Lentulus Catoni sal.

>>> Rome was *not* the first to have a detailed and specific concept of nationhood: Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, Sumer, Akkad, Persia, Macedonia, China, Japan - all had very clear ideas on what made them a nation and what nationhood meant. <<<<

It all depends what we mean by nationhood.

In Rome all citizens were fully and equally members of the populus Romanus, even a consul and a capite census were equally Romans, and their Roman identity was a common identity. The same kind of patriotic and ideological thinking could be evoked from a senator than from an urban proletarian. There was a somewhat homogeneous sense of Roman nationality (even though Romans distinguished each other by their original ethnicity) and all Romans could call each other equally fellow citizens in the populus Romanus, who share the same concept of Romanity.

Was this kind of consciousness present in Egypt, or in Mesopotamia? Certainly, some kind of nation-concept was there since the founding of the first state in the history, but were they equally detailed and specific, like the Roman one? Did the same kind of elaborate sense of community and unity exist between a pharaoh, his high priests and the villagers of Egypt?

I think the concept of "populus Romanus" was a new level of theoretical and legal thinking previously unseen in history, something that was echoed (although from another point of view) only in the modern age of enlightenment.

Cn. Lentulus legatus pro praetore M. Audenti proconsuli sal.

>>> I have suggested to the Senate

that perhaps some consideration should be made to reduce the size of

some provinces where the distance is obviously the core problem, and

that suggestion was ignored. <<<


The problem is not the size of the provinces, because there is nothing that would forbid a governor to divide his province into smaller units according to the needs of the density of the province, these smaller units called regions, that could live their entirely independent community life under the supervision of the provincial governor. 

The reasonable structure of provinces is that follows the borders of the real political units and entities, because these are the most tangible and apparent realities that affect the citizens life, besides the language and culture, but these often coincide.

The internal organization of the provincial life depends only on the governor and the dedication of the provincial citizens, who can create one or more or several real life communities, because a province is not necessarily ONE community, as this is not what determines a province.

Vale!

















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

Cn. Lentulus leg. pr. pr. L. Gratio sal.

>>> but sometimes i just think that someone should visit the governors of

every province and hear about their problems.... .and expectations <<<


All governors are encouraged and even expected to frequently communicate with the consuls of Nova Roma, and ask the senate for financial or other kinds of support. There is a means for communication with fellow governors and central administration of the republic, the Conventus Gubernatorum mailing list:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CONVENTVS_GVBERNATORVM/

Please urge your governor (I think he is T. Arminius Genialis) to join to that mailing list and to ask help from fellow governors, and to share ideas.

Nova Roma already has all means and all tools for solving any existing problems, as one of our most finest senator often says. The only real problem of ours is just that most people are not well informed, and usually are not very active.

It's my fault, your fault, everyone's fault: let's therefore be very patient with each other, and try to use institutions of Nova Roma in an effective way. Because all solutions we have in our hands already. Right, T. Iuli Sabine, amice?

One reform what I would welcome is that our quaestors be used in provincial government, as they were in ancient times, and a solution for that could be assigning more then only two quaestors to the consuls, let's say 4 of the quaestors, whose primary job would be monitoring the provinces, keep the contact between the governors and the consuls, and to help stregthening the unity of work between the center and the provinces.

















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

Salvete



We need to take a page out of the Roman playbook. Rome was among other things a group of CITY-STATES. We need to redraw our provinces around the idea of cities, towns ect.



As Nova Roma provences, US states or Canadian provinces or similar organization structures are to big. We need to reduce their size.



My province includes the US states of New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania , Virginia and Washington, DC. It is too big as are all of our provinces.



Provinces based on cities would be better.



Valete



Ti. Galerius Paulinus


To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
From: famila.ulleria.venii@...
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 05:22:21 -0500
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Provincial gatherings, travel costs...





Salvete

...can not the Provinces be more fully delineated into internal
regions? ...or townships? ...depending upon population density.

With the help of Legates, perhaps smaller gatherings of Cives within
affordable travel distance of each other can gather more frequently
and the Province have an annual get together?

No "country" is fully populated on a broad swath, the concentrations
start where transportation is easy and resources are of useful
quantity.

--
Valete - Venator





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

Salve,


On that note, wouldn't that increase the number of Governors? In
theory that's going on in my head, it would look the need for
Governors would increase even more..


Maybe, having one Governor per Province and the Legates being in
charge of the cities... Just a thought..


Vale,
Aeternia

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 9:15 AM, Timothy or Stephen Gallagher
<spqr753@...> wrote:

>
>
> Salvete
>
>
>
> We need to take a page out of the Roman playbook. Rome was among other things a group of CITY-STATES. We need to redraw our provinces around the idea of cities, towns ect.
>
>
>
> As Nova Roma provences, US states or Canadian provinces or similar organization structures are to big.  We need to reduce their size.
>
>
>
> My province includes the US states of New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania , Virginia and Washington, DC. It is too big as are all of our provinces.
>
>
>
> Provinces based on cities would be better.
>
>
>
> Valete
>
>
>
> Ti. Galerius Paulinus
>
>
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> From: famila.ulleria.venii@...
> Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 05:22:21 -0500
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Provincial gatherings, travel costs...
>
>
>
>
>
> Salvete
>
> ...can not the Provinces be more fully delineated into internal
> regions? ...or townships? ...depending upon population density.
>
> With the help of Legates, perhaps smaller gatherings of Cives within
> affordable travel distance of each other can gather more frequently
> and the Province have an annual get together?
>
> No "country" is fully populated on a broad swath, the concentrations
> start where transportation is easy and resources are of useful
> quantity.
>
> --
> Valete - Venator
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Cn. Lentulus Ti. Paulino sal.

> We need to take a page out of the Roman playbook. Rome was
> among other things a group of CITY-STATES. We need to redraw
> our provinces around the idea of cities, towns ect.

It's better, Ti. Pauline, if we do not complicate these things. Let the cities be cities and provinces provinces. We have a city-system in NR. If a city or town and its agglomeration has at least 5 citizens, they can create a self governing Nova Roman community, an OPPIDUM. So we already have this means in our hands. Nova Roman community life can be centered around cities and towns, and it does not depend on the provincial level, but it is totally up to the local citizens to form local communities.

The same goes for counties, or smaller units. They can be established as "regiones" with their own internal organization.

Let it be clear that a province is not a tool for the local citizens, but a tool for the center of Nova Roma to check local Nova Roma. The governor is the representative of the central government, the senate and the consuls, and his job is to harmonize the local groups' activities in his province with the expectations of the central administration.

In fact, we have too many provinces, and I think that the USA should be one province, as it is one country, and all USA States should be regions of that province. The job of the governor would be harmonize and control the activity within this province, and report to the senate, while his legates and prefects appointed to the local communities would lead the local activity. Of course, the governor himself could personally lead those local groups that are in his neighborhood. This would not only give more significance to the original concept of what a Roman province was, but also it would decrease the number of pro-magistrates, and lesser the huge administration we currently have.

And all inactive provinces should be immediately disbanded, as paradoxes. A province without government and citizens is not a province, so pretending that we have two Asias, Venedia, Hibernia etc... is just obfuscating the fact that those provinces are in fact dissolved by its citizens who left them.

Salvete;
I was the first governor of Hibernia and when I moved back to the U.S. even with a new governor the province lapsed. It's not hard to get people together. There are Roman ruins in Ireland! But people need help organizing. Some are natural organizers.

So that would be my suggestion, get those like Lentulus, Julia Aquila, Audens, etc who are successful organizers and idea people to advise governors.

also, viz the curule aediles, we had 2 conventus' last year that almost dissolved. one in France, just cost way too much, the U.S. one -nothing was accomplished until the last minute. So I would suggest that the experienced organizers also advise.

vale
Maior

>
> so pretending that we have two Asias, Venedia, Hibernia etc... is just obfuscating the fact that those provinces are in fact dissolved by its citizens who left them.
>

Master Lucius Vesta;

In regard to your last, my personal view is that the words of the
Magistrates Oath go far enough. Your view of a declaration such as
you suggest is probably what got Christians into trouble under Emperor
Marcus Aurelius. I do and will adhere to the oath that I took as a
Magistrate, but to declare my belief system is something it is not I
will not do, nor would I expect anyone to do that. In my view that
proposal goes too far, and simply causes more problems than it solves.

Respectfully;

Marcus Audens

On Apr 14, 2010, at 10:32 AM, Lucius Quirinus wrote:

> SALVETE OMNES
>
> I would have no objections to have Christians in NOVA ROMA providing
> that they should publicly and officially declare to accept and
> respect all Gods of our Pantheon and thereby acknowledging that
> their God is just one among others.
> A reciprocal act of respect and equal dignity between us and them.
>
> Comments are welcomed.
>
> VALETE OPTIME
> LVCIVS Q. VESTA
>
> --- Dom 11/4/10, Vedius <vedius@...> ha scritto:
>
> Da: Vedius <vedius@...>
> Oggetto: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: On the use of the term "superstition"
> A: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Data: Domenica 11 Aprile 2010, 02:16
>
>
>
> Salve,
>
> I'm curious... has anyone actually advocated publicly for the
> removal of
> Christians from Nova Roma?
>
> For myself, I'd be content if they'd just keep their Christian
> practices
> to themselves, rather than spouting off about them here and in other
> fora, as recently happened.
>
> Vale,
>
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus
>
> T. Annaeus Regulus wrote:
> > Thanks for clearing that up. There are some that I would classify
> as 'hostile' towards Christianity, but you weren't one of them and I
> was somewhat disappointed at what I thought was your public stance
> against Christianity. Certainly not being a Christian and being
> hostile towards Christianity are separate things and I am glad that
> you seem to be the former.
> >
> > I also don't support the idea of a protected Christian institution
> in NR. It's pagan state cult is a unique aspect that I think adds
> another element of realism that we could not otherwise have, and as
> you point out, there is no need of Christians to practice their
> faith here. I share your views on Christians in NR. They were
> allowed in, encouraged even, and now are quite well established. To
> ask them to leave now would be unfair, and so we must make do. The
> fact that some use the fact that Christianity is not 'protected' to
> antagonize others is what really bothers me. To me, however, that is
> best remedied by maturity and cool-headedness, not legislation.
> >
> > Vale,
> > Regulus
> >
> >
> > From: QFabiusMaxmi@ aol.com
> > Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2010 6:13 PM
> > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogrou ps.com
> > Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: On the use of the term "superstition"
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > In a message dated 4/10/2010 12:28:23 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
> > t.annaevsregvlvs@ ymail.com writes:
> >
> > The fall of the Roman pagan religion was a tragedy. It was
> undoubtedly
> > enthusiastically encouraged and sometimes even orchestrated by
> Christian
> > authorities at the time. It was wrong. BUT - Neither you nor Cato
> were alive at
> > the time. No Christians in NR today had anything to do with the
> wrongs of
> > Antiquity. Clearly, just by the principle of self-selection,
> Christians who
> > have some sort of repugnance of pagan Roman culture aren't here. The
> > Christians you have here are genuinely interested in ancient Roman
> culture. Some
> > parts more than others perhaps, but I haven't heard anyone speak
> up to ban
> > the Religio, nor do I expect to. We are all brothers who share
> many of the
> > same goals, and we should be able to accommodate the
> idiosyncrasies of
> > pagans and Christians to accomplish our very clear goal - a living
> Roman
> > Republic, complete with a legally protected cultus deorum.
> >
> > Its not an issue for me, I was answering the Senator's question.
> >
> > I for one was baptized, was an altar boy, and got to handle the
> chalice
> > and monstrance, it was my job
> > to keep them polished.
> >
> > I left Catholicism in the 11th grade after attending classes of Fr
> > Wasko's Comparative Religion Studies at St. Augustine's.
> > To my horror my one true religion was actually a blending of three
> > religions. Disillusioned I left the Church and became an Agnostic.
> I had to fake
> > church activity till I was 18, because of my parents.
> > I became interested in the The Immortals after several interesting
> > visions/dreams.
> >
> > Cato's Eastern Rite is likely closer to the real religion in Roman
> times
> > then the West, and while I was studying for my MA I would attend
> this
> > Armenian church just to watch the rituals and processions. It was
> the closest I
> > could get to the Eastern Roman tradition and one that connected me
> with
> > Rome.
> >
> > Senator's Cato argument that Christianity here must be protected,
> is to me
> > a bit of hyperbole. It is already protected around the world.
> >
> > My view is this: If NR did not want Christians among its ranks
> then it
> > should have said so in its declaring documents. Since it did not,
> the point
> > is moot. Some of my best friends here in NR are Christians. I have
> > served along side them in government and in the Comita.
> >
> > Q. Fabius Maximius
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------ --------- --------- ------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>



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

Mistress Aeternia;

Yes, it would and that is certainly the down side of the proposal, and
a reason that it will probably not be considered. Master Lentulus
disagrees with me and offers the solution to expand the Provincia to
include all of the U.S., as I understand his view, and simply engage
certain parts of the country as regions as the Senate and Governors
would decide. I personally think that such would be very difficult to
control and make work. As I said earlier , I will now shift to making
large urban areas into regions within the Nova Britannia Province, now
that I have seen the futility of working with a Geographical Region
(state) and a whole province. It will take some time to establish as
Master Lentulus has indicated we do not want Regions named with no-one
in charge. My understanding of selecting provinces that had less than
five Citizens was with the hope that they would grow. As Senator
Maximus has indicated, what deadline is there for the major present
goals of NR, and I would assume that that idea would also apply to
Provinces authorized with less than five Citizens.

Senator Horatia has indicated that it is not difficult to get people
together for face-to-face meetings and I am afraid that I cannot agree
with her. It is difficult to have a Citizen drive for and hour or two
to attend a meeting that lasts for two hours even with the promise of
a nice dinner afterward or the meeting planned around such and then
drive two hours home again. The concerns include gas milage, work,
study time (many Citizens are still in College), and family, The same
concerns as other organizations have. I have served as President and
Commander to several similar organizations and the concerns are always
the same. Now it may well be that the real problem is with me, and if
so this year will determine that as soon as I begin to set up some
meetings. However, before I do that, I shall be pleased to work up an
agenda to present on the NB Web List to see just how many Citizens are
even interested in the administrative aspects of a Province or a
Region. As I find those who are interested I shall certainly appoint
them as Region Representatives and give them whatever authority they
need to manage that region. We already have two such in the NB a
representative for Legio III and a representative for cultural
activities, a legate for Connecticut, one for Maine, and one for Rhode
Island.

Respectfully;

Marcus Audens



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

Esteemed Master Audens,


That's what I was thinking, and then also realizing that the number of
increased Legates would also be another problem.. We do not currently at
this time have the populace to do such grandiose things. I was going to go
into a long response of how the Provinces need to be restructured, both the
positions of Governor & Legate need redefining to meet present and future
needs.. But it looks that there a few us thinking along the same lines :-)


Vale Optime,
Aeternia

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:24 PM, James Mathews <JLMTopog@...>wrote:

>
>
> Mistress Aeternia;
>
> Yes, it would and that is certainly the down side of the proposal, and
> a reason that it will probably not be considered. Master Lentulus
> disagrees with me and offers the solution to expand the Provincia to
> include all of the U.S., as I understand his view, and simply engage
> certain parts of the country as regions as the Senate and Governors
> would decide. I personally think that such would be very difficult to
> control and make work. As I said earlier , I will now shift to making
> large urban areas into regions within the Nova Britannia Province, now
> that I have seen the futility of working with a Geographical Region
> (state) and a whole province. It will take some time to establish as
> Master Lentulus has indicated we do not want Regions named with no-one
> in charge. My understanding of selecting provinces that had less than
> five Citizens was with the hope that they would grow. As Senator
> Maximus has indicated, what deadline is there for the major present
> goals of NR, and I would assume that that idea would also apply to
> Provinces authorized with less than five Citizens.
>
> Senator Horatia has indicated that it is not difficult to get people
> together for face-to-face meetings and I am afraid that I cannot agree
> with her. It is difficult to have a Citizen drive for and hour or two
> to attend a meeting that lasts for two hours even with the promise of
> a nice dinner afterward or the meeting planned around such and then
> drive two hours home again. The concerns include gas milage, work,
> study time (many Citizens are still in College), and family, The same
> concerns as other organizations have. I have served as President and
> Commander to several similar organizations and the concerns are always
> the same. Now it may well be that the real problem is with me, and if
> so this year will determine that as soon as I begin to set up some
> meetings. However, before I do that, I shall be pleased to work up an
> agenda to present on the NB Web List to see just how many Citizens are
> even interested in the administrative aspects of a Province or a
> Region. As I find those who are interested I shall certainly appoint
> them as Region Representatives and give them whatever authority they
> need to manage that region. We already have two such in the NB a
> representative for Legio III and a representative for cultural
> activities, a legate for Connecticut, one for Maine, and one for Rhode
> Island.
>
> Respectfully;
>
> Marcus Audens
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>


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

Ex Officio Pratricum;

Please observe Roman forms of address on the Main List.

