>
> On Thu, 19 Oct 2006, pompeia_minucia_tiberia wrote:
>
> Salve Consul,
>
> > No, you publicly suggested to them in the forum
> > that they are in error, in using bad judgement in their timing.
>
> It's OK; no harm done. His concern was legitimate and I hope our
> answer was satisfactory.
>
> But I do appreciate your support.
>
> Vale, Octavius.
>
> --
> Marcus Octavius Gracchus
> octavius@... * http://www.graveyards.com
>
> -"Apes don't read philosophy."
> -"Yes they do, Otto, they just don't understand it! Let me correct
> you on a few things: Aristotle was not Belgian. The central message of
> Buddhism is not 'every man for himself'. And the London Underground is
> not a political movement! Those are all mistakes. I looked them up."
> -from "A Fish Called Wanda"
>

> Salve Consul Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
>
> Your are right I did vote for item V but before the Pontiff
> Maximus had made his opinion know.
>
> I believe I asked you in private what the vote had been in the
> Collegium Pontificum. Based on the fact that no one had voted

> it I believe it had the full support of the Collegium Pontificum
> and so I voted for it.
>
> It turned out that it did not have the full support of the

> Pontificum and as I stated on the Senate list, I was changing

> vote based on the remarks of the Pontiff Maximus. He did so during
> voting and not during the debate, so I changed my mind.
>
> Not only did I say why I was changing my vote but I apologized
> twice, to you, for doing so and as you can see Consul I even said
> it would be better and more productive if Senators would express
> there opinion during debate and not during a vote.
>
> See Senate list post number Message #9215 Sat Oct 14, 2006 4:41 pm
>
> Consul you said in part
>
> Â…"Do you have free will or do others think for you? Â…
>
> There were five items to be voted onand I voted your way on three
> of them.
>
> So who should I be independent of you or others?
>
> I do agree that there should be debate during the 96 hours

> for it. But if Senators choose not to voice their opinions on a
> matter until they cast a vote we do have the right to take those
> opinions into account before the end of voting and we can change

> minds.
>
> Vale
>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
>

----- Original Message -----
From: Maior<mailto:rory12001@...>
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2006 1:37 AM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Report of Senate Session


Salve Ti. Galeri;
so as Consul you would follow the lead of Q. Fabius Maximus
our non-acting, woman-barring pontiff? He is too busy to even post
the important Feria on the Religio list. Or turn up for a vote in
the CP. Consul Modianus with other active pontiffs has been trying
to move the Collegium Pontificum to an historical basis.
What are your reasons? I sure as heck want to know if you
are running for Consul & as a non-practictioner where your
sympathies lie.
Marca Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebs
producer "Vox Romana" podcast
http://www.insulaumbra.com/voxromana/<http://www.insulaumbra.com/voxromana/>
1st vowed temple on NRWiki
http://www.novaroma.org/wiki/<http://www.novaroma.org/wiki/>
Fortuna Populi Romani Quiritium

> Salve Consul Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
>
> Your are right I did vote for item V but before the Pontiff
> Maximus had made his opinion know.
>
> I believe I asked you in private what the vote had been in the
> Collegium Pontificum. Based on the fact that no one had voted
again
> it I believe it had the full support of the Collegium Pontificum
> and so I voted for it.
>
> It turned out that it did not have the full support of the
Collegium
> Pontificum and as I stated on the Senate list, I was changing
my
> vote based on the remarks of the Pontiff Maximus. He did so during
> voting and not during the debate, so I changed my mind.
>
> Not only did I say why I was changing my vote but I apologized
> twice, to you, for doing so and as you can see Consul I even said
> it would be better and more productive if Senators would express
> there opinion during debate and not during a vote.
>
> See Senate list post number Message #9215 Sat Oct 14, 2006 4:41 pm
>
> Consul you said in part
>
> ."Do you have free will or do others think for you? .
>
> There were five items to be voted onand I voted your way on three
> of them.
>
> So who should I be independent of you or others?
>
> I do agree that there should be debate during the 96 hours
allotted
> for it. But if Senators choose not to voice their opinions on a
> matter until they cast a vote we do have the right to take those
> opinions into account before the end of voting and we can change
our
> minds.
>
> Vale
>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
>





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

On 10/19/06, Stephen Gallagher <spqr753@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Maior
>
> I am sorry but you have misunderstood.
> I said I changed my vote after the "Pontiff Maximus"
> ( title not a name ie Marcus Cassius Iulianus)
> had made his views know.
>
> I can understand the mistake and next time I will write
> out all the names so you understand completely.
>
> As to the Religio my adviser on these matters is my cousin
> Flavius Galerius Aurelianus. I also respect the opinion of my
> mater Helena Galeria Aureliana. I also think it an ok practice
> to follow the advice of the "Pontiff Maximus" Marcus Cassius Iulianus
>
> You said that you would like to know where my sympathies lie
>
> With Rome of course
>
> Vale
>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
>
>
>
>


