How does one properly celebrate paganalia? --- On Fri, 1/23/09, M•IVL•SEVERVS <marcusiuliusseverus@...> wrote: From: M•IVL•SEVERVS <marcusiuliusseverus@...> Subject: [Nova-Roma] EDICTVM CONSVLARE V - DE FERIAE SEMENTIVAE To: "Nova Roma" <nova-roma@yahoogroups.com>, nrprovinciamexico@yahoogroups.com, "Nova Roma Announce" <novaroma-announce@yahoogroups.com> Date: Friday, January 23, 2009, 12:50 PM M. Curiatius Complutensis M. Iulius Severus consules: Senatui Populoque Novo Romano, Quiritibus et omnibus: salutem plurimam dicunt: Iubemus vos omnes bono animo esse! Ante diem VII Idus Februarias, populo Novo Romano Quiritibus feriae Sementivae erunt; quando concepta fuerint, dies nefastus esto. Consules edicunt, ut omnia sacella sacra aperiantur, supplicationesque pro re publica populi Novi Romani Quiritium fiant. Datum est a. d. XI Kalendas Februarias, M. Curiatio Complutense M. Iulio Severo consulibus, anno MMDCCLXII AVC.   Los Cónsules M. Curiatius Complutensis y M. Iulius Severus saludan a las Madres y a los Padres Conscriptos del Senado, al Pueblo de Nova Ropma, los Quirites, y a todos los demás: Les deseamos alegría y felicidad. El séptimo día de febrero (calendario gregoriano; 24 de enero, calendario juliano), siete días antes de los Idus de febrero, el Pueblo romano, los Quirites, celebrarán las feriae Seámentivae (Paganalia); en cuanto comiencen, todos los asuntos legales dejarán de ser tramitados. Los Cónsules proclaman que ese día, todos los santuarios serán abiertos y se ofrecerán acciones de gracias por la República del Pueblo de Nova Roma, los Quirites. Dado en el Consulado de M. Curiatius Complutensis y M. Iulius Severus, 23 de enero de 2009 d.n.e.

Salvete,

I'm with Livia on this.

I well know and understand that ancient Greece did have influences
in and on Rome, however that does not mean that Zeus = Jupiter plain
and simple, and if anything you are perpetuating the idea that Rome
is not a unique and individual culture with its own Gods and
religion, something that Piscinus has done quite well at dispelling
with his posts.

I can tell you if I were new to Nova Roma and the Religio Romana in
general and received those posts, I'd be quite dismayed to discover
that Rome = Greece once again.

Besides, the Gods are not defined by Their myths, They are defined
by Their cult; orthopraxy. Rome may have absorbed the literature of
the Greek East, but that doesn't mean that the Temples in the city
were renamed to reflect the accomodation of Greek literature. So
that begs the question, did the Gods of Rome became Hellenized as
much as you think?

In Pax Deorum Romanorum,
Nero

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Lucia Livia Plauta" <cases@...>
wrote:

>
> Salve Cato,
> >
> > I got a kick out the throwaway line "all that's left..." :)
> >
> Sorry, I think it's no secret that I like Piscinus' posts more

than

> yours.
>
> >
> > If a Roman and a Greek were in a bar, and an Egyptian came up

and

> > asked, "Which one of the gods is the squinty hunch-backed one

that

> > was tossed out of the heavens, married the goddess of love, and
> > makes the armor for the god of war?", the Greek would
> > say, "Hephaeistos!" and the Roman would say, "Vulcan!"
> >
> > They would both be right.
> >
> I totally agree with you on this, but the same is true in present
> times. That's why I find your posts not too informative.
> Piscinus' posts mostly concentrate on the differences, on what

makes

> the roman religion roman, on the little titbits that not everybody
> knows (plus the historical and battle descriptions, which I often
> skip, but I'm sure find a lot of appreciation among men).
>
> Optime vale,
> Livia
>

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Gnaeus Caelius Ahenobarbus
<cn.caelius@...> wrote:

>
> Caelius Lentulo omnibusque s.p.d.
>
> Not only is there an image copyright issue, but doesn't "Nova

Roma, Inc." own the "Nova Roma" service mark? That must be pursued or
else we look as if we don't care about it. They must not be able to
use that name.

YES if we do not send sopmething like a Trademark use Cease and Desist
Letter and then sue them(he etc) we can lose the rights to it very fast
M.C.F.

>
> --
> Gnaeus Caelius Ahenobarbus
> Lictor Curiatus et Accensus Consulibus
> http://becomingnewthroughtheold.blogspot.com
>

Cato omnes in foro SPD

Salvete!

Titus Annaeus Regulus, you wrote (in part):

"Does this seem plausible? Obviously there were some influences of
Greek religion on the earliest stages of Roman religion, but I feel
that the later parallels were simply a natural process but on a much
grander scale."

I agree wholeheartedly with this, and I think the literature and the
very nature of the gods in their respective (Greek and Roman)
cultures bears this out. The gods of Greece are basically great big
kids with superpowers abusing themselves, each other, and human
beings for sport and spite and out of boredom. Ares was bloodlust
and fury and wild battle cries, accompanied by Phobos and Deimos,
terror and fear. Mars is the stately beat of war drums, the echo of
the trumpets and the thunderous tramp of thousands of Roman boots as
they march across a continent "to rule the world and make mankind
obey".

You also wrote:

"Perhaps you could even argue that the influence of Greek religion
effectively swallowed native Roman religion, but at the very least
some differences remained. I don't see the rationale behind claiming
that Roman gods 'are' Greek gods, if that is the case then you would
have only one set of gods, not two (albeit very similar for the
reasons listed above)."

I would say the opposite: that Rome swallowed up the Greek gods and
gradually made them her own. That they were overwhelmingly the
Greeks' first is undeniable - and the fact that Mars is one of the
VERY few pre-existing Roman gods is an interesting sidenote here.
So what Rome made of them may be something quite different but the
stories, the histories, are the same. Remember I said that the
orthopraxy of the two religious traditions probably differed -
the "who stood where and did what when"; but the foundation of a
series of gods with the same basic attributes and the same histories
remains.

And would "only one set" of gods be a bad thing?

Vale bene,

Cato

-Maior Plautae, Regulo Catonique spd;
Hm, I really miss Piscinus, he needs a bit off a break. Cato youre
totally off on Roman deities, there are tons of them, Piscinus sent me
an enormous pdf running to 400 pages.

as for cross cultural influence for sure..Fortuna a really ancient
Roman goddess, of good things, was influenced early on by the Greeks
in Campania, but Greek Tyche became a protector of cities during the
Empire, which is a big function of Roman Fortuna. So Tyche was changed
by Fortuna.

Or think of the cultus of Venus of Eryx. it was a temple of Aprhodite
originally, but this Aphrodite had temple prostitutes. Aphrodite of
Eryx was influenced by Astarte. Venus of Eryx was brought to Rome and
installed, but of course no temple prostitution, her cult was
thoroughly Roman.

Now as for one set of gods being a 'good thing'; I can assure you it's
not. Muslims think their gods are no 1, Christians their trimity is
superior and before all that the Judaeans refusing to house the statue
of the emperor in the Temple & we know where that led;-)
valete
Maior

>
> Cato omnes in foro SPD
>
> Salvete!
>
> Titus Annaeus Regulus, you wrote (in part):
>
> "Does this seem plausible? Obviously there were some influences of
> Greek religion on the earliest stages of Roman religion, but I feel
> that the later parallels were simply a natural process but on a much
> grander scale."
>
> I agree wholeheartedly with this, and I think the literature and the
> very nature of the gods in their respective (Greek and Roman)
> cultures bears this out. The gods of Greece are basically great big
> kids with superpowers abusing themselves, each other, and human
> beings for sport and spite and out of boredom. Ares was bloodlust
> and fury and wild battle cries, accompanied by Phobos and Deimos,
> terror and fear. Mars is the stately beat of war drums, the echo of
> the trumpets and the thunderous tramp of thousands of Roman boots as
> they march across a continent "to rule the world and make mankind
> obey".
>
> You also wrote:
>
> "Perhaps you could even argue that the influence of Greek religion
> effectively swallowed native Roman religion, but at the very least
> some differences remained. I don't see the rationale behind claiming
> that Roman gods 'are' Greek gods, if that is the case then you would
> have only one set of gods, not two (albeit very similar for the
> reasons listed above)."
>
> I would say the opposite: that Rome swallowed up the Greek gods and
> gradually made them her own. That they were overwhelmingly the
> Greeks' first is undeniable - and the fact that Mars is one of the
> VERY few pre-existing Roman gods is an interesting sidenote here.
> So what Rome made of them may be something quite different but the
> stories, the histories, are the same. Remember I said that the
> orthopraxy of the two religious traditions probably differed -
> the "who stood where and did what when"; but the foundation of a
> series of gods with the same basic attributes and the same histories
> remains.
>
> And would "only one set" of gods be a bad thing?
>
> Vale bene,
>
> Cato
>

Salve

>>I would say the opposite: that Rome swallowed up the Greek gods

and gradually made them her own. That they were overwhelmingly the
Greeks' first is undeniable - and the fact that Mars is one of the
VERY few pre-existing Roman gods is an interesting sidenote here. So
what Rome made of them may be something quite different but the
stories, the histories, are the same.<<

Ummm...No. If there only a few handful of "original" Roman deities,
then please use your vast wealth of Greek Mythology to explain the
likes of Pales, Bona Dea, Falacer, Egeria, Vertumnus, Virbius,
Quirinus, Janus, Segetia, Dea Dia, Temepestates, Seia, Laverna,
Larunda, Tiberinus, Vediovis, Summanus, Semo Sancus, Terminus, Fors,
Forculus, Tellumo, Cacus, Caca, Ferentina, Lua Mater, Stata Mater,
Genita Mana, Robigo, Rumina, Carmentis, Inuus, Pomona, Picus,
Canens...need I say more?

Remember I said that the orthopraxy of the two religious traditions
probably differed - the "who stood where and did what when"; but the
foundation of a series of gods with the same basic attributes and
the same histories remains.<<

Please reveal with your wealth of mythology the tale that says how Zeus,
full of lust and desire for fornication, wandered from his native
Greece and indulged himself therewith in Rome? You won't find it. The Gods of Rome (who were not introduced at a later date like Magna Mater, Isis and so
on) do have specific histories that take root in Rome or the greater
extent of Latium in general.

Do yourself a favor and heed the advice of our Flaminica Carmentalis
and read up on the works of John Scheid and Mary Beard, they will
serve you well I promise you that.

