial proclamation"
[my emphasis]. As you see, this quite clearly
contradicts what we might call the sensible
interpretation: it says in very clear language that
the requirement for three witnesses is not satisfied
merely by the fact that the announcement is made in a
public forum where three people can be assumed to have
read it. It is only valid if those three people
actually write to the relevant magistrate - and,
moreover, only if they do it within 72 hours. It could
hardly be clearer: an announcement in a public forum
which is not personally and individually addressed to
the relevant magistrate is only valid if three
witnesses tell the relevant magistrate about it,
*regardless* of the fact that the relevant magistrate
may himself have been in that forum and have read that
announcement. But hold on, we think to ourselves: just
because the lex Cornelia Maria said that, it doesn't
mean it will continue to be the case under these
proposals, does it? It does, because the very same
clause is preserved in article III.A of your proposal
de civitate ejurando. Which you seem to have forgotten
about. You ask me to read your proposals more
carefully? Maybe you should read them more carefully.

At this point in your reply you paused to deliver a
rather novel form of attack. It was an ad hominem
attack, to be sure, but a rather interesting kind.
What you did was to accuse *me* of making an ad
hominem attack against *you*, so that you could then
justify responding to it by attacking me personally.
Here is that fascinating maneouvre in full:

> Additionally, if all this is a way of saying 'your
> stupid', I
> already know what you think of my intellect. But,
> others will read
> the way you've gotten your facts twisted in an
> attempt to defeat
> these proposals. You make the mistake in supposing
> that others dont
> have reading and reasoning abilities, simply because
> they don't
> posess a degree in history or law. That might be
> close to a
> quasiintellectual elitism, Cordus, and a trap which
> can ensnare and
> leave one drowning alone in a sea of regret, if such
> a trend goes
> unrecognized and unchecked.

Watch it unfold majestically: first, you accuse me of
calling you stupid. You know that this has no actual
basis in what I wrote, so you do it carefully: you say
"if". This is a classic stratagem: "you didn't
actually say this, but if you had you would be wrong
because..." The purpose of such a move is clear,
because it allows you to attack me while giving the
impression that you are merely defending yourself, and
all cloaked in a hypothetical which make it deniable.
And the attack you go on to make is that I am an
elitist snob. Well, all I can say is this. I meant
precisely what I wrote, and I did not mean what I did
not write. I did not call you stupid, and I did not
mean that you are stupid. I said that the "three
witnesses" rule is stupid. Clever people can do stupid
things. And frankly it's not even your idea, so
there's no reason why it should reflect on your
intelligence. All you've done is copy and paste it
from another lex (a nice example of your "starting
from scratch" approach) without, it seems, giving
careful consideration to its implications. And note,
please, that even very intelligent people are likely
to make mistakes if they fail to give careful
consideration to things. This is one of the reasons
why I am surprised that you think five days are enough
for you to read, consider, decide upon, and act upon
any suggestions which may arise from this debate: not
because I think you are too stupid to do it more
quickly but because I don't think any person, however
intelligent, would be able to give adequate thought
and study to any substantial amendment within this
time.

As for whether I am an elitist, I say only this: I
have never, to my knowledge, called you or anyone else
stupid or criticised you or anyone else for lacking
knowledge. No one can know everything, and knowing
something is not a sign of virtue or even of
intelligence. I do think, however, that there is a
duty on any magistrate who proposes legislation to
find out, if he does not know already, how the Romans
themselves dealt with the issue, and to give very
careful consideration to that. If he chooses not to do
it the Roman way, he must have good reasons for that
decision, and he must explain what they are. None of
this requires him to be intelligent or to have a
degree or anything like that. I firmly believe that
anyone who sets his mind to finding out about
something and understanding it has the power to do so.
This is, if anything, the opposite of intellectual
snobbery. Therefore if I see that a magistrate is
proposing legislation without giving adequate thought
to Roman tradition and without having impressive,
well-thought-out answers to explain any divergences he
has made from that tradition, I do not say that that
magistrate it stupid, and I do not say that that
magistrate is ignorant. What I do say is that that
magistrate has not devoted the research, the time, and
the effort which he ought to have devoted and which it
was perfectly within his power to devote.