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

>
> ---Salve Marcus Sejanus et Salvete Onmnes
>
>
> In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "legio_vi_tribunis"
> <marcus.sejanus@> wrote:
> >
> > Salve Honorable Consul Pompeia,
> > In regards to your comments about my questioning why a candidate was
> > made a Senator just before election, I believe that perhaps you need
> > to actually read the posts all the way through. Yes I stated that the
> > Senate appointed him, when in fact it was the Censors, and I
> > apologized for the mistake.
>
> Pompeia respondeo: You apologized for confusing the Senate with the
> Censors in terms of being custodians of the Senate roles. Fair enough.
> Not a problem in itself..as long as you are clear as to the
> respective roles of each. But this is not my entire concern. If it
> was I wouldn't have said anything.
> The Censors quoted the Lex Popillia Senatoria as legal rationale for
> their actions. Had you looked it up, you might have had less reason
> to publicly question their actions. Further, this is an excellent
> time to reconcile the Senate count as the Censors will have to engage
> in the task of aligning the tribes and centuries, assigning the proper
> ranks to the citizens. There are often legitimate reasons for timing.
>
> I miss quoted, but only after a 26 hour
> > work day.
>
> Pompeia: I stop making sense after a 16 hour work day, and so you
> don't hear from me:)
>
> So for future reference, perhaps you should read the posts
> > all the way through and show leniency when a person apologizes for a
> > simple mistake.
>
> Pompeia: With the same leniency you showed the Censors? Did you
> write them privately and say 'gosh, this timing doesn't look fair to
> me, and here's why'...No, you publicly suggested to them in the forum
> that they are in error, in using bad judgement in their timing. You
> encroached on implying that they are indulging in ambitious
> behaviours. Perhaps not meaning to, but due to inexperience with the
> constitution. And I'm of the opinion that if you have of read the Lex
> Popillia Senatoria before you posted to them last night, you might
> have written the Censors privately. And you might have had more
> insight as to the legal obligations of the Censors.
>
> All I said more or less is you need to get into the legal literature
> with respect to who does what. And I stand by it, I'm afraid.
>
> That is not exactly a stake into the heart, Marcus Sejanus.
>
>
> As Consul I have an obligation to the best interests of the people.
> You are asking for approval of a responsible position...and you will
> likely be approved. You will be called upon to make informed and
> legal decisions. You will have the power to promulgate laws and veto
> the actions of others. Pardon me if I come across as nitpicky or
> tactless if I see that, despite perhaps good intentions, some reading
> of the constitution is in order.
>
> It is called 'constructive criticism', ie useful criticism, and you
> will receive citicism of all ilk when serving as a magistrate..good,
> bad, ugly. I received some tonight as a matter of fact with respect
> to one element of the religio..it was suggested that I might do some
> reading so that I am better able to make informed decisions. Well,
> that was said in the presence of others, and if I enter into
> discussion about a given subject and produce opinions, then I can
> expect feedback. I am not having a meltdown over it. I'm going to do
> the research that was suggested. Someone said in forum recently, that
> we are 'all' students (paraphrased)
>
> You have asked for accountability from fellow candidates in recent
> posts and rightly so. But when someone asks for accountability from
> you, you feel the need to bring in issues as your military service in
> Iraq (thank you for serving BTW), your years of citizenship etc. as
> if I've despised these noble accomplishments by one phrase, which I
> have not.
>
> And if your sympathetics/supporters/whatever wish to get the entire
> provincia/state of California to affirm me as obnoxious and tactless
> then so be it. But all this is a poor smoke screen for the issue at
> hand..The issue being that I think, apology or no for your using
> Senator for Censor, you still need to familiarize yourself with the
> language of the current constitution, and take time to look up a law
> referenced in a edict before you pontificate inappropriateness to two
> long term magistrates, the Censors of Nova Roma.
>
> If others are reading the law and you are not, it is 'them' who are
> Tribunes and not yourself. I am sure this is not what you want. And
> it is not in the republic's best interests.
>
> Valete
> Pompeia Minucia Strabo
>
>
> >
> > Marcus Sejanus
> >
>

> the Aventine possibly being the last point in the
> procession of the Salii. note 261

> Salve Consul Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
>
> Your are right I did vote for item V but before the Pontiff
> Maximus had made his opinion know.
>
> I believe I asked you in private what the vote had been in the
> Collegium Pontificum. Based on the fact that no one had voted

> it I believe it had the full support of the Collegium Pontificum
> and so I voted for it.
>
> It turned out that it did not have the full support of the

> Pontificum and as I stated on the Senate list, I was changing

> vote based on the remarks of the Pontiff Maximus. He did so during
> voting and not during the debate, so I changed my mind.
>
> Not only did I say why I was changing my vote but I apologized
> twice, to you, for doing so and as you can see Consul I even said
> it would be better and more productive if Senators would express
> there opinion during debate and not during a vote.
>
> See Senate list post number Message #9215 Sat Oct 14, 2006 4:41 pm
>
> Consul you said in part
>
> …"Do you have free will or do others think for you? …
>
> There were five items to be voted onand I voted your way on three
> of them.
>
> So who should I be independent of you or others?
>
> I do agree that there should be debate during the 96 hours

> for it. But if Senators choose not to voice their opinions on a
> matter until they cast a vote we do have the right to take those
> opinions into account before the end of voting and we can change

> minds.
>
> Vale
>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
>

>
> Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Tiberio Galerio Paulino salutem dicit
>
> When you asked me in private who within the Collegium Pontificum

> for the Religio Reform I told you how many voted and who voted.

> Pontifex Maximus said during his vote in the senate was nothing

> you that only three pontifices voted for the Reform: Astur,

> myself. I told you that in my e-mail to you. When you changed

> you did nothing to ask for clarification before you changed your

> simply took a "knee jerk" reaction and did so. But do not tell

> that you communicated in private about your vote because you did

> think that was the point of Marinus making the comment that he

> asked me and I told you how many in the Collegium had voted for

> asked me nothing else. You did not discuss the changing of your

>
> As a Consul I presented items to the senate for the "wisest and

> experienced" of Nova Roma to provide their insight and offer

> advice. You provided none of this to me, and by your own

> changed your vote simply because someone else voted a certain way

> coming up with a clear reason for yourself. In the past you have

> the phone and called me for less important reasons, you could have

> in this instance, called and asked for some clarification.
>
> However, Marcus Cassius Julianus and I are now working together to

> with mutually acceptable Reform proposals. Since by your own

> state, "its ok to follow the advice of the" Pontifex Maximus" I

> if elected Consul, will support these Reforms in their

> they are not finished during my turn.
>
> Vale:
>
> Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
>
> On 10/19/06, Stephen Gallagher <spqr753@...> wrote:
> >
> > Salve Maior
> >
> > I am sorry but you have misunderstood.
> > I said I changed my vote after the "Pontiff Maximus"
> > ( title not a name ie Marcus Cassius Iulianus)
> > had made his views know.
> >
> > I can understand the mistake and next time I will write
> > out all the names so you understand completely.
> >
> > As to the Religio my adviser on these matters is my cousin
> > Flavius Galerius Aurelianus. I also respect the opinion of my
> > mater Helena Galeria Aureliana. I also think it an ok practice
> > to follow the advice of the "Pontiff Maximus" Marcus Cassius

> >
> > You said that you would like to know where my sympathies lie
> >
> > With Rome of course
> >
> > Vale
> >
> > Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

> Salve Marca Hortensia Maior.
>
> It should be apparent that Tb. Galerius Paulinus honors Dii

> As a member of the current CP, I do not support any Senate

>
> F. Galerius Aurelianus
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rory12001@...
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 12:37 AM
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Report of Senate Session
>
>
> Salve Ti. Galeri;
> so as Consul you would follow the lead of Q. Fabius

> our non-acting, woman-barring pontiff? He is too busy to even post
> the important Feria on the Religio list. Or turn up for a vote in
> the CP. Consul Modianus with other active pontiffs has been

> to move the Collegium Pontificum to an historical basis.
> What are your reasons? I sure as heck want to know if

> are running for Consul & as a non-practictioner where your
> sympathies lie.
> Marca Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebs
> producer "Vox Romana" podcast
> http://www.insulaumbra.com/voxromana/
> 1st vowed temple on NRWiki
> http://www.novaroma.org/wiki/
> Fortuna Populi Romani Quiritium
>
> > Salve Consul Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
> >
> > Your are right I did vote for item V but before the Pontiff
> > Maximus had made his opinion know.
> >
> > I believe I asked you in private what the vote had been in the
> > Collegium Pontificum. Based on the fact that no one had voted
> again
> > it I believe it had the full support of the Collegium

