Cato Aureliano PPMM sal.

Salve, pontiff.

I agree entirely regarding the benefit of the religio being woven into the fabric of the State;
as I mentioned earlier, and you have here described quite well, the sense of bonding
together that comes from the public celebration and understanding of the State cult is a
matter of immense importance.

That a citizen like your cousin Appius Aurelianus also derives such a deeply satisfying
sense of fulfillment by virtue of his practice is an excellent example for all practitioners.

I am still working out in my head, however, that vital - to us as opposed to Roma Antiqua
- connection between the lex constitutiva and the structure of the religious terms of
office. The fact that continued citizenship (as an assidui) is dependent upon an outside,
changeable factor - the payment of taxes - is totally at odds with the historic mos, and
brings us to this odd place.

To use your example of laitization, we could put into the lex constitutiva (and it would
have to be an amendment directly to that document so that no previous or subsequent lex
could override its stipulations) saying that a Pontifex Maximus who left the respublica for
any reason *or* did not pay taxes would be laicized.

On a different note, after looking it up I found that we (EO) do practice laitization very
rarely but that in the RC church even a laitized priest is still held to have that indelible
sacramental mark upon his soul.

vale!

Cato

A. Tullia Scholastica quiritibus, sociis, peregrinisque bonae voluntatis S.P.D.

    We have only four gladiators entered in the munera, so there were no quarter-final bouts.  The entries for the semifinal bouts are:

        1.  Diogenes, secutor, owned by L. Rutilius Minervalis; like most of his type, he fights offensively (Veneta);

        2.  Hierocles, murmillo, a powerful 25-year-old Spartan owned by C. Petronius Dexter (Russata);

        3. Lucanus, hoplomachus, a very tall, 22-year-old Latin, also owned by C. Petronius Dexter (Russata), and

        4. Hanno, Thraex, a grizzled veteran Carthaginian owned by C. Valerianus Germanicus (Veneta); he fights defensively.  

                
                In the first bout, Diogenes was matched with Hierocles; Diogenes won (Veneta).  In the second bout, Lucanus was paired with Hanno, and (horrors!) the Carthaginian Hanno (Veneta) won.  Thus only the Blues will be represented in the finals...Both defeated gladiatores, however, were missi stantes, and will live to fight again.

                We regret that our regular reporter for these pugilistic contests is missing, so please excuse the brevity of the description.  

Valete.

    

Cato C. Fabio Buteoni Modiano sal.

Salve!

Ah, yep, that's right about the belief/acknowledgement...so the Romans would not have
fallen into that category.

The question your suggestion brings to mind is that if we understand the religio to be at
least somewhat basically orthopractic, then the ancient texts describing certain rites and
rituals for specific days and celebrations would be necessary for the proper practice of the
cult.

The idea of a theology of the religio cuts back to a rephrasing of the original question: is
there one? We have the stories of the gods' exploits and interventions in human history;
they are well - if confusingly, since Everyone is related to Everyone else and often in
multiple ways - documented. But is there an underlying theology per se?

I think Agricole might say that we are thinking of "theology" in a post-Christian sense,
with its trappings of sin and salvation. With the Roman gods I do not get the same idea
that there is an over-arching "purpose" to history; the rewards and punishments They dole
out are based in many ways on Their whim not based on some rigid sense of objective
Right and Wrong.

Vale!

Cato

C. Equitius Cato Varroni sal.

Il est vrai que beaucoup de dommage a été fait au nom du
christianisme, mais cela est vrai de toutes les convictions
religieuses et politiques, indépendamment de l'intention du fondateur
ou origine de ces convictions. Oui, je suis un chrétien et une
chrétienne orthodoxe, le coeur et l'âme de ce qui a été à l'avant-
garde de la destruction de la religio romana. Mais ce qui s'est passé
dans le passé est le passé. Nous ne vivons plus dans ce monde encore.

Ce forum n'est pas vraiment le lieu approprié pour tenter d'expliquer
vos problèmes avec le christianisme. S'il vous plaît croyez-moi quand
je dis, cependant, que lors de l'examen du religio romana ici j'ai
l'intention seulement des résultats bénéfiques pour la Respublica.

Bien que je ne peut jamais annuler ce qui a été fait pour vous dans
le passé, j'ai toujours considéré que, dans ce Respublica, la
pratique du religio est sacrée et protégée, et que tous ceux qui le
culte des dieux et déesses de Rome doit se sentir à la maison.

Ne laissez pas les cris de Maior - ou toute autre personne qui aurait
susciter la haine ou préjudice - rendent impossible pour vous de
reconnaître et d'apprécier une sincère et un vif intérêt. Je poser
des questions sur le religio parce que je suis désireux de
connaître les réponses, pas de l'attaquer.

vale,

Cato

Cato Buteoni Modiano Iulio Regulo omnibusque in foro SPD

Salvete!

Modiane, does the orthopractic basis of the religio lend itself to a theology, though? This
would be, as you suggest, an interesting road to walk down. Iulis Regulus writes that it
would be a good thing to find out what makes the religio "tick", and I agree. I am still
drawn back to Appius Aurelianus' expressions of real joy and satisfaction in his experience
of the religio - something to which I can relate as having felt in the past with the Divine
Liturgy.

It is possible to examine the religio here, in public, from soup to nuts, without causing
riots in the streets and general chaos because (as I said in my previous post to Varro in
probably terrible French) the responses, as varied as they might be, can only benefit the
respublica; as we hear what people think and believe about the religio and its theological
structure, we are getting to know them better as well. There is nothing (aside from
meeting face-to-face) that demonstrates better the mechanics of a person's thought
process than seeing how they write.

Then, when we have a clearer picture of what the religio actually *is* to our citizens, we
can look at how this can be translated into the legal structure of the respublica.

My only concern is that we *not* try to repeat the emperor Julian's flawed attempt to
squeeze the religio into a set of boxes created by Christianity. As has been quite
adequately demonstrated, the religio will not allow itself to be put there.

Valete!

Cato

L. Livia Plauta omnibus S.P.D.

I'll try here to reply to three points based on my modest experience
as a cultrix deorum. More expert people are welcome to correct me.

First, Marinus asked "Could not the religio be seen as somewhat
henotheistic? With Iuppiter Optimus Maximus
at the top, calling the shots, while the Others tend Their own
specific areas of interest."

I have the impression Christians tend to see Religio as enotheistic
because they want to assimilate it to their own conception, but I see
no evidence of that in historical sources or in my own experience.

In my opinion Iuppiter Optimus Maximus has a superior position, but by
no means an unchallenged one. He is not like a monotheistic God, but
not even like a general: his position is rather like that of a pater
familias, trying to keep order in a big and unruly family.

He has his specific area of interest, which is weather, and in
particular rain and thunder. He might be able to influence other areas
too, but for those it is more effective to enlist the help of the
specialist god.
If I need protection for a trip I will ask Mercurius, not Iuppiter,
for war I will ask Mars, and I will ask Venus for favours of a
particular kind, not any other goddess.
My short experience with rituals, though, suggests that Iuppiter does
consider himself to be "at the top". At least, he seems to object to
being lumped together with other gods and goddesses and not invoked
separately during rituals, by sending thunderstorms, while he can
reward properly executed rituals with "just right" weather for long
periods of time.
However this topic needs to be further researched with a lot more
years of experience.

Second: orthopraxy.
Even if Agricola thinks the concept doesn't apply (and probably he's
right) I agree with those who like to stress that no kind of "faith",
or orthodoxy, is needed in Religio.
Religio is a contract between men and Gods.
If I'm a publisher and I sign a contract with someone for a
translation I'm paying for, I don't really care whether the translator
hated the text or loved it or what their feelings are for me (even
though all these factors may have a role in the result): what I want
is a good translation, a definite case of orthopraxy. In most
contracts, really, faith or feelings play a secondary role.

Third: ethics.
There seems to be a misbelief that ethics have something to do with
religion.
This was certainly not the case in Roma antiqua, at least until
Christians had the idea of trying to unite the two.
Until then ethics was a personal matter, and dealt with by philosophy.
Contracts (see above) are not ethical matters. I may be a very
generous person, and try to enlist the help of the di celesti for a
noble purpose, or I may be nasty, and rather like to enlist the help
of di inferi to curse people. Either way, Religio gives me the means,
but not the purposes. The purposes are up to me and I will choose them
according to my character and the dominant ethics of my time.

Optime valete.

Salvete Varro Dexterque

Je pense que vous avez à présent compris qu'il est parfaitement
inutile de discuter sur cette liste... Peut-être pourrons-nous fonder
un jour une organisation réellement romaine...

Optime Valete,
Lucius Rutilius Minervalis


[[I think that you have now understood that it is a waste of time discussing inside this list... Maybe we can found one day a real Roman organization... [trsl. by mod. praet. PMA]]

Maior Catoni sal;
if you want to know about the cultus deorum, read John Scheid. It
doesn't get easier than that. But you refuse to and ask these quasi-
Christian questions in the forum. It isn't helpful.


If you read John Scheid, you'd know that the pontifices, flamines,
sacerdotes are all part-time reliious technicians. That's it. They
are men and women with jobs, families, usually Senators, magistrates
or someone wealthy or important who has this post.

Vestal virgins were full-time religious specialists who after their
30 year service, could have sex, get married, have children, do
whatever they wanted.


If you read John Scheid's "An introduction to Roman Religion" you
would understand. You'd understand that the cultus doesn't care if
you are gay or straight or bisexual, have orgies or are celibate.
You just need to give the gods their due:)

Do the rituals. I suggest you worship at your lararium daily and
you'd understand.
bene vale in pacem deorum
M. Hortensia Maior


"Do not let the cries of Maior or all other persons who would arouse
hate or prejudice - make impossible for you to recognize and
appreciate a sincere and lively interest. I pose questions on the
religio because I desire to know answers not attack them." Cato


Ne laissez pas les cris de Maior - ou toute autre personne qui aurait
susciter la haine ou préjudice - rendent impossible pour vous de
reconnaître et d'apprécier une sincère et un vif intérêt. Je poser
des questions sur le religio parce que je suis désireux de
connaître les réponses, pas de l'attaquer.
--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Tuloup Pierre-Jean"
<pjtuloup@...> wrote:

>
> Salvete Varro Dexterque
>
> Je pense que vous avez à présent compris qu'il est parfaitement
> inutile de discuter sur cette liste... Peut-être pourrons-nous

fonder

> un jour une organisation réellement romaine...
>
> Optime Valete,
> Lucius Rutilius Minervalis
>
>
> [[I think that you have now understood that it is a waste of time

discussing inside this list... Maybe we can found one day a real
Roman organization... [trsl. by mod. praet. PMA]]

>

Salve,
My heart leaps and my soul is stirred, by the thoughts and ideas that you have proposed today.I for one would be just overjoyed at the prospect of such an undertaking.What a wonderfull concept indeed.
I imagine it would be an undertaking that would require input from many sources, but well worth the effort if it could inspire and motivate all the gifted people within our nation.I ask you all to forgive me, for my outburst of emotion in regard to this concept, of a more defined theological, Nova Roman Religio Romana.I just have a feeling that many followers will come forth with their own testimonials to contribute, if such an undertaking were to prove a serious, and sincere effort on the part of those in the Respublica ,with the desire to actually make this a reality.I hope there are many, who will step forward, and support this project as wholeheartedly as I myself feel compelled, to bring forth and to see it develop grow.Thank you,Lucius Iulius Regulus.The Gods have truly inspired you.

Vale,

Appius Galerius Aurelianus

--- On Fri, 9/12/08, Lucius Iulius Regulus <luciusjul25@...> wrote:

> From: Lucius Iulius Regulus <luciusjul25@...>
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Welcome, Cato.
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Friday, September 12, 2008, 10:49 PM
> Salve,
>
> Indeed this is a very good topic and it would do well for
> all who are involved with the Religio to speak their opinion
> if they wish. Even for those who are not involved in the
> practices of the Religio want to know what makes our Religio
> tick, in a sense. Why do me acknowledge these Gods?? What is
> the basis for our belief?? These are all great questions
> that many in the Religio probably dont know the answers to,
> not to any fault of our own. I also think it would be a
> great benefit to the citizens to form a theological
> group for the Religio to figure out what is the backround
> of our belief system. Are there any writings, books, tablets
> that explain what is the basis for our worship to these Gods
> and, if not, how can we go about forming some kind
> of theology for the Religio. Perhaps by forming this
> theological group we could bring to light a new era of the
> Religio for all practitioners. If enough people sound off on
> this maybe their could be in the near
> future a theological group for the Religio and enough
> members involved to form this group.It should be put into
> further review. Im sure there would be many citizens who
> would like to join this group, practitioners and
> non-practitioners alike.
>
> Lucius Iulius Regulus 
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: David Kling (Modianus)
> <tau.athanasios@...>
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, September 12, 2008 5:07:31 PM
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Welcome, Cato.
>
>
> Caeso Fabius Buteo Modianus Gaio Equitio Catoni salutem
> dicit
>
> Henotheism is typically thought of as the belief in
> multiple Gods while only acknowledging one.  It could be
> possible for ancient Jews to fall in this category, but
> I'm not sure the Romans would have.  There are clearly
> other Gods being honored, if anything look at the flamen. 
> They where cleary cultural-centric.  Attaching other Gods
> to their own as can be seen in the Romano-Celtic deities
> (fused Roman and Celtic deities).  I would say the mystery
> traditions where more henotheistic, but only when operating
> within their cult -- since there where priests of Mithras
> who where also involved in other cults. 
>
> I have often thought it would be of benefit to Nova Roma to
> have a "theological group" who worked to
> articulate theology for TODAY.  Humanity is in a different
> place sociologically and how is the Religio going to
> accomodate todays NOVA Roman.  Where does it fit,
> theologically, into the grand scheme of the world --
> theologically.  You can look at old texts, but they cannot
> be definitive (like a Christian would look at the Bible).
>
> Vale;
>
> Caeso Fabius Buteo Modianus
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 4:42 PM, Gaius Equitius Cato
> <mlcinnyc@gmail. com> wrote:
>
> C. Equitius Cato C. Fabio Buteoni Modiano M. Hortensiae
> Maiori Varroni omnibusque in
> foro SPD
>
> Salvete!
>
> Modiane, perhaps... with strict monotheism developing over
> the course of time.
>
> Could not the religio be seen as somewhat henotheistic?
> With Iuppiter Optimus Maximus
> at the top, calling the shots, while the Others tend Their
> own specific areas of interest.