The fact that your proposals creates a second category
of semi-citizens in addition to, and overlapping with,
the socii, is one which seems to come as something of
a surprise to you. Such a drastic failure to
anticipate the failure obvious consequences of your
own legislation is not something which inspires
confidence. Nor is your attempt to absolve yourself by
saying that you trusted your co-drafter M. Moravius to
have thought about it. Nor is your assurance that it
will all somehow be sorted out in practice. This is,
in fact, exactly the sort of thing whihc you should
have expected to arise in the course of a contio and
which should lead you to make an amendment. But of
course you haven't got time to make one now, so we
shall have to vote on the proposal as it is, even
though you have more or less acknowledged that the
failure to deal with the socii was a simple mistake on
your part.

Your response is similar when it comes to the point
that you are giving "suspended" citizens considerably
more rights than probationary citizens. You say that
"that line could use some clarification re the rights,
yes". I think you do too little credit to your
drafting here. There is nothing at all unclear about
the wording: it is crystal clear and could be
understood by the proverbial "moron in a hurry". It
says that "suspended" citizens have all the rights of
citizenship except the right to vote. There is no need
for "clarification" here: what is needed is amendment,
improvement, alteration. Unfortunately your five-day
debate has left us so little time that we will have no
time to discuss any amendment you may come up with.

Next we come to the point that "returning" citizens
are asked, but not obliged, to give their reasons for
resigning and returning, and that the censores are not
obliged to do anything with this information. Your
rather feeble response to this indicates that you
cannot think of any good reason why this clause should
actually be in the proposal, because all you have to
say is that it isn't your clause: it's another one you
copied uncritically (while "starting from scratch")
from a previous lex, this time the lex Equitia. In
fact you seem rather triumphant about this fact, as
though I have really shot myself in the foot by
criticising a clause from a lex which was proposed by
Cn. Equitius. I cannot think why. Am I under some
moral obligation to support everything our esteemed
censor ever passed into law? Or do you think, as you
seem to imply, that the censor is really just some
sort of facade and that all his legislation is written
single-handedly by me, so that I am in fact
criticising my own wording? Of course that would be
very embarrassing for me, but in fact I had nothing to
do with the lex Equitia de civitate ejurando: the
first time I saw it was when it was promulgated in the
forum. I know that there are some people who cannot
remember the contents of their own leges, but I am not
one of them.

Your reply is exactly the same when I point out that
under your proposal a returning citizen is barred from
taking the name of an existing citizen even though
this bar does not apply to a person applying for
citizenship for the first time. Once again you cannot
think of anything to say to defend this clause, which
you have unquestioningly copied and pasted from a
previous lex ("starting from scratch"): all you have
to say is that it came from the lex Equitia and if I
had an objection I ought to have said so when the lex
Equitia was proposed. So what? I am objecting now. Do
you or do you not think this is a sensible clause? If
you do, tell us why. If you don't, then what on earth
is it doing in your proposal?

Well, so much for my discussion of the technical,
practical difficulties with the proposals. This
message is getting long, so I'm going to cut it now
and do the other half in a separate message.




___________________________________________________________
NEW Yahoo! Cars - sell your car and browse thousands of new and used cars online! http://uk.cars.yahoo.com/
Group: Nova-Roma Message: 43024 From: A. Apollonius Cordus Date: 2006-03-31
Subject: Re: In leges Moravias Minucias (fundamentals)
A. Apollonius Pompejae Minuciae omnibusque sal.

In my previous message I continued our discussion of
the detailed provisions of your proposals, and the
problems they create. You responded quite amply to my
points concerning those issues. In the end, of course,
you dismissed most of these by saying "well this is
only a technicality, it won't be a problem in
practice, you are nit-picking, if this is all you can
find to worry about then I don't see the problem", and
similar things.