> > and so I voted for it.
> >
> > It turned out that it did not have the full support of the
> Collegium
> > Pontificum and as I stated on the Senate list, I was changing
> my
> > vote based on the remarks of the Pontiff Maximus. He did so

> > voting and not during the debate, so I changed my mind.
> >
> > Not only did I say why I was changing my vote but I apologized
> > twice, to you, for doing so and as you can see Consul I even

> > it would be better and more productive if Senators would express
> > there opinion during debate and not during a vote.
> >
> > See Senate list post number Message #9215 Sat Oct 14, 2006 4:41

> >
> > Consul you said in part
> >
> > …"Do you have free will or do others think for you? …
> >
> > There were five items to be voted onand I voted your way on

> > of them.
> >
> > So who should I be independent of you or others?
> >
> > I do agree that there should be debate during the 96 hours
> allotted
> > for it. But if Senators choose not to voice their opinions on a
> > matter until they cast a vote we do have the right to take those
> > opinions into account before the end of voting and we can change
> our
> > minds.
> >
> > Vale
> >
> > Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

> Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and

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

> Salve Marca Hortensia Maior.
>
> It should be apparent that Tb. Galerius Paulinus honors Dii

> As a member of the current CP, I do not support any Senate

>
> F. Galerius Aurelianus
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rory12001@...
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 12:37 AM
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Report of Senate Session
>
>
> Salve Ti. Galeri;
> so as Consul you would follow the lead of Q. Fabius

> our non-acting, woman-barring pontiff? He is too busy to even post
> the important Feria on the Religio list. Or turn up for a vote in
> the CP. Consul Modianus with other active pontiffs has been

> to move the Collegium Pontificum to an historical basis.
> What are your reasons? I sure as heck want to know if

> are running for Consul & as a non-practictioner where your
> sympathies lie.
> Marca Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebs
> producer "Vox Romana" podcast
> http://www.insulaumbra.com/voxromana/
> 1st vowed temple on NRWiki
> http://www.novaroma.org/wiki/
> Fortuna Populi Romani Quiritium
>
> > Salve Consul Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
> >
> > Your are right I did vote for item V but before the Pontiff
> > Maximus had made his opinion know.
> >
> > I believe I asked you in private what the vote had been in the
> > Collegium Pontificum. Based on the fact that no one had voted
> again
> > it I believe it had the full support of the Collegium

> > and so I voted for it.
> >
> > It turned out that it did not have the full support of the
> Collegium
> > Pontificum and as I stated on the Senate list, I was changing
> my
> > vote based on the remarks of the Pontiff Maximus. He did so

> > voting and not during the debate, so I changed my mind.
> >
> > Not only did I say why I was changing my vote but I apologized
> > twice, to you, for doing so and as you can see Consul I even

> > it would be better and more productive if Senators would express
> > there opinion during debate and not during a vote.
> >
> > See Senate list post number Message #9215 Sat Oct 14, 2006 4:41

> >
> > Consul you said in part
> >
> > …"Do you have free will or do others think for you? …
> >
> > There were five items to be voted onand I voted your way on

> > of them.
> >
> > So who should I be independent of you or others?
> >
> > I do agree that there should be debate during the 96 hours
> allotted
> > for it. But if Senators choose not to voice their opinions on a
> > matter until they cast a vote we do have the right to take those
> > opinions into account before the end of voting and we can change
> our
> > minds.
> >
> > Vale
> >
> > Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

> Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and

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

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> Salve F. Galerius Aureliane;
> this is just what worries me. You are still adhereing to an
> unhistorical notion of gens Galeria as one big family with a pater
&
> materfamilias & Ti. Galerius looks to you & Helena Galeria.
>
> This is just historically wrong & has no basis in fact &
absolutely
> nothing to do with the practice of Roma Antiqua,the res publica
and
> how the Religio was administered.
>
> Sentaor Astur as well as others are admirably trying to reform the
> CP back to Republican practice. I wish to know Ti. Galerius's
> support of this -not yours. He is the one who wishes to be consul.
> M. Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebis
> producer "Vox Romana" podcast
>
>
> > Salve Marca Hortensia Maior.
> >
> > It should be apparent that Tb. Galerius Paulinus honors Dii
> Immortales and has kept his Oaths of Office under the
Constitution.
> He is actually more involved in the historical practices of the
> praetor's office than many who follow the Sacra et Religio.
> Furthermore, he is the minority in the Galeri as most of the
family
> are Cultores Deorum.
>
> If appears to me that he is stating that he does not support
> political interference in the affairs of the Sacred College by
> elected magistrates whether they are Cultores Deorum or, if you'll
> pardon the term, gentiles (non-followers).
> > As a member of the current CP, I do not support any Senate
> involvement in the restoration and reconstruction of the Sacra et
> Religio Romana beyond those absolutely necessary to fill empty
> positions when a college has no members or very few; as per
> historical example. Nova Roma has already had women as pontiffs
> (although none are active) and we continue to have a number of
women
> in sacred posts; including my sister, Violentilla Galeria
Saltarix,
> and my materfamilias, Helena Galeria Aureliana. I hope to see
more
> men and women applying to the Sacred Colleges for membership as
> pontiffs, augurs, epulones, and other positions.
> >
> > F. Galerius Aurelianus
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: rory12001@
> > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 12:37 AM
> > Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Report of Senate Session
> >
> >
> > Salve Ti. Galeri;
> > so as Consul you would follow the lead of Q. Fabius
> Maximus
> > our non-acting, woman-barring pontiff? He is too busy to even
post
> > the important Feria on the Religio list. Or turn up for a vote
in
> > the CP. Consul Modianus with other active pontiffs has been
> trying
> > to move the Collegium Pontificum to an historical basis.
> > What are your reasons? I sure as heck want to know if
> you
> > are running for Consul & as a non-practictioner where your
> > sympathies lie.
> > Marca Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebs
> > producer "Vox Romana" podcast
> > http://www.insulaumbra.com/voxromana/
> > 1st vowed temple on NRWiki
> > http://www.novaroma.org/wiki/
> > Fortuna Populi Romani Quiritium
> >
> > > Salve Consul Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
> > >
> > > Your are right I did vote for item V but before the Pontiff
> > > Maximus had made his opinion know.
> > >
> > > I believe I asked you in private what the vote had been in the
> > > Collegium Pontificum. Based on the fact that no one had voted
> > again
> > > it I believe it had the full support of the Collegium
> Pontificum
> > > and so I voted for it.
> > >
> > > It turned out that it did not have the full support of the
> > Collegium
> > > Pontificum and as I stated on the Senate list, I was
changing
> > my
> > > vote based on the remarks of the Pontiff Maximus. He did so
> during
> > > voting and not during the debate, so I changed my mind.
> > >
> > > Not only did I say why I was changing my vote but I apologized
> > > twice, to you, for doing so and as you can see Consul I even
> said
> > > it would be better and more productive if Senators would
express
> > > there opinion during debate and not during a vote.
> > >
> > > See Senate list post number Message #9215 Sat Oct 14, 2006
4:41
> pm
> > >
> > > Consul you said in part
> > >
> > > …"Do you have free will or do others think for you? …
> > >
> > > There were five items to be voted onand I voted your way on
> three
> > > of them.
> > >
> > > So who should I be independent of you or others?
> > >
> > > I do agree that there should be debate during the 96 hours
> > allotted
> > > for it. But if Senators choose not to voice their opinions on
a
> > > matter until they cast a vote we do have the right to take
those
> > > opinions into account before the end of voting and we can
change
> > our
> > > minds.
> > >
> > > Vale
> > >
> > > Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
_____________________________________________________________________
> ___
> > Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety
and
> security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos
from
> across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>