For those who need help here is a link to our web page:
http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Latin_for_e-mail and ask Gn. Cornelius Lentulus, A. Tullia Scholastica, G. Petronius Dexter, NR's latinists for help.
the Praetrices

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Jennifer Harris <cyannerose@...> wrote:
>
> Esteemed Master Audens,
>
>
> That's what I was thinking, and then also realizing that the number of
> increased Legates would also be another problem.. We do not currently at
> this time have the populace to do such grandiose things. I was going to go
> into a long response of how the Provinces need to be restructured, both the
> positions of Governor & Legate need redefining to meet present and future
> needs.. But it looks that there a few us thinking along the same lines :-)
>
>
> Vale Optime,
> Aeternia
>
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:24 PM, James Mathews <JLMTopog@...>wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Mistress Aeternia;
> >
> > Yes, it would and that is certainly the down side of the proposal, and
> > a reason that it will probably not be considered. Master Lentulus
> > disagrees with me and offers the solution to expand the Provincia to
> > include all of the U.S., as I understand his view, and simply engage
> > certain parts of the country as regions as the Senate and Governors
> > would decide. I personally think that such would be very difficult to
> > control and make work. As I said earlier , I will now shift to making
> > large urban areas into regions within the Nova Britannia Province, now
> > that I have seen the futility of working with a Geographical Region
> > (state) and a whole province. It will take some time to establish as
> > Master Lentulus has indicated we do not want Regions named with no-one
> > in charge. My understanding of selecting provinces that had less than
> > five Citizens was with the hope that they would grow. As Senator
> > Maximus has indicated, what deadline is there for the major present
> > goals of NR, and I would assume that that idea would also apply to
> > Provinces authorized with less than five Citizens.
> >
> > Senator Horatia has indicated that it is not difficult to get people
> > together for face-to-face meetings and I am afraid that I cannot agree
> > with her. It is difficult to have a Citizen drive for and hour or two
> > to attend a meeting that lasts for two hours even with the promise of
> > a nice dinner afterward or the meeting planned around such and then
> > drive two hours home again. The concerns include gas milage, work,
> > study time (many Citizens are still in College), and family, The same
> > concerns as other organizations have. I have served as President and
> > Commander to several similar organizations and the concerns are always
> > the same. Now it may well be that the real problem is with me, and if
> > so this year will determine that as soon as I begin to set up some
> > meetings. However, before I do that, I shall be pleased to work up an
> > agenda to present on the NB Web List to see just how many Citizens are
> > even interested in the administrative aspects of a Province or a
> > Region. As I find those who are interested I shall certainly appoint
> > them as Region Representatives and give them whatever authority they
> > need to manage that region. We already have two such in the NB a
> > representative for Legio III and a representative for cultural
> > activities, a legate for Connecticut, one for Maine, and one for Rhode
> > Island.
> >
> > Respectfully;
> >
> > Marcus Audens
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Cute, real real cute...

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:57 PM, rory12001 <rory12001@...> wrote:

>
>
> Ex Officio Pratricum;
>
> Please observe Roman forms of address on the Main List.
>
> For those who need help here is a link to our web page:
> http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Latin_for_e-mail and ask Gn. Cornelius
> Lentulus, A. Tullia Scholastica, G. Petronius Dexter, NR's latinists for
> help.
> the Praetrices
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>, Jennifer
> Harris <cyannerose@...> wrote:
> >
> > Esteemed Master Audens,
> >
> >
> > That's what I was thinking, and then also realizing that the number of
> > increased Legates would also be another problem.. We do not currently at
> > this time have the populace to do such grandiose things. I was going to
> go
> > into a long response of how the Provinces need to be restructured, both
> the
> > positions of Governor & Legate need redefining to meet present and future
> > needs.. But it looks that there a few us thinking along the same lines
> :-)
> >
> >
> > Vale Optime,
> > Aeternia
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:24 PM, James Mathews <JLMTopog@...>wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Mistress Aeternia;
> > >
> > > Yes, it would and that is certainly the down side of the proposal, and
> > > a reason that it will probably not be considered. Master Lentulus
> > > disagrees with me and offers the solution to expand the Provincia to
> > > include all of the U.S., as I understand his view, and simply engage
> > > certain parts of the country as regions as the Senate and Governors
> > > would decide. I personally think that such would be very difficult to
> > > control and make work. As I said earlier , I will now shift to making
> > > large urban areas into regions within the Nova Britannia Province, now
> > > that I have seen the futility of working with a Geographical Region
> > > (state) and a whole province. It will take some time to establish as
> > > Master Lentulus has indicated we do not want Regions named with no-one
> > > in charge. My understanding of selecting provinces that had less than
> > > five Citizens was with the hope that they would grow. As Senator
> > > Maximus has indicated, what deadline is there for the major present
> > > goals of NR, and I would assume that that idea would also apply to
> > > Provinces authorized with less than five Citizens.
> > >
> > > Senator Horatia has indicated that it is not difficult to get people
> > > together for face-to-face meetings and I am afraid that I cannot agree
> > > with her. It is difficult to have a Citizen drive for and hour or two
> > > to attend a meeting that lasts for two hours even with the promise of
> > > a nice dinner afterward or the meeting planned around such and then
> > > drive two hours home again. The concerns include gas milage, work,
> > > study time (many Citizens are still in College), and family, The same
> > > concerns as other organizations have. I have served as President and
> > > Commander to several similar organizations and the concerns are always
> > > the same. Now it may well be that the real problem is with me, and if
> > > so this year will determine that as soon as I begin to set up some
> > > meetings. However, before I do that, I shall be pleased to work up an
> > > agenda to present on the NB Web List to see just how many Citizens are
> > > even interested in the administrative aspects of a Province or a
> > > Region. As I find those who are interested I shall certainly appoint
> > > them as Region Representatives and give them whatever authority they
> > > need to manage that region. We already have two such in the NB a
> > > representative for Legio III and a representative for cultural
> > > activities, a legate for Connecticut, one for Maine, and one for Rhode
> > > Island.
> > >
> > > Respectfully;
> > >
> > > Marcus Audens
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>


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

Salve,

I think this is a terrific idea. Anything to get things going
face-to-face in a practical fashion gets my endorsement.

See? Cato and I *can* agree on something. :-)

vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus

Cato wrote:

> Cato omnibus in foro SPD
>
> This seems as good a time as any to remind people that I suggested - some three years ago - the idea of an Aedilician Fund.
>
> The Aedilician Fund would be for the specific purpose of subsidizing events in the provinces of Nova Roma; a citizen, group of citizens, or governor acting on behalf of his or her citizens, would approach the Senate and request funds for a specific Nova Roman event in that province. Be it purchasing incense and wine or oil for a simple ceremony, rent for a meeting space, or the purchase of a bull for sacrifice on behalf of the Respublica, we can - and should - support these efforts.
>
> The money could be requested as either a loan or an outright gift, depending on the nature of the event in question. I suggested that the amount in the Fund would be at least 10% of the previous year's income from taxes.
>
> For all the doom-and-gloom screeching we have heard from the fringe elements of the Respublica, we actually have a considerable sum available at our disposal; I think it is high time we start giving back to the provinces funds with which t further the goals of the Respublica.
>
> As a (hopeful) candidate for Aedilis Curulis, this will once again be a major element of my platform. Even if I am *not* elected Curule Aedile, as a senator I will fight for this kind of useful, appropriate use of funds available from the Aerarium.
>
> Valete,
>
> Cato

C. Maria Caeca Cn. Cornelio Lentulo sal,

Amice, this post was a pleasure to read, and it is I who thank you, for taking the time and effort to first prepare, and then to share, your thoughts with us.

Vale quam optime,
C. Maria Caeca

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

Frau Maior, you're joking, right? And ex officio at that?

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "rory12001" <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> Ex Officio Pratricum;
>
> Please observe Roman forms of address on the Main List.
>
> For those who need help here is a link to our web page:
> http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Latin_for_e-mail and ask Gn. Cornelius Lentulus, A. Tullia Scholastica, G. Petronius Dexter, NR's latinists for help.
> the Praetrices
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Jennifer Harris <cyannerose@> wrote:
> >
> > Esteemed Master Audens,
> >
> >
> > That's what I was thinking, and then also realizing that the number of
> > increased Legates would also be another problem.. We do not currently at
> > this time have the populace to do such grandiose things. I was going to go
> > into a long response of how the Provinces need to be restructured, both the
> > positions of Governor & Legate need redefining to meet present and future
> > needs.. But it looks that there a few us thinking along the same lines :-)
> >
> >
> > Vale Optime,
> > Aeternia
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:24 PM, James Mathews <JLMTopog@>wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Mistress Aeternia;
> > >
> > > Yes, it would and that is certainly the down side of the proposal, and
> > > a reason that it will probably not be considered. Master Lentulus
> > > disagrees with me and offers the solution to expand the Provincia to
> > > include all of the U.S., as I understand his view, and simply engage
> > > certain parts of the country as regions as the Senate and Governors
> > > would decide. I personally think that such would be very difficult to
> > > control and make work. As I said earlier , I will now shift to making
> > > large urban areas into regions within the Nova Britannia Province, now
> > > that I have seen the futility of working with a Geographical Region
> > > (state) and a whole province. It will take some time to establish as
> > > Master Lentulus has indicated we do not want Regions named with no-one
> > > in charge. My understanding of selecting provinces that had less than
> > > five Citizens was with the hope that they would grow. As Senator
> > > Maximus has indicated, what deadline is there for the major present
> > > goals of NR, and I would assume that that idea would also apply to
> > > Provinces authorized with less than five Citizens.
> > >
> > > Senator Horatia has indicated that it is not difficult to get people
> > > together for face-to-face meetings and I am afraid that I cannot agree
> > > with her. It is difficult to have a Citizen drive for and hour or two
> > > to attend a meeting that lasts for two hours even with the promise of
> > > a nice dinner afterward or the meeting planned around such and then
> > > drive two hours home again. The concerns include gas milage, work,
> > > study time (many Citizens are still in College), and family, The same
> > > concerns as other organizations have. I have served as President and
> > > Commander to several similar organizations and the concerns are always
> > > the same. Now it may well be that the real problem is with me, and if
> > > so this year will determine that as soon as I begin to set up some
> > > meetings. However, before I do that, I shall be pleased to work up an
> > > agenda to present on the NB Web List to see just how many Citizens are
> > > even interested in the administrative aspects of a Province or a
> > > Region. As I find those who are interested I shall certainly appoint
> > > them as Region Representatives and give them whatever authority they
> > > need to manage that region. We already have two such in the NB a
> > > representative for Legio III and a representative for cultural
> > > activities, a legate for Connecticut, one for Maine, and one for Rhode
> > > Island.
> > >
> > > Respectfully;
> > >
> > > Marcus Audens
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>

Surely it should be enough for them to simply agree to respect and not do anything to undermine the cultus deorum. Asking them to make declarations of belief that would obviously be in contravention of their dogma makes no sense. If a Christian acknowledges that their God is just one among many, they are no longer following Christian belief. If you join a predominantly Christian organisation, I'm sure you won't be happy to admit that the Gods are actually demons and that the only real God is Jesus? You would expect them to allow you to believe what you wish as long as you don't undermine their religion.

Cicero

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Lucius Quirinus <ostiaaterni@...> wrote:
>
> SALVETE OMNES
>  
> I would have no objections to have Christians in NOVA ROMA providing that they should publicly and officially declare to accept and respect all Gods of our Pantheon and thereby acknowledging that their God is just one among others.
> A reciprocal act of respect and equal dignity between us and them.
>  
> Comments are welcomed.
>  
> VALETE OPTIME
> LVCIVS Q. VESTA
>
> --- Dom 11/4/10, Vedius <vedius@...> ha scritto:
>
>
> Da: Vedius <vedius@...>
> Oggetto: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: On the use of the term "superstition"
> A: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Data: Domenica 11 Aprile 2010, 02:16
>
>
>  
>
>
>
> Salve,
>
> I'm curious... has anyone actually advocated publicly for the removal of
> Christians from Nova Roma?
>
> For myself, I'd be content if they'd just keep their Christian practices
> to themselves, rather than spouting off about them here and in other
> fora, as recently happened.
>
> Vale,
>
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus
>
> T. Annaeus Regulus wrote:
> > Thanks for clearing that up. There are some that I would classify as 'hostile' towards Christianity, but you weren't one of them and I was somewhat disappointed at what I thought was your public stance against Christianity. Certainly not being a Christian and being hostile towards Christianity are separate things and I am glad that you seem to be the former.
> >
> > I also don't support the idea of a protected Christian institution in NR. It's pagan state cult is a unique aspect that I think adds another element of realism that we could not otherwise have, and as you point out, there is no need of Christians to practice their faith here. I share your views on Christians in NR. They were allowed in, encouraged even, and now are quite well established. To ask them to leave now would be unfair, and so we must make do. The fact that some use the fact that Christianity is not 'protected' to antagonize others is what really bothers me. To me, however, that is best remedied by maturity and cool-headedness, not legislation.
> >
> > Vale,
> > Regulus
> >
> >
> > From: QFabiusMaxmi@ aol.com
> > Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2010 6:13 PM
> > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogrou ps.com
> > Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: On the use of the term "superstition"
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > In a message dated 4/10/2010 12:28:23 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
> > t.annaevsregvlvs@ ymail.com writes:
> >
> > The fall of the Roman pagan religion was a tragedy. It was undoubtedly
> > enthusiastically encouraged and sometimes even orchestrated by Christian
> > authorities at the time. It was wrong. BUT - Neither you nor Cato were alive at
> > the time. No Christians in NR today had anything to do with the wrongs of
> > Antiquity. Clearly, just by the principle of self-selection, Christians who
> > have some sort of repugnance of pagan Roman culture aren't here. The
> > Christians you have here are genuinely interested in ancient Roman culture. Some
> > parts more than others perhaps, but I haven't heard anyone speak up to ban
> > the Religio, nor do I expect to. We are all brothers who share many of the
> > same goals, and we should be able to accommodate the idiosyncrasies of
> > pagans and Christians to accomplish our very clear goal - a living Roman
> > Republic, complete with a legally protected cultus deorum.
> >
> > Its not an issue for me, I was answering the Senator's question.
> >
> > I for one was baptized, was an altar boy, and got to handle the chalice
> > and monstrance, it was my job
> > to keep them polished.
> >
> > I left Catholicism in the 11th grade after attending classes of Fr
> > Wasko's Comparative Religion Studies at St. Augustine's.
> > To my horror my one true religion was actually a blending of three
> > religions. Disillusioned I left the Church and became an Agnostic. I had to fake
> > church activity till I was 18, because of my parents.
> > I became interested in the The Immortals after several interesting
> > visions/dreams.
> >
> > Cato's Eastern Rite is likely closer to the real religion in Roman times
> > then the West, and while I was studying for my MA I would attend this
> > Armenian church just to watch the rituals and processions. It was the closest I
> > could get to the Eastern Roman tradition and one that connected me with
> > Rome.
> >
> > Senator's Cato argument that Christianity here must be protected, is to me
> > a bit of hyperbole. It is already protected around the world.
> >
> > My view is this: If NR did not want Christians among its ranks then it
> > should have said so in its declaring documents. Since it did not, the point
> > is moot. Some of my best friends here in NR are Christians. I have
> > served along side them in government and in the Comita.
> >
> > Q. Fabius Maximius
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------ --------- --------- ------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Maybe you can help me Aeternia, since I can't seem to find the law that demands that you have to use certain forms of address on the Main List? But there must be one, if a Praetor is getting involved. Can you perhaps point me in the right direction, having been a citizen for so long as you have?