Salvete Quirites:
I've retitled this thread as this is the true issue: becoming
Roman. Thinking like a Roman. Something I have discussed and worked
on for years particularly with the help of Cordus and Agricola, both
Classics majors, Cordus a barrister and Agricola teaching
intercultural communication in Japan, an urban polytheistic culture.


How do you become Roman? Well it takes time to slough off your
culture and take on Roman ideas. So in my particular case, as a good
dutiful Roman I see the jewish god yahweh as part of my penates, a
family cultus that I inherited, whether I like it or not;-) So I
celebrate the main holidays with my parents and would go to their
temple - no problem. It's an ancestral deity. No different than
Venus Caelestis.
Now that's the Roman way to think about such things.

Actually the ancient Jews were polytheists, they worshipped gods and
goddesses from Ugarit and Phonecian Astarte. Zoroaster invented
monotheism.
If you are interested get this book by Prof. Mark S. Smith:

The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel's Polytheistic Background
and the Ugaritic Texts by Mark S. Smith

If you want to believe like a pythagorean in a divine monad, go
ahead, or be a stoic, go ahead, or epicurean or be any kind of
philosopher go ahead. If you want to participate in a mystery cult -
go ahead.

Total intellectual freedom is part of becoming Roman.
optime valete
M.Hortensia Maior
sacerdos Mentis

> Cato Buteoni Modiano Iulio Regulo omnibusque in foro SPD
>
> Salvete!
>
> Modiane, does the orthopractic basis of the religio lend itself to

a theology, though? This

> would be, as you suggest, an interesting road to walk down. Iulis

Regulus writes that it

> would be a good thing to find out what makes the religio "tick",

and I agree. I am still

> drawn back to Appius Aurelianus' expressions of real joy and

satisfaction in his experience

> of the religio - something to which I can relate as having felt in

the past with the Divine

> Liturgy.
>
> It is possible to examine the religio here, in public, from soup

to nuts, without causing

> riots in the streets and general chaos because (as I said in my

previous post to Varro in

> probably terrible French) the responses, as varied as they might

be, can only benefit the

> respublica; as we hear what people think and believe about the

religio and its theological

> structure, we are getting to know them better as well. There is

nothing (aside from

> meeting face-to-face) that demonstrates better the mechanics of a

person's thought

> process than seeing how they write.
>
> Then, when we have a clearer picture of what the religio actually

*is* to our citizens, we

> can look at how this can be translated into the legal structure of

the respublica.

>
> My only concern is that we *not* try to repeat the emperor

Julian's flawed attempt to

> squeeze the religio into a set of boxes created by Christianity.

As has been quite

> adequately demonstrated, the religio will not allow itself to be

put there.

>
> Valete!
>
> Cato
>

Cato Maiori sal.

salve!

I'd rather read real live people - my fellow citizens - talking about their present actual
experiences and knowledge of a living practice of the religio. You could have summed up
your last three or four posts with this:

"the pontifices, flamines, sacerdotes are all part-time reliious technicians. That's it. They
are men and women with jobs, families, usually Senators, magistrates or someone wealthy
or important who has this post."

rather than bringing into play your own prejudices. Whether what you say above is correct
or not is up to interpretation, of course, even if Mr. Scheid did write it.

vale!

Cato

Salve Plauta,

Lucia Livia Plauta <cases@...> writes:

> First, Marinus asked "Could not the religio be seen as somewhat
> henotheistic?

No I didn't. Please check your attributions.

Vale,

CN-EQVIT-MARINVS

Maior Catoni sal;
they are the facts, that you will find in any textbook or in any
work on classical Roman culture. Not my opinion at all!!
http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Reading_list_for_the_cultus_deorum
I have read just about every book in the reading list and I sugggest
you start with Beard or Rupke, so you have a clue. After all these
years, you are still ignorant....


Many modern practitioners are heavily influenced by their former
religious backgrouds. Since we are NOT neo-pagan but Roman Recons, the
past is totally important in how we understand Roman institutions.

This is my last post to you, as you don't seem to want to discuss
Roman history, Roman religious institutions or any facts. I'm
dedicated to reconstructing; as Cordus reminds me: Romans were
conservative but practical.
bene vale in pacem deorum
M. Hortensia Maior
sacerdos Mentis

Quirites understand Roman religion: read this!!
http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Roman_religion

>
> "the pontifices, flamines, sacerdotes are all part-time reliious

technicians. That's it. They

> are men and women with jobs, families, usually Senators, magistrates

or someone wealthy

> or important who has this post."
>
> rather than bringing into play your own prejudices. Whether what

you say above is correct

> or not is up to interpretation, of course, even if Mr. Scheid did

write it.

>
> vale!
>
> Cato
>

Cato Maiori sal.

Salvete!

Maior, you wrote:

"...the pontifices, flamines, sacerdotes are all part-time reliious technicians. That's it. They
are men and women with jobs, families, usually Senators, magistrates or someone wealthy
or important who has this post."

and

"they are the facts, that you will find in any textbook or in any work on classical Roman
culture. Not my opinion at all!!...I have read just about every book in the reading list and I
sugggest you start with Beard or Rupke, so you have a clue. After all these years, you are
still ignorant...."



However, take a look at this:

"...some priests however formed an exception, for the duumviri, the rex sacrorum and the
flamen dialis were not allowed to hold any state office, and were also exempt from service
in the armies (Dionys. IV.8)." - William Smith, D.C.L., LL.D.: A Dictionary of Greek and
Roman Antiquities ( John Murray, London, 1875),"sacerdotes"

and

"...[the rex sacrorum] held his office for life (Dionys. IV.74), was not allowed to hold any
civil or military dignity, and was at the same time exempted from all military and civil
duties (Dionys. l.c.; Plut. Quaest. Rom. 63; Liv. XL.42)" - op. cit., "rex sacrorum"

so it's not as clear-cut as you would imply in your vast knowledge of the subject. This is
why we should be able to ask questions of those who actually *live* what you have *read*
about.

vale!

Cato

C. Petronius Fl. Aureliano s.p.d.,

I think that questions specific and of details could be discussed on
Sodalitates list. Is forum Religio Romana vain?

It is not to censure. It is to be efficients. Now the main Forum is
made fun by a man who shows off his misknowledges about the sacra
Latina and speaks about feath and other things unknown by Romans.

Remember the attitude of the Roman Respublica on the affair of the
Bacchants. The only gods and goddesses to which some peoples had
feath was Isis, Mithra and perhaps during the Mysteries of Eleusis.

> Personally, I believe that the NR ML is the forum of Nova Roma and

that any subject related to Romanitas is welcom on this list and
should be continued.? The separation of church and state has no place
here as the public and sacred lives of Romans are entwined.<

The separation between church and state, is properly French and from
the Revolution.

But "church" did not exist in ancient Roma. How can you put a
separation with a thing unknown and without existence? Do you think
that Collegium Pontificum was a "church"? No, it was not.

I think that good and deep discussions, can be discussed in
these "oratoria" as the particular lists. All these lists have free
access.

And, I will do like that, in future.

Vale.

C. Petronius Dexter.

Ave Tullia Scholastica,

>Both defeated gladiatores, however, were
> missi stantes, and will live to fight again.

Gratias deis ! My team is allways living. But I am very angry because
both are defeated.

They will have a hard and violent training, now.

"Spartace ! go and train these grubs !"

Vale.

C. Petronius Dexter

Ave Minervalis,

Tout d'abord félicitations à ton secutor Diogenes qui a vaincu mon
murmillon Hieroclès. Tu vas voir ce que je vais faire vivre à ce
vaurien. J'espère que tu gagneras en finale.

[First, my greetings about the victory of your secutor Diogenes on my
murmillo Hierocles. You will see how I will correct this waster. I
hope you will be the final winner.]

> Je pense que vous avez à présent compris qu'il est parfaitement
> inutile de discuter sur cette liste...

Oui, j'ai l'impression en lisant un tel déferlement de confusions où
tout y passe, comme la foi, l'église, le besoin de témoigner, jouer
sa rock star people... qu'il y a encore beaucoup de chemin à faire
pour honorer dignement nos dieux.

[Yes, I fell reading all this wave of confusions where all come in
like faith, church, the wish to testimony, playing the people rock
star... the road to honour with dignity our gods is long.]

> Peut-être pourrons-nous fonder
> un jour une organisation réellement romaine...

Oui, commençons par faire de notre province l'exemple d'une
organisation réellement romaine.

[Yes, perhaps let's begin with our province as example for a true
Roman organisation.]

Vale.

C. Petronius Dexter.

Agricola Aureliano sal.

Thank you for demonstrating that faith is possible within a system
that does not demand an explicit confession. Your letter illustrates
far better than my little lecture how poorly a simple
orthopraxy/orthodoxy dichotomy captures the reality of our experience.

optime vale in cura deorum Romanorum!




--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Robert Levee <galerius_of_rome@...>
wrote:

>
> Salve,
>
> Thank you, Tiberius Galerius Paulinus.I for one agree with you that

this is a facinating disscussion,and it is well, that it is being
discussed on this list.I think this is a subject that all Romans
should be encouraged to heighten their awareness of the Religio
Romana.If it were to be consighned to Religio Romana forum it would
not recieve the attention it deserves.Many who claim themselves
Christian,Jewish,Pagan,Atheist,etc,would not be enlightened in regards
to the many aspects of the State Religion of the Respublica..

>
> Many voices have come forth with different opinions on this

subject.I know this may have started out being about ordination for
life, but it has turned out to be much more than that.

>
> I am not a religious scholor, in fact, my degree is in science.To

many this may sound like a contradiction after what I have to say.

>
> I am just a humble follower of my faith.Yes, I said faith.That being

the Religio Romana.And I am proud to make that statement.Though I have
been ridiculed and at times and persecuted for this.You see for
myself, this is a living faith not just a set of rituals.I personally
believe however regardless of what some might say,that there is an
intrinsic need in our genes, that can only be satisfied by some sort
of ritual in our lives.But that we can save for another dicussion.

>
> Now I woild like to give you my testimony concerning my faith.When I

perform my ritual and prayer, I feel an overwhelming sence of
connectedness to my Gods and Godesses.A true belief that as I speak to
them, they also respond to me, filling my life with an unexplainable
sence of joy, that courses through me and gives meaning to my
existance.I have had my ephiphany which convinced me of the truth of
my beliefs.And that is sacred to me.I invite all Romans to join
together and seek this journey to enlightenment.All I ask is that
other Romans respect my religion and I will be happy to do the
same..May the Gods smile upon all those in this Respublica.