> A. Tullia Scholastica L. Iunio quiritibus, sociis, peregrinisque bonae
> voluntatis S.P.D.
>
> Ignoscatis, quaeso, absentiam praelongam meam, quae causa tempestatis
> inferentis damnum vis electricae per hebdomadem contigit.
>
>
>
> Lucius Iunius Pompeiae Minuciae Tiberiae sal.
>
> Scripsisti: "It is called 'constructive criticism', ie useful criticism, and
> you will receive citicism of all ilk when serving as a magistrate..good, bad,
> ugly."
>
> As one so appreciative of constructive criticism, Consul mi, I pray that you
> will welcome the following from your poor servant:
>
> ATS: Assuming, as we seem to be compelled to do, that Consul Strabo is
> feminine, then the word consul should also be feminine, so the correct form
> would be consul mea. Avitus has informed us that scriba is feminine when
> applied to woman, though it is normally a masculine noun of the (usually
> feminine) first declension, so let us assume that similar rules apply.
>
> "Pompeia respondeo" means in English "Pompeia, I respond"—so unless you there
> intended to address yourself, I think you may possibly have been in error.
>
> ATS: Actually, this may mean I, Pompeia, reply, just as well. It¹s also
> a heck of a lot more likely, nonne?
>
> And, if I may continue to serve, please allow me to offer these constructive
> observations of the comments that you made in your native tongue:
>
> ATS: Not all native speakers are equally fluent in the use of their
> native tongues. You missed seeing some gems from other magistrates who are
> native speakers of English, having arrived to late to enjoy (so to speak)
> them.
>
> First, you said, "Someone said in forum recently, that we are 'all' students
> (paraphrased)." Actually, though I appreciate your caution, that is exactly
> what I said, so you should have
> felt free to have located your quotation marks—so oddly placed around the word
> "all"—about my entire statement.
>
> You also said, "With the same leniency you showed the Censors? Did you write
> them privately and say 'gosh, this timing doesn't look fair to me, and here's
> why'...No, you publicly suggested to them in the forum that they are in error,
> in using bad judgment in their timing. You encroached on implying that they
> are indulging in ambitious behaviour.
>
> Perhaps not meaning to, but due to inexperience with the constitution. And I'm
> of the opinion that if you have of read the Lax Papilla Senatorial before you
> posted to them last night, you might have written the Censors privately. And
> you might have had more insight as to the legal obligations of the Censors."
>
> You are dear, Consul mi, for having so worried after the sensitivities of our
> good censores.
>
> ATS: Well, the censores can write nasty notae...
>
> I dare say, however, that you may have slightly misread a perfectly honest
> question as an attack on the propriety of the actions censorum. Your
> colleagues—both reasonable men—seem to have taken the remark as an opportunity
> to patiently instruct a fellow citizen on the considerations behind their
> collective decision. They had no reason to fear the question in a public
> forum, and the man who posed the question accepted their explanation
> graciously. They seem to have been secure enough in their stances to have
> responded reasonably to the concern expressed by M. Seianus—a concern that may
> easily have been shared by other, silent citizens. You, however, seem to be
> awfully keen to perceive an attack and quash it—which brings me to yet another
> constructive observation:
>
> Scripsisti: "You will be called upon to make informed and legal decisions.
> You will have the power to promulgate laws and veto the actions of others.
> Pardon me if I come across as nitpicky or tactless if I see that, despite
> perhaps good intentions, some reading of the constitution is in order."
>
> Your present allegiance to legal particulars withstanding, you very recently
> ignored the language of legal precision while announcing your intention to
> consult the Senate prior to a vote before the comitia on constitutional
> amendments. When citizens opted to express a reasonable concern over the
> implications of that imprecise language, you clamped down.
>
> You have written about your own receipt of criticism that, as a magistrate,
> you "expect feedback.... [and will not have] a meltdown over it"—yet you
> repeatedly seem thin skinned,
> and weakly snap at those who may even hint some criticism of the magistrates.
> We are sovereign over you, Consul mi, and you are lucky for the honor to
> explain yourself in response to our concerns. Do show some respect while you
> do so.
>
> Scripsisti: "And if your sympathetics/supporters/whatever wish to get the
> entire provincia/state of California to affirm me as obnoxious and tactless
> then so be it."
>
> This Californian, Consul mi, feels that you have been far more effective
> toward that end than his poor efforts could possibly have lent. That is not
> to say, however, that I haven't
> enjoyed lending you a hand.
>
> Vale.
>
> Vale, et valete,
>
> A. Tullia Scholastica
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
> <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@...> wrote:
>> >
>> > ---Salve Marcus Sejanus et Salvete Onmnes
>> >
>> >
>> > In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com> ,
>> "legio_vi_tribunis"
>> > <marcus.sejanus@> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > Salve Honorable Consul Pompeia,
>>> > > In regards to your comments about my questioning why a candidate was
>>> > > made a Senator just before election, I believe that perhaps you need
>>> > > to actually read the posts all the way through. Yes I stated that the
>>> > > Senate appointed him, when in fact it was the Censors, and I
>>> > > apologized for the mistake.
>> >
>> > Pompeia respondeo: You apologized for confusing the Senate with the
>> > Censors in terms of being custodians of the Senate roles. Fair enough.
>> > Not a problem in itself..as long as you are clear as to the
>> > respective roles of each. But this is not my entire concern. If it
>> > was I wouldn't have said anything.
>> > The Censors quoted the Lex Popillia Senatoria as legal rationale for
>> > their actions. Had you looked it up, you might have had less reason
>> > to publicly question their actions. Further, this is an excellent
>> > time to reconcile the Senate count as the Censors will have to engage
>> > in the task of aligning the tribes and centuries, assigning the proper
>> > ranks to the citizens. There are often legitimate reasons for timing.
>> >
>> > I miss quoted, but only after a 26 hour
>>> > > work day.
>> >
>> > Pompeia: I stop making sense after a 16 hour work day, and so you
>> > don't hear from me:)
>> >
>> > So for future reference, perhaps you should read the posts
>>> > > all the way through and show leniency when a person apologizes for a
>>> > > simple mistake.
>> >
>> > Pompeia: With the same leniency you showed the Censors? Did you
>> > write them privately and say 'gosh, this timing doesn't look fair to
>> > me, and here's why'...No, you publicly suggested to them in the forum
>> > that they are in error, in using bad judgement in their timing. You
>> > encroached on implying that they are indulging in ambitious
>> > behaviours. Perhaps not meaning to, but due to inexperience with the
>> > constitution. And I'm of the opinion that if you have of read the Lex
>> > Popillia Senatoria before you posted to them last night, you might
>> > have written the Censors privately. And you might have had more
>> > insight as to the legal obligations of the Censors.
>> >
>> > All I said more or less is you need to get into the legal literature
>> > with respect to who does what. And I stand by it, I'm afraid.
>> >
>> > That is not exactly a stake into the heart, Marcus Sejanus.
>> >
>> >
>> > As Consul I have an obligation to the best interests of the people.
>> > You are asking for approval of a responsible position...and you will
>> > likely be approved. You will be called upon to make informed and
>> > legal decisions. You will have the power to promulgate laws and veto
>> > the actions of others. Pardon me if I come across as nitpicky or
>> > tactless if I see that, despite perhaps good intentions, some reading
>> > of the constitution is in order.
>> >
>> > It is called 'constructive criticism', ie useful criticism, and you
>> > will receive citicism of all ilk when serving as a magistrate..good,
>> > bad, ugly. I received some tonight as a matter of fact with respect
>> > to one element of the religio..it was suggested that I might do some
>> > reading so that I am better able to make informed decisions. Well,
>> > that was said in the presence of others, and if I enter into
>> > discussion about a given subject and produce opinions, then I can
>> > expect feedback. I am not having a meltdown over it. I'm going to do
>> > the research that was suggested. Someone said in forum recently, that
>> > we are 'all' students (paraphrased)
>> >
>> > You have asked for accountability from fellow candidates in recent
>> > posts and rightly so. But when someone asks for accountability from
>> > you, you feel the need to bring in issues as your military service in
>> > Iraq (thank you for serving BTW), your years of citizenship etc. as
>> > if I've despised these noble accomplishments by one phrase, which I
>> > have not.
>> >
>> > And if your sympathetics/supporters/whatever wish to get the entire
>> > provincia/state of California to affirm me as obnoxious and tactless
>> > then so be it. But all this is a poor smoke screen for the issue at
>> > hand..The issue being that I think, apology or no for your using
>> > Senator for Censor, you still need to familiarize yourself with the
>> > language of the current constitution, and take time to look up a law
>> > referenced in a edict before you pontificate inappropriateness to two
>> > long term magistrates, the Censors of Nova Roma.
>> >
>> > If others are reading the law and you are not, it is 'them' who are
>> > Tribunes and not yourself. I am sure this is not what you want. And
>> > it is not in the republic's best interests.
>> >
>> > Valete
>> > Pompeia Minucia Strabo
>> >
>> >
>>> > >
>>> > > Marcus Sejanus
>>> > >
>> >
>