Cicero

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Jennifer Harris <cyannerose@...> wrote:
>
> Cute, real real cute...
>
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:57 PM, rory12001 <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Ex Officio Pratricum;
> >
> > Please observe Roman forms of address on the Main List.
> >
> > For those who need help here is a link to our web page:
> > http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Latin_for_e-mail and ask Gn. Cornelius
> > Lentulus, A. Tullia Scholastica, G. Petronius Dexter, NR's latinists for
> > help.
> > the Praetrices
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>, Jennifer
> > Harris <cyannerose@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Esteemed Master Audens,
> > >
> > >
> > > That's what I was thinking, and then also realizing that the number of
> > > increased Legates would also be another problem.. We do not currently at
> > > this time have the populace to do such grandiose things. I was going to
> > go
> > > into a long response of how the Provinces need to be restructured, both
> > the
> > > positions of Governor & Legate need redefining to meet present and future
> > > needs.. But it looks that there a few us thinking along the same lines
> > :-)
> > >
> > >
> > > Vale Optime,
> > > Aeternia
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:24 PM, James Mathews <JLMTopog@>wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Mistress Aeternia;
> > > >
> > > > Yes, it would and that is certainly the down side of the proposal, and
> > > > a reason that it will probably not be considered. Master Lentulus
> > > > disagrees with me and offers the solution to expand the Provincia to
> > > > include all of the U.S., as I understand his view, and simply engage
> > > > certain parts of the country as regions as the Senate and Governors
> > > > would decide. I personally think that such would be very difficult to
> > > > control and make work. As I said earlier , I will now shift to making
> > > > large urban areas into regions within the Nova Britannia Province, now
> > > > that I have seen the futility of working with a Geographical Region
> > > > (state) and a whole province. It will take some time to establish as
> > > > Master Lentulus has indicated we do not want Regions named with no-one
> > > > in charge. My understanding of selecting provinces that had less than
> > > > five Citizens was with the hope that they would grow. As Senator
> > > > Maximus has indicated, what deadline is there for the major present
> > > > goals of NR, and I would assume that that idea would also apply to
> > > > Provinces authorized with less than five Citizens.
> > > >
> > > > Senator Horatia has indicated that it is not difficult to get people
> > > > together for face-to-face meetings and I am afraid that I cannot agree
> > > > with her. It is difficult to have a Citizen drive for and hour or two
> > > > to attend a meeting that lasts for two hours even with the promise of
> > > > a nice dinner afterward or the meeting planned around such and then
> > > > drive two hours home again. The concerns include gas milage, work,
> > > > study time (many Citizens are still in College), and family, The same
> > > > concerns as other organizations have. I have served as President and
> > > > Commander to several similar organizations and the concerns are always
> > > > the same. Now it may well be that the real problem is with me, and if
> > > > so this year will determine that as soon as I begin to set up some
> > > > meetings. However, before I do that, I shall be pleased to work up an
> > > > agenda to present on the NB Web List to see just how many Citizens are
> > > > even interested in the administrative aspects of a Province or a
> > > > Region. As I find those who are interested I shall certainly appoint
> > > > them as Region Representatives and give them whatever authority they
> > > > need to manage that region. We already have two such in the NB a
> > > > representative for Legio III and a representative for cultural
> > > > activities, a legate for Connecticut, one for Maine, and one for Rhode
> > > > Island.
> > > >
> > > > Respectfully;
> > > >
> > > > Marcus Audens
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Don Cato

I like your proposal! This is something that really needs to be done as soon as possible.

Cisalpine Cicero

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Cato" <catoinnyc@...> wrote:
>
> Cato Lentulo sal.
>
> Since legally nothing in that current Fund can actually be used for anything other than the Magna Mater Project, we would need to create an actual Aedilician Fund, and re-name that existing fund the "Magna Mater Fund".
>
> My concept of the Aedilician Fund would not require donors to specify which projects, as we simply don't know what projects or proposals may come up in the future; it would be a way for citizens to donate for their fellow-citizens' ideas.
>
> In a non-profit such as ours, money donated to a specific project can *only*, legally, be used for that project; if the project doesn't happen, the money is either given back or the donor is asked what they would like done with it. For some reason the Magna Mater Project was lumped into the Aedilician Fund, thus rendering it, for a legal purposes, useless for the actual benefit of the citizens.
>
> My proposal is to create a real Aedilician Fund, under the control of the Curule and Plebeian Aediles, made up first of moneys granted by the Senate then further supported by both donations and a yearly amount from the Aerarium. Proposals would be made to the aediles, who would decide which ones to fund, with their decisions then being ratified by the Senate.
>
> Vale,
>
> Cato
>
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Cn. Cornelius Lentulus" <cn_corn_lent@> wrote:
> >
> > Cn. Lentulus C. Catoni sal.
> >
> > Let me say first that I fully agree with the idea of Cato about an Aedilician Fund. What's more, as to my knowledge, there IS already an Aedilician Fund, but with few money. So all we would need to do is to expand this fund. After a quick search in our website, I have found the 2009 Budget, and it includes the Aedilician Fund:
> >
> > http://novaroma.org/nr/Approved_Budget_2009
> >
> > And there is a page about the Nova Roman Aedilician Fund here:
> >
> > http://novaroma.org/nr/Aedilician_fund
> >
> > The four aediles TOGETHER, 4, working in a college, as they did in Rome, should have much more importance in our system, with more real works, especially related to our communication, cultural and commercial aspects, as they did have in ancient Rome, and legislation in the direction would be most welcome during this year.
> >
> > Cura, ut valeas!
> >
> >
> > --- Mer 14/4/10, Cato <catoinnyc@> ha scritto:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Cato omnibus in foro SPD
> >
> >
> >
> > This seems as good a time as any to remind people that I suggested - some three years ago - the idea of an Aedilician Fund.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>

Aeterniae Ciceroni sal,


This may shock you, never in all my long years of being here have I
encountered such a problem( I know right)... I don't believe there is a law,
if there is to be a law stating you must use certain forms of address at all
times, and I mean at all times... Then they have quite a bit of time on
their hands.

Vale Optime,
Aeternia



On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 4:32 PM, lucius_cornelius_cicero
<Cicero@...>wrote:

>
>
> Maybe you can help me Aeternia, since I can't seem to find the law that
> demands that you have to use certain forms of address on the Main List? But
> there must be one, if a Praetor is getting involved. Can you perhaps point
> me in the right direction, having been a citizen for so long as you have?
>
> Cicero
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>, Jennifer
> Harris <cyannerose@...> wrote:
> >
> > Cute, real real cute...
>
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:57 PM, rory12001 <rory12001@...> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Ex Officio Pratricum;
> > >
> > > Please observe Roman forms of address on the Main List.
> > >
> > > For those who need help here is a link to our web page:
> > > http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Latin_for_e-mail and ask Gn. Cornelius
> > > Lentulus, A. Tullia Scholastica, G. Petronius Dexter, NR's latinists
> for
> > > help.
> > > the Praetrices
> > >
> > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com><Nova-Roma%
> 40yahoogroups.com>, Jennifer
>
> > > Harris <cyannerose@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Esteemed Master Audens,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > That's what I was thinking, and then also realizing that the number
> of
> > > > increased Legates would also be another problem.. We do not currently
> at
> > > > this time have the populace to do such grandiose things. I was going
> to
> > > go
> > > > into a long response of how the Provinces need to be restructured,
> both
> > > the
> > > > positions of Governor & Legate need redefining to meet present and
> future
> > > > needs.. But it looks that there a few us thinking along the same
> lines
> > > :-)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Vale Optime,
> > > > Aeternia
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:24 PM, James Mathews <JLMTopog@>wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Mistress Aeternia;
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, it would and that is certainly the down side of the proposal,
> and
> > > > > a reason that it will probably not be considered. Master Lentulus
> > > > > disagrees with me and offers the solution to expand the Provincia
> to
> > > > > include all of the U.S., as I understand his view, and simply
> engage
> > > > > certain parts of the country as regions as the Senate and Governors
> > > > > would decide. I personally think that such would be very difficult
> to
> > > > > control and make work. As I said earlier , I will now shift to
> making
> > > > > large urban areas into regions within the Nova Britannia Province,
> now
> > > > > that I have seen the futility of working with a Geographical Region
> > > > > (state) and a whole province. It will take some time to establish
> as
> > > > > Master Lentulus has indicated we do not want Regions named with
> no-one
> > > > > in charge. My understanding of selecting provinces that had less
> than
> > > > > five Citizens was with the hope that they would grow. As Senator
> > > > > Maximus has indicated, what deadline is there for the major present
> > > > > goals of NR, and I would assume that that idea would also apply to
> > > > > Provinces authorized with less than five Citizens.
> > > > >
> > > > > Senator Horatia has indicated that it is not difficult to get
> people
> > > > > together for face-to-face meetings and I am afraid that I cannot
> agree
> > > > > with her. It is difficult to have a Citizen drive for and hour or
> two
> > > > > to attend a meeting that lasts for two hours even with the promise
> of
> > > > > a nice dinner afterward or the meeting planned around such and then
> > > > > drive two hours home again. The concerns include gas milage, work,
> > > > > study time (many Citizens are still in College), and family, The
> same
> > > > > concerns as other organizations have. I have served as President
> and
> > > > > Commander to several similar organizations and the concerns are
> always
> > > > > the same. Now it may well be that the real problem is with me, and
> if
> > > > > so this year will determine that as soon as I begin to set up some
> > > > > meetings. However, before I do that, I shall be pleased to work up
> an
> > > > > agenda to present on the NB Web List to see just how many Citizens
> are
> > > > > even interested in the administrative aspects of a Province or a
> > > > > Region. As I find those who are interested I shall certainly
> appoint
> > > > > them as Region Representatives and give them whatever authority
> they
> > > > > need to manage that region. We already have two such in the NB a
> > > > > representative for Legio III and a representative for cultural
> > > > > activities, a legate for Connecticut, one for Maine, and one for
> Rhode
> > > > > Island.
> > > > >
> > > > > Respectfully;
> > > > >
> > > > > Marcus Audens
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>

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

This is most disoncerting then! Why ever would the female praetor, in her official capacity, demand such a thing?

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Jennifer Harris <cyannerose@...> wrote:
>
> Aeterniae Ciceroni sal,
>
>
> This may shock you, never in all my long years of being here have I
> encountered such a problem( I know right)... I don't believe there is a law,
> if there is to be a law stating you must use certain forms of address at all
> times, and I mean at all times... Then they have quite a bit of time on
> their hands.
>
> Vale Optime,
> Aeternia
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 4:32 PM, lucius_cornelius_cicero
> <Cicero@...>wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Maybe you can help me Aeternia, since I can't seem to find the law that
> > demands that you have to use certain forms of address on the Main List? But
> > there must be one, if a Praetor is getting involved. Can you perhaps point
> > me in the right direction, having been a citizen for so long as you have?
> >
> > Cicero
> >
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>, Jennifer
> > Harris <cyannerose@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Cute, real real cute...
> >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:57 PM, rory12001 <rory12001@> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Ex Officio Pratricum;
> > > >
> > > > Please observe Roman forms of address on the Main List.
> > > >
> > > > For those who need help here is a link to our web page:
> > > > http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Latin_for_e-mail and ask Gn. Cornelius
> > > > Lentulus, A. Tullia Scholastica, G. Petronius Dexter, NR's latinists
> > for
> > > > help.
> > > > the Praetrices
> > > >
> > > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com><Nova-Roma%
> > 40yahoogroups.com>, Jennifer
> >
> > > > Harris <cyannerose@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Esteemed Master Audens,
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > That's what I was thinking, and then also realizing that the number
> > of
> > > > > increased Legates would also be another problem.. We do not currently
> > at
> > > > > this time have the populace to do such grandiose things. I was going
> > to
> > > > go
> > > > > into a long response of how the Provinces need to be restructured,
> > both
> > > > the
> > > > > positions of Governor & Legate need redefining to meet present and
> > future
> > > > > needs.. But it looks that there a few us thinking along the same
> > lines
> > > > :-)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Vale Optime,
> > > > > Aeternia
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:24 PM, James Mathews <JLMTopog@>wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Mistress Aeternia;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yes, it would and that is certainly the down side of the proposal,
> > and
> > > > > > a reason that it will probably not be considered. Master Lentulus
> > > > > > disagrees with me and offers the solution to expand the Provincia
> > to
> > > > > > include all of the U.S., as I understand his view, and simply
> > engage
> > > > > > certain parts of the country as regions as the Senate and Governors
> > > > > > would decide. I personally think that such would be very difficult
> > to
> > > > > > control and make work. As I said earlier , I will now shift to
> > making
> > > > > > large urban areas into regions within the Nova Britannia Province,
> > now
> > > > > > that I have seen the futility of working with a Geographical Region
> > > > > > (state) and a whole province. It will take some time to establish
> > as
> > > > > > Master Lentulus has indicated we do not want Regions named with
> > no-one
> > > > > > in charge. My understanding of selecting provinces that had less
> > than
> > > > > > five Citizens was with the hope that they would grow. As Senator
> > > > > > Maximus has indicated, what deadline is there for the major present
> > > > > > goals of NR, and I would assume that that idea would also apply to
> > > > > > Provinces authorized with less than five Citizens.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Senator Horatia has indicated that it is not difficult to get
> > people
> > > > > > together for face-to-face meetings and I am afraid that I cannot
> > agree
> > > > > > with her. It is difficult to have a Citizen drive for and hour or
> > two
> > > > > > to attend a meeting that lasts for two hours even with the promise
> > of
> > > > > > a nice dinner afterward or the meeting planned around such and then
> > > > > > drive two hours home again. The concerns include gas milage, work,
> > > > > > study time (many Citizens are still in College), and family, The
> > same
> > > > > > concerns as other organizations have. I have served as President
> > and
> > > > > > Commander to several similar organizations and the concerns are
> > always
> > > > > > the same. Now it may well be that the real problem is with me, and
> > if
> > > > > > so this year will determine that as soon as I begin to set up some
> > > > > > meetings. However, before I do that, I shall be pleased to work up
> > an
> > > > > > agenda to present on the NB Web List to see just how many Citizens
> > are
> > > > > > even interested in the administrative aspects of a Province or a
> > > > > > Region. As I find those who are interested I shall certainly
> > appoint
> > > > > > them as Region Representatives and give them whatever authority
> > they
> > > > > > need to manage that region. We already have two such in the NB a
> > > > > > representative for Legio III and a representative for cultural
> > > > > > activities, a legate for Connecticut, one for Maine, and one for
> > Rhode
> > > > > > Island.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Respectfully;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Marcus Audens
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Aeterniae Ciceroni sal,

Lets attempt to give the Praetrix a little credit...

A slight chance of maybe, if there is one, then we cannot be black kettles
of hypocrisy, we must adhere to rules and follow the law of course..