>
> Appius Galerius Aurelianus
>
>
>
>
> --- On Fri, 9/12/08, Stephen Gallagher <spqr753@...> wrote:
>
> > From: Stephen Gallagher <spqr753@...>
> > Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Welcome, Cato.
> > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> > Date: Friday, September 12, 2008, 2:11 PM
> > Salve Gnaeus Caelius Ahenobarbus
> >
> > “Should we move this to the Religio list?”
> >
> > No I don’t think you should.
> >
> > It is a fascinating discussion and is one that I am
> > enjoying. So far, with
> > one or two exceptions, it has been conducted with respect,
> > intelligence,
> > consideration and sensitivity. The Roman Forum is for all
> > Romans to discuss
> > what they like. Unless someone is advocating the overthrow
> > of the republic
> > our laws allow nay encourage you to continue holding this
> > discussion.
> >
> > Please continue.
> >
> > Vale
> >
> > Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> >
> >
> > >From: Gnaeus Caelius Ahenobarbus
> > <cn.caelius@...>
> > >Reply-To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> > >To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> > >Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Welcome, Cato.
> > >Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 20:09:11 -0700 (PDT)
> > >
> > >Cn. Caelius Ahenobarbus C. Equitio Catoni S.P.D.
> > >
> > >
> > > >Thank you, this is the train of though I was
> > hoping to provoke.
> > >
> > > Being that I was also an Orthodox Christian for a
> > time (now apostate
> > >according to the Church) and was being trained to be
> > tonsured as a Reader,
> > >I am quite familiar with the ecclesiology and theology
> > inherent in this
> > >topic, not to mention the related subject of liturgics.
> > >
> > > >There has been some discussion in the past here in
> > the forum regarding
> > >the nature of the
> > > >religo; is it primarily orthopractic or
> > orthodoxic. The answer has
> > >weighed towards the
> > > >orthopractic - that the religio is not concerned
> > so much with right
> > >*thought* as it is with
> > > >right *action*
> > >
> > > This is my understanding. I remember reading in
> > some book recently
> > >that said that exact thing: the Religio isn't about
> > "belief", but about
> > >"actions". I agree with Agricola that the
> > "praxis-doxis axis" (that phrase
> > >makes me want to sneeze :-P ) may very well make no (or
> > little) sense here.
> > >Yet, I have the philosophical bent that makes me say,
> > "as you believe, so
> > >you do; and as you do, so you believe".
> > >
> > > Should we move this to the Religio list?
> > >
> > >Optime vale!
> > >
> > >--
> > >Gnaeus Caelius Ahenobarbus
> > >Tucson, Arizona, US, America Austroccidentalis
> > >http://becomingnewthroughtheold.blogspot.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>

Dexter Agricolae s.p.d.,

> Thank you for demonstrating that faith is possible within a system
> that does not demand an explicit confession.

The faith whose Aurelianus speaks is a private experience. We know in
the Roman history somes "visions" of gods... but I wonder if these
private experiences rather have something with the "superstitio" than
with the "religio".

What was the ancient Latin word to significate a sort of "faith"
towards the gods? It was not "Fides" used by christian. It
was "religio". Religio was the true term of the Roman faith. What
was "religio"? The respect, the scrupulous attention about gods. The
term "religio" not comes from "religare"= making a link. It is a false
but opportunistic etymology. "Religio" comes from religere, id est to
read again. As far as the ritual is not well accomplished you do it
again. It was the Roman faith to have Pax Deorum.

"Fides", which chrestians use to significate "faith" was the respect of
his words. Regulus, defeated in Africa, returned at Rome to announce
his defeat, come back at Carthago to be sacrified using his "fides".
The fides was "doing what you say".

"Pietas", an other word changed by christians was the respect towards
his ancestors. The emperor Antoninus was "Pius" not by his religious
faith, but because his advocated in front the senators the honour of
his father in law the emperor Hadrian to whom Senatus did not want give
the Apotheosis. Finally Antoninus convinced senators to honour Hadrian
as a god and to name him Divus Hadrianus. And Antoninus was
called "Pius".

Vale.

C. Petronius Dexter.

Maior Minervalis spd;
mon cher ami, écoutez à les paroles de Dexter! Quand je viens à
L'Autun pour le Conventus;montrez-moi la Gallia une provincia qui
est Romaine et savait comme honorer les dieux! Les Galli parmi tous
les Novi Romani sont érudits plien de Romanitas, nous avons besoin
de vous: votre l'exemple.
cura ut valeas
Maior

> Oui, commençons par faire de notre province l'exemple d'une
> organisation réellement romaine.
>
> [Yes, perhaps let's begin with our province as example for a true
> Roman organisation.]
>
> Vale.
>
> C. Petronius Dexter.
>

Agricola Dextri s.p.d.

You have reminded us of an important point. The meanings of words can
change over time. More than that, words can have many meanings. Any
discussion that uses words like "faith" is bound to be problematic
because of the history of the words we use.

optime vale!


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gaius Petronius Dexter"
<jfarnoud94@...> wrote:

>
>
> Dexter Agricolae s.p.d.,
>
> > Thank you for demonstrating that faith is possible within a system
> > that does not demand an explicit confession.
>
> The faith whose Aurelianus speaks is a private experience. We know in
> the Roman history somes "visions" of gods... but I wonder if these
> private experiences rather have something with the "superstitio" than
> with the "religio".
>
> What was the ancient Latin word to significate a sort of "faith"
> towards the gods? It was not "Fides" used by christian. It
> was "religio". Religio was the true term of the Roman faith. What
> was "religio"? The respect, the scrupulous attention about gods. The
> term "religio" not comes from "religare"= making a link. It is a false
> but opportunistic etymology. "Religio" comes from religere, id est to
> read again. As far as the ritual is not well accomplished you do it
> again. It was the Roman faith to have Pax Deorum.
>
> "Fides", which chrestians use to significate "faith" was the respect of
> his words. Regulus, defeated in Africa, returned at Rome to announce
> his defeat, come back at Carthago to be sacrified using his "fides".
> The fides was "doing what you say".
>
> "Pietas", an other word changed by christians was the respect towards
> his ancestors. The emperor Antoninus was "Pius" not by his religious
> faith, but because his advocated in front the senators the honour of
> his father in law the emperor Hadrian to whom Senatus did not want give
> the Apotheosis. Finally Antoninus convinced senators to honour Hadrian
> as a god and to name him Divus Hadrianus. And Antoninus was
> called "Pius".
>
> Vale.
>
> C. Petronius Dexter.
>

Salve Maior,

Let us suppose that the (beautiful) Tower of Pisa is divided into
apartments. Unfortunately, the majority of the inhabitants pile up on
side of the slope (and what is more some of the heaviest are in the
highest stages). Impossible to reason them: the tower will fall.

Is it then really useful to compensate for, in only one apartment, the
slope of the walls and the floor by artifices of masonry? Is it
effective to stand on the opposite side?

It could be worth to move house.

Optime Vale,
LRM

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> Maior Minervalis spd;
> mon cher ami, écoutez à les paroles de Dexter! Quand je viens à
> L'Autun pour le Conventus;montrez-moi la Gallia une provincia qui
> est Romaine et savait comme honorer les dieux! Les Galli parmi tous
> les Novi Romani sont érudits plien de Romanitas, nous avons besoin
> de vous: votre l'exemple.
> cura ut valeas
> Maior
>
>
>
>
> > Oui, commençons par faire de notre province l'exemple d'une
> > organisation réellement romaine.
> >
> > [Yes, perhaps let's begin with our province as example for a true
> > Roman organisation.]
> >
> > Vale.
> >
> > C. Petronius Dexter.
> >
>

M. Moravius Piscinus cultoribus Deorum et omnibus salutem plurimam
dicit: Deos Deaeque ego omnis ut fortunas sint precor

Hodie est Eidus Septembrae; haec dies nefastus piaculum est: feriae
Iovi Optimi Maximi; Iovi epulum; feriae ex senatus consulto quod eo
die nefaria consilia quae de salute Tiberi Caesaris liberorumque eius
et aliorum principum civitatis deque re publica inita ab M. Libone
erant in senatu convicta sunt; Ex pristino sidere nonnumquam
tempestatem significat.

"O Father Jupiter who inhabits the Tarpeian Heights as His chosen
abode next to the heavens, and You Juno, Daughter of Saturnus, Â… and
You, divine Virgin, whose gentle breast is harshly girt with the
aegis of the terrible Gorgon, and all You Gods and Indigites of
Italy, hear me as I swear by Your divine powers." ~ Ti. Catius
Asconius Sillius Italicus, Punica 10.432-36).


Vow to Construct the Capitolium

"After the acquisition of Gabii, Tarquin made peace with the Aequi
and renewed the treaty with the Etruscans. Then he turned his
attention to the business of the City. The first thing was the temple
of Jupiter on the Tarpeian Mount, which he was anxious to leave
behind as a memorial of his reign and name; both the Tarquins were
concerned in it, the father had vowed it, the son completed it. That
the whole of the area which the temple of Jupiter was to occupy might
be wholly devoted to that deity, he decided to deconsecrate the fanes
and chapels, some of which had been originally vowed by King Tatius
at the crisis of his battle with Romulus, and subsequently
consecrated and inaugurated. Tradition records that at the
commencement of this work the Gods sent a divine intimation of the
future vastness of the empire, for whilst the omens were favourable
for the deconsecration of all the other shrines, they were
unfavourable for that of the fanum of Terminus. This was interpreted
to mean that as the abode of Terminus was not moved and He alone of
all the deities was not called forth from His consecrated borders, so
all would be firm and immovable in the future empire. This augury of
lasting dominion was followed by a prodigy which portended the
greatness of the empire. It is said that whilst they were digging the
foundations of the temple, a human head came to light with the face
perfect; this appearance unmistakably portended that the spot would
be the stronghold of empire and the head of all the world. This was
the interpretation given by the soothsayers in the City, as well as
by those who had been called into council from Etruria. The king's
designs were now much more extensive; so much so that his share of
the spoils of Pometia, which had been set apart to complete the work,
now hardly met the cost of the foundations. This makes me inclined to
trust Fabius (Pictor) - who, moreover is the older authority - when
he says that the amount was only forty talents, rather than Piso, who
states that forty thousand pounds of silver were set apart for that
object. For not only is such a sum more than could be expected from
the spoils of any single city at that time, but it would more than
suffice for the foundations of the most magnificent building of the
present day." ~ Titus Livius 1.55


AUC 246 / 507 BCE: Dedication of the Capitolium

"The temple of Jupiter Capitolinus had been vowed by Tarquin, the son
of Demaratus, when he was at war with the Sabines, but it was
actually built by Tarquinius Superbus, the son, or grandson, of him
who vowed it. He did not, however, get so far as to consecrate it,
but was driven out before it was quite completed. Accordingly, now
that it was completely finished and had received all the ornaments
that belonged to it, Publicola was ambitious to consecrate it. But
this excited the jealousy of many of the nobility. They could better
brook his other honours, to which, as legislator and military
commander, he had a rightful claim. But this one they thought he
ought not to have, since it was more appropriate for others, and
therefore they encouraged and incited Horatius to claim the privilege
of consecrating the temple. At a time, then, when Publicola was
necessarily absent on military service, they got a vote passed that
Horatius should perform the consecration, and conducted him up to the
Capitol, feeling that they could not have gained their point had
Publicola been in the city. Some, however, say that Publicola was
designated by lot, against his inclination, for the expedition, and
Horatius for the consecration. And it is possible to infer how the
matter stood between them from what happened at the consecration. It
was the Ides of September, a day which nearly coincides with the full
moon of the Attic month Metageitnion; the people were all assembled
on the Capitol, silence had been proclaimed, and Horatius, after
performing the other ceremonies and laying hold upon the door of the
temple, as the custom is, was pronouncing the usual words of
consecration. But just then Marcus, the brother of Publicola, who had
long been standing by the door and was watching his opportunity,
said: 'O Consul, thy son lies dead of sickness in the camp.' This
distressed all who heard it; but Horatius, not at all disturbed,
merely said: 'Cast forth the dead then whither ye please, for I take
no mourning upon me,' and finished his consecration. Now the
announcement was not true, but Marcus thought by his falsehood to
deter Horatius from his duty. Wonderful, therefore, was the firm
poise of the man, whether he at once saw through the deceit, or
believed the story without letting it overcome him." ~ Plutarch, Life
of Poplicola 14

"The temple of Jupiter on the Capitol had not yet been dedicated, and
the consuls drew lots to decide which should dedicate it. The lot
fell to Horatius. Publicola set out for the Veientine war. His
friends showed unseemly annoyance at the dedication of so illustrious
a fane being assigned to Horatius, and tried every means of
preventing it. When all else failed, they tried to alarm the consul,
whilst he was actually holding the door-post during the dedicatory
prayer, by a wicked message that his son was dead, and he could not
dedicate a temple while death was in his house. As to whether he
disbelieved the message, or whether his conduct simply showed
extraordinary self-control, there is no definite tradition, and it is
not easy to decide from the records. He only allowed the message to
interrupt him so far that he gave orders for the body to be burnt;
then, with his hand still on the door-post, he finished the prayer
and dedicated the temple." ~ Titus Livius 2.8.6-8


AUC 391 / 362 BCE: The Hammering of the Nail Ceremony

"C. Genucius and L. Aemilius Mamercus were the new consuls, each for
the second time. The fruitless search for effective means of
propitiation was affecting the minds of the people more than disease
was affecting their bodies. It is said to have been discovered that
the older men remembered that a pestilence had once been assuaged by
the Dictator driving in a nail. The senate believed this to be a
religious obligation, and ordered a Dictator to be nominated for that
purpose. L. Manlius Imperiosus was nominated, and he appointed L.
Pinarius as his Master of the Horse. There is an ancient instruction
written in archaic letters which runs: Let him who is the praetor
maximus fasten a nail on the Ides of September. This notice was
fastened up on the right side of the temple of Jupiter Optimus
Maximus, next to the chapel of Minerva. This nail is said to have
marked the number of the year - written records being scarce in those
days - and was for that reason placed under the protection of Minerva
because She was the inventor of numbers. Cincius, a careful student
of monuments of this kind, asserts that at Volsinii also nails were
fastened in the temple of Nortia, an Etruscan Goddess, to indicate
the number of the year. It was in accordance with this direction that
the consul Marcus Horatius dedicated the Temple of Jupiter Optimus
Maximus in the year following the expulsion of the kings; from the
consuls the ceremony of fastening the nails passed to the Dictators,
because they possessed greater authority." ~ Titus Livius 7.3


AUC 196 BCE: Tresviri Epulones

"This year for the first time three epulones were appointed, namely
C. Licinius Lucullus, one of the tribunes of the plebs who had got
the law passed under which they were appointed, and with him P.
Manlius and P. Portius Laeca. They were allowed by law to wear the
toga praetexta like the priests." ~ Titus Livius 33.42

Uncertain is whether the epulum Iovis originally took place in
conjunction with the Ludi Romani of September or with the Ludi Plebi
of November. There is no mention of the epulum Iovis on this day in
Livy or earlier. It is found later in imperial calendars, but not
before. However, dating to the Republican era, an epulum Minervae is
found on rustic calendars for this day. On this occasion, "at the
epulum Iovis He Himself was invited to dine on a couch, while Juno
and Minera had chairs, a form of austerity which our age is more
careful to retain on the Capitol than in its houses (Valerius Maximus
2.1.2)." On this occaision, too, "It was the custom upon festivals
to colour the face of the statue of Jupiter even with (cinnabar)
minium [Pliny H. N. 33.36 (111)]." The salient feature of the epulum
Iovis, unlike in a lectisternium, was the presence of the temple
images of Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva seated amongst the members of
the Senate at a feast.