Like I said previously, the literature of the Greeks became popular
in Rome, as did the philosophy, mathematics, and more! But as I
said, the way the Romans looked upon the Gods of Rome didn't change
whatsoever, hence the Greek Gods were not adopted or "swallowed" up
by Rome. The use of Roman names in the literature of the Greeks was
not to show that A equals B, but rather the idea that A is being
used to describe B for an audience already familiar with A.

In Pax Deorum Romanorum,
Nero

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

Salvete omnes,

Not to be rude or anything, but whats with the daily calendar postings
being solely composed of Greek-related material?  

    ATS:  What has happened is simply that Piscinus is ill, apparently with a chronic condition which worsens at this time of year.  Consequently, he is not posting, but Cato, who supplied the calendar posts for several years, has independently stepped in to fill the void, as he occasionally supplements those from Piscinus’ hand.  There is no requirement for the calendar posts to deal with the Roman religion, or with religion at all; in the past, they often dealt with ancient history.  


Last I knew, we are
Nova *Roma* and worship the Gods of *Rome*, who are certainly not
alternate names for Greek deities.

    ATS:  In Nova Roma, there are people who worship the gods of ancient Greece, the gods of ancient Egypt, the gods of ancient Rome, the gods of ancient and modern India, etc.  There may be some who worship the Maharaj Ji, for all I know.  There are also those who worship one god, or none.  We should respect everyone’s beliefs.  

    The names of the Greek and Roman deities may well not be alternates; to me, even though at least one is essentially the same (Apollwn, Apollo), they are different, but one may discuss these matters in the normal, natural, logical manner of academia rather than amid outbursts of emotions.  

The postings are interesting, but are quite off topic in my opinion.

    ATS:  Yes, they are interesting, and part of the function of this list and such posts is to provide information to the members of the list.  It is for the praetores to determine what is off topic, and if you consult the moderation edictum, you will find that discussions of virtually every aspect of antiquity are not deemed off topic, whereas those concerning, say, the best means of repairing assorted household appliances clearly are.  Discussions of ancient Greece, ancient Egypt, ancient Sumer, etc., are perfectly fine here so long as the other parameters are observed.  It is perfectly possible to debate these issues without erupting into puerile emotionalism.  We academics do this with some frequency.  All concerned should make their point and give exact references; refrain from ranting, bearing in mind that this list has an educational purpose, and has many members who are not Roman citizens, as well as several who are not anywhere close to being adults; minors, and very young ones at that.  Give them a good example of how controversial topics are handled among educated adults, not how the overwrought fans at some sports event act when their team loses.  Or wins.  

In Pax Deorum,
Nero

Vale, et valete.  
      
   Messages in this topic           <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/message/60612;

----- Original Message -----

From: phoenixfyre17

To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 1:12 AM

Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Religio Hellenica?

Salvete,

I'm with Livia on this.

I well know and understand that ancient Greece did have influences
in and on Rome, however that does not mean that Zeus = Jupiter plain
and simple, and if anything you are perpetuating the idea that Rome
is not a unique and individual culture with its own Gods and
religion, something that Piscinus has done quite well at dispelling
with his posts.

I can tell you if I were new to Nova Roma and the Religio Romana in
general and received those posts, I'd be quite dismayed to discover
that Rome = Greece once again.

Besides, the Gods are not defined by Their myths, They are defined
by Their cult; orthopraxy. Rome may have absorbed the literature of
the Greek East, but that doesn't mean that the Temples in the city
were renamed to reflect the accomodation of Greek literature. So
that begs the question, did the Gods of Rome became Hellenized as
much as you think?

In Pax Deorum Romanorum,
Nero

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogrou ps.com, "Lucia Livia Plauta" <cases@...>
wrote:
>
> Salve Cato,
> >
> > I got a kick out the throwaway line "all that's left..." :)
> >
> Sorry, I think it's no secret that I like Piscinus' posts more
than
> yours.
>
> >
> > If a Roman and a Greek were in a bar, and an Egyptian came up
and
> > asked, "Which one of the gods is the squinty hunch-backed one
that
> > was tossed out of the heavens, married the goddess of love, and
> > makes the armor for the god of war?", the Greek would
> > say, "Hephaeistos! " and the Roman would say, "Vulcan!"
> >
> > They would both be right.
> >
> I totally agree with you on this, but the same is true in present
> times. That's why I find your posts not too informative.
> Piscinus' posts mostly concentrate on the differences, on what
makes
> the roman religion roman, on the little titbits that not everybody
> knows (plus the historical and battle descriptions, which I often
> skip, but I'm sure find a lot of appreciation among men).
>
> Optime vale,
> Livia
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Orange vous informe que cet e-mail a été contrôlé par l'anti-virus mail.
Aucun virus connu à ce jour par nos services n'a été détecté.

----- Original Message -----

From: phoenixfyre17

To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 7:29 AM

Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Religio Hellenica?

Salve

>>I would say the opposite: that Rome swallowed up the Greek gods
and gradually made them her own. That they were overwhelmingly the
Greeks' first is undeniable - and the fact that Mars is one of the
VERY few pre-existing Roman gods is an interesting sidenote here. So
what Rome made of them may be something quite different but the
stories, the histories, are the same.<<

Ummm...No. If there only a few handful of "original" Roman deities,
then please use your vast wealth of Greek Mythology to explain the
likes of Pales, Bona Dea, Falacer, Egeria, Vertumnus, Virbius,
Quirinus, Janus, Segetia, Dea Dia, Temepestates, Seia, Laverna,
Larunda, Tiberinus, Vediovis, Summanus, Semo Sancus, Terminus, Fors,
Forculus, Tellumo, Cacus, Caca, Ferentina, Lua Mater, Stata Mater,
Genita Mana, Robigo, Rumina, Carmentis, Inuus, Pomona, Picus,
Canens...need I say more?

Remember I said that the orthopraxy of the two religious traditions
probably differed - the "who stood where and did what when"; but the
foundation of a series of gods with the same basic attributes and
the same histories remains.<<

Please reveal with your wealth of mythology the tale that says how Zeus,
full of lust and desire for fornication, wandered from his native
Greece and indulged himself therewith in Rome? You won't find it. The Gods of Rome (who were not introduced at a later date like Magna Mater, Isis and so
on) do have specific histories that take root in Rome or the greater
extent of Latium in general.

Do yourself a favor and heed the advice of our Flaminica Carmentalis
and read up on the works of John Scheid and Mary Beard, they will
serve you well I promise you that.

Like I said previously, the literature of the Greeks became popular
in Rome, as did the philosophy, mathematics, and more! But as I
said, the way the Romans looked upon the Gods of Rome didn't change
whatsoever, hence the Greek Gods were not adopted or "swallowed" up
by Rome. The use of Roman names in the literature of the Greeks was
not to show that A equals B, but rather the idea that A is being
used to describe B for an audience already familiar with A.

In Pax Deorum Romanorum,
Nero

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Orange vous informe que cet e-mail a été contrôlé par l'anti-virus mail.
Aucun virus connu à ce jour par nos services n'a été détecté.

Cn. Lentulus pontifex C. Equitio Catoni senatori praetorio sal. >>> Anyway, I've always loved the stories about the gods and heroes and was just sort of filling in time because Piscinus hadn't posted. <<< And thank you for doing that, C. Cato! Cato did the Calendar posting through almost 3 years, and no one had a wrong word to that, in fact, there were many voices of gratefulness and citizens thanking him for the interesting posts. One day some found a problem with Christian references in his posts, saying it is "Christian propaganda" what he sends. He stopped posting and M. Moravius Piscinus undertook the job. Now, our Cato is serving us again, substitutes Piscinus and helps him during his illness, takes part in the forum activities making and posting the Calendar posts voluntarily. Yet now again some find problem with his posts, and what is now the problem? They are too Greek! Poor Cato, once he too Christian, then he is too Greek?! LOL! I think who does have problem with his posts, should not read them: on the other hand they are interesting to other people in Nova Roma, and Cato makes a favour with sacrificing his time for this, so if there is anything that can be said about his posts is nothing else than a big "thank you". As he said: >>> If nothing else, when I post you'll get the date. You can always just skip over the rest... <<< As for the historical accuracy from the religious point of view, C. Cato: Hortensia and Iulius are right to say that you need to search and read about the Roman religion to get a better picture of it. The Greek gods and Roman gods are in 75% not the same divine persons. If you speak about the Olympian Twelve, it's true that they are almost entirely identified with the relevant Roman gods, and when a Roman read about a Hera, he could not think of any other god than Iuno, and he thought they are the same goddess. But the Olympian Twelve are just a little minority among the vaste number of the ancient gods, and there are hundreds of Roman gods who weren't even identified with the Greek ones because simply they could not be. And it happens that those gods unable to identify with Greek gods were more important to the everyday life and avarage people than the pompous chief gods like Iuppiter and Iuno -- for example, Abeona or Adeona, who helped the children to go away and return to home... Cn. Cornelius Lentulus Pontifex

----- Original Message -----

From: Titus Annaeus Regulus

To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 4:20 PM

Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Religio Hellenica?

Salve Varro,

 

I agree with you here to a point. While there are shades or grey, and a great deal of influence from one religion to another, and even common roots in PIE, I think it is safe to say that Hellenic gods and Roman gods were not the same. Similar to be sure, and even more similar after a period of side-by-side interaction, but not the exact same god with a different name. Perhaps after hundreds of years of common evolution Greeks and Romans were even willing to consider that they might just be the same gods, but only in certain cases, and even then both gods could have changed so much to be almost entirely new deities.

 

I'm not sure exactly what Caesar's intentions were in Commentaries, but I agree that he certainly drew parallels between native and Roman deities. It is a luxury of inclusivity not found in Abrahamic religions, but quite acceptable to a polytheist pantheon. Whether he considered Gallic gods like Roman gods or considered Gallic gods to be Roman gods, I would still argue that their history of separate evolution, unique rituals etc, would make them at least partially distinct. If you were to rename all temples to Mars in Rome and rededicate them to Camulos or Ares during the Republic, I doubt the people would have been supportive.

 

However I do agree with you that purity is a dangerous quest. Perhaps it is just that since the 'Roman' posts have stopped coming, practitioners of the RR resent Hellenic deities receiving so much more press. Understandable considering we are Nova Roma, but I would much rather encourage others to post on Roman deities than encourage Cato to stop his informative and interesting posts on Greek ones.