You seem to have missed the rest of my message. I went
on to say, "I think that... illustrates most of the
practical problems with these proposals. But the
problems are deeper than that." And I then devoted
some fifteen or sixteen paragraphs to exploring those
deeper problems. That may be a tediously large
quantity of prose for you to read, and I can
sympathise with that, but I certainly don't think it
leaves you any room to argue that all my objections
are concerned with trifling technicalities. No, the
technical problems of these proposals, numerous though
they are, took up on the first part of my argument.
The rest - the most important part - you have very
little to say about. I hope that by dealing with these
fundamental issues in a separate e-mail I can draw to
them the attention you did not give previously.

I argued that you are perpetuating the policy of
making the legal definition of a valid resignation
drastically different from the common-sense
understanding of what a resignation is. This policy, I
suggested, is in fact the fundamental cause of all the
problems we have had with resignations over the last
three or four years, and yet your proposals do not
eradicate it but perpetuate and indeed extend it. This
is perhaps one of the two most fundamental elements of
my opposition to your proposals. You have said not one
single word in reply. I presume, therefore, that you
cannot think of any flaw in my reasoning and that you
are hoping that if you say nothing about it people
won't notice.

You do manage to summon up a few words on the subject
of historical accuracy. Your words are to the effect
that we cannot adopt a historical Roman policy on
resignations because in ancient Rome resignations were
rare. First, this is a non sequitur. In Rome
resignations were rare, you say. So what? Why does
that mean we should not deal with them, when they do
occur, in exactly the same way that the Romans did? I
think perhaps there is a hidden step in your
reasoning: you are assuming that one of the basic
purposes of our law on resignations should be to try
to stop people resigning. This is the only way I can
make sense of your argument. You are therefore saying,
if I've guessed correctly, that the ancient practice
would not be appropriate to our situation because in
antiquity people did not often try to resign, and
therefore they did not have a system which was
effective at stopping them resigning; we need to stop
people resigning, therefore the Roman system is not
adequate for our needs.

If this is indeed your reasoning, then it does not
help your cause much, because the simple fact is that
these proposals, like the Roman system, will not stop
people resigning. I can say this with considerable
confidence because there is nothing at all in these
proposals which could conceivably stop people
resigning except ideas which have already been tried
in the lex Cornelia Maria. In essence the policy is
"stop people resigning by making a legally valid
resignation more difficult to do". The lex Cornelia
Maria has demonstrably failed to stop people
resigning, and there is no reason whatsoever why we
should believe that your proposals will have any
better success. They are based on the same flawed
principle which has been tested and found inadequate.

There is, in fact, almost nothing we can do by mere
legislation to stop people leaving Nova Roma or
resigning from office. It is simply not a problem
which can be solved by legislation. What we *can* do
with legislation, however, is put an end to these
absurd legal wrangles about what is and is not a
technically valid resignation. Your solution to this
is to put in place more and more technical legal
requirements for a valid resignation. This is patently
not going to work. Every technical legal requirement
you create will simply create more borderline cases
which are hard to fit within the scheme of the law.
The only sensible solution is to *remove* the
technical requirements and to allow magistrates and
others to use their common sense to decide what is and
is not a resignation. This is, of course, what the
Romans did.

Ah, the Romans again. Forgot about them, didn't you?
Evidently you did, because they're not much in
evidence in your proposals (in spite of your attempt
to stick the Latin label "postliminium" on something
which is in fact nothing to do with postliminium at
all). But let's go back to your assertion that
resignation didn't happen in the ancient republic.
Actually this is at best half-wrong. It is true that
people did not stand up in the forum and say "I resign
my citizenship of this republic". If that is what you
class as a resignation, then no, it did not happen.
But the issue which your proposals address is wider:
it concerns voluntary loss of citizenship. This
occured in the ancient republic very often indeed. It
happened, in fact, every time a Roman citizen
emigrated. The mere act of going to live somewhere
else, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary,
was taken as a sign that the person concerned had
decided to abandon his citizenship.