>
> F. Galerius Aurelianus
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rory12001@...
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 11:50 AM
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Report of Senate Session
>
>
> Salve F. Galerius Aureliane;
> this is just what worries me. You are still adhereing to an
> unhistorical notion of gens Galeria as one big family with a pater

> materfamilias & Ti. Galerius looks to you & Helena Galeria.
>
> This is just historically wrong & has no basis in fact &

> nothing to do with the practice of Roma Antiqua,the res publica

> how the Religio was administered.
>
> Sentaor Astur as well as others are admirably trying to reform the
> CP back to Republican practice. I wish to know Ti. Galerius's
> support of this -not yours. He is the one who wishes to be consul.
> M. Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebis
> producer "Vox Romana" podcast
>
>
> > Salve Marca Hortensia Maior.
> >
> > It should be apparent that Tb. Galerius Paulinus honors Dii
> Immortales and has kept his Oaths of Office under the

> He is actually more involved in the historical practices of the
> praetor's office than many who follow the Sacra et Religio.
> Furthermore, he is the minority in the Galeri as most of the

> are Cultores Deorum.
>
> If appears to me that he is stating that he does not support
> political interference in the affairs of the Sacred College by
> elected magistrates whether they are Cultores Deorum or, if you'll
> pardon the term, gentiles (non-followers).
> > As a member of the current CP, I do not support any Senate
> involvement in the restoration and reconstruction of the Sacra et
> Religio Romana beyond those absolutely necessary to fill empty
> positions when a college has no members or very few; as per
> historical example. Nova Roma has already had women as pontiffs
> (although none are active) and we continue to have a number of

> in sacred posts; including my sister, Violentilla Galeria

> and my materfamilias, Helena Galeria Aureliana. I hope to see

> men and women applying to the Sacred Colleges for membership as
> pontiffs, augurs, epulones, and other positions.
> >
> > F. Galerius Aurelianus
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: rory12001@
> > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 12:37 AM
> > Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Report of Senate Session
> >
> >
> > Salve Ti. Galeri;
> > so as Consul you would follow the lead of Q. Fabius
> Maximus
> > our non-acting, woman-barring pontiff? He is too busy to even

> > the important Feria on the Religio list. Or turn up for a vote

> > the CP. Consul Modianus with other active pontiffs has been
> trying
> > to move the Collegium Pontificum to an historical basis.
> > What are your reasons? I sure as heck want to know if
> you
> > are running for Consul & as a non-practictioner where your
> > sympathies lie.
> > Marca Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebs
> > producer "Vox Romana" podcast
> > http://www.insulaumbra.com/voxromana/
> > 1st vowed temple on NRWiki
> > http://www.novaroma.org/wiki/
> > Fortuna Populi Romani Quiritium
> >
> > > Salve Consul Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
> > >
> > > Your are right I did vote for item V but before the Pontiff
> > > Maximus had made his opinion know.
> > >
> > > I believe I asked you in private what the vote had been in the
> > > Collegium Pontificum. Based on the fact that no one had voted
> > again
> > > it I believe it had the full support of the Collegium
> Pontificum
> > > and so I voted for it.
> > >
> > > It turned out that it did not have the full support of the
> > Collegium
> > > Pontificum and as I stated on the Senate list, I was

> > my
> > > vote based on the remarks of the Pontiff Maximus. He did so
> during
> > > voting and not during the debate, so I changed my mind.
> > >
> > > Not only did I say why I was changing my vote but I apologized
> > > twice, to you, for doing so and as you can see Consul I even
> said
> > > it would be better and more productive if Senators would

> > > there opinion during debate and not during a vote.
> > >
> > > See Senate list post number Message #9215 Sat Oct 14, 2006