Treat others how you want to be treated its only fair :-)

vale,
Aeternia




On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 5:04 PM, lucius_cornelius_cicero
<Cicero@...>wrote:

>
>
> This is most disoncerting then! Why ever would the female praetor, in her
> official capacity, demand such a thing?
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>, Jennifer
> Harris <cyannerose@...> wrote:
> >
> > Aeterniae Ciceroni sal,
> >
> >
> > This may shock you, never in all my long years of being here have I
> > encountered such a problem( I know right)... I don't believe there is a
> law,
> > if there is to be a law stating you must use certain forms of address at
> all
> > times, and I mean at all times... Then they have quite a bit of time on
> > their hands.
> >
> > Vale Optime,
> > Aeternia
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 4:32 PM, lucius_cornelius_cicero
> > <Cicero@...>wrote:
>
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Maybe you can help me Aeternia, since I can't seem to find the law that
> > > demands that you have to use certain forms of address on the Main List?
> But
> > > there must be one, if a Praetor is getting involved. Can you perhaps
> point
> > > me in the right direction, having been a citizen for so long as you
> have?
> > >
> > > Cicero
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com><Nova-Roma%
> 40yahoogroups.com>, Jennifer
> > > Harris <cyannerose@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Cute, real real cute...
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:57 PM, rory12001 <rory12001@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Ex Officio Pratricum;
> > > > >
> > > > > Please observe Roman forms of address on the Main List.
> > > > >
> > > > > For those who need help here is a link to our web page:
> > > > > http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Latin_for_e-mail and ask Gn. Cornelius
> > > > > Lentulus, A. Tullia Scholastica, G. Petronius Dexter, NR's
> latinists
> > > for
> > > > > help.
> > > > > the Praetrices
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com><Nova-Roma%
> 40yahoogroups.com><Nova-Roma%
>
> > > 40yahoogroups.com>, Jennifer
> > >
> > > > > Harris <cyannerose@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Esteemed Master Audens,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That's what I was thinking, and then also realizing that the
> number
> > > of
> > > > > > increased Legates would also be another problem.. We do not
> currently
> > > at
> > > > > > this time have the populace to do such grandiose things. I was
> going
> > > to
> > > > > go
> > > > > > into a long response of how the Provinces need to be
> restructured,
> > > both
> > > > > the
> > > > > > positions of Governor & Legate need redefining to meet present
> and
> > > future
> > > > > > needs.. But it looks that there a few us thinking along the same
> > > lines
> > > > > :-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Vale Optime,
> > > > > > Aeternia
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:24 PM, James Mathews <JLMTopog@
> >wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Mistress Aeternia;
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Yes, it would and that is certainly the down side of the
> proposal,
> > > and
> > > > > > > a reason that it will probably not be considered. Master
> Lentulus
> > > > > > > disagrees with me and offers the solution to expand the
> Provincia
> > > to
> > > > > > > include all of the U.S., as I understand his view, and simply
> > > engage
> > > > > > > certain parts of the country as regions as the Senate and
> Governors
> > > > > > > would decide. I personally think that such would be very
> difficult
> > > to
> > > > > > > control and make work. As I said earlier , I will now shift to
> > > making
> > > > > > > large urban areas into regions within the Nova Britannia
> Province,
> > > now
> > > > > > > that I have seen the futility of working with a Geographical
> Region
> > > > > > > (state) and a whole province. It will take some time to
> establish
> > > as
> > > > > > > Master Lentulus has indicated we do not want Regions named with
> > > no-one
> > > > > > > in charge. My understanding of selecting provinces that had
> less
> > > than
> > > > > > > five Citizens was with the hope that they would grow. As
> Senator
> > > > > > > Maximus has indicated, what deadline is there for the major
> present
> > > > > > > goals of NR, and I would assume that that idea would also apply
> to
> > > > > > > Provinces authorized with less than five Citizens.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Senator Horatia has indicated that it is not difficult to get
> > > people
> > > > > > > together for face-to-face meetings and I am afraid that I
> cannot
> > > agree
> > > > > > > with her. It is difficult to have a Citizen drive for and hour
> or
> > > two
> > > > > > > to attend a meeting that lasts for two hours even with the
> promise
> > > of
> > > > > > > a nice dinner afterward or the meeting planned around such and
> then
> > > > > > > drive two hours home again. The concerns include gas milage,
> work,
> > > > > > > study time (many Citizens are still in College), and family,
> The
> > > same
> > > > > > > concerns as other organizations have. I have served as
> President
> > > and
> > > > > > > Commander to several similar organizations and the concerns are
> > > always
> > > > > > > the same. Now it may well be that the real problem is with me,
> and
> > > if
> > > > > > > so this year will determine that as soon as I begin to set up
> some
> > > > > > > meetings. However, before I do that, I shall be pleased to work
> up
> > > an
> > > > > > > agenda to present on the NB Web List to see just how many
> Citizens
> > > are
> > > > > > > even interested in the administrative aspects of a Province or
> a
> > > > > > > Region. As I find those who are interested I shall certainly
> > > appoint
> > > > > > > them as Region Representatives and give them whatever authority
> > > they
> > > > > > > need to manage that region. We already have two such in the NB
> a
> > > > > > > representative for Legio III and a representative for cultural
> > > > > > > activities, a legate for Connecticut, one for Maine, and one
> for
> > > Rhode
> > > > > > > Island.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Respectfully;
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Marcus Audens
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>

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

Salve,

There is, in fact, a passage in the constitution that flat-out
contradicts the Praetor's demand:

"The right to participate in all public fora and discussions, and the
right to reasonably expect such fora to be supported by the State. Such
communications, regardless of their content, may not be restricted by
the State, except where they represent an imminent and clear danger to
the Republic. Such officially sponsored fora may be expected to be
reasonably moderated in the interests of maintaining order and civility."

I doubt that anyone would think that using the respectful term "master"
or "mistress" rather than the greeting "salve" would rise to the level
of an imminent and clear danger to the Republic. ;-)

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus

Jennifer Harris wrote:

> Aeterniae Ciceroni sal,
>
>
> This may shock you, never in all my long years of being here have I
> encountered such a problem( I know right)... I don't believe there is a law,
> if there is to be a law stating you must use certain forms of address at all
> times, and I mean at all times... Then they have quite a bit of time on
> their hands.
>
> Vale Optime,
> Aeternia

Salve Audens,
I just have to point out that you were attributing to me words that belonged
to someone else who was replying to my post.
In fact, I stated several times that I do not believe in the necessity of a
"state" for Religio. We can have "sacra privata" (masterfully explained
below by Lentulus) and only bother about "sacra publica once we actually
have a state.

Optime vale,
Livia

----- Original Message -----
From: "Cn. Cornelius Lentulus" <cn_corn_lent@..>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 11:43 AM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Our religious concept of "Nation"


Cn. Lentulus pontifex M. Minucio Aedenti senatori et omnibus sal.


Esteemed Senator M. Audens!

Quirites!


You have just very well outlined what the point of our "nation-concept" is.
It is, as I pointed out in my earlier posts 10 days ago, actually a matter
of belief, a spiritual and religious concept, and as always with Roman
religious concepts, it is a matter of Roman legal thinking. Romans never
made difference between legal and religious concepts. The subject of the
Roman religion was always the Roman nation. Roman religion was nothing more
than prayers, rituals and sacrifices offered for the well-being of the Roman
People. This was the "sacra publica", as we call it. The "sacra privata",
however, was not at all regulated, it pertained under the authority of each
pater familias, therefore we cannot even pretend that we can create a
republic to be the home of the cults other than of the New Roman nation.

1. WHICH MEANING OF THE WORD "NATION" IS USED IN NOVA ROMA?

But what do we mean by the word "nation"? It seems that we interpret it in
different ways. Those who are against this concept in NR, they interpret it
literally, which is ridiculous, because none of us thinks that we consider
ourselves a really sovereign nation. I thought it was clear that everyone
agrees that our nationhood is cultural, symbolic, ideological, theoretical,
spiritual and different from the concept of "nation" what the UNO accepts as
"nation". We use another vocabulary, another meaning of this word.

It seems as if there would be one authentic and genuin, "official"
understanding of this concept. There is none. Several theorries interpret
the word and the concept in different ways. We, in Nova Roma, have our own
interpretation, too, at least for our own internal businesses.

2. MOST COMMON DEFINITIONS AND CONFUSIONS

According to the New Oxford American Dictionary, "a nation is a grouping of
people who share common history, culture, language -- or ethnic origin,
often possessing or seeking its own government." The concepts of nation and
nationality have much in common with ethnic
group and ethnicity, but have a more political connotation.


Wikipedia says that although "nation" is also commonly used in informal
discourse as a synonym for state or country, a nation is not identical
to a state. Confusingly, the terms "national" and "international" are
used as
technical terms applying to states. International law, for instance,
applies to relations between states.In the strict sense, terms such as
"nation," and
"people" denote a group of human beings.
For instance, the United Nations Organization, despite its name, has
states as its members, and not nations.

3. ALTERNATIVE DEFINITIONS, OTHER POINTS OF VIEW

3.A. Nations As Imagined Communities

Professor Benedict Anderson, an expert of International Studies, Government
at Cornell University, and is best known for his celebrated book "Imagined
Communities" (1983), argues that nations are "imagined communities" because
"the members of even the smallest nation will never know most of their
fellow-members, meet them, or even hear of them, yet in the minds of each
lives the image of their communion", and traces their origins back to
vernacular print journalism, which by its very nature was limited with
linguistic zones and addressed a common audience. Benedict Anderson argues
nations are imagined communities that are imagined as limited and sovereign.
The imagination is made possible by extensive use ideology and propaganda:
printing press, mass media etc. Nations are therefore defined by how the
communities are imagined.

3.B. Nations As Communities of Invented Traditions

Eric Hobsbawm argues nations are invented tradition, include invention of
education, public ceremonies and mass production of public monuments. The
nations are defined by those invented traditions.

3.C. Nations As Voluntary Communities

Some ideas of a nation emphasise not shared characteristics, but rather
on the shared choice for membership. The most famous voluntarist definition
of nation is that of Ernest
Renan. In a lecture in 1882, "Qu'est-ce qu'une nation?" he rhetorically
asked "What is a Nation?", and answered that it is a "daily
plebiscite". Renan meant, that the members of the nation, by their
daily participation in the life of the nation, show their consent to
its existence, and to their own continued membership. Renan saw the nation
as a group
"having done great things together and wishing to do more" ("avoir fait
de grandes choses ensemble, vouloir en faire encore").

4. CULTURAL NATIONHOOD

Perhaps the best defenition that applies to the nationhood of Nova Roma is
that of a "cultural nation". A base line to define it is that the members of
a cultural nation are aware of constituting an ethical-political body
together, which is differentiated from others by the members sharing a
number of defining cultural features. Those features can include language
(Latin for Nova Roma), religion (Roman religion), tradition (mos maiorum),
or shared history (Roman history and our 13 years of NR history). All this
can be taken as a sign of a historically evolved distinct culture. The
question whether a nation needs to have an associated territory is subject
of debate.

The concept of cultural nation is normally coupled with a historical
doctrine taking as a principle that all humans can be divided into groups
called nations. In this sense, we are dealing with an ethical and
philosophical doctrine which is at the basis of the ideology of nationalism.
The members of a nation are distinguished by a common identity and generally
by a shared origin and the sense of common ancestry. Individuals, however,
can have diverging personalities and beliefs, live in different places and
speak different languages and still see each other as members of the same
nation.

There are cases in which a group of persons defines itself as a nation not
based on the features they have, but for the features they lack or dislike.
The feeling of belonging to a nation is then used as a defense against other
groups, even if these other groups would appear to be closer in matters of
ideology cultural practices. In the case of Nova Roma, we don't define our
nationhood based on features we lack or dislike, but what we like, and what
we aspire for. Finally, members of a nation can emphasize their common
history despite ethnic and linguistic differences, as is the case of
Switzerland, which sees it self as a "Willensnation" (nation by will).

4.A. Cultural Nations

If the cultural nation is conceptualized as exclusively ethnic, and not as
requiring a territory, a number of nations without land can be found. A
prominent example would be the "gypsy nation"-- a cultural nation can exist
without having an independent state, and not all independent states are
cultural nations. Many independent states are simply administrative unions
of different cultural nations or peoples.

Other examples of cultural nations without states are the Jews before the
creation of the state of Israel. On the other hand, states like Belgium
consist of several cultural nations, most prominently Flemish and Walloons.
The question of whether the state of Canada harbours one cultural nation or
two (British Canadian and Québécois) has been object of political debate as
well. It could also be said that the nations of the English, Scottish and
Welsh are also nations without states as they exists as a larger sovereign
state known as the United Kingdom.

4.B. The Concept of "Roman Nation" and Nationhood in Nova Roma

Romans did not use the word "natio" in that political way, as Latin "natio"
meant "race" or "tribe", but what Romans called "populus Romanus" it was
very close to how today we can interpret "political nation". So, though
"nation" is a modern concept, it is not entirely modern, and Rome was the
very first example of a refined concept of nationhood in the history,
although it is different in some ways from modern concept of nationhood.

Now the question is how we understand the nationhood in Nova Roma as it is
applied to the Nova Roman nation? It is sure that we can call ourselves
"nation", if we differentiate bewteen different meanings of the word and we
make it clear (as I did) that our nationhood is NOT equal to a nationhood
accepted by the UNO, and our understanding of "Nova Roman Nation" is
cultural, intentional, religious and symbolic.

I think it was clear that we agreed in our previous debates that a
modification of the Constitution that makes these things clear will be
welcome. But the current proposal just obfuscated it, and opened the
possibility for a total denying of our nationhood, whivh would have been a
lie. I encourage evere Nova Roman to approach the concept of nation with a
more theroretical point of view, and let it be clear that the word means
many things, from entities like the USA to the group of gypsies worldwide,
from Monaco to the Jewish diasporas before the mid 20th century.

I am not a lunatic when I say this, but it is quite clear to me that we
*CAN* call ourselves a nation in some of the many senses of this word, and I
agree to the idea that a more precise and rationalistic definition of these
concepts should be adopted into our constitution, but the current proposal
was not satisfactory to that.

5. RELIGIOUS NATIONHOOD

Now we have a beautiful 13 years of communication with the Gods, all have
been done in the name of the New Roman Nation. The Gods accepted it, as they
helped hugely Nova Roma, and today there are people from all over the world
who call themselves Nova Roman, the flag of Nova Roma is honoured from
Pannonia to the Americas, the Gods are worshipped in the name of the Nova
Roman People from Dacia to Sarmatia, from America to Japan (with our new
augur from Japan). If the Gods would not accept the Declaration of the Roman
Nation Reborn, in 1998, Nova Roma could never attract so many people from so
many territories, and would still be limited to the few founding people, to
those 10-15 people in the East USA, who founded it. But no, Nova Roma,
slowly, is more and more real, and we are at the point that we actually
succeed in creating a real identity, a real religion and we have our own
traditions, our own "mos" is a living, but very young, little child of us.

4.A. Contract with The Gods

We now have a contract, a new contract with the Gods. They consider us the
New Roman nation, even if we are only 1000 people. It's the basis of our
"belief". The United Nations Organization's or anyone's opinion doesn't
matter, we shall not and should not occupy ourselves with the "realist"
critics of people from outside Nova Roma. We are not for them, the theories
and beliefs about the Roman nation reborn is valid only in our internal
culture, *within* Nova Roma. To the poeple outside Nova Roma we are a
religious and educational, cultural organization, until we can prove it to
them that we are more than that.

To make it easier to understand, I have made several comparison about Nova
Roma and the (Catholic) Church. The beliefs in the Church are nothing more
than fantasies, dreams, or even lies to those who do not pertain to the
Church. Christians call themselves, and believe in it, that they are the New
Isreal, the New Nation of God. Does anyone challange this view, does any
serious person occupy himself about it, whether it is right or not? It is a
matter of belief. It may be right for those who adhere to this faith.
Similarly with the Eucharist. It is a simple piece of bread to those outside
the Church, but it is the living God in his real presence to those inside
the Church. It is a matter of belief: is it true or false? We can argue
about it, but to those who believe in it it remains true even if it is
incredible.

The nationhood of Nova Roma is similar to this. Those who call themselves
Nova Roma they believe that they are Nova Romans because they are part of a
Nova Roman nation. Unlike the reenactors who are only "scholarly" actors,
Nova Romans take Roman names because they take a new nationality besides
their native ones.

If we rigorously followed the "rationalistic" arguements of those who argued
against the nation-concept, we should drop our beliefs that we are the
resurrection of the Roman nation, therefore we would have abslotely no right
to call ourselves Romans anymore, we would absolutely no right to pray to
the Gods in the name of the Nova Roman Republic and its People anymore.

4. MEMBERSHIP IN THE RELIGIO IS MEMBERSHIP IN A NATION

You can start with Roman religion only if you are Roman. If you are Roman,
it means you are of Roman nationality. And, thanks to Gods, Roman
nationality was always a very open and flexible idea, as it's only
requirement was a Roman citizenship and Roman name and cultural identity.
Roman nationality was always a cultural and legalistic nationality. In Nova
Roma, however, we are humble and we do not claim we are right now the "real
Romans". With modesty we call ouselves only "New Romans", to indicate that
we are secondary to the real Rome, and we can only follow them, not replace
them.

In one word, Roman religion exists only for the Roman nation, it was never a
missionary religion, or a religion of prozeytism. To practice, to live the
Roman religion, you cannot convert to the religion, you must, and can only,
convert to the nation, and assume citizenship in the Roman, or Nova Roman,
nation. Until you don't identify yourself as of Roman nationality, your
religion, even if you practice in a Roman style, remains "barbarian", and
your prayers are not listened by the Roman Gods, but only by the local Gods
where you live.

5. CONCLUSION

So, to conclude: the idea, the concept that we are a new Roman nation, is
the cornerstone, or more exactly, the only one "stone" upon which a Roman
religion can be built up, and the only one thing that can authorize us to
call ourselves "Roman", or "Nova Roman" seriously.

If we drop the concept, we remain simple re-enactors, and our religion
remains the religion of our native nationality in "interpretatio Romana"
(practiced in Roman manner).


Thank you for reading this! It was quite long, but I hope it will open a new
way to understand each other better.

Vale et valete!


--- Mer 14/4/10, James Mathews <JLMTopog@...> ha scritto:



















Omnes:



In regard to Mistress Plauta's explanation about the beliefs of those

who embrace the Religio. Her comment that those who believe in the

Religio believe that if the business about a "Sovereign Nation" were

removed from the Constitution it would break a commitment to the Gods

that they worship is something new to me. I was not aware of that

since I do not embrace that belief structure. So, if that is a

truism, and I have no reason to believe that it is not, then since it

is a part and parcel of the Religio, and I have sworn to honor the

religio just as I honor the Catholics who light candles for their

wishes, I must now withdraw all my objections directed toward the

retention of the argued wording in the present Constitution. If it is

the basis of belief for the Religio as the lady has indicated, then I

cannot criticize that which involves another's belief structure. I

wish that I had been aware of that particular aspect much earlier and

I would never have entered this arena. I must apologize to all for

that ignorance of your beliefs and retire from the field. Since I am

not able to vote anyway, because Nova Roma does not recognize Marcus

Minucius Audens as a voting member, it will not make any serious

difference.