So if you are arguing that the Roman system did not
stop people giving up their citizenship, then you're
right. But if you're arguing that it didn't do this
because people didn't try to give up their
citizenship, you are dead wrong. People *did* do it,
they did it often, and Roman law did not try to stop
them because it would have been futile. If a Roman
citizen told his friends that he was going to live in
Mongolia, and he packed up his things and left, Roman
law did not insist that until he sent a written notice
in compliance with certain rules to a certain
magistrate he had not really left at all. It simply
accepted the plain facts: he had gone to live
somewhere else; he was no longer a citizen. But, just
as it was easy to leave, so it was easy to return. If
this fellow found that Mongolia was not his cup of
tea, and came back, he did not have to "apply" for
citizenship again, let alone change his name or give
his reasons for leaving to some official who couldn't
care less. He just came back. And the law said, "okay,
he has come back: we will treat him as the same person
he was before, and he is now a Roman citizen again,
just as he was before".

If your concern is that a system like this will not
stop people leaving, then I think you must ask
yourself: why should we try to stop people leaving? Do
we really benefit from a high citizen-count if many of
those citizens are only still here because we have
introduced complex legislation making it hard for them
to leave? Of course not. The only reason there has
been in the past for trying to stop people leaving is
that once a person has left it has been very tedious
for him to get back in because he has had to "apply"
for citizenship all over again. This would obviously
be solved at a single stroke by introducing the Roman
practice, because it would make it not only very easy
to leave but also very easy to come back. Problem
solved.

You express concern for people who resign their
citizenship in the heat of the moment and then regret
it. We are all concerned with these people. Yet you
don't seem to have grasped the fact that under the
ancient Roman system this problem disappears. "So you
resigned your citizenship in the heat of the moment
and then regretted it? No problem," says the ancient
practice, "just come straight back, no hassle, no
paperwork". How much easier could it be? No nine-day
period of grace, but an *infinite* period of grace! If
you're concerned for people who resign and then regret
it, the Roman practice is infinitely superior than
your proposals.

But come now, you may say, this doesn't apply to
resignations of office: Romans never resigned their
offices. On the contrary. I have said this before, but
you don't seem to have heard, so let me say it again.
**Just about every Roman magistrate who did not die in
office resigned**. It was standard practice. When you
came to the last day of your term, you got up on the
rostra, made a speech, swore you had obeyed the laws,
and then ceremonially resigned. You did not have to
send a message to some particular magistrate; you did
not have to twiddle your thumbs waiting for your
resignation to be "accepted" or "acknowledged". The
resignation simply took effect as soon as you declared
it.

I simply cannot understand what could be problematic
about this very simple, very untechnical, very Roman
way of doing things. Your responses so far have not
enlightened me; all they have done is to make me more
and more convinced that when you decided not to adopt
ancient Roman practice it was simply because you had
not adequately understood, or bothered to find out,
what ancient Roman practice actually involved.

We are not going to stop people leaving Nova Roma by
making them jump through hoops to do it: all we are
going to achieve is to decrease the number of people
who validly resign and increase the number of people
who have left but who we cannot take off the list
because their resignations did not meet the complex
legal requirements for validity. The same is true of
resignation from office. Legislation cannot stop
people doing these things. It is questionable whether
we should even be bothering to *try* to stop people
doing these things. There is no good reason at all, as
far as I can see, for failing to adopt the ancient
Roman way of doing things. If you leave, you lose your
citizenship; but if you come back afterwards, you get
it back with no hassle. If you announce your
resignation from office, you lose that office; if you
want it back, you can run for re-election. What could
be simpler? What could be more sensible? What could be
more Roman? Nothing that I can think of; and certainly
not the leges Moraviae Minuciae.



___________________________________________________________
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com