> pm
> > >
> > > Consul you said in part
> > >
> > > …"Do you have free will or do others think for you? â

> > >
> > > There were five items to be voted onand I voted your way on
> three
> > > of them.
> > >
> > > So who should I be independent of you or others?
> > >
> > > I do agree that there should be debate during the 96 hours
> > allotted
> > > for it. But if Senators choose not to voice their opinions on

> > > matter until they cast a vote we do have the right to take

> > > opinions into account before the end of voting and we can

> > our
> > > minds.
> > >
> > > Vale
> > >
> > > Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

> ___
> > Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety

> security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos

> across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

> Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and

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

> Salve M. Hortensia Maior,
>
> Are you actually reading my posts or just scanning them for key

> not toeing the dear departed Boni party line. I am IN FAVOR of

> active members of the Sacred Colleges and am nigh on to sick to

> CP dancing around the subject for the last two years. While I do

> see women in the cult of Hercules or male vestals, I would love

> of our citizens move up the ladder on the Sacred Colleges that

> being proposed.
> I totally respect Astur Pontifex and continue to learn from him

> we have our difference. I want to work with you in the province

> we are having our differences right now.
>
> F. Galerius Aurelianus.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

>
> Salve Marca Hortensia Maior
>
> "this is just what worries me. You are still adhering to an
> unhistorical notion of gens Galeria as one big family with a
> Pater"...
>
> No its just good manners, something you could use by the bucket
> full.
>
> Helena Galeria founded the gens Galeria and even though legal
> changes have been made to the gens structure, since we all joined,
> we sill respect her as being first.
>
> Please remember that F. Galerius Aurelianus is a member of the CP.
> He is more than qualified to give advice on these matters,
> especially when a magistrate ask for such.
>
> Helena Galeria is also a practitioner of the Religio and a student
> of it as well and so again she is qualified to give advice.
>
> For information on my views on the Religio please see my post
> number 46426
>
>
> Vale
>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> Candidate for Consul
> Mea gloria fideles
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@> wrote:
> >
> > Salve F. Galerius Aureliane;
> > this is just what worries me. You are still adhereing to an
> > unhistorical notion of gens Galeria as one big family with a

> &
> > materfamilias & Ti. Galerius looks to you & Helena Galeria.
> >
> > This is just historically wrong & has no basis in fact &
> absolutely
> > nothing to do with the practice of Roma Antiqua,the res publica
> and
> > how the Religio was administered.
> >
> > Sentaor Astur as well as others are admirably trying to reform

> > CP back to Republican practice. I wish to know Ti. Galerius's
> > support of this -not yours. He is the one who wishes to be

> > M. Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebis
> > producer "Vox Romana" podcast
> >
> >
> > > Salve Marca Hortensia Maior.
> > >
> > > It should be apparent that Tb. Galerius Paulinus honors Dii
> > Immortales and has kept his Oaths of Office under the
> Constitution.
> > He is actually more involved in the historical practices of the
> > praetor's office than many who follow the Sacra et Religio.
> > Furthermore, he is the minority in the Galeri as most of the
> family
> > are Cultores Deorum.
> >
> > If appears to me that he is stating that he does not support
> > political interference in the affairs of the Sacred College by
> > elected magistrates whether they are Cultores Deorum or, if

> > pardon the term, gentiles (non-followers).
> > > As a member of the current CP, I do not support any Senate
> > involvement in the restoration and reconstruction of the Sacra

> > Religio Romana beyond those absolutely necessary to fill empty
> > positions when a college has no members or very few; as per
> > historical example. Nova Roma has already had women as pontiffs
> > (although none are active) and we continue to have a number of
> women
> > in sacred posts; including my sister, Violentilla Galeria
> Saltarix,
> > and my materfamilias, Helena Galeria Aureliana. I hope to see
> more
> > men and women applying to the Sacred Colleges for membership as
> > pontiffs, augurs, epulones, and other positions.
> > >
> > > F. Galerius Aurelianus
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: rory12001@
> > > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> > > Sent: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 12:37 AM
> > > Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Report of Senate Session
> > >
> > >
> > > Salve Ti. Galeri;
> > > so as Consul you would follow the lead of Q. Fabius
> > Maximus
> > > our non-acting, woman-barring pontiff? He is too busy to even
> post
> > > the important Feria on the Religio list. Or turn up for a vote
> in
> > > the CP. Consul Modianus with other active pontiffs has been
> > trying
> > > to move the Collegium Pontificum to an historical basis.
> > > What are your reasons? I sure as heck want to know

> > you
> > > are running for Consul & as a non-practictioner where your
> > > sympathies lie.
> > > Marca Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebs
> > > producer "Vox Romana" podcast
> > > http://www.insulaumbra.com/voxromana/
> > > 1st vowed temple on NRWiki
> > > http://www.novaroma.org/wiki/
> > > Fortuna Populi Romani

> > >
> > > > Salve Consul Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
> > > >
> > > > Your are right I did vote for item V but before the Pontiff
> > > > Maximus had made his opinion know.
> > > >
> > > > I believe I asked you in private what the vote had been in

> > > > Collegium Pontificum. Based on the fact that no one had

> > > again
> > > > it I believe it had the full support of the Collegium
> > Pontificum
> > > > and so I voted for it.
> > > >
> > > > It turned out that it did not have the full support of the
> > > Collegium
> > > > Pontificum and as I stated on the Senate list, I was
> changing
> > > my
> > > > vote based on the remarks of the Pontiff Maximus. He did so
> > during
> > > > voting and not during the debate, so I changed my mind.
> > > >
> > > > Not only did I say why I was changing my vote but I

> > > > twice, to you, for doing so and as you can see Consul I

> > said
> > > > it would be better and more productive if Senators would
> express
> > > > there opinion during debate and not during a vote.
> > > >
> > > > See Senate list post number Message #9215 Sat Oct 14, 2006
> 4:41
> > pm
> > > >
> > > > Consul you said in part
> > > >
> > > > …"Do you have free will or do others think for you? …
> > > >
> > > > There were five items to be voted onand I voted your way on
> > three
> > > > of them.
> > > >
> > > > So who should I be independent of you or others?
> > > >
> > > > I do agree that there should be debate during the 96 hours
> > > allotted
> > > > for it. But if Senators choose not to voice their opinions

> a
> > > > matter until they cast a vote we do have the right to take
> those
> > > > opinions into account before the end of voting and we can
> change
> > > our
> > > > minds.
> > > >
> > > > Vale
> > > >
> > > > Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

> > ___
> > > Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety
> and
> > security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos
> from
> > across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
>