On one memorable occasion two fierce rivals, Publius Scipio Africanus
and Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus, attended the epulum Iovis. As
chance would have it, they were seated next to one another. "And as
if the immortal Gods, acting as arbiters at the feast of Jupiter
Optimus Maximus, had joined their hands, they became the best of
friends. And not only did friendship spring up between them but at
the same time their families were united by a marriage (Gellius, N.
A. 12.8.1-4)." Livy gives us more behind this tale.

"The story goes that when Gracchus saw that L. Scipio was on the
point of being carried off to prison and that none of his fellow-
tribunes interfered on his behalf, he swore that though his enmity
towards the Scipios was as strong as ever, and he would do nothing to
win his favour, yet he would not look on whilst the brother of
Africanus was being taken to a dungeon into which he had seen
Africanus himself taking kings and commanders. The senate happened to
be dining that day in the Capitol, and rising in a body they begged
Scipio to betroth his daughter to Gracchus there and then. The
betrothal having been formally completed in the presence of the whole
gathering, Scipio went home. On meeting his wife, he told her that he
had betrothed their youngest daughter (Cornelia). She was naturally
hurt and indignant at not having been consulted in the disposal of
their child, and observed that even if he were giving her to Tiberius
Gracchus, her mother ought to have had a voice in the matter. Scipio
was delighted to find that they were of one accord, and told her that
it was to that man that she was betrothed. It is right that in the
case of so great a man the various opinions and the different
historical statements as to these details should be noted." ~ Titus
Livius 38.57


AUC 819 / 66 CE: The Cultus on the Capitolium

"Jupiter has a special attendant to announce when visitors call and
another to tell Him the hour of the day; one to wash Him and another
to oil Him, who in fact only mimes the movements with his hands.
Juno and Minerva have special women hairdressers, who operate at some
distance away, not just from the statue, but from the temple; they
move their fingers in the style of hairdressers, while others again
hold up mirrors. You find some people who are praying to the Gods to
put up bail for them, and others again who are handing over their
writs and expounding on the lawsuits they are involved. There use to
be an old, decrepit but very experienced pantomime artist who put on
his act every day on the Capitol as if the Gods were enjoying the
show, now abandoned by a human audience. Meanwhile craftsmen of
every trade stand around waiting for work on behalf of the immortal
Gods. Soon afterwards Seneca adds: at least the services they offer
are not indecent or dishonorable, however unnecessary. But there are
some women who hang around on the Capitol because they believe that
Jupiter is in love with them, totally undeterred by fear of Juno's
anger and jealousy." ~ L. Annaeus Seneca in Augustinus of Hippo, City
of God 6.10


AUC 834 / 81 CE: Death of Titus

As he lay on his death bed the Emperor Titus Flavius allayed the
distress of those attending him by saying, "Friends, I have lost a
day (Suetonius Titus 8.1)."


Our thought for today is from Lucius Annaeus Seneca, Epistle 19:

"If possible, withdraw yourself from all the business of which you
speak; and if you cannot do this, tear yourself away."

Cato ones SPD

salvete!

May I remain everyone that this is NOT a discussion about the merits or flaws in
Christianity? It is about how we need to approach the term of the Pontifex Maximus.

If you read the past speeches (not even very carefully) you will see that I used the formula
"tu es sacerdos in aeternum" ONLY as an example of other priesthoods/sacred offices that
are given for life.

Agricole and I then began discussing the *differences* - not an evaluation - between
Western concepts of the sacred and Eastern ones; this is useful because it reminds us that
the familiar (in many cases, Christianity) is not necessarily applicable to the currently
necessary (determining how to formulate an adequate legal structure regarding the religio
and its relationship to the State).

Because I am interested and yet do not have the luxury of time that some others might
have to read an enormous series of books, I ask questions. Some have answered and I
think it is extremely beneficial for all of us to read these answers, whether they be
technical or emotional. From both kinds of answers spring new questions and new ideas.

The problem stems from the idea that some seem to have that we are playing a "zero sum"
game - that one set of ideas or beliefs cannot work without the total suppression of all
other ideas and beliefs. This is wrong, and very dangerous. We see the fruit of this deadly
tree in the Inquisition, in the Holocaust, in the actions taken in our own lifetimes by
extremists in Islam, to name just a few examples. Everyone else doesn't *have* to be
wrong.

Varro is completely correct that the religio is a social obligation, and I have said this very
thing over and over and over in the past. In order for us to understand how we should
approach the appointment of sacred offices - many of which were held for life in Roma
Antiqua - we need to understand how these two elements of society work together.

But he is completely incorrect in fanning the absurd flames of unnecessary antagonism
between the religio and any other system of belief or practice.

valete!

Cato

Cato L. Liviae Plautae omnibusque in foro SPD

Salvete!

Livia Plauta, thank you as well for you quite detailed explanation of how the religio works in
your care - and I very much enjoyed your depiction of Iuppiter OM. From reading the stories
of the gods, I get the feeling that He finds keeping the Others in line effectually similar to
herding cats :)

Your concept of a contract is quite sensible, and echoes sentiments expressed over the years
by several of our practitioners. If this is true on the level of the State cult, then the term of
Pontifex Maximus represents the signing of a contract between the State and the gods that
this particular individual will represent us to Them for an indefinite period of time.

Valete!

Cato

Cato Varroni sal.

Varro, you wrote:

"...can you imagine that perhaps jesus could be one of our gods (some 'avatar' of
Dionysos?)... yes i can, but can a christain accept this idea?"

This is NOT an attempt to describe the gazillion different little branches of Christology
that have sprung up over the past two thousand years; nor is this an apologetic for
Christianity. I will not discuss the subject further, but feel this requires a direct answer.
Whether you like it or agree with it on an historical basis or not, theologically speaking the
answer is "no".

Christianity is *not* syncretist. Christianity is by its very nature exclusive; it does not
accept the existence of any other deities in any form whatsoever. Any system of religious
belief which does not teach that there is only one God and that Jesus is the only real
Incarnation of that God cannot be understood to be a valid form of Christianity.

Modiane and I have long since understood that we may have to agree to disagree on this
point.

vale,

Cato

Salvete omnes,

As a result of discussions within the Praetorian cohort, the Praetors
have asked me to remind everybody of the Edictum de Sermone, which can
be found in the files section at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/files/ I especially draw your
attention to paragraph III on Civil Discourse, and to paragraph IV on
Forbidden Topics. Note that "Insulting the religious beliefs of
others, and the historical basis for those beliefs, is off limits."

In particular, the current discussion about religion seems to be
getting a little hot. Those participating in it would be well advised
to keep the tone civil and refrain from making exaggerated claims
and/or personal attacks.

The Praetors and their assistants are monitoring the mailing list, and
will act decisively if necessary to insure civility. It will be far
better if our citizens can be civil without our having to impose
sanctions.

Valete,

CN-EQVIT-MARINVS

Albucius aed. omn. lusoribus, factionibus omn.que s.d.

Scholastica has asked me to take in charge directly the Circenses.
As we all know how important they are, specially in our Ludi Romani,
it has been a pleasure for me.

Beautiful Round 1 and Quarters races this afternoon (reports to
come), under the protection of our triad Jupiter-Iuno-Minerva!

The chariots had been organised in conformity with the usual rules
(an equal repartitition of the factiones if possible), and displayed
in Groups 1 to 4 by lots.

Then, it had been decided that the quarters would give the following
crossed oppositions:

1st Gr. - 1st vs 4th Gr. 2nd
1st Gr. - 2nd vs 4th Gr. 1st
2nd Gr. - 1st vs 3rd Gr. 2nd
2nd Gr. - 2nd vs 3rd Gr. 1st

Here are the results of the 1st Round exciting races:

1st Group - 14 :00 Rome time :

1st : Scorpianus (V) Gralified for the 1/2
2nd : Germanica (R) Gralified for the 1/2
3rd : Vita brevis (A) eliminated

2nd Group - 14:30:

1st : Delectus consulis (V) Gralified for the 1/2
2nd : Incitatus (R) Gralified for the 1/2
3rd : Biga fortuna (A) eliminated


3rd Group - 15:00:

1st : Pilum (A) Gralified for the 1/2
2nd : Fulgur II (V) Gralified for the 1/2
3rd : Rubidea (R) eliminated


4th Group - 15:30:

1st : Aurora rubra (R) Gralified for the 1/2
2nd : Ulixes geminus (V) Gralified for the 1/2
3rd : Diem perdidi (P) eliminated (accident)


From 16 :30 on, the following quarters were to take place:

1. Scorpianus (V) - Ulixes geminus (V) - 16:30
2. Germanica (R) - Aurora rubra (R) - 17:00
3. Delectus consulis (V) - Fulgur II (V) - 17:30
4. Incitatus (R) - Pilum (A) - 18:00

p.s. : Fulgur II = Lightning II (Lusitanus)

Unhappily for Factio Veneta, its four qualified chariots had to fight
each other in these quarters. But Veneti were sure to lead two
chariots in the semi-finals.

(coming: Quarters results, and the name of the qualified for the Semi-
finals!!)


Valete omnes,



Albucius aed.

Salvete lusores, factiones et omnes !

Today from 16:30 on, in Circus maximus, in our City, the following
Circenses Ludorum romanorum Quarters took place:

1. Scorpianus (V) - Ulixes geminus (V) - 16:30
2. Germanica (R) - Aurora rubra (R) - 17:00
3. Delectus consulis (V) - Fulgur II (V) - 17:30
4. Incitatus (R) - Pilum (A) - 18:00

p.s. : Fulgur II = Lightning II (Lusitanus)


Here are the results of these beautiful Quarters:

1. Scorpianus (V) defeats Ulixes geminus (V)
2. Germanica (R) defeats Aurora rubra (R)
3. Fulgur II (V) defeats Delectus consulis (V)
4. Incitatus (R) defeats Pilum (A)

The Semi-Finals and the Finals will take place in Circus Maxiums next
a.d. XVI Kal. Oct (Sept. 16), in the first part of the afternoon for
the ½, and in the second part of the afternoon for the Finals. The
results will be then proclaimed.

The Semi-Finals will oppose the qualified chariots according the
crossing method :
1st Qu. winner vs. 4th Qu. winner
2nd Qu. winner vs. 3rd Qu. winner

so :

1. Scorpianus (V) vs. Incitatus (R)
2. Germanica (R) vs. Fulgur II (V)

We see that Praesina and Albata have been barred from victory. We
have left two factiones, and two passionnating perfectly balanced
semi-finals. Either we will have two Russati in Finals, or two
Veneti, or a Veneta-Russata finals...

Take your bids, and see you all in three days !!!


Valete omnes,


Albucius aed.