Respectfully;



Marcus Audens



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

























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

Salvete omnes,
please pay attention to what Lentulus writes about the province system. We
do have solutions for everything, and subdivisions that offer a great deal
of flexibility. All it takes is people willing to take advantage of it.
In fact, I know of oppida which hold regular meetings. One such example is
the oppidum of Urbs Roma itself, whose members meet at least every month.

Optime valete,
Livia

----- Original Message -----
From: "Cn. Cornelius Lentulus" <cn_corn_lent@...>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 7:04 PM
Subject: RE: [Nova-Roma] Provincial gatherings, travel costs...


Cn. Lentulus Ti. Paulino sal.


> We need to take a page out of the Roman playbook. Rome was
> among other things a group of CITY-STATES. We need to redraw
> our provinces around the idea of cities, towns ect.


It's better, Ti. Pauline, if we do not complicate these things. Let the
cities be cities and provinces provinces. We have a city-system in NR. If a
city or town and its agglomeration has at least 5 citizens, they can create
a self governing Nova Roman community, an OPPIDUM. So we already have this
means in our hands. Nova Roman community life can be centered around cities
and towns, and it does not depend on the provincial level, but it is totally
up to the local citizens to form local communities.

The same goes for counties, or smaller units. They can be established as
"regiones" with their own internal organization.

Let it be clear that a province is not a tool for the local citizens, but a
tool for the center of Nova Roma to check local Nova Roma. The governor is
the representative of the central government, the senate and the consuls,
and his job is to harmonize the local groups' activities in his province
with the expectations of the central administration.

In fact, we have too many provinces, and I think that the USA should be one
province, as it is one country, and all USA States should be regions of that
province. The job of the governor would be harmonize and control the
activity within this province, and report to the senate, while his legates
and prefects appointed to the local communities would lead the local
activity. Of course, the governor himself could personally lead those local
groups that are in his neighborhood. This would not only give more
significance to the original concept of what a Roman province was, but also
it would decrease the number of pro-magistrates, and lesser the huge
administration we currently have.

And all inactive provinces should be immediately disbanded, as paradoxes. A
province without government and citizens is not a province, so pretending
that we have two Asias, Venedia, Hibernia etc... is just obfuscating the
fact that those provinces are in fact dissolved by its citizens who left
them.

Aeterniae Liviae sal,

I agree the Oppidum was an excellent idea, my Oppidum meets on a regular
basis and we can actually discuss not just NR wise but Mundane as well..
It's nice to put a face to the people you talk to online, makes the whole NR
experience actually more realistic..


Vale,
Aeternia

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 5:05 PM, L. Livia Plauta <livia.plauta@...>wrote:

>
>
> Salvete omnes,
> please pay attention to what Lentulus writes about the province system. We
> do have solutions for everything, and subdivisions that offer a great deal
> of flexibility. All it takes is people willing to take advantage of it.
> In fact, I know of oppida which hold regular meetings. One such example is
> the oppidum of Urbs Roma itself, whose members meet at least every month.
>
> Optime valete,
> Livia
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Cn. Cornelius Lentulus" <cn_corn_lent@...>
> To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 7:04 PM
> Subject: RE: [Nova-Roma] Provincial gatherings, travel costs...
>
> Cn. Lentulus Ti. Paulino sal.
>
> > We need to take a page out of the Roman playbook. Rome was
> > among other things a group of CITY-STATES. We need to redraw
> > our provinces around the idea of cities, towns ect.
>
> It's better, Ti. Pauline, if we do not complicate these things. Let the
> cities be cities and provinces provinces. We have a city-system in NR. If a
>
> city or town and its agglomeration has at least 5 citizens, they can create
>
> a self governing Nova Roman community, an OPPIDUM. So we already have this
> means in our hands. Nova Roman community life can be centered around cities
>
> and towns, and it does not depend on the provincial level, but it is
> totally
> up to the local citizens to form local communities.
>
> The same goes for counties, or smaller units. They can be established as
> "regiones" with their own internal organization.
>
> Let it be clear that a province is not a tool for the local citizens, but a
>
> tool for the center of Nova Roma to check local Nova Roma. The governor is
> the representative of the central government, the senate and the consuls,
> and his job is to harmonize the local groups' activities in his province
> with the expectations of the central administration.
>
> In fact, we have too many provinces, and I think that the USA should be one
>
> province, as it is one country, and all USA States should be regions of
> that
> province. The job of the governor would be harmonize and control the
> activity within this province, and report to the senate, while his legates
> and prefects appointed to the local communities would lead the local
> activity. Of course, the governor himself could personally lead those local
>
> groups that are in his neighborhood. This would not only give more
> significance to the original concept of what a Roman province was, but also
>
> it would decrease the number of pro-magistrates, and lesser the huge
> administration we currently have.
>
> And all inactive provinces should be immediately disbanded, as paradoxes. A
>
> province without government and citizens is not a province, so pretending
> that we have two Asias, Venedia, Hibernia etc... is just obfuscating the
> fact that those provinces are in fact dissolved by its citizens who left
> them.
>
>
>


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

Salve Livia,

The very attitude taken by the SVR. Nova Roma was consciously founded to
espouse another philosophy.

Perhaps you joined the wrong group by mistake?

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus
Pater Patriae

L. Livia Plauta wrote:

> Salve Audens,
> I just have to point out that you were attributing to me words that belonged
> to someone else who was replying to my post.
> In fact, I stated several times that I do not believe in the necessity of a
> "state" for Religio. We can have "sacra privata" (masterfully explained
> below by Lentulus) and only bother about "sacra publica once we actually
> have a state.
>
> Optime vale,
> Livia

Salve,

I knew someone would have this, for once I find myself saying this to you..
That was spiffy of you :)

Vale,
Aeternia

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 5:19 PM, Vedius <vedius@...> wrote:

>
>
> Salve,
>
> There is, in fact, a passage in the constitution that flat-out
> contradicts the Praetor's demand:
>
> "The right to participate in all public fora and discussions, and the
> right to reasonably expect such fora to be supported by the State. Such
> communications, regardless of their content, may not be restricted by
> the State, except where they represent an imminent and clear danger to
> the Republic. Such officially sponsored fora may be expected to be
> reasonably moderated in the interests of maintaining order and civility."
>
> I doubt that anyone would think that using the respectful term "master"
> or "mistress" rather than the greeting "salve" would rise to the level
> of an imminent and clear danger to the Republic. ;-)
>
> Vale,
>
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus
>
>
> Jennifer Harris wrote:
> > Aeterniae Ciceroni sal,
> >
> >
> > This may shock you, never in all my long years of being here have I
> > encountered such a problem( I know right)... I don't believe there is a
> law,
> > if there is to be a law stating you must use certain forms of address at
> all
> > times, and I mean at all times... Then they have quite a bit of time on
> > their hands.
> >
> > Vale Optime,
> > Aeternia
>
>
>


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

Salvete omnes,
why are so many people making a big fuss about the praetrix inviting people
to use proper Roman forms of address. (Note she didn't mention any laws or
prospected punishments: she just issued an invitation).

On the other hand, why can't so many people be bothered to use proper Roman
forms of address, at least as a sign of respect?
It doesn't take a huge mental effort to at least learn to write "Salve" or
"Salvete". Nobody's requiring the more complicated forms of address like "A.
Sempronius Bestia C. Iulio Maiori S.P.D". For those it takes some IQ.

I, for example, find it a bit disturbing to be addressed as "mistress" as
I'm neither a brothel owner, not the lover of a married man. I just find the
matter not important enough to have mentioned it until now.
But there needs to be some some concerted effort at using an uniform method
of address, otherwise we could just address each other as "bro", chief", and
whatever else.

Agree, chief Vedius?

Optime valete,
Livia

> Salve,
>
> There is, in fact, a passage in the constitution that flat-out
> contradicts the Praetor's demand:
>
> "The right to participate in all public fora and discussions, and the
> right to reasonably expect such fora to be supported by the State. Such
> communications, regardless of their content, may not be restricted by
> the State, except where they represent an imminent and clear danger to
> the Republic. Such officially sponsored fora may be expected to be
> reasonably moderated in the interests of maintaining order and civility."
>
> I doubt that anyone would think that using the respectful term "master"
> or "mistress" rather than the greeting "salve" would rise to the level
> of an imminent and clear danger to the Republic. ;-)
>
> Vale,
>
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus
>
> Jennifer Harris wrote:
>> Aeterniae Ciceroni sal,
>>
>>
>> This may shock you, never in all my long years of being here have I
>> encountered such a problem( I know right)... I don't believe there is a
>> law,
>> if there is to be a law stating you must use certain forms of address at
>> all
>> times, and I mean at all times... Then they have quite a bit of time on
>> their hands.
>>
>> Vale Optime,
>> Aeternia
>
>

Dear Livia,

I personally find no compelling interest of the State in telling us how
we should address one another, as long as it's not an outright insult. I
daresay starting a post by saying "salve stercule" would be beyond the
pale no matter *how* correct the Latin was. (And, before the
caterwauling starts, that was said to make a point, which, if you find
the word offensive, you agree with.)

These things are usually best handled through acculturation and gentle
peer pressure, rather than top-down commands. If 95% of the folks on the
list address one another by the noted correct Latin forms (or at least
make a worthy attempt), newcomers will most likely follow, and as long
as those who don't are harmless in the forms of address they choose to
use, well... it's harmless.

At the risk of speaking on his behalf, the term "mistress" as used by
Marcus Audens was meant as an honorific in the strictest sense of the
word, and knowing him as I do, he would never have used it in the senses
of the term you mention below. I think that was pain from the context.

That being said, I'm all for correct Latin usages, and would love to see
Latin more adopted as a living language. But such initiatives are, I
think, best done from the ground up, so to speak, rather than imposed
from on high.

But yikes... that we even have to spend time talking about this sort of
thing is just ridiculous.

Yours,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus

L. Livia Plauta wrote:

> Salvete omnes,
> why are so many people making a big fuss about the praetrix inviting people
> to use proper Roman forms of address. (Note she didn't mention any laws or
> prospected punishments: she just issued an invitation).
>
> On the other hand, why can't so many people be bothered to use proper Roman
> forms of address, at least as a sign of respect?
> It doesn't take a huge mental effort to at least learn to write "Salve" or
> "Salvete". Nobody's requiring the more complicated forms of address like "A.
> Sempronius Bestia C. Iulio Maiori S.P.D". For those it takes some IQ.
>
> I, for example, find it a bit disturbing to be addressed as "mistress" as
> I'm neither a brothel owner, not the lover of a married man. I just find the
> matter not important enough to have mentioned it until now.
> But there needs to be some some concerted effort at using an uniform method
> of address, otherwise we could just address each other as "bro", chief", and
> whatever else.
>
> Agree, chief Vedius?
>
> Optime valete,
> Livia
>
>
>
>> Salve,
>>
>> There is, in fact, a passage in the constitution that flat-out
>> contradicts the Praetor's demand:
>>
>> "The right to participate in all public fora and discussions, and the
>> right to reasonably expect such fora to be supported by the State. Such
>> communications, regardless of their content, may not be restricted by
>> the State, except where they represent an imminent and clear danger to
>> the Republic. Such officially sponsored fora may be expected to be
>> reasonably moderated in the interests of maintaining order and civility."
>>
>> I doubt that anyone would think that using the respectful term "master"
>> or "mistress" rather than the greeting "salve" would rise to the level
>> of an imminent and clear danger to the Republic. ;-)
>>
>> Vale,
>>
>> Flavius Vedius Germanicus

Salvete!

Did I calculate the time incorrectly (certainly possible), or weren't we
supposed to see the voting results about 12 hours ago?

Voting ended on Sunday, plus 48 hours to get the final tally to the
consuls, plus 24 hours to post the results. That makes it about 10 AM
(EST) today. Or am I forgetting something?

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus

Cato Vedio omnibusque in foro SPD

Will wonders never cease...

In addition, I have floated the idea of a Pontifical Fund, much like the Aedilician Fund but focused specifically on subsidizing the ritual practices of both the sacra publica and the sacra privata of the religiones Romanae.

Individuals or groups could submit proposals to the Sacred College for the purchase of items necessary for performing rituals; the College, under the general supervision of the pontifex maximus, would administer the Pontifical Fund with different pontifices acting as direct administrators on a rotating schedule.

It would be interesting to see if donations to this specific fund could be tax deductable under our status as a non-profit.

Valete,

Cato

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Vedius <vedius@...> wrote:
>
> Salve,
>
> I think this is a terrific idea. Anything to get things going
> face-to-face in a practical fashion gets my endorsement.
>
> See? Cato and I *can* agree on something. :-)
>
> vale,
>
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus
>
> Cato wrote:
> > Cato omnibus in foro SPD
> >
> > This seems as good a time as any to remind people that I suggested - some three years ago - the idea of an Aedilician Fund.
> >
> > The Aedilician Fund would be for the specific purpose of subsidizing events in the provinces of Nova Roma; a citizen, group of citizens, or governor acting on behalf of his or her citizens, would approach the Senate and request funds for a specific Nova Roman event in that province. Be it purchasing incense and wine or oil for a simple ceremony, rent for a meeting space, or the purchase of a bull for sacrifice on behalf of the Respublica, we can - and should - support these efforts.
> >
> > The money could be requested as either a loan or an outright gift, depending on the nature of the event in question. I suggested that the amount in the Fund would be at least 10% of the previous year's income from taxes.
> >
> > For all the doom-and-gloom screeching we have heard from the fringe elements of the Respublica, we actually have a considerable sum available at our disposal; I think it is high time we start giving back to the provinces funds with which t further the goals of the Respublica.
> >
> > As a (hopeful) candidate for Aedilis Curulis, this will once again be a major element of my platform. Even if I am *not* elected Curule Aedile, as a senator I will fight for this kind of useful, appropriate use of funds available from the Aerarium.
> >
> > Valete,
> >
> > Cato
>

Cato Ciceroni sal.

There is no such requirement under our law.

It would seem to make sense as we are self-identified by our Roman names, but specific forms of address are purely an aesthetic choice apart from our Roman nomenclature.

Vale,

Cato

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "lucius_cornelius_cicero" <Cicero@...> wrote:
>
> Maybe you can help me Aeternia, since I can't seem to find the law that demands that you have to use certain forms of address on the Main List? But there must be one, if a Praetor is getting involved. Can you perhaps point me in the right direction, having been a citizen for so long as you have?
>
> Cicero
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Jennifer Harris <cyannerose@> wrote:
> >
> > Cute, real real cute...
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:57 PM, rory12001 <rory12001@> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Ex Officio Pratricum;
> > >
> > > Please observe Roman forms of address on the Main List.
> > >
> > > For those who need help here is a link to our web page:
> > > http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Latin_for_e-mail and ask Gn. Cornelius
> > > Lentulus, A. Tullia Scholastica, G. Petronius Dexter, NR's latinists for
> > > help.
> > > the Praetrices
> > >
> > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>, Jennifer
> > > Harris <cyannerose@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Esteemed Master Audens,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > That's what I was thinking, and then also realizing that the number of
> > > > increased Legates would also be another problem.. We do not currently at
> > > > this time have the populace to do such grandiose things. I was going to
> > > go
> > > > into a long response of how the Provinces need to be restructured, both
> > > the
> > > > positions of Governor & Legate need redefining to meet present and future
> > > > needs.. But it looks that there a few us thinking along the same lines
> > > :-)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Vale Optime,
> > > > Aeternia
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:24 PM, James Mathews <JLMTopog@>wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Mistress Aeternia;
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, it would and that is certainly the down side of the proposal, and
> > > > > a reason that it will probably not be considered. Master Lentulus
> > > > > disagrees with me and offers the solution to expand the Provincia to
> > > > > include all of the U.S., as I understand his view, and simply engage
> > > > > certain parts of the country as regions as the Senate and Governors
> > > > > would decide. I personally think that such would be very difficult to
> > > > > control and make work. As I said earlier , I will now shift to making
> > > > > large urban areas into regions within the Nova Britannia Province, now
> > > > > that I have seen the futility of working with a Geographical Region
> > > > > (state) and a whole province. It will take some time to establish as
> > > > > Master Lentulus has indicated we do not want Regions named with no-one
> > > > > in charge. My understanding of selecting provinces that had less than
> > > > > five Citizens was with the hope that they would grow. As Senator
> > > > > Maximus has indicated, what deadline is there for the major present
> > > > > goals of NR, and I would assume that that idea would also apply to
> > > > > Provinces authorized with less than five Citizens.
> > > > >
> > > > > Senator Horatia has indicated that it is not difficult to get people
> > > > > together for face-to-face meetings and I am afraid that I cannot agree
> > > > > with her. It is difficult to have a Citizen drive for and hour or two
> > > > > to attend a meeting that lasts for two hours even with the promise of
> > > > > a nice dinner afterward or the meeting planned around such and then
> > > > > drive two hours home again. The concerns include gas milage, work,
> > > > > study time (many Citizens are still in College), and family, The same
> > > > > concerns as other organizations have. I have served as President and
> > > > > Commander to several similar organizations and the concerns are always
> > > > > the same. Now it may well be that the real problem is with me, and if
> > > > > so this year will determine that as soon as I begin to set up some
> > > > > meetings. However, before I do that, I shall be pleased to work up an
> > > > > agenda to present on the NB Web List to see just how many Citizens are
> > > > > even interested in the administrative aspects of a Province or a
> > > > > Region. As I find those who are interested I shall certainly appoint
> > > > > them as Region Representatives and give them whatever authority they
> > > > > need to manage that region. We already have two such in the NB a
> > > > > representative for Legio III and a representative for cultural
> > > > > activities, a legate for Connecticut, one for Maine, and one for Rhode
> > > > > Island.
> > > > >
> > > > > Respectfully;
> > > > >
> > > > > Marcus Audens
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>

Cato Ciceroni sal.