 

Vale,

Titus Annaeus Regulus

From: philippe cardon

Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 7:25 AM

To: Nova-Roma@yahoogrou ps.com

Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Religio Hellenica?

you raise an interressant point but you answer it with some quaest of apure Rligion romana whcth probably never existed

and teh Roamns about the time of the end of the republic were sure that Juppier and Zeus were the sam, probably worshipped differntly through palces in Italy and greece but the same, tht the core and the secret of he well kon interpretation romana

when casar equated Gaulish gods with Romans ones in his book about his war in Gaul he did that

1) as informative intention: such gaulish god is like our mercury

2 but also he thought the Gualish and the romans worshipped the same gods and equated really this one  and this roman one

 

the ancients saw the plurality of religions and gods as they were all true, that i very different from the abrahamic point of view but the ancients thought also that different people knew under differents names the same gods and had myths to explainthat as i is show in herodotus in relationship with egyptian and Greek gods

the modern studies on PIE show us that the God sof th indo-europeans became such and suc gods of the historia pantheons but stayed the same, that doesn't mean some pople kept some gods others lost (as janus whitch is difficultly identified with agreek god but some sought for that in antiquity)

 

the quaest of purity is always dangerous, see that is the root of racism and xenophobia

purity in all things is a fantasm

event the oldest form of the Religio romana we know is not purebut mixed with estruceans and so with greek elements

we can ssearch what is typically roman, but what is typically roman (and not italic or samite or so) is something  very important because it created the particularism of religio romana and in the same time what is tipycally roman is the salt you add to a dish, that change the taste but it is not and aw not and can't be te whole dish, if you understand what i mean

 

Varro

 

----- Original Message -----

From: phoenixfyre17

To: Nova-Roma@yahoogrou ps.com

Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 1:12 AM

Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Religio Hellenica?

Salvete,

I'm with Livia on this.

I well know and understand that ancient Greece did have influences
in and on Rome, however that does not mean that Zeus = Jupiter plain
and simple, and if anything you are perpetuating the idea that Rome
is not a unique and individual culture with its own Gods and
religion, something that Piscinus has done quite well at dispelling
with his posts.

I can tell you if I were new to Nova Roma and the Religio Romana in
general and received those posts, I'd be quite dismayed to discover
that Rome = Greece once again.

Besides, the Gods are not defined by Their myths, They are defined
by Their cult; orthopraxy. Rome may have absorbed the literature of
the Greek East, but that doesn't mean that the Temples in the city
were renamed to reflect the accomodation of Greek literature. So
that begs the question, did the Gods of Rome became Hellenized as
much as you think?

In Pax Deorum Romanorum,
Nero

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogrou ps.com, "Lucia Livia Plauta" <cases@...>
wrote:
>
> Salve Cato,
> >
> > I got a kick out the throwaway line "all that's left..." :)
> >
> Sorry, I think it's no secret that I like Piscinus' posts more
than
> yours.
>
> >
> > If a Roman and a Greek were in a bar, and an Egyptian came up
and
> > asked, "Which one of the gods is the squinty hunch-backed one
that
> > was tossed out of the heavens, married the goddess of love, and
> > makes the armor for the god of war?", the Greek would
> > say, "Hephaeistos! " and the Roman would say, "Vulcan!"
> >
> > They would both be right.
> >
> I totally agree with you on this, but the same is true in present
> times. That's why I find your posts not too informative.
> Piscinus' posts mostly concentrate on the differences, on what
makes
> the roman religion roman, on the little titbits that not everybody
> knows (plus the historical and battle descriptions, which I often
> skip, but I'm sure find a lot of appreciation among men).
>
> Optime vale,
> Livia
>

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ---
Orange vous informe que cet e-mail a été contrôlé par l'anti-virus mail.
Aucun virus connu à ce jour par nos services n'a été détecté.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Orange vous informe que cet e-mail a été contrôlé par l'anti-virus mail.
Aucun virus connu à ce jour par nos services n'a été détecté.

M. Valerius Potitus omnibus SPD.

Varro brings up a good point when he says that a Roman of the late
Republic (I would say the middle Republic, too) would not see a
distinction between the Greek gods and the Roman gods.

The search for the "pure" roots of the Religio is an old-fashioned
academic search, in the style of W. Warde Fowler. It is an intriguing
search, like the search for the origins of the Hebrew Yahweh. But it
can also lead to deductions and speculations that would be
unrecognizable by the real people being studied (ie., the ancient
Romans themselves). This is one of the dangers of anthropology.

We can say, for example, that the Romans didn't have myths about
Iuppiter's love affairs--or that he wasn't seen as the husband or
consort of Iuno. Perhaps this is true--but to be sure, we would have
to interview actual Romans, from salves to common people in the
streets, to senators. Unfortunately, we don't have this luxury.
Instead, we have to rely on evidence (literary and physical), and try
to draw our conclusions.

Another example: my gens, the gens Valeria, venerated Dis Pater and
Proserpina. Family tradition says this veneration dated back as far as
the founder of the gens. Now this pairing of chthonic gods is clearly
Hades and Persephone--in fact, they are clearly marked as such in an
ancient Etruscan painting. Does this mean that the gens Valeria
imported Greek gods? I could speculate that the gens Valeria worshiped
some unknown underground deities, who later became synchretized with
Hades and Persephone. I could stamp my foot and say, No, Dis Pater and
Proserpina are different than Hades and Persephone. But, I suggest, if
you visited the Valerians in antiquity, you would find no such discussion.

Valete.

Cato omnes in foro SPD

Salvete omnes!

Hodiernus dies est ante diem IX Kalendas Februarius; haec dies comitialis est.


"The first division of religious rites he assigned to the thirty
curiones, who, as I have stated, perform the public sacrifices for the
curiae. The second, to those called by the Greeks stephanephoroi or
'wearers of the crown' and by the Romans flamines; they are given this
name from their wearing caps and fillets, called 'flama', which they
continue to wear even to this day. The third, to the commanders of
the celeres, who, as I have stated, were appointed to be the
body-guards of the kings and fought both as cavalry and infantry; for
these also performed certain specified rites. The fourth, to those
who interpret the signs sent by the gods and determine what they
portend both to private persons and to the public; these, from one
branch of the speculations belonging to their art, the Romans call
augurs, and we should call them oionopoloi or 'soothsayers by means of
birds'; they are skilled in all sorts of divination in use among the
Romans, whether founded on signs appearing in the heavens, in mid-air
or on the earth. The fifth he assigned to the virgins who are the
guardians of the sacred fire and who are called Vestals by the Romans,
after the goddess whom they serve, he himself having been the first to
build a temple at Rome to Vesta and to appoint virgins to be her
priestesses. But concerning them it is necessary to make a few
statements that are most essential, since the subject requires it; for
there are problems that have been thought worthy of investigation by
many Roman historians in connexion with this topic and those authors
who have not diligently examined into the causes of these matters have
published rather worthless accounts.

At any rate, as regards the building of the temple of Vesta, some
ascribe it to Romulus, looking upon it as an inconceivable thing that,
when a city was being founded by a man skilled in divination, a public
hearth should not have been erected first of all, particularly since
the founder had been brought up at Alba, where the temple of this
goddess had been established from ancient times, and since his mother
had been her priestess. And recognizing two classes of religious
ceremonies — the one public and common to all the citizens, and the
other private and confined to particular families — they declare that
on both these grounds Romulus was under every obligation to worship
this goddess.

For they say that nothing is more necessary for men
than a public hearth, and that nothing more nearly concerned Romulus,
in view of his descent, since his ancestors had brought the sacred
rites of this goddess from Ilium and his mother had been her
priestess. Those, then, who for these reasons ascribe the building of
the temple to Romulus rather than to Numa seem to be right, in so far
as the general principle is concerned that, when a city was being
founded, it was necessary for a hearth to be established first of all,
particularly by a man who was not unskilled in matters of religion;
but of the details relating to the building of the present temple and
to the virgins who are in the service of the goddess they seem to have
been ignorant. For, in the first place, it was not Romulus who
consecrated to the goddess this place where the sacred fire is
preserved (a strong proof of this is that it is outside of what they
call Roma Quadrata, which he surrounded with a wall, whereas all men
place the shrine of the public hearth in the best part of a city and
nobody outside of the walls); and, in the second place, he did not
appoint the service of the goddess to be performed by virgins, being
mindful, I believe, of the experience that had befallen his mother,
who while she was serving the goddess lost her virginity; for he
doubtless felt that the remembrance of his domestic misfortunes would
make it impossible for him to punish according to the traditional laws
any of the priestesses he should find to have been violated. For this
reason, therefore, he did not build a common temple of Vesta nor did
he appoint virgins to be her priestesses; but having erected a hearth
in each of the thirty curiae on which the members sacrificed, he
appointed the chiefs of the curiae to be the priests of those hearths,
therein imitating the customs of the Greeks that are still observed in
the most ancient cities. At any rate, what are called prytaneia among
them are temples of Hestia, and are served by the chief magistrates of
the cities." - Dionysius of Halicarnassus 2.64-65


"On the ninth day before the Kalends of February at about the seventh
hour he hesitated whether or not to get up for luncheon, since his
stomach was still disordered from excess of food on the day before,
but at length he came out at the persuasion of his friends. In the
covered passage through which he had to pass, some boys of good birth,
who had been summoned from Asia to appear on the stage, were
rehearsing their parts, and he stopped to watch and encourage them;
and had not the leader of the troop complained that he had a chill, he
would have returned and had the performance given at once. From this
point there are two versions of the story: some say that as he was
talking with the boys, Chaerea came up behind, and gave him a deep cut
in the neck, having first cried, 'Take that,' and that then the
tribune Cornelius Sabinus, who was the other conspirator and faced
Gaius, stabbed him in the breast. Others say that Sabinus, after
getting rid of the crowd through centurions who were in the plot,
asked for the watchword, as soldiers do; and that when Gaius gave him
'Jupiter,' he cried 'So be it,' and as Gaius looked around, he split
his jawbone with a blow of his sword. As he lay upon the ground and
with writhing limbs called out that he still lived, the others
dispatched him with thirty wounds; for the general signal was 'Strike
again.' Some even thrust their swords through his privates. At the
beginning of the disturbance his bearers ran to his aid with their
poles, and presently the Germans of his body-guard, and they slew
several of his assassins, as well as some inoffensive senators." -
Suetonius, Lives of the Caesars, "Gaius" LVIII

"His surname Caligula he derived from a joke of the troops, because he
was brought up in their midst in the dress of a common soldier. To
what extent besides he won their love and devotion by being reared in
fellowship with them is especially evident from the fact that when
they threatened mutiny after the death of Augustus and were ready for
any act of madness, the mere sight of Gaius unquestionably calmed
them. For they did not become quiet until they saw that he was being
spirited away because of the danger from their outbreak and taken for
protection to the nearest town. Then at last they became contrite, and
laying hold of the carriage and stopping it, begged to be spared the
disgrace which was being put upon them." - Suetonius, Lives of the
Caesars, "Gaius" IX


On this day in A.D. 41 the emperor Gaius Caesar Augustus Germanicus,
known as "Caligula", was murdered by his own Praetorian Guard, led by
Cassius Chaerea. He was 29 years old, and had reigned for just under
4 years. His brutality and fits of insanity are legendary; he did
not, however, make his horse Incitatus a senator. He did consider
making him a consul.