--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Publius Memmius Albucius"
<albucius_aoe@...> wrote:

>
> Albucius aed. omn. lusoribus, factionibus omn.que s.d.
>
> Scholastica has asked me to take in charge directly the Circenses.
> As we all know how important they are, specially in our Ludi

Romani,

> it has been a pleasure for me.
>
> Beautiful Round 1 and Quarters races this afternoon (reports to
> come), under the protection of our triad Jupiter-Iuno-Minerva!
>
> The chariots had been organised in conformity with the usual rules
> (an equal repartitition of the factiones if possible), and

displayed

> in Groups 1 to 4 by lots.
>
> Then, it had been decided that the quarters would give the

following

> crossed oppositions:
>
> 1st Gr. - 1st vs 4th Gr. 2nd
> 1st Gr. - 2nd vs 4th Gr. 1st
> 2nd Gr. - 1st vs 3rd Gr. 2nd
> 2nd Gr. - 2nd vs 3rd Gr. 1st
>
> Here are the results of the 1st Round exciting races:
>
> 1st Group - 14 :00 Rome time :
>
> 1st : Scorpianus (V) Gralified for the 1/2
> 2nd : Germanica (R) Gralified for the 1/2
> 3rd : Vita brevis (A) eliminated
>
> 2nd Group - 14:30:
>
> 1st : Delectus consulis (V) Gralified for the 1/2
> 2nd : Incitatus (R) Gralified for the 1/2
> 3rd : Biga fortuna (A) eliminated
>
>
> 3rd Group - 15:00:
>
> 1st : Pilum (A) Gralified for the 1/2
> 2nd : Fulgur II (V) Gralified for the 1/2
> 3rd : Rubidea (R) eliminated
>
>
> 4th Group - 15:30:
>
> 1st : Aurora rubra (R) Gralified for the 1/2
> 2nd : Ulixes geminus (V) Gralified for the 1/2
> 3rd : Diem perdidi (P) eliminated (accident)
>
>
> From 16 :30 on, the following quarters were to take place:
>
> 1. Scorpianus (V) - Ulixes geminus (V) - 16:30
> 2. Germanica (R) - Aurora rubra (R) - 17:00
> 3. Delectus consulis (V) - Fulgur II (V) - 17:30
> 4. Incitatus (R) - Pilum (A) - 18:00
>
> p.s. : Fulgur II = Lightning II (Lusitanus)
>
> Unhappily for Factio Veneta, its four qualified chariots had to

fight

> each other in these quarters. But Veneti were sure to lead two
> chariots in the semi-finals.
>
> (coming: Quarters results, and the name of the qualified for the

Semi-

> finals!!)
>
>
> Valete omnes,
>
>
>
> Albucius aed.
>

Salve Cato,

>
> Your concept of a contract is quite sensible, and echoes sentiments

expressed over the years

> by several of our practitioners.

Yes, I didn't make it up: it's taken from those who are more expert
than me.

> If this is true on the level of the State cult, then the term of
> Pontifex Maximus represents the signing of a contract between the

State and the gods that

> this particular individual will represent us to Them for an

indefinite period of time.

>

Sorry, but this is not true if formulated this way. There is no easy
way to delegate our duties to the gods to one person.
In ancient Rome, the pontifex maximus was the chief of a council of
pontifices who had duties concerning the worship of gods on behalf of
the community of Rome. He wasn't the only individual who represented
people for public cult: there were flamines and the rex sacrorum.
All these people never represented the whole Republic or Empire,
except to the extent that the affairs of the whole Republic or Empire
coincided with those of the city of Rome.

Outside Rome, each city had its group of religious specialists, who
were organized in a different way in each city . For example in Ostia
the most important religious function was that of the flamen
volcanalis, not the flamen dialis. And each city had a different calendar.

The function of the pontifex maximus in Nova Roma is a wholly
different matter anyway.
At the moment we don't even have a physical territory, a city whose
interests can be represented by a pontifex. We have a virtual
community/State, but it is yet to be proved that this is equivalent to
a real territorial State.

On the other hand, as my friend Lentulus keeps saying, the old
contract between gods and men expired, so it is entirely up to us to
make a new one, negotiating new terms.

As I see it, the function of the collegium pontificum in NR is exactly
to negotiate the terms of the new contract, based upon roman
practices, of course, but also on today's exigences, and the role of
the pontifex maximus is to be a team leader.
It would be extremely unusual in today's world to ask a research team
leader to keep his post for life, and it might even scare off
prospective applicants if it were an obligation.
Probably a good compromise between the practice in Roma antiqua and
today's needs would be to make the post lifelong in theory, while
leaving open the possibility for the pontifex maximus to resign or to
be demoted if he neglects his duties as a team leader.

Optime vale,
Livia

Attachments :

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Poco spazio e tanto spam? Yahoo! Mail ti protegge dallo spam e ti da tanto spazio gratuito per i tuoi file e i messaggi
http://mail.yahoo.it

C. Equitius Cato C. Fabio Buteoni Modiano sal.

Salve!

I'm not sure which claims I make on the religio; it's mostly (I think) a matter of asking
questions and drawing conclusions from the answers I get. I am always open to hearing
more information. Again my motivation is to discuss how to reconcile the unhistoric
situation of citizenship-by-fee and the historic appointment of the Pontifex Maximus to his
chair for life within the framework of our lex constitutiva and other leges. This, to some
degree, necessitates a discussion of the elemental form of the religio itself and the mutable
or immutable, possibly contractual, nature of its pontifices', sacerdotes', flamens', &c. offices.

As to the other bit... well, I believe - again, without rancor or ill-will - that there is a
theological logic in orthodox Christianity that is severely lacking in other, non-traditional
systems of religious belief that use Jesus as their centerpiece. So, from a traditional,
orthodox Christian the answer to Varro's question must be "no."

Vale!

Cato

Salve P. Albuci aedilis,

> Here are the results of these beautiful Quarters:
>
> 1. Scorpianus (V) defeats Ulixes geminus (V)
> 2. Germanica (R) defeats Aurora rubra (R)
> 3. Fulgur II (V) defeats Delectus consulis (V)
> 4. Incitatus (R) defeats Pilum (A)

This time I had a good result. Better than with my couple of
gladiators.

> The Semi-Finals will oppose the qualified chariots according the
> crossing method :
> 1st Qu. winner vs. 4th Qu. winner
> 2nd Qu. winner vs. 3rd Qu. winner
>
> so :
>
> 1. Scorpianus (V) vs. Incitatus (R)
> 2. Germanica (R) vs. Fulgur II (V)

My champion is allways in the race ! Hip hip hurrah !

Gratias tibi Iovi !

And now I can sing in Latine :

Iam Romani sunt Ludi, sunt munera danda,
Venit tempus nunc facere sacra lovi.
Alme Pater divum ! nos te colimus per arenam
Pulveream Circi, Maximeque alme Pater !

Iam sol declinans excelsa cacumina Romae
Illustrat, Iam adsunt munera vota Iovi !
Romana Albucius pleno et spectacula Circo
Quadrijugos aequo carcere misit equos.

Iam cursus spectant, dant clamoresque Quirites
Laetitiae plenos, pignore nec vacuos.
Aurorae ora favent vana, est quoque victus Vlixes
Delecti, Pili acta haud melioraque sunt.

Iam sunt caela serena Iovis, iam pulveris orbes
Cessant in Circo nunc madido et tacito.
Cursus expectant iam venturosque Quirites
Aediles dabunt quos in honore Iovis.

Vale.

C. Petronius Dexter

A. Tullia Scholastica P. Memmio Albucio quiritibus, sociis, peregrinisque bonae voluntatis S.P.D.  
 

Albucius aed. omn. lusoribus, factionibus omn.que s.d.

Scholastica has asked me to take in charge directly the Circenses.

    ATS:  That is, to do the calculations, of which I am incapable, especially in this Byzantine form.  



As we all know how important they are, specially in our Ludi Romani,
it has been a pleasure for me.

Beautiful Round 1 and Quarters races this afternoon (reports to
come), under the protection of our triad Jupiter-Iuno-Minerva!

The chariots had been organised in conformity with the usual rules
(an equal repartitition of the factiones if possible), and displayed
in Groups 1 to 4 by lots.

Then, it had been decided that the quarters would give the following
crossed oppositions:

1st Gr. - 1st vs  4th Gr. 2nd
1st Gr. - 2nd vs  4th Gr. 1st
2nd Gr. - 1st vs  3rd Gr. 2nd
2nd Gr. - 2nd vs  3rd Gr. 1st

Here are the results of the 1st Round exciting races:

1st Group - 14 :00 Rome time :

1st : Scorpianus (V) Gralified for the 1/2
2nd : Germanica (R) Gralified for the 1/2
3rd : Vita brevis (A)  eliminated

2nd Group - 14:30:

1st : Delectus consulis (V) Gralified for the 1/2
2nd : Incitatus (R) Gralified for the 1/2
3rd : Biga fortuna (A) eliminated

3rd Group - 15:00:

1st : Pilum (A) Gralified for the 1/2
2nd : Fulgur II (V) Gralified for the 1/2
3rd : Rubidea (R) eliminated

4th Group - 15:30:

1st : Aurora rubra (R) Gralified for the 1/2
2nd : Ulixes geminus (V) Gralified for the 1/2
3rd : Diem perdidi (P) eliminated (accident)

From 16 :30 on,  the following quarters were to take place:

1.  Scorpianus (V) - Ulixes geminus (V) - 16:30
2.  Germanica (R) - Aurora rubra (R) - 17:00
3.  Delectus consulis (V) - Fulgur II (V) - 17:30
4.  Incitatus (R) - Pilum (A) - 18:00

p.s. : Fulgur II = Lightning II (Lusitanus)

Unhappily for Factio Veneta, its four qualified chariots had to fight
each other in these quarters. But Veneti were sure to lead two
chariots in the semi-finals.

(coming: Quarters results, and the name of the qualified for the Semi-
finals!!)

    ATS:  The chariots I have listed as having entered these ludi are:  Biga Fortuna and Vita Brevis, Albata, owned by Cn. Equitius Marinus; Vlixes Geminus [twin Odysseus], Veneta, owned by C. Valerianus Germanicus; Pilum, Albata, owned by Q. Cornelia Quadrata; Germanica, Russata, owned by D. Arminius Brutus; Rubidea and Aurora Rubra, Russata, owned by M. Arminius Maior; unnamed chariot, Veneta, owned by L. Rutilius Minervalis; Incitatus, Russata, owned by C. Petronius Dexter, Delectus Consulis, owned by Ti. Galerius Paulinus (apparently Veneta), and Lightning, owned by Lusitanus, a very late entry whose full information I do not have in printed form.  Apparently there was another sent to Albucius and which was not posted to the cohors list.  I would like to thank all for participating in the Ludi.   

    We have two entries for the second Latin certamen, and one for the first one, with a second promised.  Is no one else brave enough to write in Latin?  The longer essay may be in the vernacular, so long as it is a vernacular someone in the cohors can read.  

    As has happened in the past, there are no Praesina entries, and very few Albata ones.  


Valete omnes,

Albucius aed.

Vale, et valete.  

 
      
   Messages in this topic           <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/message/57638

M. Moravius Piscinus cultoribus Deorum et omnibus salutem plurimam
dicit: Castor et Castoris virtutem in nos addat.

Hodie est ante diem XIIX Kalendas Octobres; haec dies fastus aterque
est: Castori et Pollucis; equorum probatio.

The Equorum Probatio

The Ludi Romani Magni originally only fell on the Ides of Septmber.
Over time, as the celebration became more elaborate the games
expanded over several days on either side of the Ides. The Epulum
Iovis was a plebeian addition. Another later addition was the
procession of the Equites equo publico. That is, the special class
of citizens, only 300 in number, who were provided with a horse at
public expense. According to one account, their procession began
soon after the Battle of Lake Regillus (Dionysius of Halicarnassus
6.13.4). Another story told how censor Q. Fabius introduced the
Equites probatio originally on the Ides of July (Livy 9.46; Valerius
Maximus 2.2.9). The Equites equo publico wore the distinctive
trabeati equites – a short purple toga, as well as the tunica with
narrow purple stripes (angusti clavi), the special equestrian shoes
(calci) and gold rings. In purple and gold they mounted white
horses, parading from the Campus Martius, stopping at the Temple of
Casto and Pollux to offer sacrifices to their patron deities, before
continuing on to the Capitolium to sacrifice to Jupiter Optimus
Maximus.


Flamen Dialis Proscribed from Wearing Rings

"Likewise to wear a ring,unless it be perforated and without a gem."
~ Aulus Gellius, Noctes Atticae 10.15.6

This prohibition, like those against knots and chains, was intended
to prevent charms from being worked upon the flamen Dialis. The
mention of rings set with stones again shows that these prohibitions
came late. The stones often had magical inscriptions, and healing
herbs were placed in the ring's setting beneath the stone. Such
rings were introduced from the Hellenistic East along with other
medical practices. The first Greek doctor to come to Rome was
Archagathus in the consulship of L. Aemilius and M. Livius (219
BCE). Such rings with stones and charms may well have come to Rome
shortly before his time. But still it indicates that the
prohibitions set upon the flamen Dialis date from the later third
century at the earliest, and likely from the time of the Second Punic
War, or possibly even later.