Because the praetor does not know our law.

But is this a surprise?

Vale,

Cato

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "lucius_cornelius_cicero" <Cicero@...> wrote:
>
> This is most disoncerting then! Why ever would the female praetor, in her official capacity, demand such a thing?
>
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Jennifer Harris <cyannerose@> wrote:
> >
> > Aeterniae Ciceroni sal,
> >
> >
> > This may shock you, never in all my long years of being here have I
> > encountered such a problem( I know right)... I don't believe there is a law,
> > if there is to be a law stating you must use certain forms of address at all
> > times, and I mean at all times... Then they have quite a bit of time on
> > their hands.
> >
> > Vale Optime,
> > Aeternia
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 4:32 PM, lucius_cornelius_cicero
> > <Cicero@>wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Maybe you can help me Aeternia, since I can't seem to find the law that
> > > demands that you have to use certain forms of address on the Main List? But
> > > there must be one, if a Praetor is getting involved. Can you perhaps point
> > > me in the right direction, having been a citizen for so long as you have?
> > >
> > > Cicero
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>, Jennifer
> > > Harris <cyannerose@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Cute, real real cute...
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:57 PM, rory12001 <rory12001@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Ex Officio Pratricum;
> > > > >
> > > > > Please observe Roman forms of address on the Main List.
> > > > >
> > > > > For those who need help here is a link to our web page:
> > > > > http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Latin_for_e-mail and ask Gn. Cornelius
> > > > > Lentulus, A. Tullia Scholastica, G. Petronius Dexter, NR's latinists
> > > for
> > > > > help.
> > > > > the Praetrices
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com><Nova-Roma%
> > > 40yahoogroups.com>, Jennifer
> > >
> > > > > Harris <cyannerose@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Esteemed Master Audens,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That's what I was thinking, and then also realizing that the number
> > > of
> > > > > > increased Legates would also be another problem.. We do not currently
> > > at
> > > > > > this time have the populace to do such grandiose things. I was going
> > > to
> > > > > go
> > > > > > into a long response of how the Provinces need to be restructured,
> > > both
> > > > > the
> > > > > > positions of Governor & Legate need redefining to meet present and
> > > future
> > > > > > needs.. But it looks that there a few us thinking along the same
> > > lines
> > > > > :-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Vale Optime,
> > > > > > Aeternia
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:24 PM, James Mathews <JLMTopog@>wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Mistress Aeternia;
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Yes, it would and that is certainly the down side of the proposal,
> > > and
> > > > > > > a reason that it will probably not be considered. Master Lentulus
> > > > > > > disagrees with me and offers the solution to expand the Provincia
> > > to
> > > > > > > include all of the U.S., as I understand his view, and simply
> > > engage
> > > > > > > certain parts of the country as regions as the Senate and Governors
> > > > > > > would decide. I personally think that such would be very difficult
> > > to
> > > > > > > control and make work. As I said earlier , I will now shift to
> > > making
> > > > > > > large urban areas into regions within the Nova Britannia Province,
> > > now
> > > > > > > that I have seen the futility of working with a Geographical Region
> > > > > > > (state) and a whole province. It will take some time to establish
> > > as
> > > > > > > Master Lentulus has indicated we do not want Regions named with
> > > no-one
> > > > > > > in charge. My understanding of selecting provinces that had less
> > > than
> > > > > > > five Citizens was with the hope that they would grow. As Senator
> > > > > > > Maximus has indicated, what deadline is there for the major present
> > > > > > > goals of NR, and I would assume that that idea would also apply to
> > > > > > > Provinces authorized with less than five Citizens.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Senator Horatia has indicated that it is not difficult to get
> > > people
> > > > > > > together for face-to-face meetings and I am afraid that I cannot
> > > agree
> > > > > > > with her. It is difficult to have a Citizen drive for and hour or
> > > two
> > > > > > > to attend a meeting that lasts for two hours even with the promise
> > > of
> > > > > > > a nice dinner afterward or the meeting planned around such and then
> > > > > > > drive two hours home again. The concerns include gas milage, work,
> > > > > > > study time (many Citizens are still in College), and family, The
> > > same
> > > > > > > concerns as other organizations have. I have served as President
> > > and
> > > > > > > Commander to several similar organizations and the concerns are
> > > always
> > > > > > > the same. Now it may well be that the real problem is with me, and
> > > if
> > > > > > > so this year will determine that as soon as I begin to set up some
> > > > > > > meetings. However, before I do that, I shall be pleased to work up
> > > an
> > > > > > > agenda to present on the NB Web List to see just how many Citizens
> > > are
> > > > > > > even interested in the administrative aspects of a Province or a
> > > > > > > Region. As I find those who are interested I shall certainly
> > > appoint
> > > > > > > them as Region Representatives and give them whatever authority
> > > they
> > > > > > > need to manage that region. We already have two such in the NB a
> > > > > > > representative for Legio III and a representative for cultural
> > > > > > > activities, a legate for Connecticut, one for Maine, and one for
> > > Rhode
> > > > > > > Island.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Respectfully;
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Marcus Audens
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>

Cato Liviae sal.

Although, we can certainly practice the sacra publica as magistrates - and we do, to some extent, with the taking of auspices, etc.

One thing that has bothered me is that in ancient Rome the magistrates took the auspices, not the augurs; the augurs simply interpreted them if there was a question.

Vale,

Cato

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "L. Livia Plauta" <livia.plauta@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Audens,
> I just have to point out that you were attributing to me words that belonged
> to someone else who was replying to my post.
> In fact, I stated several times that I do not believe in the necessity of a
> "state" for Religio. We can have "sacra privata" (masterfully explained
> below by Lentulus) and only bother about "sacra publica once we actually
> have a state.
>
> Optime vale,
> Livia
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Cn. Cornelius Lentulus" <cn_corn_lent@>
> To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 11:43 AM
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Our religious concept of "Nation"
>
>
> Cn. Lentulus pontifex M. Minucio Aedenti senatori et omnibus sal.
>
>
> Esteemed Senator M. Audens!
>
> Quirites!
>
>
> You have just very well outlined what the point of our "nation-concept" is.
> It is, as I pointed out in my earlier posts 10 days ago, actually a matter
> of belief, a spiritual and religious concept, and as always with Roman
> religious concepts, it is a matter of Roman legal thinking. Romans never
> made difference between legal and religious concepts. The subject of the
> Roman religion was always the Roman nation. Roman religion was nothing more
> than prayers, rituals and sacrifices offered for the well-being of the Roman
> People. This was the "sacra publica", as we call it. The "sacra privata",
> however, was not at all regulated, it pertained under the authority of each
> pater familias, therefore we cannot even pretend that we can create a
> republic to be the home of the cults other than of the New Roman nation.
>
> 1. WHICH MEANING OF THE WORD "NATION" IS USED IN NOVA ROMA?
>
> But what do we mean by the word "nation"? It seems that we interpret it in
> different ways. Those who are against this concept in NR, they interpret it
> literally, which is ridiculous, because none of us thinks that we consider
> ourselves a really sovereign nation. I thought it was clear that everyone
> agrees that our nationhood is cultural, symbolic, ideological, theoretical,
> spiritual and different from the concept of "nation" what the UNO accepts as
> "nation". We use another vocabulary, another meaning of this word.
>
> It seems as if there would be one authentic and genuin, "official"
> understanding of this concept. There is none. Several theorries interpret
> the word and the concept in different ways. We, in Nova Roma, have our own
> interpretation, too, at least for our own internal businesses.
>
> 2. MOST COMMON DEFINITIONS AND CONFUSIONS
>
> According to the New Oxford American Dictionary, "a nation is a grouping of
> people who share common history, culture, language -- or ethnic origin,
> often possessing or seeking its own government." The concepts of nation and
> nationality have much in common with ethnic
> group and ethnicity, but have a more political connotation.
>
>
> Wikipedia says that although "nation" is also commonly used in informal
> discourse as a synonym for state or country, a nation is not identical
> to a state. Confusingly, the terms "national" and "international" are
> used as
> technical terms applying to states. International law, for instance,
> applies to relations between states.In the strict sense, terms such as
> "nation," and
> "people" denote a group of human beings.
> For instance, the United Nations Organization, despite its name, has
> states as its members, and not nations.
>
> 3. ALTERNATIVE DEFINITIONS, OTHER POINTS OF VIEW
>
> 3.A. Nations As Imagined Communities
>
> Professor Benedict Anderson, an expert of International Studies, Government
> at Cornell University, and is best known for his celebrated book "Imagined
> Communities" (1983), argues that nations are "imagined communities" because
> "the members of even the smallest nation will never know most of their
> fellow-members, meet them, or even hear of them, yet in the minds of each
> lives the image of their communion", and traces their origins back to
> vernacular print journalism, which by its very nature was limited with
> linguistic zones and addressed a common audience. Benedict Anderson argues
> nations are imagined communities that are imagined as limited and sovereign.
> The imagination is made possible by extensive use ideology and propaganda:
> printing press, mass media etc. Nations are therefore defined by how the
> communities are imagined.
>
> 3.B. Nations As Communities of Invented Traditions
>
> Eric Hobsbawm argues nations are invented tradition, include invention of
> education, public ceremonies and mass production of public monuments. The
> nations are defined by those invented traditions.
>
> 3.C. Nations As Voluntary Communities
>
> Some ideas of a nation emphasise not shared characteristics, but rather
> on the shared choice for membership. The most famous voluntarist definition
> of nation is that of Ernest
> Renan. In a lecture in 1882, "Qu'est-ce qu'une nation?" he rhetorically
> asked "What is a Nation?", and answered that it is a "daily
> plebiscite". Renan meant, that the members of the nation, by their
> daily participation in the life of the nation, show their consent to
> its existence, and to their own continued membership. Renan saw the nation
> as a group
> "having done great things together and wishing to do more" ("avoir fait
> de grandes choses ensemble, vouloir en faire encore").
>
> 4. CULTURAL NATIONHOOD
>
> Perhaps the best defenition that applies to the nationhood of Nova Roma is
> that of a "cultural nation". A base line to define it is that the members of
> a cultural nation are aware of constituting an ethical-political body
> together, which is differentiated from others by the members sharing a
> number of defining cultural features. Those features can include language
> (Latin for Nova Roma), religion (Roman religion), tradition (mos maiorum),
> or shared history (Roman history and our 13 years of NR history). All this
> can be taken as a sign of a historically evolved distinct culture. The
> question whether a nation needs to have an associated territory is subject
> of debate.
>
> The concept of cultural nation is normally coupled with a historical
> doctrine taking as a principle that all humans can be divided into groups
> called nations. In this sense, we are dealing with an ethical and
> philosophical doctrine which is at the basis of the ideology of nationalism.
> The members of a nation are distinguished by a common identity and generally
> by a shared origin and the sense of common ancestry. Individuals, however,
> can have diverging personalities and beliefs, live in different places and
> speak different languages and still see each other as members of the same
> nation.
>
> There are cases in which a group of persons defines itself as a nation not
> based on the features they have, but for the features they lack or dislike.
> The feeling of belonging to a nation is then used as a defense against other
> groups, even if these other groups would appear to be closer in matters of
> ideology cultural practices. In the case of Nova Roma, we don't define our
> nationhood based on features we lack or dislike, but what we like, and what
> we aspire for. Finally, members of a nation can emphasize their common
> history despite ethnic and linguistic differences, as is the case of
> Switzerland, which sees it self as a "Willensnation" (nation by will).
>
> 4.A. Cultural Nations
>
> If the cultural nation is conceptualized as exclusively ethnic, and not as
> requiring a territory, a number of nations without land can be found. A
> prominent example would be the "gypsy nation"-- a cultural nation can exist
> without having an independent state, and not all independent states are
> cultural nations. Many independent states are simply administrative unions
> of different cultural nations or peoples.
>
> Other examples of cultural nations without states are the Jews before the
> creation of the state of Israel. On the other hand, states like Belgium
> consist of several cultural nations, most prominently Flemish and Walloons.
> The question of whether the state of Canada harbours one cultural nation or
> two (British Canadian and Québécois) has been object of political debate as
> well. It could also be said that the nations of the English, Scottish and
> Welsh are also nations without states as they exists as a larger sovereign
> state known as the United Kingdom.
>
> 4.B. The Concept of "Roman Nation" and Nationhood in Nova Roma
>
> Romans did not use the word "natio" in that political way, as Latin "natio"
> meant "race" or "tribe", but what Romans called "populus Romanus" it was
> very close to how today we can interpret "political nation". So, though
> "nation" is a modern concept, it is not entirely modern, and Rome was the
> very first example of a refined concept of nationhood in the history,
> although it is different in some ways from modern concept of nationhood.
>
> Now the question is how we understand the nationhood in Nova Roma as it is
> applied to the Nova Roman nation? It is sure that we can call ourselves
> "nation", if we differentiate bewteen different meanings of the word and we
> make it clear (as I did) that our nationhood is NOT equal to a nationhood
> accepted by the UNO, and our understanding of "Nova Roman Nation" is
> cultural, intentional, religious and symbolic.
>
> I think it was clear that we agreed in our previous debates that a
> modification of the Constitution that makes these things clear will be
> welcome. But the current proposal just obfuscated it, and opened the
> possibility for a total denying of our nationhood, whivh would have been a
> lie. I encourage evere Nova Roman to approach the concept of nation with a
> more theroretical point of view, and let it be clear that the word means
> many things, from entities like the USA to the group of gypsies worldwide,
> from Monaco to the Jewish diasporas before the mid 20th century.
>
> I am not a lunatic when I say this, but it is quite clear to me that we
> *CAN* call ourselves a nation in some of the many senses of this word, and I
> agree to the idea that a more precise and rationalistic definition of these
> concepts should be adopted into our constitution, but the current proposal
> was not satisfactory to that.
>
> 5. RELIGIOUS NATIONHOOD
>
> Now we have a beautiful 13 years of communication with the Gods, all have
> been done in the name of the New Roman Nation. The Gods accepted it, as they
> helped hugely Nova Roma, and today there are people from all over the world
> who call themselves Nova Roman, the flag of Nova Roma is honoured from
> Pannonia to the Americas, the Gods are worshipped in the name of the Nova
> Roman People from Dacia to Sarmatia, from America to Japan (with our new
> augur from Japan). If the Gods would not accept the Declaration of the Roman
> Nation Reborn, in 1998, Nova Roma could never attract so many people from so
> many territories, and would still be limited to the few founding people, to
> those 10-15 people in the East USA, who founded it. But no, Nova Roma,
> slowly, is more and more real, and we are at the point that we actually
> succeed in creating a real identity, a real religion and we have our own
> traditions, our own "mos" is a living, but very young, little child of us.
>
> 4.A. Contract with The Gods
>
> We now have a contract, a new contract with the Gods. They consider us the
> New Roman nation, even if we are only 1000 people. It's the basis of our
> "belief". The United Nations Organization's or anyone's opinion doesn't
> matter, we shall not and should not occupy ourselves with the "realist"
> critics of people from outside Nova Roma. We are not for them, the theories
> and beliefs about the Roman nation reborn is valid only in our internal
> culture, *within* Nova Roma. To the poeple outside Nova Roma we are a
> religious and educational, cultural organization, until we can prove it to
> them that we are more than that.
>
> To make it easier to understand, I have made several comparison about Nova
> Roma and the (Catholic) Church. The beliefs in the Church are nothing more
> than fantasies, dreams, or even lies to those who do not pertain to the
> Church. Christians call themselves, and believe in it, that they are the New
> Isreal, the New Nation of God. Does anyone challange this view, does any
> serious person occupy himself about it, whether it is right or not? It is a
> matter of belief. It may be right for those who adhere to this faith.
> Similarly with the Eucharist. It is a simple piece of bread to those outside
> the Church, but it is the living God in his real presence to those inside
> the Church. It is a matter of belief: is it true or false? We can argue
> about it, but to those who believe in it it remains true even if it is
> incredible.
>
> The nationhood of Nova Roma is similar to this. Those who call themselves
> Nova Roma they believe that they are Nova Romans because they are part of a
> Nova Roman nation. Unlike the reenactors who are only "scholarly" actors,
> Nova Romans take Roman names because they take a new nationality besides
> their native ones.
>
> If we rigorously followed the "rationalistic" arguements of those who argued
> against the nation-concept, we should drop our beliefs that we are the
> resurrection of the Roman nation, therefore we would have abslotely no right
> to call ourselves Romans anymore, we would absolutely no right to pray to
> the Gods in the name of the Nova Roman Republic and its People anymore.
>
> 4. MEMBERSHIP IN THE RELIGIO IS MEMBERSHIP IN A NATION
>
> You can start with Roman religion only if you are Roman. If you are Roman,
> it means you are of Roman nationality. And, thanks to Gods, Roman
> nationality was always a very open and flexible idea, as it's only
> requirement was a Roman citizenship and Roman name and cultural identity.
> Roman nationality was always a cultural and legalistic nationality. In Nova
> Roma, however, we are humble and we do not claim we are right now the "real
> Romans". With modesty we call ouselves only "New Romans", to indicate that
> we are secondary to the real Rome, and we can only follow them, not replace
> them.
>
> In one word, Roman religion exists only for the Roman nation, it was never a
> missionary religion, or a religion of prozeytism. To practice, to live the
> Roman religion, you cannot convert to the religion, you must, and can only,
> convert to the nation, and assume citizenship in the Roman, or Nova Roman,
> nation. Until you don't identify yourself as of Roman nationality, your
> religion, even if you practice in a Roman style, remains "barbarian", and
> your prayers are not listened by the Roman Gods, but only by the local Gods
> where you live.
>
> 5. CONCLUSION
>
> So, to conclude: the idea, the concept that we are a new Roman nation, is
> the cornerstone, or more exactly, the only one "stone" upon which a Roman
> religion can be built up, and the only one thing that can authorize us to
> call ourselves "Roman", or "Nova Roman" seriously.
>
> If we drop the concept, we remain simple re-enactors, and our religion
> remains the religion of our native nationality in "interpretatio Romana"
> (practiced in Roman manner).
>
>
> Thank you for reading this! It was quite long, but I hope it will open a new
> way to understand each other better.
>
> Vale et valete!
>
>
> --- Mer 14/4/10, James Mathews <JLMTopog@...> ha scritto:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Omnes:
>
>
>
> In regard to Mistress Plauta's explanation about the beliefs of those
>
> who embrace the Religio. Her comment that those who believe in the
>
> Religio believe that if the business about a "Sovereign Nation" were
>
> removed from the Constitution it would break a commitment to the Gods
>
> that they worship is something new to me. I was not aware of that
>
> since I do not embrace that belief structure. So, if that is a
>
> truism, and I have no reason to believe that it is not, then since it
>
> is a part and parcel of the Religio, and I have sworn to honor the
>
> religio just as I honor the Catholics who light candles for their
>
> wishes, I must now withdraw all my objections directed toward the
>
> retention of the argued wording in the present Constitution. If it is
>
> the basis of belief for the Religio as the lady has indicated, then I
>
> cannot criticize that which involves another's belief structure. I
>
> wish that I had been aware of that particular aspect much earlier and
>
> I would never have entered this arena. I must apologize to all for
>
> that ignorance of your beliefs and retire from the field. Since I am
>
> not able to vote anyway, because Nova Roma does not recognize Marcus
>
> Minucius Audens as a voting member, it will not make any serious
>
> difference.
>
>
>
> Respectfully;
>
>
>
> Marcus Audens
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