>
> Salve Romans
>
> After careful consideration I come before you to endorse the
> candidacy of
>
> Lucius Arminius Faustus for Consul of Nova Roma.
>
> I do so for a number of reasons.
>
> The first is that Lucius Arminius Faustus and I have history. We
> have served together as Tribunes. We have had some lively
> discussions and even some heated arguments but we kept them within
> the confines of the Tribunes list.
>
> We discussed topics and issues and did not let personalities get in
> the way of us doing our jobs.
>
> Did I like everything he said or did? NO. Did he like everything I
> said and did NO. But we were able to disagree without being
> disagreeable.
>
>

>
> M. Hortensia Ti.Galerio Paulino spd;
> you are running for Consul, you are asked to vote on a
> serious matter of Constitutional reform of the Collegium Ponteficium.
> Now whom do you consult? 2 Galeri & the Pontifex Maximus
> who knows nil about religious law much less has 0 Latin, to even do
> research.
> Did you consult A. Apollonius Cordus? Classics scholar,
> teacher of Roman law at Academia Thules, specialist in Roman
> religious law & also a non-practitioner? No & you know him. Did you
> consult anyone with command of this important subject? No.
>
> Whether you are for the legislation or not. You simply did not
> make an attempt to get the best information available.
> This shows a real lack of good judgement.
>
> I will vote for Lucius Arminius Faustus and Marcus Moravius
> Piscinus Horatianus as Consules. One is a teacher at Academia Thules
> of the Religio Romana, Flamen Carmentalis & a Latin speaker, Faustus
> also is a Latin speaker with a Classics background, who has
> chastised me more than once to behave like a Roman! That's the
> calibre of Consul I ask for.
> bene valete
> Marca Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebis
> producer "Vox Romana" podcast
>
>
> >

> Faustus also is a Latin speaker with a Classics background, who has
> chastised me more than once to behave like a Roman!

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@... wrote:
My family has built, consecrated, and dedicated the only publicly
accessible, physical templum to a God within this province
according to the best information on the rites to do so. I cast
the auguries as auspex for it, published the techniques, and
> results on the ML. I have been active within the CP since being
named flamen Cerialis. I have contributed a good deal of material
to the ML, House of Vesta, RR, Hellenic Rites, and provincial lists
about the Sacra et Religio.>>>

On 10/19/06, Maior <rory12001@...> wrote:


Nova Roma will please the gods just fine by renewing the Pax Romana
> of the res publica. Many are here because of their devotion to Roman
> republican ideals. I am. I have no desire to live in a polytheistic
> theocracy


I am sick to the back teeth with people who do not even believe in the gods,
having the utter hubris to tell us what will please them. Frankly, if you
don't follow the religio don't try to tell people what's acceptable to the
gods - that's just downright insulting. Don't tell me what to do in my
religion, I won't tell you what to do in yours.

Flavia Lucilla Merula


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

>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "os390account" <Velaki@> wrote:
> >
> > Salvete!
> >
>
> ...
>
> >
> > In keeping with many ancient, and modern, traditions regarding
> > applied law, I would like to propose extentions to the tabularium
> > consisting of a compendium of applicable interpretive commentary

> > each law.
>
> Do you mean like the Codex Juris Novae Romae?
> http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Codex_Juris_Novae_Romae
>
> Fuscus started that and I think he has a lot more to add. I asked

> to hold off a bit until we had the naming of leges straightened out.
>
> optime vale
>
> Agricola
>

> the Aventine possibly being the last point in the
> procession of the Salii. note 261

> Since Salvius Astur published his proposals a

>
> Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus Augur Quiritibus salutem dicit
>
> Please excuse me for interrupting the Hortensia v Galeria feud.
>
> Our good Censor Marinus asked for additional information.
> "I understand that you're quoting this from a published work. I'd

> interested in knowing what note 261 says, if you could please

>
> L Equitius, sure thing,
>
> 261 Armilustum: see Varro, LL, 5.15.3; 6.22 ; Festus, 17L; Plut.

> Lydus, de meus. 4.34. The Participation of the Salii is not directly
> attested, but probably rightly assumed. (The argument that the

> active in October because the duties of Scipio Africanus as a

> before Magnesia delayed him in October, no longer applies if in

> calendar was so out gear that it was registering March 189, through

> 190 by the Julian reckoning) Cf. F.W. Walbank, Polybius, iii, 105.
>
>
> Vale
>

>
> 5a. ARMILUSTIUM
> Posted by: "M.J. Cope (Cincinnatus)" vergil96@... l_equitius
> Date: Thu Oct 19, 2006 7:33 am (PDT)
>
> Ex Domo Flamen Martalis Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus Augur

> dicit
>
> Mars nos protegas
>
>
> 19 October XIV KAL. NOV.
> NP Dies religiosus
> ARMILUSTIUM
>
> The beginning of the campaigning season in March had been marked by

> dancing of the Salii through the streets (p. 85), the Equirria (p.

> Quinquatrus and the Tubilustrium (p. 92), so its end in October saw

> ceremonies of the October horse and the Armilustrium when the army

> purified from the dangerous infection that it may have incurred

> with bloodshed and strangers. This was a festival in honour of

> Salian priests probably once again danced and sang through the

> during the sacrifices tubae were sounded, and the arma and

> purified and then put away until the next year. It appears from

> Varro that the lustratio was performed on the Aventine 'ad Circum

> in an open space called Armilustrium (it lay south of the church of

> Sabina), the Aventine possibly being the last point in the

> Salii. note 261
> An entry in the Praenestine calendar seems to apply to 20

> could be a note to the previous day's Armilustrium. It runs '[...]

> gustare antea frequenter solebant' (they frequently used blood to

> blood before'). This presumably refers to the tasting of blood from

> sacrifice, a practice which had apparently ceased by the time of

> when the calendar was composed.
>
> From 'Festivals and Ceremonies of the Roman Republic' by HH Scullard
>
> Valete
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> Messages in this topic (2)
>

>
> 5b. Re: ARMILUSTIUM
> Posted by: "Gnaeus Equitius Marinus" gawne@... equitius_marinus
> Date: Thu Oct 19, 2006 7:43 am (PDT)
>
> Salve Luci Equiti,
>
> "M.J. Cope \(Cincinnatus\)" <vergil96@...> writes:
>
> > the Aventine possibly being the last point in the
> > procession of the Salii. note 261
>
> I understand that you're quoting this from a published work. I'd be
> interested in knowing what note 261 says, if you could please

>
> Otherwise, thank you for taking the time to post about this

> festival.
>
> Vale,
>
> CN.EQVIT.MARINVS
>

> > Since Salvius Astur published his proposals a
> few months ago there really has been no discussion; they *seem*
> reasonable to me, but since we may be asked to vote on them in the
>
> near future, it might be in the interests of the parties involved

> express their reason(s) for supporting or rejecting them.
> <
>
> There was a little discussion. I suggested a couple of changes:

>
> I'm sorry to keep banging this drum. If someone has decided that

>
>
>
> Send instant messages to your online friends

>

> Salvette,
> I just wanted to let all of my fellow Nova Romans know that a world
> renowned bladesmith has offered me two exquisite Egyptian Khepeshes at
> a huge discount. These are one of a kind, hand smelted and forged of
> pure demascus. I will be more than happy to email you pictures and
> prices. One of them has 24K gold fittings, and is done in the Anubis
> motiff. Also, is you are into 16th century Japanese swords, he has a
> sword called the Mondavi which is made of demascus with rosewood
> handle. All three are period perfect, no modern tools or techniques
> were used.
>
> Vale
> Marcus
>
>

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@... wrote:
>
> F. Galerius Aurelianus S.P.D.
>
> No Hortensia-Galeria feud. 14 Galeri, 2 Hortensi. It would be
unfair to
> have feud with very small domus of very small gens. Besides,
Maior and I just
> having little written exchange for purposes of education and
clarification.
> She is welcome to say whatever she want about me as long as she
leave my
> family out of it and I will keep her domus out of my posts.
> Besides, we are both plebs and from same province. Not even
considered
> strong language in these parts.
>
> Valete.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> M. Hortensia A. Apollonio spd;
> Corde, would you kindly explain to one and all why it
> would be a Good Thing to vote for this reform of the CP.?
> for all Nova Romans; polytheists, philosophers, monotheists
> etc..
> M. Hortensia Maior

> Could not the actual author of the proposal do so?
>
> Vale bene,
>
> Cato
>
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@> wrote:
> >
> > M. Hortensia A. Apollonio spd;
> > Corde, would you kindly explain to one and all why

> > would be a Good Thing to vote for this reform of the CP.?
> > for all Nova Romans; polytheists, philosophers,

> > etc..
> > M. Hortensia Maior
>

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> M. Hortensia G. Equitio spd;
> well I don't think so amice, as Pontiff Astur is getting
> married tomorrow;-). It's also term break so I don't know if
> Pontiffs Modianus and Metellus are away from school, which is why I
> asked A. Apollonius Cordus, as he'd seen it, made comments & seemed
> to me an impeccable person to discuss the pros & cons.
> cura ut valeas
> Marca Hortensia Maior
>
> > Could not the actual author of the proposal do so?
> >
> > Vale bene,
> >
> > Cato
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@> wrote:
> > >
> > > M. Hortensia A. Apollonio spd;
> > > Corde, would you kindly explain to one and all why
> it
> > > would be a Good Thing to vote for this reform of the CP.?
> > > for all Nova Romans; polytheists, philosophers,
> monotheists
> > > etc..
> > > M. Hortensia Maior
> >
>

> Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus Augur Quiritibus salutem dicit

> 261 Armilustum: see Varro, LL, 5.15.3; 6.22 ; Festus, 17L; Plut. Rom. 23.3;
> Lydus, de meus. 4.34. The Participation of the Salii is not directly
> attested, but probably rightly assumed. (The argument that the Salii were
> active in October because the duties of Scipio Africanus as a Salian priest
> before Magnesia delayed him in October, no longer applies if in fact the
> calendar was so out gear that it was registering March 189, through October
> 190 by the Julian reckoning) Cf. F.W. Walbank, Polybius, iii, 105.

>
> Salve Amice!
>
> Dear friend I wish You all the best when You marry today! I also wish
> You and your bride wonderful wedding and a happy life!
> --
>
> Vale
>
> Caeso Fabius Buteo Quintilianus
>
> Senator, Censorius et Consularis
> Accensus GFBM
> 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
>

>
> Indeed!
>
> A toast to Gnaeus Salvius Astur and his new bride! A libation for
> their health and happiness!
>
> And for the newish folks who don't know about whom we speak:
> http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Gnaeus_Salvius_Astur_%28Nova_Roma%29
>
> optime valete
>
> M. Lucretius Agricola
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Caeso Fabius Buteo Quintilianus
> <christer.edling@> wrote:
> >
> > Salve Amice!
> >
> > Dear friend I wish You all the best when You marry today! I also

> > You and your bride wonderful wedding and a happy life!
> > --
> >
> > Vale
> >
> > Caeso Fabius Buteo Quintilianus
> >
> > Senator, Censorius et Consularis
> > Accensus GFBM
> > 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
> >
>

>
> Indeed!
>
> A toast to Gnaeus Salvius Astur and his new bride! A libation for
> their health and happiness!
>
> And for the newish folks who don't know about whom we speak:
> http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Gnaeus_Salvius_Astur_%28Nova_Roma%29
>
> optime valete
>
> M. Lucretius Agricola
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Caeso Fabius Buteo Quintilianus
> <christer.edling@> wrote:
> >
> > Salve Amice!
> >
> > Dear friend I wish You all the best when You marry today! I also

> > You and your bride wonderful wedding and a happy life!
> > --
> >
> > Vale
> >
> > Caeso Fabius Buteo Quintilianus
> >
> > Senator, Censorius et Consularis
> > Accensus GFBM
> > 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
> >
>

> I'll drink to that. I don't have any wine though.....>>>

>
> SALVE AMICA !
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
> <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@> wrote:
>
> > I'll drink to that. I don't have any wine though.....>>>
>
> I still remember my first days in NR. I still remember your

> for an Amaretto or Hungarian Chardonnay...
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/message/31648
> Anytime...
>
> The time fly...I have two years and three days in NR , a lot of
> friends and here is my second family.
>
> BTW, Quinte Suetoni, I still have that promised bottle.
>
> VALE BENE,
> Sabinus.
>

>A toast to Gnaeus Salvius Astur and his new bride! A libation for
>their health and happiness!

>
> Omnibus S.P.D. Fl Vedius Germanicus
>
> It's been a while since I've posted on the status of the Sacrifice

> so here it is once more, to keep it in the public eye.
>
> Thusfar, the Nova Roma Sacrifice Fund has received US$200 in

> with other individuals having offered to help without naming a
> particular sum.
>
> What is the Nova Roma Sacrifice Fund?
>
> In accordance with the decretum of the Collegium Pontificum dealing

> the subject of animal sacrifices, no state monies are currently to

> allocated for the purpose of funding animal sacrifice in the

> of the Religio Publica. As private Citizens, on the other hand, we

> free to donate to such causes as we wish. The Sacrifice Fund,

> is a completely private institution whose purpose is to help defray

> cost of conducting animal sacrifices by official priests, acting on
> behalf of the Religio Publica.
>
> Anyone wishing to make a pledge to the Sacrifice Fund, to help

> the cause of celebrating the Religio Publica as it was celebrated

> Roma Antiqua, please send me a private email and I'll add you to

> list. Send no money now; your pledge of support is sufficient at

> point. I would, however, ask you to name an amount, just to keep

> record-keeping simple.
>
> Valete,
>
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus
> Pater Patriae
> Consular
> Senator
>
> http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Flavius_Vedius_Germanicus_

>