A Libyan Myth

"Once upon a time, so runs the story, there was a dangerous and
savage species of animal whose main haunt was in the uninhabited
regions of Libya. For that country even to this day seems to produce
all sorts of living creatures, reptiles as well as other kinds. Now
among them was the species with which this story has to deal. It had
a body that, in general, was a composite thing of the most
incongruous parts, an utter monstrosity, and it used to roam as far
as the Mediterranean and the Syrtis in search of food. For it hunted
both the beasts of prey such as the lion and the panther, even as
those hunt the deer and the wild asses and the sheep, but took the
most delight in catching men. The general character and appearance of
their body were as follow: the face was that of a woman, a brief
woman. The breast and bosom, and the neck, too, were extremely
beautiful, the like of which no mortal maid or bride in the bloom of
youth could claim, nor sculptor or painter will ever be able to
reproduce. The complexion was of dazzling brightness, the glance of
the eyes aroused affection and yearning in the souls of all that
beheld. The rest of the body was hard and protected by scales, and
all the lower part was snake, ending in the snake's baleful head. Now
the story does not say that these animals were winged like the
sphinxes — nor that they, like them, spoke or made any sound whatever
except a hissing noise such as dragons make, very shrill — but that
they were the swiftest of all land creatures, so that no one could
ever escape them. And while they overcame other creatures by force,
they used guile with man, giving them a glimpse of their bosom and
breasts and at the same time they infatuated their victims by fixing
their eyes upon them, and filled them with a passionate desire for
intercourse. Then the men would approach them as they might women,
while they on their part stood quite motionless, often dropping their
eyes in the manner of a decorous woman. But as soon as a man came
within reach they seized him in their grasp; for they had clawlike
hands too, which they had kept concealed at first. Then the serpent
would promptly sting and kill him with his poison; and the dead body
was devoured by the serpent and the rest of the beast together.

"A certain king of Libya attempted to destroy this breed of animals,
angered as he was at the destruction of his people. And he found that
many of them had established themselves there, having taken
possession of a dense wild wood beyond the Syrtis. So he mustered a
mighty host and found their dens. For they were not difficult to
detect owing to the trails left by their serpents' tails and to the
terrible stench that emanated from the dens. He thus surrounded them
on all sides and hurled fire in upon them, so that, being cut off,
they perished with their young. As for the Libyans, they fled with
all haste from the region, resting neither night nor day, until,
thinking they had gained a great start, they halted for rest beside a
certain river. But those of the creatures who had been away hunting,
as soon as they learned of the destruction of their dens, pursued the
army to the river, and finding some asleep and others exhausted by
the toil, destroyed them one and all. At that time, then, the task
of destroying this brood was not completed by the king. Later,
however - so the story continues - Heracles, while clearing the whole
earth of wild beasts and tyrants, came to this place too, set it on
fire, and when the creatures were escaping from the flames, slew with
his club all that attacked him, and with his arrows those that tried
to run away.

"Now perhaps the myth is an allegory to show that, when the majority
of men try to clear the trackless region of their souls, teeming with
savage beasts, by rooting out and destroying the brood of lusts in
the hope of then having got rid of them and escaped, and yet have not
one this thoroughly, they are soon afterwards overwhelmed and
destroyed by the remaining lusts; but that Heracles, the son of Jove
and Alcmene, carried the task through to completion and made his own
heart pure and gentle or tame; and that this is what is meant by his
taming, that is, civilizing the earth." ~ Cybissus, in exceprts from
Dio Chrysostom, Discourses 5.5-23


Today's thought is from Democritus, Golden Sentences 43.

"It is not useless indeed to procure wealth, but to procure it from
injustice is the most pernicious of all things."

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Tiberius Quintilianus
<ti.quintilianus@...> wrote:

>
>
> Salve omnes
>
> I recently read in Suetonius' The Twelve Caesars that Tiberius left

to Caligula two billions and three hundred millions sestertii. I would
like to know, if you can help me, what could we buy with one
sestertius in ancient Rome just to have an idea of what that quantity
meant.

>
> Valete
>
> Ti. Cornelius Quintilianus
>

Agricola Quintiliano sal.

It is impossible to make anything other than a rough comparison. It
is often said that in the late Republic, a day's wage for unskilled
labor was a denarius. And a denarius is worth four sestertii. So in a
rough way having a sestertius probably felt something like have 5 or
10 dollars.


By comparison, our Nova Roma sestertii are grossly undervalued!


Note that the sestertius was itself worth 2.5 ases. The normal
abbreviation for sestertius, "HS" may have started off as "IIS" where
"S" stands for semi. (IIS would mean "two and a half").


optime vale!

Dextro s.d.

What better Race report could we issue than your ode ?!

Congratulations to you for this still great result!

Indeed, this circenses romanorum have seen the coming, beside still
famous auriges, of *new* talents : your Stolo driving Incitatus,
Germanica and owner D. Arminius Brutus, and Lucius Fidelius
Lusitanus, driving himself Fulgur II, just to speak about the four
final auriges.
It is also Minervalis' Scorpianu first Circenses, if I well remember.

Vale and good luck to you, to your Stolo and omnis aurigis !


P. Memmius Albucius
aed. cur.


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gaius Petronius Dexter"
<jfarnoud94@...> wrote:

>

(..)

> My champion is always in the race ! Hip hip hurrah !
> Gratias tibi Iovi !
> And now I can sing in Latine :
>
> Iam Romani sunt Ludi, sunt munera danda,
> Venit tempus nunc facere sacra lovi.
> Alme Pater divum ! nos te colimus per arenam
> Pulveream Circi, Maximeque alme Pater !
>
> Iam sol declinans excelsa cacumina Romae
> Illustrat, Iam adsunt munera vota Iovi !
> Romana Albucius pleno et spectacula Circo
> Quadrijugos aequo carcere misit equos.
>
> Iam cursus spectant, dant clamoresque Quirites
> Laetitiae plenos, pignore nec vacuos.
> Aurorae ora favent vana, est quoque victus Vlixes
> Delecti, Pili acta haud melioraque sunt.
>
> Iam sunt caela serena Iovis, iam pulveris orbes
> Cessant in Circo nunc madido et tacito.
> Cursus expectant iam venturosque Quirites
> Aediles dabunt quos in honore Iovis.
>
> Vale.
>
> C. Petronius Dexter
>

C. Petronius Dexter Ti. Cornelio Quintiliano s.p.d.,

At the time of Caligula, one sestertius was a bronze coin with the
value of 4 asses.
You had 4 sestertii in 1 denarius (silver coin).
25 denarii (100 sestertii) in 1 aureus (golden coin).

Some ideas of prices at the time of Caligula:

1 day of a worker = 1 denarius (4 sestertii)
1 modius (6,503kg) of wheat = 3 sestertii.
1 tunica = 15 sestertii.
1 bread (0,500 kg) = 1 as.
Annual salary of a simple legionary = 225 denarii.(900sestertii)
Salary of a teacher (ludi magister) = 8 asses by pupils on 1 month.
(With a classroom of 30 pupils = 240 asses 1 month = 60 sestertii)

To have an other idea, the aureus = 100 sestertii. And his golden
pound was : 0,008kg.

18 000 euros = 1 kg of gold.
1 aureus = 0,008 kg of gold = 22,50 euros.
1 sestertius = 0,22 euro.

One dayly salary of a worker = 0,22 x 4 = 0,88 euro !
What a life not expensive!
1 bread = 0,05 euro.

Vale.

C. Petronius Dexter.

C. Petronius Dexter omnibus Quiritibus s.p.d.,

> To have an other idea, the aureus = 100 sestertii. And his golden
> pound was : 0,008kg.
>
> 18 000 euros = 1 kg of gold.
> 1 aureus = 0,008 kg of gold = 22,50 euros.
> 1 sestertius = 0,22 euro.

I am not right... if 18 000 euros are 1 kg of gold, 1 gr of gold is 18
euros, and 8 gr (or 1 aureus) are 144 euros !

1 aureus = 144 euros.
1 denarius = 5,76 euros.
1 sestertius = 1,44 euro.

Vale.

C. Petronius Dexter.

Gnaeus Caelius Ahenobarbus <cn.caelius@...> writes:

> When I bought a few sestertii for myself, I wondered why they were
> valued so inexpensively.

That's a decision that was made back when the first "Declatio"
sestercii were minted. 1 Nova Roman sestercius = $0.50 USD, since the
US Dollar was originally based on the Spanish Dolar, and that in turn
was worth two Roman sestercii.

Vale,

CN-EQVIT-MARINVS

Salvete   Gratias quod me certiorem fecistis. By the way a correction: Tiberius did not leave to Caligula 2300000 HS as I first said, but much more, 2700000 HS.   Valete bene Ti. Corn. Quint. --- On Sun, 9/14/08, Gnaeus Caelius Ahenobarbus <cn.caelius@...> wrote: From: Gnaeus Caelius Ahenobarbus <cn.caelius@...> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Money in ancient Rome To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, September 14, 2008, 5:14 PM Cn. Caelius Ahenobarbus C. Petronio Dextro omnibusque S.P.D.     It's interesting that you came up with the "sestertius= 1.44 euro" number. When I bought a few sestertii for myself, I wondered why they were valued so inexpensively. If Nova Roma minted a denarius made of half an ounce of silver and used that as the basis for the monetary system (and its exchange value outside of Nova Roma would vary according to the price of silver), a denarius would be worth about USD$5.40 right now, and a sestertius at one-quarter of that--USD$1. 35--almost 3 times its current valuation. If we needed an aureus (I think it would be overkill as it is valued so highly; it could be a very valuable collectible, though), it would be worth about USD$135, or 1/6th of an ounce of gold at today's prices.   Vale, et valete! -- Gnaeus Caelius Ahenobarbus Tucson, Arizona, US, America Austroccidentalis http://becomingnewt hroughtheold. blogspot. com

A. Tullia Scholastica quiritibus, sociis, peregrinisque bonae voluntatis S.P.D.

    The AT server is now working, though there may be a bit of a problem with strikeovers in some parts of the software.  Students who have an AT ID may register at will for the Rudimenta Latina course and any others whose enrollment is open to those who do not require an enrollment key.  All Latin language classes require registrants to have such a key to ensure possession of the text and other required materials and that of any academic prerequisites.   

    Grammatica Latina II is in progress and my not be entered; Grammatica I is technically in progress, and will be in full swing Monday.  Registration in Grammatica I is open only to those who have the ID and text already, or who have contacted me concerning problems acquiring the latter.  Sermo Latinus I is open to those who have the AT ID as well as the text and recordings; prospective students who have fulfilled those conditions may obtain the key by writing to me in private.  Due to technical issues, including the server shutdowns, the site is not yet ready to accept Sermo II registrations.  Class will begin October 13th for both Sermo courses.  Rudimenta, which we recommend for anyone wishing to learn about Latin and review a bit of Latin before taking an actual language course, will begin September 29th/30th; I expect to be at a major reenactment event that weekend, so we may be a bit behind.

Valete.

     

    

Aurelianus Cato sal.

 

I believe that you have made a non sequitur in your thinking.  Any Roman who doesn't contribute to the state both financially and with active participation should not be allowed to hold office, public or sacred.  That is why I favor a lifetime membership that would permit citizens truly committed to Nova Roma to display that committment not just by an annual tax payment but for all time.

 

Vale.

Fl. Galerius Aurelianus L. Iulio Regulo sal.

 

Based on a wide variety of commentaries about Dii Immortales and the Religio by Cicero, Valerius Maximus, Plautus, Livy, Polybius, and other classical authors, there are several salient points about the Sacra et Religio that can be established as "theological."

 

I have come to accept the following as being among the most widely accepted among cultores deorum:

 

1. The Gods (Dii Immortales) exist but their benevolence or malevolence are determined by the proper prayers and sacrifices being maintained by mortals.  This holds for both the private family rites and for the public state rites.  This is the basis of the pax deorum; i.e. to secure the favor of the Gods and avoid their anger or ire.

 

2. Dii Immortales show their intent and communicate with mortals by messages manifested by natural, observable phenomena.  These are most commonly dreams, sortilege, auspices, haruspices, prophecies or oracles, portents, prodigies, monstra, et cetera.  These signs can be interpreted personally, by consultation with one's friends and family, or by consultation with augures and haruspexes.  If one is inclined, one might also consult with astrologers, magi, and certain sacerdotes of various cults.

 

3. The correct performance of ritual are critically important.  Due to the imperfect nature of mortals, we allow for the correction of mistakes by means of piaculum during a caerimonia or ritus.  Dii Immortales reward the proper performance of sacrifice and prayer with wealth, fame, success, and the continuance of family.  Dii Immortales are not impressed or act with favor to those who are just, moderate, and righteous if they do not maintain the pax deorum.

 

4.The correct sacrifice and prayer increase the power of Dii Immortales so that they may return favor upon us.  This is the concept of "do ut dies" or giving to the Gods so that they may give.

 

5. The private rites offer the greatest opportunity to the individual to express their personal devotion to the Gods of their ancestors, house, family, and (by extension) the state.  The public adminstration of the state rites is something that all public officials and members of the sacred colleges should endeavor to perform correctly to insure that the Res Publica maintains the Pax Deorum for the benefit of those who may not practice the Sacra et Religio.