C. Maria Caeca omnibus in foro S. P. D.

OK, I am, officially mortified (yet again). I want to pay my taxes. This
time, at least I was able to access my Album Civium page ...but I can't find
either a link or a button that says "pay taxes" and I thought there was one.
Where should I be looking?

Gratias tibi ago,
Valete bene,

C. Maria Caeca, trying to hide under the computer desk and type at the same
time.

Salvete omnes,

Forge my last post, please. I should have been more persistent and creative
...I apologize for the waste of your time. Mission accomplished.

Valete,
C. Maria Caeca

Salvete Romans,



How does one say "nanny state" in Latin?



Valete



Ti. Galerius Paulinus





To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
From: rory12001@...
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 20:57:45 +0000
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Provincial gatherings, travel costs... - a reminder from the Praetrices





Ex Officio Pratricum;

Please observe Roman forms of address on the Main List.

For those who need help here is a link to our web page:
http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Latin_for_e-mail and ask Gn. Cornelius Lentulus, A. Tullia Scholastica, G. Petronius Dexter, NR's latinists for help.
the Praetrices

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Jennifer Harris <cyannerose@...> wrote:
>
> Esteemed Master Audens,
>
>
> That's what I was thinking, and then also realizing that the number of
> increased Legates would also be another problem.. We do not currently at
> this time have the populace to do such grandiose things. I was going to go
> into a long response of how the Provinces need to be restructured, both the
> positions of Governor & Legate need redefining to meet present and future
> needs.. But it looks that there a few us thinking along the same lines :-)
>
>
> Vale Optime,
> Aeternia
>
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:24 PM, James Mathews <JLMTopog@...>wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Mistress Aeternia;
> >
> > Yes, it would and that is certainly the down side of the proposal, and
> > a reason that it will probably not be considered. Master Lentulus
> > disagrees with me and offers the solution to expand the Provincia to
> > include all of the U.S., as I understand his view, and simply engage
> > certain parts of the country as regions as the Senate and Governors
> > would decide. I personally think that such would be very difficult to
> > control and make work. As I said earlier , I will now shift to making
> > large urban areas into regions within the Nova Britannia Province, now
> > that I have seen the futility of working with a Geographical Region
> > (state) and a whole province. It will take some time to establish as
> > Master Lentulus has indicated we do not want Regions named with no-one
> > in charge. My understanding of selecting provinces that had less than
> > five Citizens was with the hope that they would grow. As Senator
> > Maximus has indicated, what deadline is there for the major present
> > goals of NR, and I would assume that that idea would also apply to
> > Provinces authorized with less than five Citizens.
> >
> > Senator Horatia has indicated that it is not difficult to get people
> > together for face-to-face meetings and I am afraid that I cannot agree
> > with her. It is difficult to have a Citizen drive for and hour or two
> > to attend a meeting that lasts for two hours even with the promise of
> > a nice dinner afterward or the meeting planned around such and then
> > drive two hours home again. The concerns include gas milage, work,
> > study time (many Citizens are still in College), and family, The same
> > concerns as other organizations have. I have served as President and
> > Commander to several similar organizations and the concerns are always
> > the same. Now it may well be that the real problem is with me, and if
> > so this year will determine that as soon as I begin to set up some
> > meetings. However, before I do that, I shall be pleased to work up an
> > agenda to present on the NB Web List to see just how many Citizens are
> > even interested in the administrative aspects of a Province or a
> > Region. As I find those who are interested I shall certainly appoint
> > them as Region Representatives and give them whatever authority they
> > need to manage that region. We already have two such in the NB a
> > representative for Legio III and a representative for cultural
> > activities, a legate for Connecticut, one for Maine, and one for Rhode
> > Island.
> >
> > Respectfully;
> >
> > Marcus Audens
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>






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

Maior civibus spd;
I'm buried under work right now, but certainly Dexter or Lentulus can give a better explanation than myself of the nature of Roman mos. To always look to a written law as the final word is a modern idea, Romans looked to their mos, their customs as do we Nova Romans.

In Britain there still is the concept of the weight of custom when it comes to their legal system. Anyway, why Roman address is important and the nature of mos - is something worthy of discussion.
vale
Maior

Cn. Lentulus M. Hortensiae praetrici Quiritibusque sal.

I am fully convinced that Senator M. Audens uses the forms "Master" and "Mistress" as a sign of utmost respect and humility, and therefore he deserves our appreciation and the same level of respect.

However, the Praetrix made some very good points as for the expected behaviour of Nova Romans. All Nova Romans are expected to endeavour and learn to behave like Romans. No written law is needed to this. This law is written in our hearts, in the very nature of what we are: a restoration of the Roman People.

Everything (except slavery, murder etc) that brings us closer to the Romans is a positive and laudable act in our civitas. Everything that brings us further from the Romans, is a negative, reprehensible act that we shall try to avoid.

We are simple students of Rome here. Our duty is to study what and how the Romans did, and to reproduce it in our community.

Romans avoided the words "dominus" or "domina" among free men, and they did it because they were very proud that they knew no lords, no masters above themselves.

I would never dare to lecture such an old and honourable dignity like our consular senator M. Minucius Audens, and I acknowledge his right to adhere forms he likes even if it contradicts to Roman customs, but I invite everybody to consider what I have written: we should not have written laws about why we have to try to behave and think like Romans.

We are here just to endeavour to behave and think like Romans.




--- Gio 15/4/10, rory12001 <rory12001@...> ha scritto:







 









Maior civibus spd;

I'm buried under work right now, but certainly Dexter or Lentulus can give a better explanation than myself of the nature of Roman mos. To always look to a written law as the final word is a modern idea, Romans looked to their mos, their customs as do we Nova Romans.



In Britain there still is the concept of the weight of custom when it comes to their legal system. Anyway, why Roman address is important and the nature of mos - is something worthy of discussion.

vale

Maior

























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

Lentulus Aeterniae sal.

>
> I agree the Oppidum was an excellent idea,  my Oppidum
> meets on a regular
> basis and we can actually discuss not just NR wise but
> Mundane as well..
> It's nice to put a face to the people you talk to online,
> makes the whole NR
> experience actually more realistic..

That's wonderful, and you and everyone, are the heroes of Nova Roma, who show the way to the rest of us.

Let me, however, ask a question. What is your oppidum? What's its name? Who are its elected officers and where is its constitution? A Nova Roman oppidum is an official self-governing entity, founded by a Charter and with its elected officers.

Is your oppidum the Oppidum Fluminis Gilae?

A. Tullia Scholastica Ti. Galerio Paulino L. Liviae Plautae quiritibus,
sociis, peregrinisque bonae voluntatis S.P.D.

>
> Salvete Romans,
>
>
>
> How does one say "nanny state" in Latin?

ATS: Well, my English-Latin dictionaries don't even list 'nanny,'
except as applying to female goats, so I can't help you there. Besides, I
strongly suspect that the concept of a nanny state was utterly alien to the
Romans, completely (to borrow a term) unRoman.

Plauta, 'mistress' is simply the full form of the word from which the
English abbreviations Miss and Mrs., a well as the more correct modern Ms.,
are derived There is nothing inappropriate about addressing someone as
Mistress Caeca, for example, any more than saying Master Avitus. The usage
we learnt in school, however, was that master was the title of prepubescent
boys, Mr. was the title of adult males, and adolescent males had no title.
Nonetheless, our modern titles do not fit very well with our Roman names,
and the titles mistress and master, which some find quaint, are actually
rather better.

As for using Roman salutations and closings, that is something one
expects here, but using any such additions is far better than the modern
lazy custom of omitting all salutations and even a signature, so that one
cannot discern who wrote the post one is reading. Not everyone here should
be expected to use Latin salutations, especially not the formal one such as
what I used above, but one should at least make an effort to greet one's
readers and sign one's work. That is simply good manners, and good sense.
It's far better to say 'Master Y' and 'Mistress X' than just to write some
text with no greeting or closing, or, for that matter, to say 'salve'
without the name of the person or persons addressed.

Miss Manners must be feeling faint seeing all of these letters without
so much as the most elementary hint of proper epistolary form...

>
>
>
> Valete
>
>
>
> Ti. Galerius Paulinus

Valete.

>
>
>
>
>
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> From: rory12001@...
> Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 20:57:45 +0000
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Provincial gatherings, travel costs... - a reminder
> from the Praetrices
>
>
>
>
>
> Ex Officio Pratricum;
>
> Please observe Roman forms of address on the Main List.
>
> For those who need help here is a link to our web page:
> http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Latin_for_e-mail and ask Gn. Cornelius Lentulus, A.
> Tullia Scholastica, G. Petronius Dexter, NR's latinists for help.
> the Praetrices
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Jennifer Harris <cyannerose@...> wrote:
>>
>> Esteemed Master Audens,
>>
>>
>> That's what I was thinking, and then also realizing that the number of
>> increased Legates would also be another problem.. We do not currently at
>> this time have the populace to do such grandiose things. I was going to go
>> into a long response of how the Provinces need to be restructured, both the
>> positions of Governor & Legate need redefining to meet present and future
>> needs.. But it looks that there a few us thinking along the same lines :-)
>>
>>
>> Vale Optime,
>> Aeternia
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:24 PM, James Mathews <JLMTopog@...>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Mistress Aeternia;
>>>
>>> Yes, it would and that is certainly the down side of the proposal, and
>>> a reason that it will probably not be considered. Master Lentulus
>>> disagrees with me and offers the solution to expand the Provincia to
>>> include all of the U.S., as I understand his view, and simply engage
>>> certain parts of the country as regions as the Senate and Governors
>>> would decide. I personally think that such would be very difficult to
>>> control and make work. As I said earlier , I will now shift to making
>>> large urban areas into regions within the Nova Britannia Province, now
>>> that I have seen the futility of working with a Geographical Region
>>> (state) and a whole province. It will take some time to establish as
>>> Master Lentulus has indicated we do not want Regions named with no-one
>>> in charge. My understanding of selecting provinces that had less than
>>> five Citizens was with the hope that they would grow. As Senator
>>> Maximus has indicated, what deadline is there for the major present
>>> goals of NR, and I would assume that that idea would also apply to
>>> Provinces authorized with less than five Citizens.
>>>
>>> Senator Horatia has indicated that it is not difficult to get people
>>> together for face-to-face meetings and I am afraid that I cannot agree
>>> with her. It is difficult to have a Citizen drive for and hour or two
>>> to attend a meeting that lasts for two hours even with the promise of
>>> a nice dinner afterward or the meeting planned around such and then
>>> drive two hours home again. The concerns include gas milage, work,
>>> study time (many Citizens are still in College), and family, The same
>>> concerns as other organizations have. I have served as President and
>>> Commander to several similar organizations and the concerns are always
>>> the same. Now it may well be that the real problem is with me, and if
>>> so this year will determine that as soon as I begin to set up some
>>> meetings. However, before I do that, I shall be pleased to work up an
>>> agenda to present on the NB Web List to see just how many Citizens are
>>> even interested in the administrative aspects of a Province or a
>>> Region. As I find those who are interested I shall certainly appoint
>>> them as Region Representatives and give them whatever authority they
>>> need to manage that region. We already have two such in the NB a
>>> representative for Legio III and a representative for cultural
>>> activities, a legate for Connecticut, one for Maine, and one for Rhode
>>> Island.
>>>
>>> Respectfully;
>>>
>>> Marcus Audens
>>>
>
>

Lentulus Liviae suae amicae s. p. d.

>>> In fact, I stated several times that I do not believe in the necessity of a "state" for Religio. We can have "sacra privata" (masterfully explained below by Lentulus) and only bother about "sacra publica once we actually have a state. <<<

Actually, optima mea Livia, I explained that *we*, in plural as a *community*, can not have a Roman "sacrum privatum", by the simple fact that it is private and unregulated, spontaneous and unorganized. Each house, each family has its own tradition, each pater familias decides how and what to do, and the purpose of the sacra privata is the individual and the family, not the community. It's not the religion of Rome, but the religion of the family.

If the Roman community wants to be an established Roman community with its community religion, they have to have a "church". And "church" in Roman sense is equal to "State".