Valete bene!

Cato

Cato omnes if foro SPD

Salvete!

I have just ordered Beard's book from Amazon.com :)

I have always been ready to stand corrected, and in this case I shall certainly investigate to
see if such a stance is in fact necessary. I readily admit that my focus in the correlation of
the gods was the Olympian Twelve, but I did run across this, which shows a much broader
panoply of deistic interchange:

http://www.geocities.com/athens/troy/2774/mythgods.html


I would point out that Iuppiter was most certainly known for his extramarital philandering!

Higgledy-piggledy
Iuppiter, Thunderer,
gazed down from Heaven with
unbridled lust;
if He took interest, He
theophanistically
took on another form -
one we would trust!

Io, Callipso,
Europa and Laranda,
all became victims -
and not just of Jove's;
Iuno, in fury, would
lash out with frenzy
and punish the mortals
who received His love.

Higgledy-piggledy,
Romans or Greeks when
receiving the awful hand
dealt out this way
couldn't be bothered to
choose, theologically,
which of the pantheons
ruined their day!

Valete!

Cato

C Marcius Crispus T. Annaeus Regulus omnibusque S.P.D

Regulus scripsit  "I am not aware of Nova Roma having an Equestrian class".

There is indeed provision for an equestrian class, and information about the history of the class, and how it exists within our Republic, can be found here:-

http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Category:Equestrian_order_(Nova_Roma)

Following a review last year, there is currently only one citizen in this class, and that is Gaius Vipsanius Agrippa. There is at least one other citizen who has expressed an interest in trading as a member of this class.

You will find a link to his shop in the market place on the Nova Roma main page.

Vale, et valete optime

C Marcius Crispus

Cn, Lentulus accenus consularis T. Annaeo sal. What you bring up is one of my main point that I'm pushing for realization for years. The lacking of a proper equestrian order in Nova Roma was one of the reasons why I declined my senatorial appointment last October. Furthermore, the thing was recently discussed in the Consular Office, so you are totally actual to bring up the question of the ordo equester. However, before we start a discussion about the equestrian order in this forum, we should have to have clear picture of what equestrian order was in the old republic. You wrote: >>> However, now that I think on it, I am not aware of Nova Roma having any sort of equestrian class. <<< Firstly, you must know that Nova Roma *has* an ordo equester, a group of public merchants, currently made up of one member: http://novaroma.org/nr/Equestrian_order_(Nova_Roma) There are two problems with the current system of equestrians in Nova Roma. The first is that this is unhistorical. The second is that it doesn't work. The equestrians weren't a group of merchants. Thy were the highest social class based on financial wealth except senators. Anybody who had a certain amount of money was included into the equestrian order. I can't write more currently, but as a brief summary let it be enough that the equestrian order had a history, that means, there were changes. Firstly it included the senators, later, after the Gracchi, senators were considered a separate order and no one could be senator and equestrian in the same time. And, furthermore, there were two levels of the equestrian orer: the "equites equo publico" and the "equites equo privato". The equestrians with public hourse were a limited group located into 18 centuriae, and not exceeding selected 1800 men. They were given a "public hourse" and were considered the proper and true equestrian order. Besides this, there was the class of the equestrians with private hourse and in this class there was included all Roman citizens having a certain amount of money: they did not get hourse from the state, and they weren't considered original equites. Slowly the difference between the two groups disappeared. As I have said, I can't write very long now, please visit the article and you will learn more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equestrian_(Roman) Now, I answer some points of yours, then I copy here what I wrote in the Consular Office list.   >>> If I am wrong forgive me, but if we do not have an equestrian class, may I suggest that we do something to change that? <<<< Yes, I fully agree that it must be changed. >>>> Whether it be awarded for a certain length of time membership in NR (as a plebian, I doubt patricians would want to 'downgrade') , or to any plebian who attains a curule magistracy, <<<< I think we should create a solution that is the closest possible to what was in Rome. Membership of equestrian order wasn't awarded as an insignia , and it was a *large* group, consisting mostly of those who DID NOT participated in politics. So awarding membership in the ordo equester to those who are elected to certain offices would be a huge departion from the mos maiorum... Let me share my ideas about what kind of ordo equester should we have below. You also say: >>> I would dearly love to see all three classes represented in Nova Roma. <<< No, it is a misunderstanding when you speak about patricians, plebeians and equestrians as the three classes of the Roman society. Plebeians and patricians weren't "classes". Equestrians were. An equestrian could be either plebeian or patrician. Patricians were native-born aristocracy in the ancient Rome, descended from the earliest inhabitants of the city. Plebeians were originally immigrants to Rome after its foundation and inhabitants of conquered territories around the city. The distinction was all about descendance, and not about wealth. There were poor patricians and wealthy equestrians. There were equestrian plebeians who were much more richer than some patricians who weren't equestrians. The three social orders of the ancient Roman republic were originally two: 1) equestrians and 2) common people. From the Gracchi there were three social orders indeed: 1) senatorial order, 2) equestrian order, and 3) common people. This latter was called later and sometimes "ordo plebeius", but this was different from the original plebeians because not necessarily was everybody plebeian in it, and most of the equestrians and senators were plebeians, too. So, being patrician or plebeian is thing (decided by birth), and being member of the senatorial or equestrian order or belonging to the common people is another thing (decided by weath and censorial decision). >>> Seems like a rather large omission for the reincarnation of the Roman Republic. <<< Yes. You are very right! So as I have said, let me share my views on this: I suggested a solution many times that involved - the question of the equestrian order - century allocations and classis-system based on century points - double level taxation system with a higher and a lower tax rate - a new category for public merchants Just very, very briefly, a summary of my plan (I have written longer articles on this, I will post them later, because it's very late here): I think that we should re-create a much more authentic and historical ordo equester, based on financial contribution to Nova Roma. Roman equestrians were the richest class of Rome, that could be represented in Nova Roma by creating a new kind of equestrian order for those who pay a higher tax rate. The higher tax rate would be two or three times higher than the basic tax rate. Who choose to pay that receive the equestrian rank. People usually like to attain honorary title, so in my opinion, just only the fact that they would receive the title "Knight"/"Eques" would bring us many citizens who choose to pay the higher tax. We could add additional advantages to that ordo equester. I'm of the opinion that only equestrian should be allowed to run for magistracies and they should be allowed to use the future JSTOR application given by Nova Roma, *but* these are jus my thoughts, so the reform has not necessarily containing these suggestions of privileges. This whole reform would mean a little re-organization of centuries and tribes, reducing their number and sorted in a more historical proportion approximately in a 18-4-4-4-6+1structure, that would mean 18 centuries - to the first class, because in the antiquity there were 98 4 c - to the second class, because in the antiquity there were 20 4 c - to the third class, because in the antiquity there were 20 4 c - to the fourth class, because in the antiquity there were 20 6 c - to the fifth class, because in the antiquity there were 30 1 c - to the capite censi, because in the antiquity there was 1 century. You can make a calculation that this system retains the ancient ratios as much as possible. All equestrian in the new system would be placed in the first class. The current unhistorical equestrian "order" (one member) would be re-titled as "mercatores publici", official merchants of NR.

Salve Regule,

Titus Annaeus Regulus <t.annaevsregvlvs@...> writes:

> However, now that I think on it, I am not aware of Nova Roma having
> any sort of equestrian class.

http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Ordo_Equester_(Nova_Roma)

Yes, we have Equestrians.

Vale,

CN-EQVIT-MARINVS

Salvete,

For some reason I always thought members of the Equestrian should have to own horses as a requirement, hehe.

Valete
- Annia Minucia Marcella

http://minucia.ciarin.com

Gnaeus Equitius Marinus wrote:

Salve Regule,

Titus Annaeus Regulus <t.annaevsregvlvs@ ymail.com> writes:

> However, now that I think on it, I am not aware of Nova Roma having
> any sort of equestrian class.

http://www.novaroma .org/nr/Ordo_ Equester_(Nova_Roma)

Yes, we have Equestrians.

Vale,

CN-EQVIT-MARINVS

Salvete,

I have no idea where the ideas of a "search for purity" are coming
from, I never suggested that. I know for a fact Rome had influences
from the Etruscans and the Greeks of Magna Graecia as well as the
surrounding tribes, however that still doesn't mean we should go willy
nilly and adopt Indra and Shiva and Devi into Roman Religion because
they have roots in PIE. Yes, Zeus and Jupiter have their roots in
Dyaus Pitar, however the history and evolution that occurred between
the original Dyaus Pitar and the end results of Jupiter and Zeus is
the fork in the road. Sure there are X number of things about Them
that are similar and that we can say hail from that original concept
of Dyaus Pitar, however there are certainly vast differences as well
that make Zeus uniquely and independently Greek just as Jupiter is
uniquely and independently Roman. Is Zeus Meilikhios and Jupiter
Capitolinus the same deity, is Hera Argeia and Juno Populonia the same
Goddess? My answer is no, plain and simple, if cult defines deity
then by default They are separate and individual entities; however
They do share that evolutionary form from Dyaus Pitar and so on, but
even that isn't enough to supplant the qualities made apparent by
those cult distinctions.

Also, I never said Cato's posts were bad or not informative, they are,
and its very nice of him to take up when/where Piscinus must take a
leave (May Salus be with him!). I just find for the sake of the
Religio Romana that they are somewhat misleading, especially if we
have minors, non-Romans, non-Pagans, and even non-Roman Pagans reading
them.

BTW, I'm glad to hear you made that order Cato! ;-)

In Pax Deorum,
Titus Iulius Nero

----- Original Message -----

From: phoenixfyre17

To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 11:00 PM

Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Religio Hellenica?

Salvete,

I have no idea where the ideas of a "search for purity" are coming
from, I never suggested that. I know for a fact Rome had influences
from the Etruscans and the Greeks of Magna Graecia as well as the
surrounding tribes, however that still doesn't mean we should go willy
nilly and adopt Indra and Shiva and Devi into Roman Religion because
they have roots in PIE. Yes, Zeus and Jupiter have their roots in
Dyaus Pitar, however the history and evolution that occurred between
the original Dyaus Pitar and the end results of Jupiter and Zeus is
the fork in the road. Sure there are X number of things about Them
that are similar and that we can say hail from that original concept
of Dyaus Pitar, however there are certainly vast differences as well
that make Zeus uniquely and independently Greek just as Jupiter is
uniquely and independently Roman. Is Zeus Meilikhios and Jupiter
Capitolinus the same deity, is Hera Argeia and Juno Populonia the same
Goddess? My answer is no, plain and simple, if cult defines deity
then by default They are separate and individual entities; however
They do share that evolutionary form from Dyaus Pitar and so on, but
even that isn't enough to supplant the qualities made apparent by
those cult distinctions.