 

These are personal interpretations of classical and modern authors that I have come to believe in and maintain as important.  However, I do not wish anyone to interpret these comments as ex officio.

 

Vale. 

Aurelianus Dexter sal.

 

I am afraid your history is a bit Franco-centric.  The original concept of separation of church and state occurred in the Crown colony of Maryland when Lord Baltimore (a catholic) needed to have settlers who were non-catholic so he exempted colonists from paying tithes to either the CofE or Roman Church.  In every other colony, the citizens were required to contribute to the colonial religious establishment, whether it was Church of England or a dissenter church.  The separation of church and state were part of the U.S. Constitution which was written up during our constitutional convention in 1787.  If memory serves me, the French Revolution began over 21 years after the American Revolution (1775) and many of the ideals of the French Revolution originated with the United States.  Please feel free to correct me if you find I am in error.

 

Vale.

M. Moravius Piscinus cultoribus Deorum et omnibus salutem plurimam
dicit: Bonam habete Fortunam.

Hodie est ante diem XVII Kalendas Octobris; haec dies nefastus est:
Ludi Romani in circo

The Hearth-Fire of the Flamen Dialis

"It is against the law for the fire to be taken from the flaminia,
that is, from the home of the flamen Dialis, except for a sacred
rite." ~ Aulus Gellius, Noctes Atticae 10.15.7


Plutarch, Roman Questions 33: "Why in ancient days did they never
dine out without their sons, even when these were still but
children?

"Did Lycurgus introduce this custom also, and bring boys to the
common meals that they might become accustomed to conduct themselves
towards their pleasures, not in a brutish or disorderly way, but with
discretion, since they had their elders as supervisors and
spectators, as it were? No less important is the fact that the
fathers themselves would also be more decorous and prudent in the
presence of their sons; for 'where the old are shameless,' as Plato
remarks, 'there the young also must needs be lost to all sense of
shame.'"


The Beautiful Earth Set as a Banquet of the Gods

"The peasant also chanted a second monody, telling how the universe
is a house very beautiful and divine, constructed by the Gods; that
just as we see houses built by men who are called prosperous and
wealthy, with portals and columns, and the roof, walls, and doors
adorned with gold and with paintings, in the same way the universe
has been made to give entertainment and good cheer to mankind,
beauteous and bespangled with stars, sun, moon, land, sea, and
plants, all these being, indeed, portions of the wealth of the gods
and specimens of their handiwork.

"Into this universe comes mankind to hold high festival, having been
invited by the King of the Gods to a most splendid feast and banquet
that they may enjoy all blessings. They recline in different places,
just as at a dinner, some getting better and others inferior
positions, and everything resembles what takes place among us at our
entertainments, except that we are comparing the divine and great
with the small and mean. For the Gods furnish us with light of two
kinds by means of lamps as it were, at one time a brighter and at
another a dimmer light, the one at night and the other by day; and
tables are set beside us, loaded with everything, with bread and
fruit, some of it wild and some cultivated, and with meats too, some
from domestic animals, some from wild, and fish also from the sea.
And these tables, the peasant said, speaking like a true rustic, are
the meadows, plains, vales, and coast-land, on which some things
grow, others pasture, and yet others are hunted. And different
persons have different things in greater abundance according to the
tables at which they have severally reclined. For some happen to have
settled by the sea, others on the plains, and yet others in the
mountains. And the waiters are the Seasons, as being the youngest of
the gods, beautifully dressed and fair to behold, and they are
adorned, not, methinks, with gold, but with garlands of all manner of
flowers. And some of the flowers themselves they distribute and also
attend to the viands of the banquet in general, serving some and
removing others at the right time. And there is dancing and every
other sort of merrymaking. Furthermore, that labour which we think
we undergo in farming and hunting and the care of the vines, is no
more than it is for those at a table to reach out for a thing and
take it in their hand. To return now to my statement that different
persons reclined in different places, the reason for p427that is the
differences in the climate. For those at the head of the tables and
those at the foot, more than of the others, are either in the cold or
in the heat, because they are either near the light or far from it.
"Now all, so the man continued, do not enjoy the merrymaking and
banqueting in the same way, but each according to his own nature. The
dissolute and intemperate neither see nor hear anything, but bend
over and eat, like pigs in a sty, and then nod in sleep. Again, some
of them are not satisfied with what is near, but reach out their
hands for the things that are farther away, as, for example, people
living inland want fish and take trouble to get it; 34 while others,
who are insatiable and wretched, fearing that food will fail them,
collect and pile up for themselves as much as they can, and after
this, when they have to go, they depart without having a share of
anything, but utterly destitute, and leave these things to others;
for they cannot take them with them. Now these persons are a laughing-
stock and disgrace.

"But it is the drunken who are most inclined to act this way.
However, it is not wine that makes them drunk, as it is with us, but
pleasure. For this is the beverage that the gods furnish at this
banquet to which all mankind is invited, so that the character of
each man may be revealed. And two cup-bearers stand at their elbows,
one male, the other female; the one of them is called Intelligence
and the other Intemperance. Now those banqueters who are sensible
have the male cup-bearer and from him alone they accept the drink
sparingly, in small cups, and only when it has been so mixed that it
is quite harmless; for there is only one bowl, that of Sobriety, has
been placed before them, nevertheless there are many bowls available
for all and differing in taste, as though filled with many kinds of
wine, and they are of silver and of gold; and besides, they have
figures of animals encircling them on the outside and certain scrolls
and reliefs. But the bowl of Sobriety is smooth, not large, and of
bronze, to judge by its appearance. So from this bowl they must take
many times as large a portion and mix with it a little of the
pleasure and drink. Now for those whose cup-bearer he is,
Intelligence pours out the wine just so, fearing and giving close
heed lest in some way he should fail to get the right mixture and
cause the banqueter to stumble and fall. But Intemperance pours out a
neat draught of pleasure for the great majority without mixing even a
little of sobriety with it, though for some she puts in just a very
little for the name of it; still this little straightway disappears
and is nowhere to be seen. And the drinkers do not take intervals of
rest, but hurry her on and bid her come faster to them, and each one
of them grabs first at what she brings. But she hurries and runs
about panting and dripping with sweat. Some of her guests dance and
lurch, falling prostrate in the sight of all, and fight and shout,
just as men do who are drunken with wine. However, these do so only
for a little while and moderately; for they are content to sleep a
little while, and after that they feel better than ever, since their
intoxication was slight. But those who have become stupefied by
pleasure, being affected by a stronger potion, act this way all
through life; and it is impossible for them to get free while they
live but only when dead. For death is the only sleep for people
intoxicated in this way and it alone helps them.

"And when they have to depart, the dissolute and intemperate are
pulled and dragged away by their slave attendants with discomforts
and spells of sickness, shouting and groaning all the while, and
having no knowledge whatever where they have been or how they have
feasted, even if one or another of them remains a very long time. But
the others depart erect and standing securely upon their own feet
after bidding farewell to their friends, joyous and happy because
they have done nothing unseemly. God, therefore, looking upon these
things p435and observing all the banqueters, as if he were in his own
house, how each person has comported himself at the banquet, ever
calls the best to himself; and if he happens to be especially pleased
with any one, he bids him remain there and makes him his boon
companion; and thenceforth this man regales himself with nectar. This
resembles the beverage of Sobriety, but is clearer by far than the
other and purer because, as I think, it belongs to divine and true
sobriety." ~ Dio Chrysostom, Discourses 30.28-44 abridged


Today's thought is a quote from Homer used by Lucius Apuleius in his
own defense, in the Apologia 1.4:

"The most glorious gifts of the Gods are in no wise to be despised;
but the things which They are wont to give are withheld from many
that would gladly possess them."

C. Petronius Aureliano s.p.d.,

> I am afraid your history is a bit Franco-centric.

Perhaps it is, but if the USA, as you said, have in their
constitution the separation between state and churchs, I would like
to know if an atheist or a muslim could be president.

So it certainly was more easy by lord Baltimore to separate the
church and the two or three colonies of the future "state" of
Maryland than doing the same thing in the Monarchy of France. Remind
that at the centuries XVI,XVII and XVIII France was the stronggest
Monarchy on the world with a population of 25 millions when at the
same period England had a population of 5 millions, USA a population
of about 40 000 europeans... and the French monarchy had a long long
experience with Catholic church which pretended to be the most
important pillar of the kingdom. France had as form of society the
monarchy and people was divised into 3 "states" or "ordines", Clergy,
Nobility and Third State. Money, of course, in his society was not
important, all was in the "blood".

But from the XVIth century some intellectuals begin to think about
the separation between the state and the church, probably because the
civil war of religions between catholics and protestants. The king
Henri IV had permit the freedom of cult to the both churches. But his
grand-son, the absolute king Louis XIV, persecuted the protestants.

The original concept of

> separation of church and state occurred in the Crown colony of

Maryland when

> Lord Baltimore (a catholic) needed to have settlers who were non-

catholic so

> he exempted colonists from paying tithes to either the CofE or

Roman Church.

> In every other colony, the citizens were required to contribute to

the

> colonial religious establishment, whether it was Church of England

or a dissenter

> church. The separation of church and state were part of the U.S.

Constitution

> which was written up during our constitutional convention in

1787. If

> memory serves me, the French Revolution began over 21 years after

the American

> Revolution (1775) and many of the ideals of the French Revolution

originated

> with the United States. Please feel free to correct me if you

find I am in

> error.

You are right on the dates. But all those ideas existed in France.
Descartes, XVIth century, was one to have some doubts about the
biblic god and to propose a metaphysical god. Nevertheless, France
was a monarchy more and more absolute and catholic. All state was
into the wishes of the king. Le "bon plaisir". We had to have a big
and bloody revolution to change that.

USA was a new world, it was not uneasy to propose the separation of
church and state, before the states building and obtaining freedom.
However, although you were a new world, you had slaves until 1865. In
france the Revolution abolished the slavery in the French colonies in
1794. But the emperor Napoleon the 1st reestablished it. It was the
second Republic, in 1848, who definitely abolished it.

The French Revolution, in its excesses, first did not propose the
separation between the church and the state, but wanted to eradicate
the belief in the christian god. We had Notre Dame of Paris become a
temple of the Reason.;o) All the properties, all the goods of the
catholic church was taken by the Republic at this period. As you
imagine, much gold, much money, much objects of art was taken by
revolutionar managers.

Finally, the separation between church and the state, the laicity as
we say, is the softest position of politicians, id est the
conservators (UMP) and the socialists (PS), because in France some
people would want completly eradicate the belief thinked as an
obscurantism and a sectar thought.

But, this matter is it a Nova Roma topic? You drove me towards the
sin I thought about the main list. :o)

Vale.

C. Petronius Dexter

Reminder from:		Nova-Roma Yahoo! Group
Title:		To all in the Far East
Date:		Monday September 15, 2008
Time:		12:00 pm - 1:00 pm
Repeats:		This event repeats every month.
Location:		http://groups.yahoo.com/group/prov_asia_orientalis/
Notes:		If you live in the Far East, why not join your provincial mailing list? Meet fellow citizens and get active locally. Don't just lurk! Send a message, introduce yourself and get involved! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/prov_asia_orientalis/ Provincial mailing lists are listed in the wiki. Go to http://novaroma.org/nr/Provincia_%28Nova_Roma%29
Get reminders on your mobile, Yahoo! Messenger, and email. Edit reminder options

Copyright © 2008  Yahoo! Inc. All Rights Reserved | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy

Ave Lusitane !

> I know your chariot is on the race, but I'm driving my own chariot,

and I entered to win. Be careful, because I'm really daring enough to
drive my own chariot!

First, if you want to drive your chariot against mine, drived by the
young Stolo of Ephesus, you must defeat D. Arminius Brutus' chariot
Germanica, and my Incitatus must defeat L. Rutilius Minervalis' chariot
Scorpianus.

Utinam dii Stoloni faveant.

Vale.