Also, I never said Cato's posts were bad or not informative, they are,
and its very nice of him to take up when/where Piscinus must take a
leave (May Salus be with him!). I just find for the sake of the
Religio Romana that they are somewhat misleading, especially if we
have minors, non-Romans, non-Pagans, and even non-Roman Pagans reading
them.

BTW, I'm glad to hear you made that order Cato! ;-)

In Pax Deorum,
Titus Iulius Nero

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Orange vous informe que cet e-mail a été contrôlé par l'anti-virus mail.
Aucun virus connu à ce jour par nos services n'a été détecté.

Salve Marcella

Given the size of most urban homes now, its going to be a bit hard to fit
them and the car in the garage. If no garage, the closet?

Vale bene
Caesar

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Annia Minucia Marcella" <annia@...>
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 2:22 PM
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Equestrian Class?

> Salvete,
>
> For some reason I always thought members of the Equestrian should have
> to own horses as a requirement, hehe.
>
> Valete
> - Annia Minucia Marcella
>
> http://minucia.ciarin.com
>
>
>
> Gnaeus Equitius Marinus wrote:
>>
>> Salve Regule,
>>
>> Titus Annaeus Regulus <t.annaevsregvlvs@...
>> <mailto:t.annaevsregvlvs%40ymail.com>> writes:
>>
>> > However, now that I think on it, I am not aware of Nova Roma having
>> > any sort of equestrian class.
>>
>> http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Ordo_Equester_
>> <http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Ordo_Equester_>(Nova_Roma)
>>
>> Yes, we have Equestrians.
>>
>> Vale,
>>
>> CN-EQVIT-MARINVS
>>
>>
>

Cn. Iulius Caesar aed. Quiritibus sal.

CURULE AEDILE EDICT 62-03: PROROGATION OF EDICTS

I declare the following edicts are prorogued and shall be considered to
still be in force and valid, pending the conclusion of the review of
these matters currently underway, the issuance of further edicts on
these matters and the cancellation of the below.

Aedilitas curulis MMDCCLXI - Edict n°61-01
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/message/54508

and

Aedilitas curulis MMDCCLXI - Edict n°61-03
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/message/54670

Cato omnibus in foro SPD

Salvete!

Valerius Potitus and Varro bring up a point worth considering: what
did the actual ancients who worshipped these deities think? What do
their writers say about their gods and the gods of the Greeks?

One striking example:

"The Arcadians have a legend that this goddess was the daughter of
Pallas, the son of Lycaon, and that she received those honors from
mankind which she now enjoys at the desire of Athena, with whom she
had been reared. For they say that Athena, as soon as she was born,
was handed over to Pallas by Zeus and that she was reared by him
till she grew up. They built also a temple to Ceres, to whom by the
ministry of women they offered sacrifices without wine, according to
the custom of the Greeks, none of which rites our time has changed.
Moreover, they assigned a precinct to the Equestrian Neptune and
instituted the festival called by the Arcadians Hippocrateia and by
the Romans Consualia, during which it is customary among the latter
for the horses and mules to rest from work and to have their heads
crowned with flowers. They also consecrated many other precincts,
altars and images of the gods and instituted purifications and
sacrifices according to the customs of their own country, which
continued to be performed down to my day in the same manner...It was
some of his followers who, begging Hercules to dismiss them from the
expedition, remained in this region and built a town on a suitable
hill, which they found at a distance of about three stades from
Pallantium. This is now called the Capitoline hill, but by the men
of that time the Saturnian hill, or, in Greek, the hill of Cronus." -
Dionysius of Halicarnassus, "Roman Antiquities" I.33.94-95, 34.1

another:

"It is no wonder, therefore, that the ancients looked upon this
country [Italy] as sacred to Saturn, since they esteemed this god to
be the giver and accomplisher of all happiness to mankind,— whether
he ought to be called Cronus, as the Greeks deem fitting, or Saturn,
as do the Romans, — and regarded him as embracing the whole
universe, by whichever name he is called...But concerning the
sacrifices and the other rites which the Roman people perform
according to the manner both of the Greeks and of their own country
I shall speak in another book" - op.cit. I.38.1,4

Throughout his work, Dionysius blends and integrates the two
religious traditions with an ease and matter-of-factness that bely
any fear that people will take offense.

Valete!

Cato

Salve Caesar,

Gnaeus Iulius Caesar <gn_iulius_caesar@...> writes:

[About members of the Ordo Equester having horses]

> Given the size of most urban homes now, its going to be a bit hard to fit
> them and the car in the garage. If no garage, the closet?

Perhaps the Senate could provide them with My Little Ponies(tm).

Vale,

CN-EQVIT-MARINVS

Salve Marine

<LOL> Visions of our august citizens explaining to their spouses why
they had received a My Little Pony kit in the mail as they sit at their
tables grooming them... priceless

Vale bene
Caesar

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

>
> Salve Caesar,
>
> Gnaeus Iulius Caesar <gn_iulius_caesar@...> writes:
>
>

Cn. Iulius Caesar aed. Quiritibus sal.

CURULE AEDILE EDICT 62-04: APPOINTMENT OF SCRIBAE

I hereby appoint the following two citizens as scribes, to be assigned
to one or more of the five work groups within the Cohors Aedilicia. No
oath is required of them. Further appointments may follow.

Gaia Maria Caeca
Gaius Sertorius Baeticus

Maior Catoni Neroni omnibusque spd;
Cato, that's excellent, good for you, and for everyone else Beard
& North "Religions of Rome" can be ordered free from your local
library via Library Loan. It's extremely helpful in understanding
Rome, politics and religion.
You have to be careful in trying to understand Romans, by looking
at intellectuals. Romans revered Numa and his ties to Pythagoras, but
Romans were suspicious of philosophers! This is why a knowledge of
Roman culture is so important.

Let's look at how the Romans dealt with the Greek import: the cult of
Apollo. This was definitely an import; during a time of trouble.

Apollo was brought to Rome to heal an epidemic. He was always
worshipped as Apollo Medicus, a healing god by the Romans and was
never terribly popular until the time of Augustus, when Augustus made
hime fashionable.

He was worshipped according to the ritus graecus, the Greek rite. Now
this was not how the Greeks worshipped Apollo, it was the Roman take
on Greek worship. Meaning head were uncovered and you wore a wreath.
And a collegia was founded with hymns in Greek. It's the Roman
conception of things.

Iuppiter to Romans, did not mean what Zeus did to Greeks or Ba'al to
the Syrians [Jupiter Dolichensus] if you need a modern example just
think how differentely Jews, Christians, Muslims think of their
'god'. It's very different;-)

If we understand Roman culture we can understand Roman attitudes to
the gods. Our problem is a cultural one and working to acquiring a
Roman mindset is what we all are all about.
optime valete
M. Hortensia Maior


- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gaius Equitius Cato" <mlcinnyc@...>
wrote:

>
> Cato omnibus in foro SPD
>
> Salvete!
>
> Valerius Potitus and Varro bring up a point worth considering: what
> did the actual ancients who worshipped these deities think? What do
> their writers say about their gods and the gods of the Greeks?
>
>

Salvete,

>>when you say "are not the same" I don't understand

on what level? historical, theological, sociological or as two
separate beings like you and i?<<

All of the above.

>>is the Virgin mary of lourdes the same than the Virgin mary of

Fatima?<<

Yes they are the same, however that statement is not equivalent to
the situation here between Jupiter vs Zeus. The Roman equivalent of
that statement would be: is Jupiter Capitolinus and Jupiter Stator
the same deity? The answer is yes, because at the core They are
both aspects of Jupiter.

In your given statement, the identity of the Virgin Mary is not in
question, a closer example to whats going on in this discussion
would be is the Virgin Mary the same as Kuan Yin? The Virgin Mary
and Kuan Yin are very similar figures in iconography, symbolism,
purpose and function, yet they are from 2 different cultures and
religions.

>>If we understand Roman culture we can understand Roman attitudes to

the gods. Our problem is a cultural one and working to acquiring a
Roman mindset is what we all are all about.<<

YES MAIOR!!! YES!!!

In Pax Deorum,
Nero

Cato T. Annaeo Regulo omnibusque in foro SPD

Salve et salvete.

This is very interesting. Didn't the Equestrians buy their way into
the privilege? If so, maybe we could use a higher tax rate to assign
equites equo privato status to anyone willing to pay a higher tax,
while the People could vote on names submitted to them by the Senate
for recognition as equites equo publico, given as recognition for
specific service(s) to the Respublica?

Vale et valete,

Cato

Cato T. Iulio Neroni sal.

Salve Iulius Nero.

I think that you may be swinging the pendulum too far in the
opposite direction in your zeal. It is obvious from writings by
actual ancient Romans that there was considerable melding of at
least the two pantheons together; not just superficially but as
simply two different names for the same god.

Maior, I certainly respect scholarship and am excited to read the
book; however, isn't it a little more sensible at times to read what
actual Romans wrote than what someone today - no matter how
educated - thinks about what a Roman wrote?

A Roman, a Greek, and an Egyptian walk into a bar...


Valete!

cato

In a message dated 1/24/2009 7:17:58 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, t.annaevsregvlvs@... writes:

Furthermore, the thing was recently discussed in the Consular Office, so you are totally actual to bring up the question of the ordo equester.

However, before we start a discussion about the equestrian order in this forum, we should have to have clear picture of what equestrian order was in the old republic.

In Nova Roma, the horse owning class are merchants.  In the old Republic, it was any non Senator who could afford the upkeep of a horse.  They also made up the Legionary Cavalry, with 300 being assigned to each Roman legio.

 

Their horsemenship was so appalling (they often dismounted to fight) the Numidians and Liby Phoenician horse could run rings around them, so that as Rome conquered provinces they became obsolete, replaced by Spanish, Gallic, Germanic horse.   The last time they were called out was during the Spartican affair, by Crassius, who agreed to pay for their horses' upkeep, so desperate he was for cavalry.  Some 1000 showed (Appius).  When considering that Livy reported that at the height of the Second Punic war, 10,000 Equites were under arms, that was an huge drop off.

 

Q. Fabius Maximus

---

A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy steps!

Salve Cato,

>>It is obvious from *writings* by actual ancient Romans that there

was considerable melding of at least the two pantheons together; not
just superficially but as simply two different names for the same
god.<<

The entirety of Rome was not composed of philosophers and writers
either, so you are just as much far flung in one direction as you make
me.

In Pax Deorum,
Nero

----- Original Message -----

From: phoenixfyre17

To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2009 4:27 AM

Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Religio Hellenica

Salvete,

>>when you say "are not the same" I don't understand
on what level? historical, theological, sociological or as two
separate beings like you and i?<<

All of the above.

>>is the Virgin mary of lourdes the same than the Virgin mary of
Fatima?<<

Yes they are the same, however that statement is not equivalent to
the situation here between Jupiter vs Zeus. The Roman equivalent of
that statement would be: is Jupiter Capitolinus and Jupiter Stator
the same deity? The answer is yes, because at the core They are
both aspects of Jupiter.

In your given statement, the identity of the Virgin Mary is not in
question, a closer example to whats going on in this discussion
would be is the Virgin Mary the same as Kuan Yin? The Virgin Mary
and Kuan Yin are very similar figures in iconography, symbolism,
purpose and function, yet they are from 2 different cultures and
religions.

>>If we understand Roman culture we can understand Roman attitudes to
the gods. Our problem is a cultural one and working to acquiring a
Roman mindset is what we all are all about.<<

YES MAIOR!!! YES!!!

In Pax Deorum,
Nero

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Orange vous informe que cet e-mail a été contrôlé par l'anti-virus mail.
Aucun virus connu à ce jour par nos services n'a été détecté.

M. Moravius Piscinus cultoribus Deorum, Quiritibus et omnibus salutem
plurimam dicit: Curate ut valeatis.

Hodie est ante diem VIII Kalendas Februarias; haec dies comitialis
est: Paganalia

Magnas gratias vos ago. My thanks go out to all those who lent me
their prayers over the past couple of weeks.


"Pray to Tellus and Ceres for protection of seeds against birds."

"The feriae Sementivae is that day set by the pontifices; it was
named from 'sementis' (seeding), because it is entered upon for the
sake of the sowing." ~ M. Terrentius Varro, Lingua Latinae 6.26

The feriae Sementivae, or Sementinae, was a ritualized sowing of the
fields. In fact it is one of the very oldest known rituals in
Italy. Bronze Age petroglyphs in the Val Camonica show scenes of a
man plowing as a woman stands at the side with her arms raised in
prayer, women, or the vates, being the main priests of that time
period. These ritualized sowings were conducted on two dates, seven
days apart, for two early sowings. The dates were not fixed in the
calendar, but set by the pontifices in accordance to the weather.
The weather forecasts were determined by the rustic sidereal calendar
that looked at the rising and setting of certain stars. Here the
particular star that would have been associated with the commencement
of the feriae Sementina is Rigel.

"That day is set by the priests. Why are you looking for moveable
days in the calendar? Though the day of the feast is uncertain, its
time is known." ~ P. Ovidius Naso, Fasti, 1.659-661

"On the eight day before the calends of February the star that Tubero
calls Regia Stella sets in the morningin the breast of Leo." ~ C.
Plinius Secunda, Historia Naturalis 18.64

In the time of Ovid and Plinius, Rigel set just before dawn on what
was the night of 24/25. The date would be somewhat different today
because of the progression of the equinoxes and also because the
Romans used the Julian calendar by then rather than the Gregorian
that we use in our civil reckonings today. The Julian calendar
currently being 13 days behind the Gregorian means that 24/25 January
by the Julian will not arrive until the night of 6/7 February on the
Gregorian calendar. And the setting of Rigel just before dawn should
arrive, by my crude calculations, on the morning of 9 February. Thus
today we mark the traditional dates for the Paganalia, which is
another name for the feriae Sementivae, and wait until next month to
celebrate the feriae Sementivae as set by the Pontifices in
accordance with the setting of Rigel.

Like the Compitalia, the feriae Sementinae began as a rural festival,
the feriae conceptivae. In the countryside they became the Paganalia
where neighbors of rural districts (pagus/pagi) held a spring sowing
festival. In the City, dependent on produce from far distant wheat
fields, the feriae Sementina made a special sacrifice of a pregnant
sow to appease Tellus and Ceres.

When the seed has been sown and the land is productive.
You bullocks, crowned with garlands, stand at the full trough,
Your labour will return with the warmth of spring.
Let the farmer hang the toil-worn plough on its post:
The wintry earth dreaded its every wound.
Steward, let the soil rest when the sowing is done,
And let the men who worked the soil rest too.
Let the village keep festival: farmers, purify the village,
And offer the yearly cakes on the village hearths.
Propitiate Tellus and Ceres, the mothers of the crops,
With their own kernels, and a pregnant sow's entrails.
Ceres and Terra fulfill a common function:
One supplies the chance to bear, the other the soil.

~ P. Ovidius Naso, Fasti, 1.662-674


We get some idea of the earlier sowing festivals first with Varro:

"The elevated soil that lies between two furrows is called
the 'porca,' as though it were a sacrificial pig, and seeds
were 'sacrificed' to these wheat fields, just as they said 'to
sacrifice' when they gave the entrails of sacrificial victims to the
Gods." ~ M. Terrentius Varro, Rerum Rustica 1.29

In Praeneste, in the Sabine territories, and among the Samnites, two
special priests, called Semones, performed the sowing ritual. At
Praeneste the Semones were related to the semi-divine twin Depidii
shepherds who raised the hero-founder Caeculus. Caeculus, like
Servius Tullius was said to have been conceived from a spark of
Volcanus as his mother sat by the hearth. She became pregnant, so the
story went, when a spark fell down into her bosum. His mother exposed
him by a sacred spring at the Temple of Jupiter. Two girls who were
sent to fetch water found the baby Caeculus. They brought him to the
Depidii brothers. As in the legends of Romulus and Remus, Caeculus
gathered a band of men around him who engaged in banditry. Caeculus
invited the people of a nearby village to a festival and asked that
they join him to found a new city. When they ridiculed his claim to
divine parentage, he called upon his Father for a sign and Vulcanus
sent a ring of fire around the assembled men. Among the Sabines Semo
Santcus, the "Holy Sower," was identified as a young version of
Jupiter or as a son of Jupiter instead. At Rome He became Sancus
Fidius and was later identified with Hercules.

At times the Semones were identified as Lares paganales, protective
spirits of the pagus fields. Pliny said of Tutilina that it
was "forbidden by the rules of our religion to even name (her)
beneath a roof (H.N. 18.52)." The same was true of Semo Sanctus as it
was for Seia and Seius, Tutilina and Tutanus, and Segesta. Rustic
deities related to sowing, growing, and gathering grain remained out
in the fields. Even when Semo Sanctus was taken at Rome to be a God
of Oaths, His temple was required to have a hole in the roof so that
oaths would only be given beneath an open sky..

From what Varro says of the seed being broadcast as a sort of
offering made to the fields, we can imagine the Semones priests
offering a sacrifice, probably that of a pregnant sow, and then
casting the seeds before the sacrifice is fully extended over the
altar fire. We find something similar at Vinalia where the flamen
Dialis first orders the sacrifice made, then makes the symbolic first
harvest of a bunch of grapes, also offered in sacrifice to Jupiter,
before the viscera of the sacrificial animal was stretched over the
altar.

In making the sacrifices, we have in Servius Honorus a quote from
Fabius Pictor on "the Gods that were enumerated as the flamen Ceralis
invoked them, while making sacrifice to Telluri and Cereri, are
Veruactorem, Reparatorem, Imporcitorem, Insitorem, Obaratorem,
Occatorem, Sarritorem, Subruncinatorem, Messorem, Conuectorem,
Conditorem, Promitorem (Serv., ad Georg. 1, 21)."

In sowing seed, whatever seed was being sown, we can also imagine the
Semones praying in this manner:

Hoc rapum mihi vico sereo.

"I sow this rape seed for myself and for my neighbors (Pliny, Hist.
Nat. 24.116)."

At Rome "fraters Arvales was the name given to those who perform
public rites to the end that the ploughlands may bear fruits (Varro,
Lingua Latinae 5.85)." This reference to fraters Arvales should not
be confused with the Augustan sodalitas of the same nameWhich was
wholely a political fraternity whose rites were conducted solely to
secure the health of the emperor. It is uncertain whether Sermones
were ever at Rome, but since it was a practice that can be traced to
Sabines, it was likely introduced to Rome following the Sabine War,
and then projected back in time to Titus Tatius and Romulus, and
later still interpreted as originating with Romulus and Remus.

Thus, while not perfectly known, enough information is available to
reconstruct a ceremony similar to what was used for Paganalia.


Our thought for today, taken from Marcus Aurelius, Meditations 7.49:

"Consider the past; such great changes of political supremacies. Thou
mayest foresee also the things which will be. For they will certainly
be of like form, and it is not possible that they should deviate from
the order of the things which take place now: accordingly to have
contemplated human life for forty years is the same as to have
contemplated it for ten thousand years. For what more wilt thou see?"

Cn. Lentulus T. Annaeo s. p. d. Thank you for your additions to my idea, Regule, I agree with them because they were in my original proposal (few years ago) but I skipped them now to simplify the description. It is good to see how our ideas are the same!   >>>> Regulus(2): I fully support any reasonable criterion to determine admission to the ordo, so long as they create a working entity with enough members to function as it did in ancient times (other than the horses, though the My Little Pony(tm) idea gave me a long laugh). <<< Yes, thanks to Cn. Marinus! ;-) The equestrian order must be something big, composed of the approximately the half of our current assidui. If we try to follow the ancient republic and differentiate equites equo publico and equites equo privato, there will be needed other changes in our social system, too. >>> Regulus(2): Plebian and patrician were indeed two separate castes. You were born into one or the other, and remained there for life (barring some unforeseen occurrence like the end of the Republic and Augustus). The three classes are the Senatorial order, Equestrian order, and Common people. I do see I got the 'caste' and 'class' ideas a little mixed up in my haste. All the same, the equestrian order could be an excellent way to reward actives cives. <<< Yes. And what you mixed up is a very common mistake everywhere. Almost everybody thinks patricians were the richest men in Rome, members of the senate etc, then equestrians the middle class, and finally plebeians the poorest ones. Even in the Constitution of Nova Roma there is this confusion, and officially, by our Constitution, Nova Roma has three "orders": "plebeian", "equestrian" and "patrician", whereas it should be two castes, plebeian and patrician, and three orders, senatorial order, equestrian order and common people. Infact, the last is not even an order: they are the "remainder". >>> Perhaps something could be instituted similar to the Roman Republic. There they had the Equo privato and Equo publico. The Equo publico was in higher esteem than the Equo privato and their functions were very slightly different. I would make Equo privato open to your higher tax level system, but I would dearly love to see some sort of title to recognize those who positively contribute to Nova Roma. <<< As I indicated in the beginning of my message, I agree with this and this was part of my original idea. There are too few ways in Nova Roma to award a citizen who contributes so much to the republic, our society certainly needs such things. >>> Those cives who the censors identify as making significant contributions to Nova Roma could be elevated to the status of Equo publico. Nova Roma benefits whether it be from positive contributions from cives, or from more tax income, with nobody being necessarily excluded because of their financial situation. What do you think? <<< I totally agree with you. But I wouldn't say that anybody would be excluded because of his financial situation... To pay twice as much money as we pay currently? Even a child could pay it from his pocket money... Cura, ut valeas! Cn. Lentulus

----- Original Message -----

From: Titus Annaeus Regulus

To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2009 5:56 PM

Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Religio Hellenica

Salve Varro,

 

From  PIE point of view I don't doubt that they would consider both Jupiter and Zeus latter-day interpretations of Dyaus Piter.