C. Petronius Dexter

Cn. Lentulus Quiritibus salutem: Hortensia Maior made some very interesting statements I would like to add my comments to. Hortensia said Roman priests were religious experts and they had nothing similarity when compared to Christian priests. This is true, but Roman priests were much more than just religious experts and advisors. In fact, Romans thought their priests and magistrates had a very strong sacred force indelible from them, which was very similar to the divine force which is called "Mana". See this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mana There are plenty of examples to this: If a curule magistrate was elected once, even if he completed his term of office, he still remained stigmatized by the sacred force (called imperium) they received. This was the reason why only those were allowed to get a political mission which required to possess the imperium, who were once elected to the a position connected to imperium. This was the reason why a former curule magistrate could continue to wear the toga praetexta, to sit in the sella curulis and be in the senate. Imperium was a sacred force connected to gods, and so was the potestas, too. Only if you see clearly how much Romans revered this sacred force only, and only then you can understand how a state without police could be so successful and strong so long. Romans beleived in orders and obeyed them, because an order of a person with imperium was a sacred thing: it was against the pax deorom not to obey. As much as the mos maiorum and the pious traditions of the Romans started to fall in the end of the republic, the pious reverence of the sacred power of magistartes was becoming  neglected. The main point of the Roman religion is beleiving (or acting as if we believed) that there are divine forces in words, deeds, persons and things that we must honour. Important and symbolic places and objects are sacred; important persons like leaders are sacred; traditional movements, acts, customs are sacred; important words like Fides, Concordia, Amor, Victoria, Venus etc are sacred. (Did you know that that Venus was just a common noun for beautifulness, attractiveness, and then, like Concordia, it became a god following the Greek Aphrodite?) So these things are sacred and what is sacred it's unchangeable, as Romans beleived (or thought). Did you ever think about why the entire republican magistracy system was not deleted until the end of the Western Empire, after 400 years since their office was made a mere formality? Even the comitia were not deleted officially, and though the magistrates during the Late Empire had no political power at all, their existence was unquestionable. Such an unchangeble world required some tricks so that they could apply their lives and institutions to the changes of the times. These tricks were the Roman law. A religious innovation never seen in the world previouly. Yes, the Roman law, too, was a religious institution, the supreme form of the sacred force which can be found in words. The answer to the question why Roman law was so outstanding and long living, why it was the foundation of legal thinking, is the simple fact that Roman law was also revered with religious observance and had an enormously important place in the society, in comparison with the Greek law, e.g. I've said Roman law was the trick so that they could apply their lives and institutions to the changes of the times. What does it mean? For example, early Romans thought commerce did not exist: a thing that is somebody's property is always the property of the same man. They thought the person who owns something has a sacred force (called "manus") over the thing he owns. A property can be alienated only through force and killing. This concept was part of the religion, the force being divine. So what could they do? Invented a trick: when someone wanted to sell his own property, he and his buyer had to do as if they fought! They pretended fighting! They had to touch the thing with a spear, too, and so there was a ceremonial "fight" and the property to be sold became the property of the "winner", ie. the buyer. And this all "ceremonial theater" was prescribed by the law! This is how early Roman law was a tool for escaping obsolete religious traditions that encumbered social development. It is impossible to find any detail in the Roman social life that would not connected to the state and thus to the religion and vice versa. This pretty much shows why we can't separete the Roman religion from the Roman state. Magistrates were some kind of priests in the same time as they were military commanders. There was no public office which was not a religious office in the same time, because the state *was* the Roman religion as it pertains to a community. Of course, the private religion is another issue; but the cult of the Roman state was res publica. It is very importat to see and understand how much Romans *beleived* (but not in a Christian meaning of the word) in the sacred force (numen) which were present everywhere but in very different extents. The imperium was the strongest that a human being could have, and it left an indelible mark on the person who once had had it. So a flamen, a consul or an augur was wearing the mark of the sacred force until his death. This was why Romans almost never removed priests, and if they did remove, they did not appointed an other one. There were, of course always are, exceptions. But the normal way was not to remove or replace a priest. In Nova Roma, I think we can modify this tradition, but we have to pretend in some way as if we did not so. Let's have *theoretically* lifetime priestly appointments that *practically* can be removed if necessary. And thanks to C. Cato for bringing up this interesting discussion! Curate, ut valeatis! Cn. Lentulus sacerdos

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Poco spazio e tanto spam? Yahoo! Mail ti protegge dallo spam e ti da tanto spazio gratuito per i tuoi file e i messaggi
http://mail.yahoo.it

M. Moravius Piscinus cultoribus Deorum et omnibus salutem plurimam
dicit: Di Deaeque vos semper servent.

Hodie est ante diem XVI Kalendas Octobres; haec dies comitialis est:
Ludi Romani in circo

"By this date the Etesian winds (of summer) have quite ceased to
blow." ~ G. Plinius Secundus, Historia Naturalis 18.74


The Flamen Dialis and Chains

"If a person in fetters enter his house, he must be loosed, the bonds
must be drawn up through the impluvium to the roof and from there let
down into the street." ~ Aulus Gellius, Noctes Atticae 10.15.8

The flamen Dialis is prohibited from wearing any chains or even
sitting next to chains. This again has to do with the idea of
casting spells into knots, or into each link of a chain. Just as the
Roman's kept the name of the Goddess who protected Rome as a state
secret, the priest of Jupiter Optimus Maximus was protected from any
magical influences that might interfer with his duties and thus bring
harm to the City.


AUC 391 / 362 BCE: Devotio of Marcus Curtius

"In this year, owing either to an earthquake or the action of some
other force, the middle of the Forum fell in to an immense depth,
presenting the appearance of an enormous cavern. Though all worked
their hardest at throwing earth in, they were unable to fill up the
gulf, until at the bidding of the Gods inquiry was made as to what
that was in which the strength of Rome lay. For this, the seers
declared, must be sacrificed on that spot if men wished the Roman
republic to be eternal. The story goes that M. Curtius, a youth
distinguished in war, indignantly asked those who were in doubt what
answer to give, whether anything that Rome possessed was more
precious than the arms and valor of her sons. As those around stood
silent, he looked up to the Capitol and to the temples of the
immortal Gods which looked down on the Forum, and stretching out his
hands first towards heaven and then to the yawning chasm beneath,
devoted himself to the Gods below. Then mounting his horse, which had
been caparisoned as magnificently as possible, he leaped in full
armour into the cavern. Gifts and offerings of fruits of the earth
were flung in after him by crowds of men and women. It was from this
incident that the designation "The Curtian Gulf" originated, and not
from that old-world soldier of Titius Tatius, Curtius Mettius. If any
path would lead an inquirer to the truth, we should not shrink from
the labor of investigation; as it is, on a matter where antiquity
makes certainty impossible we must adhere to the legend which
supplies the more famous derivation of the name." ~ Titus Livius 7.5


AUC 1060 / 307 CE: Death of Emperor Flavius Valerius Severus

Severus II had a brief career as emperor. When Diocletianus and
Maximianus abdicted on 1 May 305 they named as Augusti Galerius in
the East and Constantius in the West. Fl. Valerius Severus was
named Caesar under Constantius, and for Galerius his nephew Galerius
Valerius Maximinus Daia became a Caesar. In early 306 Constantinus,
along with his mother Helena, fled from Galerius to his father,
Constantius. When his father then died in July the legions declared
Constantinus as emperor. He, however, arranged for himself to be no
more than Caesar and had Severus raised as Augustus instead. But in
Rome the People and the Praetorians proclaimed Maxentius as Augustus,
and he drew his father Maximianus out of retirement to return as co-
Augustus (28 Oct). Severus was sent against Rome but when his army
deserted him for Maxentius, Severus surrendered, only to be executed
on 16 Sept. 307 CE.


Today's thought is from Marcus Aurelius, Meditations 9.7:

"Erase the imprint of imagination; stop impulse; quench desire;
extinguish appetite: keep the ruling faculty (with Reason as) its own
master."

Salvete omnes

 

The certamen historicum has come to an end, and the contestants have hauled home the results of their quest.

 

I thank all of them for taking part, and for the effort that they put into producing a first class competition. I hope they all enjoyed the hunt, and that those who have watched without taking part have also enjoyed the game. Perhaps we can encourage you to join in next time.

 

There were some excellent answers, some short, concise and to the point, and others that captured the essence of the moment in brief pen pictures. I have borrowed some elements of your contributions in producing the following set of answers.

 

 

1.Veni, Vidi, Vici.

Meaning?  I came, I saw, I conquered

Said by?  G. Iulius Caesar

Said to?   The Roman Senate, in his report

What happened?   He was reporting his victory over Pharnaces II of Pontus in the Battle of Zela. This curt phrase sums up his own military effectiveness, suggesting how unwise it might be for any others to oppose him.

 

 

2.Mulus Marianus

Meaning?  Marius' mules

Said by?    The Roman troops

What happened?   Among his reforms aimed at increasing military resources and efficiency by introducing a professional, full-time and highly trained army, Marius replaced lengthy baggage trains by making troops carry their own equipment. The troops, thus burdened, gave themselves this nickname.

 

 

3. Alea iacta est

Meaning?   The die is cast

Said by?   G. Iulius Caesar

Said to?   His troops as he prepared to cross the Rubicon river in northern Italy .

What happened?  The Rubicon was considered to mark the boundary between Cisalpine Gaul and Italy proper. By crossing it with an armed force, Caesar put himself in conflict with Rome . Given the small size of his troops relative to those loyal to Pompey at this stage, this phrase is appropriate in indicating what a gamble Caesar was taking in starting another civil war to defend his honour and dignity.

 

 

4. Carthago delenda est.

Meaning?  Carthage must be destroyed.

Said by?   Cato the Elder, aka Cato the Censor, aka Marcus Porcius Cato.

Said to?  Anyone he could influence, particularly to the Senate, at the end of every speech.

What happened?   After defeat in the 2^nd Punic War, Carthage again started to prosper, becoming a rival to Roman trade, and was also starting to strengthen its forces against other African enemies.  Cato believed a third Punic war was therefore inevitable and indeed necessary, so he added this phrase to all of his public speeches.  After its defeat in the 3^rd Punic War, Carthage was destroyed.

 

 

5. Pecunia non olet

Meaning?   Money doesn't stink

Said by?   The emperor Vespasian, Titus Flavius Vespasianus

Said to?   His son, Titus

What happened?   Titus questioned the propriety of his father's tax on public urinals and the sale of urine for industrial purposes in order to raise revenue. The reply simply states that, whatever the source of money, money itself is always perfectly acceptable.  
 

 

6. Cui bono 

Meaning?  To whose benefit? Who stands to gain?

Said by?  M. Tullius Cicero, quoting Censor Lucius Cassius Longinus Ravilla,

Said to?  Famously said to the Roman senate by Cicero in his defence of Titus Annius Milo against a murder charge.

What happened?   Milo was convicted anyway, but Cicero 's speech famously popularised this phrase which has become a standard element of the process of criminal investigation.

 

 

7. Qualis artifex pereo
Meaning?  What an artist I perish, or What an artist dies in me.
Said by?  The emperor Nero
What happened?  After the loss of the two great restraining influences that had fostered an exemplary early reign, tumult arose throughout the Empire, the Gallic and Spanish legions, along with the Praetorian Guards rose against him and Nero fled Rome . The senate declared him a public enemy and he committed suicide, speaking these words that reflect the various performances that he delighted to give.


8. Panem et circenses
Meaning?  Bread and  circuses.
Said by?   The poet Juvenal, Decimus Iunius Iuvenalis
What happened?   Juvenal regrets the way that the people have lost sight of their freedoms and civic duties and given power to whoever promises them a handout of bread and free entry to popular attractions. Like many today, the mob were more interested in popular pleasures rather than things that should matter.

9. Ave atque vale
Meaning?  Hail and farewell.
Said by?  The poet Juvenal
Said to?  In a poem in his honour at the tomb of his dead brother.
What happened? Juvenal visits the tomb of his brother, far from Rome , who had earlier encouraged his poetry. He laments the time that has passed since he last saw him, and that he will now see him no more.


10. Et tu, Brute OR Tu quoque Brute, fili mi?
Meaning?  You too, Brute, (my son)

Said by?  Julius Caesar
Said to?  M. Junius Brutus.
What happened?  Supposedly what Caesar said when he saw that Brutus was amongst the conspirators who stabbed him (contemporaries report that he said, in Greek, "You too, son?" - kai su, teknon? - while Shakespeare made famous the "et tu, Brute?" version)

 

 

11. Peccavi
Meaning?  I have sinned.
Said by?  Every Roman Catholic who ever went to confession before the 2nd Vatican
Council. AND The British General Sir Charles James Napier.
Said to?  The priest by those confessing their sins, AND Napier to his superiors at army HQ.
What happened?  The penitent catholic received absolution, AND in 1843 Napier captured Sindh, gaining this area for the British Empire . His message means "I have Sindh".


12. Romanes eunt domus
Meaning? – exact translation, please.  "Romanes they go (the) house".
Written by (name of character)?  Brian (Brian Cohen in the Monty Python movie The Life of Brian.
Written to?  The occupying Roman forces.
What happened?  Brian has joined the People's Front of Judea, and for his first assignment is tasked to write "Romans go home" on the palace walls .A centurion catches him, and, rather than punish him, acts the part of an English boarding school Latin teacher to correct the grammar. He makes Brian write the phrase correctly 100 times to impress it into his mind.
Give the correct Latin for this ungrammatical phrase.  Romani, ite domum.

 

 

 

And so to the scores. All contestants did well, and, as ever, there was a close fight at the finish. The final scores are:

 

A Octavius Plautus  45

G Valerius Germanicus  and G Petronius Dexter 44

Gn Equitius Marinus  43

T Galerius Paulinus  42

D Arminus Brutus  39.

 

I therefore have great pleasure in declaring A Octavius Plautus the winner this time, and I thank all contestants for taking part. We enjoyed good hunting, and I look forward to seeing you all again, joined I hope by some who were missing from our ranks this time, for the next contest.

 

Valete optime

 

Crispus