 

However from a Roman point of view, I would have to say that because of the long period of separation between the various religions, they had developed into different figures. Imagine instead of saying hello to yourself, you had somehow been created twice; one of you raised in Rome, and one in Greece. While both are yourself from an existential point of view, your different experiences would have created a different person in each scenario. While they undeniably share a common root, divergent evolution has created two separate (though similar) pantheons.

 

Imagine if people began looking back to common primate ancestors of both hominids and other primates and saying there is no difference. Are we and gorillas the same? We definitely come from the same source, and yet our different experiences after that common source have defined us into two separate groups.

 

Vale,

Titus Annaeus Regulus

From: philippe cardon

Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2009 5:35 AM

To: Nova-Roma@yahoogrou ps.com

Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Religio Hellenica

IMHO zeus and jupiter are two epithetes for the same god as they are both aspects and evolution form the Sky-God of the PIE

 

THE problem asie with germanic pantheon when Wotan/Odin is the chief God but it is Yr who is the ol Sky-God an actual go of war!

 

so each people had understood the same gods as they could or the Gods had given different peoples different knowledges of them but i can't see in the heaven Zeus who meet Jupiter or Tyr and say hello!  it is just like i should say hello to my picture in the mirror

 

but all that is IMHO

Varro

 

----- Original Message -----

From: phoenixfyre17

To: Nova-Roma@yahoogrou ps.com

Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2009 4:27 AM

Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Religio Hellenica

Salvete,

>>when you say "are not the same" I don't understand
on what level? historical, theological, sociological or as two
separate beings like you and i?<<

All of the above.

>>is the Virgin mary of lourdes the same than the Virgin mary of
Fatima?<<

Yes they are the same, however that statement is not equivalent to
the situation here between Jupiter vs Zeus. The Roman equivalent of
that statement would be: is Jupiter Capitolinus and Jupiter Stator
the same deity? The answer is yes, because at the core They are
both aspects of Jupiter.

In your given statement, the identity of the Virgin Mary is not in
question, a closer example to whats going on in this discussion
would be is the Virgin Mary the same as Kuan Yin? The Virgin Mary
and Kuan Yin are very similar figures in iconography, symbolism,
purpose and function, yet they are from 2 different cultures and
religions.

>>If we understand Roman culture we can understand Roman attitudes to
the gods. Our problem is a cultural one and working to acquiring a
Roman mindset is what we all are all about.<<

YES MAIOR!!! YES!!!

In Pax Deorum,
Nero

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ---
Orange vous informe que cet e-mail a été contrôlé par l'anti-virus mail.
Aucun virus connu à ce jour par nos services n'a été détecté.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Orange vous informe que cet e-mail a été contrôlé par l'anti-virus mail.
Aucun virus connu à ce jour par nos services n'a été détecté.

L. Livia Plauta omnibus S.P.D.

I totally support Lentulus' proposal, and I think attention should be
paid particularly to his proposal of reforming tribes and centuries,
because the current system we have creates a lot of problems, which
could be solved this way.

Optime valete,
Livia

>
> Cn. Lentulus consulibus et tribunis plebis et omnibus Quiritinus

sal.

>
>
> After my previous e-mails, I summarize my idea so that can be seen

what effect it would make on the Nova Roman society.

>  
>
> CAPITE CENSI, ASSIDUI AND EQUITES
>
>
> I propose no change on the status of the assidui and capite

censi. They are good as they are currently. One part of the assidui,
however, the most enthusiast members of Nova Roma, who are willing to
contribute more either financially or by activities, should be given
a possibility of being awarded and to become equestrians, "equites".
This way NR would have a

> Two-Tier Taxation System. Higher taxes for the 1st class (it's the

OE)

> and lower taxes for the classes 2-5.
>
> Those assidui who would pay a higher level of the current taxes,

(two, maximum three times more than the basic taxes) would
automatically classified as "equites equo privato", equestrians with
private hourse. The category of "equites equo publico" would be
reserved for those specially distingushed by the censores.

>
> In
> this manner all people in NR who presently or in the future make

policy

> for NR (senators and other active citizens) probably would belong to
> the Ordo Equester, and the Ordo Equester would be a real entity in

NR. This will mean more

> income for our republic, and -- that is the most important -- more
> authenticity with the ancient Rome. At present only the capite censi
> "class out-of-class" is distinguished from the 5 classes. In this

system

> I propose, the 1st class, the classes 2-5, and the capite censi
> all would be distinguished.   And how to
> distinguish the classes 2-5?
>
> With the century-point system: just
> like the members of the 1st class, the members of the classes 2-5

would

> be required to have a certain number of century points in order to

be admitted into one of the classes.

>   
> REQUIREMENTS TO THE CLASSES
>
>
> Here I try to create a picture about my proposed system, so that

you can see what requirements should each class satisfy and how this
is combined with the Two-Tier Taxation System and with the century
point system.

>
> The Nova Roman society would have the following stratification:
>
> (ATTENTION: the century points below are just examples, they have

to be refined!)   I. out-of-class a) capite censi -- who don't pay
taxes   II. The classes 5-2b) the 5th class -- who pay the lower
taxes and have cpt 0-15 (e.g.) c) the 4th class -- who pay the lower
taxes and have cpt 15-30 (e.g.) d) the 3rd class -- who pay the
lower taxes and have cpt 30-45 (e.g.) c) the 2nd class -- who pay
the lower taxes and have cpt 45-60 (e.g.)   III. The 1st class
e) the unofficial Ordo Equester -- who pay the higher taxes and have
cpt 60- (e.g.) d) the official Ordo Equester -- who pay the higher
taxes and have cpt 60- (e.g.) and are in the Equestrian Centuries.
f) the Ordo Senatorius -- who pay the higher taxes and have cpt 100-
(e.g.) and are members of the Senate (-OR-: If there is resistance to
require senators to pay the higher taxes, the only requirement can be
membership in the Senate.)

>
>
> EQUESTRIAN CENTURIES AND REORGANIZATION OF CENTURIES AND TRIBES
>
>   This
> system needs the establishment of the Equestrian Centuries in which
> there are the members of the official Ordo Equester, but I think

that it mustn't

> mean the establishment of additional centuries in NR. In the

Equestrian

> Centuries (the official Ordo Equester) there will be those non-

senator members of

> the 1st class who are considered the noblest citizen of NR by the
> Censors regarding his contributions, century-points, activities,

moral...

>
> In the same time I would like to note here that the whole system of

our centuries and tribes should take place as time as this reform
would be accepted.

>
> Our troublesome elections demonstrated that we have serious

problems with the size and the number of our centuries and tribes,
and most of the votes are tie and all tie votes must be decided by
lot. This means that if we won't have fewer centuries and tribes, our
elections will continue to be decided by lottery!!

>
> The number of the tribes should be reduced to 17 (as they were

until 387 BCE), instead of the current 35. It would be as historical
as the current number, but more accomodated to our size and
necessities.

>
> This would mean a little re-organization of centuries, too,

reducing their number and sorted in a more historical

> proportion approximately in a 18, 4, 4, 4, 6+1structure, that would

mean. All equestrians in the new system would be placed in the first
class, but the "equites equo publico" would be in separate centuries
because this is how they were allocated in the antiquity:

>
>
> 18 centuries - to the first class and equestrians, because in the

antiquity there were 98

> (among these centuries there would be approximately 4-8 equestrian

centuries for the "equites equo publico", position awarded by the
censors.);

> 4 centuries - to the
> second class, because in the antiquity there were 20;
> 4 centuries - to the third class, because in the antiquity there

were 20;

> 4 centuries - to the fourth class, because in the antiquity there

were 20;

> 6 centuries - to the fifth class, because in the antiquity there

were 30;

> 1 century - to the capite censi, because in the antiquity there was

1 century.

>
> You can make a calculation that this system retains the ancient

ratios as much as possible.

>
>
> MERCATORES PUBLICI - Members of the current Ordo Equesters
>  
>
> And what
> about who are presently equestrians? I think that they are

equestrians

> based on a false conception. However there was a good idea to
> emphasize who trade with Roman matter: they should be considered

also

> in the future as official merchants of NR, as "mercatores publici".

Of course,

> if they pay the higher taxes and obtain the certain number of

century

> points 1st class requires they remain equestrian too -- except all
> those who become senators.  
>
> LOWER TAXES - HIGHER TAXES
>
>
> As for the difference of the lower taxes and higher taxes:  

Lower

> taxes can be the same or (!) even lower than the present taxes in

NR -- but just very

> lightly! E.g. if one pays 10$, his future taxes (if he decides to be
> member of the 5-2 classes) would be 7$ (only e.g.)
> Higher
> taxes should be duplex or (!) triplex of the lower tax. So this

person in the example

> if wants to be an equestrian he must pay 14$ and achieve the certain
> cpt (in that example 60 ctps).  
>
> THIS SYSTEM WOULD BRING THE FOLLOWING ADVANTAGES:
>
>   1)
> Citizens who don't pay taxes because they feel too much will have an
> other opportunity to pay a lower tax: more citizen paying taxes:

more

> income in the treasury;
>
> 2) Citizens of the Ordo Equester must pay duplex taxes: more

income in the treasury;

>
> 3)
> If a citizen wants to be a magistrate, must be in the 1st class and

pay

> higher taxes.
> One who pay more money will care better his obligation
> and less will leave the organization he spent lot of money for;
>
> 4) Ordo equester will be a great and real entity within NR;
>
> 5)
> Citizen will be encouraged to collect century points to advance in

the

> classes. So citizens will be encouraged to be more active;
>
> 6) Who presently are members of the Ordo Equester will remain in

an emphasized status as "mercatores publici";

>
> 7) Our republic will be more historical, more correct, more

Roman.  

>
> I have worked out more details of this plan and if you have

questions about this idea I'm ready to answer to any question.  

>
>
>
> Gnaeus Cornelius Lentulus,
> P O N T I F E X
> SACERDOS CONCORDIAE
> ------------------------------------------
> Legatus Pro Praetore Provinciae Pannoniae
> Sacerdos Provinciae Pannoniae
> Interpres Linguae Hungaricae
> Accensus Consulum M. Curiatii Complutensis et M. Iulii Severi
> Scriba Praetoris P. Memmii Albucii
> Scriba Censorum Ti. Galerii Paulini et C. Popillii Laenatis
> Scriba Interpretis Linguae Latinae A. Tulliae Scholasticae
> -------------------------------------------
> Magister Sodalitatis Latinitatis
> Dominus Factionis Russatae
>

Cato omnibusque in foro SPD

Salve et salvete.

No, Nero, the "entirety" of Rome was not. But I think it hasty to simply dismiss an actual
ancient writer speaking to precisely this point. When he basically says, "Saturn or
Chronos, whichever name you want to call him", I think that's a pretty strong indication
that they were, in the minds of his readers, equivalent - or at least that the similarities
between the two are so strong that they are equivalent de facto if not de jure.

When trying to understand the mindset of the ancients I will take the words of the
ancients over the most scrupulous modern scholarship trying to reconstruct it. It is a
fundamental part of an historian's job not to overlay modern scruples, mores, or
accretions onto an ancient event or concept.

To Regulus: ook ook :)

I understand the mirror analogy, but would only say that to the worshippers, the inner
turmoil of a god's self-identification might not be nearly as important as how he actually
acts; and in that, at least the great Twelve seem to be basically identical in each pantheon.
So the effect of their deity is the same on humanity, whether or not peculiar specifics of
their inner beings are not. I might bring in another analogy, famous for its longevity in
our Respublica: if you want to get the sun off your head, a hat with a cotton lining acts
exactly the same as a hat with a linen lining. The subtle differences between cotton and
linen are not of the first importance, the act of relieving your head of the sun's heat is.

Valete bene!

Cato

L. Livia Plauta omnibus S.P.D.

I'm sorry, but I have to agree with Cato and Varro on this matter.

I haven't read the wealth of literature on Religio that Maior has
read (going to order the whole lot soon), but I have recently read an
updated and comprehensive book about the history of Sardinia
(important to me because my mother is from there).

According to the book, the cult of the punic god Melqart was
widespread in Sardinia, which was mithically founded by this same
god's son, Sardus.
Melqart was first identified by the Greeks as Herakles, then
consequently by the Romans as Hercules. The book (which is in
Budapest, so I can't use it now for reference), mentions that in
Augustus' time the pontifices not only officially identified Hercules
with Herakles, but a host of other roman gods with their greek and
punic counterparts.

So, whatever ones' opinions are from an academic point of view, from
a religious point of view the matter has been settled long ago, and
it would be bad form to second-guess the pontifices of Augustus'
times.

Optime valete,
Livia

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gaius Equitius Cato"
<mlcinnyc@...> wrote:

>
> Cato omnibusque in foro SPD
>
> Salve et salvete.
>
> No, Nero, the "entirety" of Rome was not. But I think it hasty to

simply dismiss an actual

> ancient writer speaking to precisely this point. When he basically

says, "Saturn or

> Chronos, whichever name you want to call him", I think that's a

pretty strong indication

> that they were, in the minds of his readers, equivalent - or at

least that the similarities

> between the two are so strong that they are equivalent de facto if

not de jure.

>
> When trying to understand the mindset of the ancients I will take

the words of the

> ancients over the most scrupulous modern scholarship trying to

reconstruct it. It is a

> fundamental part of an historian's job not to overlay modern

scruples, mores, or

> accretions onto an ancient event or concept.
>
> To Regulus: ook ook :)
>
> I understand the mirror analogy, but would only say that to the

worshippers, the inner

> turmoil of a god's self-identification might not be nearly as

important as how he actually

> acts; and in that, at least the great Twelve seem to be basically

identical in each pantheon.

> So the effect of their deity is the same on humanity, whether or

not peculiar specifics of

> their inner beings are not. I might bring in another analogy,

famous for its longevity in

> our Respublica: if you want to get the sun off your head, a hat

with a cotton lining acts

> exactly the same as a hat with a linen lining. The subtle

differences between cotton and

> linen are not of the first importance, the act of relieving your

head of the sun's heat is.

>
> Valete bene!
>
> Cato
>

Cato omnibus in foro SPD

Salvete omnes!

"On the eight day before the kalends of February the star that Tubero
calls Regia Stella sets in the morning in the breast of Leo." -
Pliny, "Natural History" 18.64

"First he [Herakles] was assigned to fetch the skin of the Nemeian
lion, an invulnerable animal sired by Typhon...He then went to Nemea,
found the lion, and shot it first with arrows. But when he knew for
sure it was invulnerable, he picked up his club and started after it.
It escaped into a double-mouthed cave, but Herakles blocked up one of
the mouths, and ran in after the creature through the other. He
encircled its neck with his arm, and by squeezing choked it to death.
He then draped it over his shoulders and took it back to Kleonai." -
Pseudo-Apollodorus, Bibliotheca 2.74-76

"The Nemeian Lion whom Hera, the queenly wife of Zeus, trained up and
settled among the hills of Nemeia, to be a plague to mankind. There
he preyed upon the tribes of the indwelling people, and was as a king
over Tretos and Apesas and Nemeia. Nevertheless, the force of strong
Herakles subdued him." - Hesiod, Theogony 327ff

"The first Labour which he [Herakles] undertook was the slaying of
the Lion in Nemea. This was a beast of enormous size, which could not
be wounded by iron, or bronze or stone and required the compulsion of
the human hand for his subduing. It passed the larger part of its
time between Mykenai and Nemea, in the neighborhood of a mountain
which was called Tretos from a peculiarity which it possessed; for it
had a cleft at its base which extended clean through it and in which
the beast was accustomed to lurk. Herakles came to the region and
attacked the lion, and when the beast retreated into the cleft, after
closing up the other opening the followed in after it and grappled
with it, and winding his arms about its neck choked it to death. The
skin of the lion he put about himself, and since he could cover his
whole body with it because of its great size, he had in it a
protection against the perils that were to follow." - Diodorus
Siculus, Library of History 4.11.3

"Constellation Leo: He is said to have been put among the stars
because he is considered the king of beasts. Some writers add that
Hercules' first Labour was with him and that he killed him unarmed.
Pisandrus and many other writers have written about this." - Pseudo-
Hyginus, Astronomica 2.24


Hercules was given twelve Labors to perform, and the first was to
kill the Nemean Lion. Imagine a very very very large lion. Then
make it much, much, much bigger, with a skin that cannot be pierced
and claws that can cut through rock. Add to that an extremely bad
temper, and you've got the picture. The Nemean Lion was the
offspring of the hundred-headed Typhon and Echidnea, a monstrosity
half woman, half serpent. The Sphinx of Thebes was its half-brother;
Hera (Iuno) created him specifically to cause grief to humankind.

Hercules started off the fight with conventional weaponry, but it
didn't work. Finally he stripped off his armor, tossed away his
weapons, and followed the lion into its cave. He grabbed the lion
around the neck and fought, eventually strangling it. Noticing that
its hide was incredibly strong, he used one of its own claws to skin
it, then draped it over his head and shoulders; it then became one of
his trademark indentifiers.

To honor both Hercules' prowess and the Lion's heritage (and the fact
that it was a "gift" from Iuno), Iuppiter took the skin and flung it
into the heavens, where it hangs as Leo.

Valete bene!

Cato

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.13/1915 - Release Date: 1/25/2009 6:13 PM

----- Original Message -----

 

From: Gaius Petronius Dexter

To: Nova Roma

Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2009 9:02 PM

Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] SOCIAL REFORM AND TWO-TIER TAXATION SYSTEM

C. Petronius Dexter quæstor omnibus forensibus s.p.d.,

 

In my opinion, Lentulus wants to repair a bad dividing up among the citizens (too much centuries and tribes regarding the population of Nova Roma) with a bad idea which remind me the revolting "régime censitaire". This regime is the aristocracy of the money in place of the blood aristocracy, both dreadful between citizens equal in rights.

 

This proposal of a system to divide up citizens into different orders regarding their wealth is yet the system that I know in my nation. More you are rich, more you have influence. I do not dream of a Nova Roman society like that. I see everyday this system when I open my windows. 

 

So on November 12, 2761 Colin Cunningham got a personal and unofficial census of Nova Roma very interesting.

 

Total Capite Censi------614
Total Assidui----- ------297

Total Nova Roman------- -911

Only 297 assidui among 911 Nova Roman, id est 297 (on 11/12/2761) citizens which paid their tax. While tax is very cheap. So if Lentulus wants equestrians which pay more taxes, he will have perhaps 30 peoples. What else? Nova Roma will be richer with 30 equestrians? In which purposes?

 

For which purposes to want a "richer" Nova Roma with an unequal society so far from the Roman virtues?

 

The equestrian order was the worst order that Roma established, this order was at the beginning of the end of the Republic and wanting more and more money this order despoiled and impoverished the free small farmers, it stole the ager publicus from the others citizens... I do not understand this need for an equestrian order? Is it Nova Roma a society which needs shareholders? After the subprimes, the surcharges?

 

O Mercuri! O god of the traders/equesters, Mercuri, do give (for free) Lentulus the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius and the Encheiridion of Epictetus.

Optime valete.

C. Petronius Dexter

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Orange vous informe que cet e-mail a été contrôlé par l'anti-virus mail.
Aucun virus connu à ce jour par nos services n'a été détecté.

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.13/1915 - Release Date: 1/25/2009 6:13 PM

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.13/1915 - Release Date: 1/25/2009 6:13 PM

Cato Cn. Caelio Ahenobarbo sal.

Salve Ahenobarbe!

Yep, it's pretty funny :)

Vale!

Cato

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Gnaeus Caelius Ahenobarbus
<cn.caelius@...> wrote:

>
> Salve!
>
>
> >Oh, you are good at
> jokes, and this one is a keeper.
> >It's being forwarded to an Egyptologist
> friend at this very moment.
>
> O dii immortales! Do you really want to do that? :-P
>
> Of course, now I am going around, acting like a teenage girl while

saying, "You know, this one time, on campaign in Gaul..." :-P

>
> --
> Gnaeus Caelius Ahenobarbus
> Lictor Curiatus et Accensus Consulum
> http://becomingnewthroughtheold.blogspot.com
>