It's possible to found private sodalitates to unite in worship, even inside Nova Roma but outside of Nova Roma as well, but the sodality religion can not involve the entirety of Roman religion, nor the full sense of Romanitas, and could be nothing more than a stub of something greater. It would be like a Catholic Order (a convent) without the Church. And without *being* Roman, i.e. Roman citizen in a Roman nation, we can't practice Roman religion anyway. Roman religion exists exclusively for Romans.

And Nova Roma was founded not simply to revive the Roman religion in a general sense, but exactly in order to resurrect the "national", public religion, exactly to resurrect the religious Roman Republic, to revive the pious Roman People, creating the New Roman People as an answer to the call of the Gods what the founders (and many others who joined) heard.

If we are religiously Romans, we are the Roman people, the successors of Roman "maiores" whom we chose to honour and worship as ancestors. If we are Romans, we constitute the Roman nation. And, as a Roman nation, we organize our community into a Roman state.

The founding of the Nova Roman "symbolic" state is a necessary thing if we want to revive the Roman Republic with its religion.

Was the founding of the Nova Roman Republic a bit premature? Shouldn't we first found a simple society/movement to organize the founding of a physical city, and only after the city was founded, to declare it as the New Roman Republic (probably without real sovereignty, as remaining part of the hosting state)? Yes, certainly, it would have been much wiser way of action, but once it was declared and founded, we should not abandon it if we ever take our sacral connection with the Gods serious. Founded prematurely, the Nova Roman republic is now only a symbolic entity, but nonetheless we have to uphold it as we confessed to be Her citizens, conducted sacrifices for Her, and took Oaths in Her name, for Her glory and Her defense.

I fully Agree with you, CICERO
 
that's why I believe that it is practically impossible for us and them to cohexist in the same Organization; we are not compatible, as We are open to welcome in our Pantheon any God, but They ARE NOT. Their Religion, same as the other  Abrahmitics, is supremacist and therefore INCOMPATIBLE with any Other.
 
VALE OPTIME.
LVCIVS Q. VESTA
 
 

--- Gio 15/4/10, lucius_cornelius_cicero <Cicero@...> ha scritto:


Da: lucius_cornelius_cicero <Cicero@...>
Oggetto: [Nova-Roma] Re: CHRISTIANS TO RESPECT ALL GODS// term "superstition"
A: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Data: Giovedì 15 Aprile 2010, 01:29


 



Surely it should be enough for them to simply agree to respect and not do anything to undermine the cultus deorum. Asking them to make declarations of belief that would obviously be in contravention of their dogma makes no sense. If a Christian acknowledges that their God is just one among many, they are no longer following Christian belief. If you join a predominantly Christian organisation, I'm sure you won't be happy to admit that the Gods are actually demons and that the only real God is Jesus? You would expect them to allow you to believe what you wish as long as you don't undermine their religion.

Cicero

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogrou ps.com, Lucius Quirinus <ostiaaterni@ ...> wrote:
>
> SALVETE OMNES
>  
> I would have no objections to have Christians in NOVA ROMA providing that they should publicly and officially declare to accept and respect all Gods of our Pantheon and thereby acknowledging that their God is just one among others.
> A reciprocal act of respect and equal dignity between us and them.
>  
> Comments are welcomed.
>  
> VALETE OPTIME
> LVCIVS Q. VESTA
>
> --- Dom 11/4/10, Vedius <vedius@...> ha scritto:
>
>
> Da: Vedius <vedius@...>
> Oggetto: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: On the use of the term "superstition"
> A: Nova-Roma@yahoogrou ps.com
> Data: Domenica 11 Aprile 2010, 02:16
>
>
>  
>
>
>
> Salve,
>
> I'm curious... has anyone actually advocated publicly for the removal of
> Christians from Nova Roma?
>
> For myself, I'd be content if they'd just keep their Christian practices
> to themselves, rather than spouting off about them here and in other
> fora, as recently happened.
>
> Vale,
>
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus
>
> T. Annaeus Regulus wrote:
> > Thanks for clearing that up. There are some that I would classify as 'hostile' towards Christianity, but you weren't one of them and I was somewhat disappointed at what I thought was your public stance against Christianity. Certainly not being a Christian and being hostile towards Christianity are separate things and I am glad that you seem to be the former.
> >
> > I also don't support the idea of a protected Christian institution in NR. It's pagan state cult is a unique aspect that I think adds another element of realism that we could not otherwise have, and as you point out, there is no need of Christians to practice their faith here. I share your views on Christians in NR. They were allowed in, encouraged even, and now are quite well established. To ask them to leave now would be unfair, and so we must make do. The fact that some use the fact that Christianity is not 'protected' to antagonize others is what really bothers me. To me, however, that is best remedied by maturity and cool-headedness, not legislation.
> >
> > Vale,
> > Regulus
> >
> >
> > From: QFabiusMaxmi@ aol.com
> > Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2010 6:13 PM
> > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogrou ps.com
> > Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: On the use of the term "superstition"
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > In a message dated 4/10/2010 12:28:23 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
> > t.annaevsregvlvs@ ymail.com writes:
> >
> > The fall of the Roman pagan religion was a tragedy. It was undoubtedly
> > enthusiastically encouraged and sometimes even orchestrated by Christian
> > authorities at the time. It was wrong. BUT - Neither you nor Cato were alive at
> > the time. No Christians in NR today had anything to do with the wrongs of
> > Antiquity. Clearly, just by the principle of self-selection, Christians who
> > have some sort of repugnance of pagan Roman culture aren't here. The
> > Christians you have here are genuinely interested in ancient Roman culture. Some
> > parts more than others perhaps, but I haven't heard anyone speak up to ban
> > the Religio, nor do I expect to. We are all brothers who share many of the
> > same goals, and we should be able to accommodate the idiosyncrasies of
> > pagans and Christians to accomplish our very clear goal - a living Roman
> > Republic, complete with a legally protected cultus deorum.
> >
> > Its not an issue for me, I was answering the Senator's question.
> >
> > I for one was baptized, was an altar boy, and got to handle the chalice
> > and monstrance, it was my job
> > to keep them polished.
> >
> > I left Catholicism in the 11th grade after attending classes of Fr
> > Wasko's Comparative Religion Studies at St. Augustine's.
> > To my horror my one true religion was actually a blending of three
> > religions. Disillusioned I left the Church and became an Agnostic. I had to fake
> > church activity till I was 18, because of my parents.
> > I became interested in the The Immortals after several interesting
> > visions/dreams.
> >
> > Cato's Eastern Rite is likely closer to the real religion in Roman times
> > then the West, and while I was studying for my MA I would attend this
> > Armenian church just to watch the rituals and processions. It was the closest I
> > could get to the Eastern Roman tradition and one that connected me with
> > Rome.
> >
> > Senator's Cato argument that Christianity here must be protected, is to me
> > a bit of hyperbole. It is already protected around the world.
> >
> > My view is this: If NR did not want Christians among its ranks then it
> > should have said so in its declaring documents. Since it did not, the point
> > is moot. Some of my best friends here in NR are Christians. I have
> > served along side them in government and in the Comita.
> >
> > Q. Fabius Maximius
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------ --------- --------- ------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>











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

M. Moravius Horatianus Quiritibus, cultoribus Deorum, et omnibus salutem plurimam dicit: Sanctissima Ceres vos porrigat opitula

Hodie est ante diem XVII Kalendas Maias; haec dies nefastus piaculum est: FORDICIDIA; Ludi Cerealis; Ventosa tempestas et imbres nec hoc constanter.

Felices natalis neptis Livia mea ! O, te, felicissima.


FORDICIDIA

"In Numa's kingship the harvest failed to reward men's efforts: the farmers, deceived, offered their prayers in vain. At one time that year it was dry, with cold northerly winds, the next, the fields were rank with endless rain: Often the crop failed the farmer in its first sprouting, and meagre wild oats overran choked soil, and the cattle dropped their young prematurely, and the ewes often died giving birth to lambs. There was an ancient wood, long untouched by the axe, still sacred to Faunus, the God of Maenalus, where He gave answers, to calm minds, in night silence. Here Numa sacrificed twin ewes. The first fell to Faunus, the second to gentle Sleep: both the fleeces were spread on the hard soil. Twice the king's unshorn head was sprinkled with spring water, twice he pressed the beech leaves to his forehead. He abstained from sex, no meat might be served at table, nor could he wear a ring on any finger. Dressed in rough clothes he lay down on fresh fleeces, having worshipped the God with appropriate words. Meanwhile Night arrived, Her calm brow wreathed with poppies, bringing with her shadowy dreams. Faunus appeared, and pressing the fleece with a hard hoof, from the right side of the bed, He uttered these words:

"'King, you must appease Tellus, with the death of two cows: Let one heifer give two lives, in sacrifice.'

"Fear banished sleep. Numa pondered the vision, and considered the ambiguous and dark command. His wife, Egeria, most dear to the grove, eased his doubt by saying: 'What's needed are the innards of a pregnant cow.'

"The innards of a pregnant cow were offered and the year proved more fruitful, and earth and cattle bore their increase." ~ P. Ovidius Naso, Fasti 4.641-672

The Fordicidia consisted of the sacrifice of a pregnant cow at each of the thirty curiae, with others sacrificed at the Arx. While the curiones and flamines sacrificed those in the curiae, the eldest Vestal Virgo sacrificed the fetal calves and kept their ashes. These ashes, representing each division of Rome, were combined with the dried blood of the October Horse and sprinkled on the purifying fires of the Parilia later this month. This sacrifice is considered by some to be an example of the earliest sort of sacrifice although there is nothing to draw such a conclusion. W. W. Fowler refers to a report from China of the very early 19th century where an annual sacrifice was made of a large porcelain cow. The cow was smashed open to reveal a multitude of small cows that were handed out as charms of fecundity in the new year, not unlike the use of a piñata with similar symbolism.

In discussing appropriate sacrifices, Sallustius says that it is first a matter of giving thanks to the Gods and Goddesses for all They have provided. One gives back a portion of what he has received. As such, what is appropriate to sacrifice to any deity depends upon what specific providence is under the deity. An appropriate sacrifice to Ceres, the Goddess of grain, would therefore be grain or bread; for Pomona, the Goddess of fruiting plants, the appropriate sacrifice would be the fruits She has provided. At Fordicia the pregnant cow represents Mother Earth, Tellus, and the fruits of Her labors, as She gives birth to all living things. The fetal calf represents the germinating seed in the earth and in herd animals, and is offered in anticipation of the produce of the earth for the herds and the crops. Even its extraction is symbolic of what is hoped for in the coming year, one calf sacrificed for a promise of many more in return.

Interesting is where these sacrifices took place, since the rite would seem to concern agriculture. The curiae were the urban districts of Rome. In contrast Numa had divided the countryside into pagi. Each curia had its own sacellum in which stood a table to receive offerings for Juno. The Arx, too, was associated mainly with Juno. Or perhaps we should say that these associations were with a Juno, or the juno of some other Goddess or Goddesses, any of which would be connected back in some way to Tellus. The nature of this sacrifice suggests its origin in the rural areas around Rome. However, the sacrifices of today took place inside the City and concern the food supply for the urban districts of the City.


AUC 332 / 421 BCE: Peace of Nikias ends the Archidamian War that would later prove to be the first phase of the Peloponnesian War.


AUC 710 / 43 BCE: Vibius Pansa defeated Anthony in the Battle of Bononia.

"For this reason a supplicatio is offered to Victoria Augusta in thanks giving for the victory at Mutina"


AUC 822 / 69 CE: Second day of the First Battle of Bedriacum, Vitellian legions under Caecina and Valens defeat the army of Otho near Cremona.


Our thought for today is on friendship, from L. Annaeus Seneca, On Tranquility of Mind 7.3

"Nothing, however, gives the mind so much pleasure as fond and faithful friendship. What a blessing it is to have those to whose waiting hearts every secret may be committed with safety, whose knowledge of you, you fear less than your knowledge of yourself, whose conversation soothes your anxiety, whose opinion assists your decision, whose cheerfulness scatters your sorrow, the very sight of whom gives you joy!"

Salve Vedi,
according to the Lex Fabia de ratione comitiorum centuriatorum the custodes
have to report the voting result exclusively to the consuls. This was done
within the 48 hour deadline, but I'm still waiting for feedback from the
consuls, who might not have come back yet from their meeting in Stockholm.

Last time I got scolded for posting the results without approval from the
consul.

This time if someone points me to a law that allows me to do so (and to the
one that prescribes the 24 hours deadline) I will be happy to post the
results, specially since they should cause no surprises to anybody.

Optime vale,
L. Livia Plauta custos

----- Original Message -----
From: "Vedius" <vedius@...>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 3:48 AM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Voting Results


> Salvete!
>
> Did I calculate the time incorrectly (certainly possible), or weren't we
> supposed to see the voting results about 12 hours ago?
>
> Voting ended on Sunday, plus 48 hours to get the final tally to the
> consuls, plus 24 hours to post the results. That makes it about 10 AM
> (EST) today. Or am I forgetting something?
>
> Valete,
>
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus
>
>

L. Livia Plauta C. Mariae Cecae sal.

You can't pay taxes yet, because the tax edict for this year has not been
published yet. I know it is ready, and I trust is will be published soon.

Optime vale,
Livia

> C. Maria Caeca omnibus in foro S. P. D.
>
> OK, I am, officially mortified (yet again). I want to pay my taxes. This
> time, at least I was able to access my Album Civium page ...but I can't
> find
> either a link or a button that says "pay taxes" and I thought there was
> one.
> Where should I be looking?
>
> Gratias tibi ago,
> Valete bene,
>
> C. Maria Caeca, trying to hide under the computer desk and type at the
> same
> time.
>
>

L. Livia Plauta A. Tulliae Scholasticae S.P.D.

I live on the other side of the pond, so I learned British English, where
"mistress" is never written out in full form (except for the meanings I
mentioned in another post). "Mrs" is also pronounced very differently from
"mistress", just as "Mr" is the abbreviation of "Mister" and not of
"Master". So it would be "Mister Avitus", and not "Master Avitus" (unless we
were playing S&M games).

Of course I can deduce from the context that Audens is perfectly innocent in
his use of the word "mistress", but I can't help flinching every time I see
the word.

Optime vale,
Livia

>
> Plauta, 'mistress' is simply the full form of the word from which the
> English abbreviations Miss and Mrs., a well as the more correct modern
> Ms.,
> are derived There is nothing inappropriate about addressing someone as
> Mistress Caeca, for example, any more than saying Master Avitus. The
> usage
> we learnt in school, however, was that master was the title of
> prepubescent
> boys, Mr. was the title of adult males, and adolescent males had no title.
> Nonetheless, our modern titles do not fit very well with our Roman names,
> and the titles mistress and master, which some find quaint, are actually
> rather better.
>

Livia Lentulo sal.

Well, as it happens there are quite a few organizations of cultores which
think that it is not necessary to found a "church" (state). I guess they see
themselves as a community of friends who help each other with the sacra
privata.

But the division between sacra publica and privata is an oversimplification.
In Rome there were many intermediate levels: some gentes could have common
cults, but specially there were many collegia dedicated to the cult of this
or that deity.

In my opinion (which I have repeated often enough) we fall into the category
of "collegium". Since we operate within states which do not have a pact with
the Roman deities, we are forced to be dedicated not just to one deity, but
to all Roman ones.
The fact that within our collegium we give to the officers names that are
taken from the Roman state organization does not make us a "state" or change
out status as a collegium.

Optime vale,
Livia

----- Original Message -----
From: "Cn. Cornelius Lentulus" <cn_corn_lent@..>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 11:31 AM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Our religious concept of "Nation"


Lentulus Liviae suae amicae s. p. d.


>>> In fact, I stated several times that I do not believe in the necessity
>>> of a "state" for Religio. We can have "sacra privata" (masterfully
>>> explained below by Lentulus) and only bother about "sacra publica once
>>> we actually have a state. <<<


Actually, optima mea Livia, I explained that *we*, in plural as a
*community*, can not have a Roman "sacrum privatum", by the simple fact that
it is private and unregulated, spontaneous and unorganized. Each house,
each family has its own tradition, each pater familias decides how and what
to do, and the purpose of the sacra privata is the individual and the
family, not the community. It's not the religion of Rome, but the religion
of the family.

If the Roman community wants to be an established Roman community with its
community religion, they have to have a "church". And "church" in Roman
sense is equal to "State".

It's possible to found private sodalitates to unite in worship, even inside
Nova Roma but outside of Nova Roma as well, but the sodality religion can
not involve the entirety of Roman religion, nor the full sense of Romanitas,
and could be nothing more than a stub of something greater. It would be like
a Catholic Order (a convent) without the Church. And without *being* Roman,
i.e. Roman citizen in a Roman nation, we can't practice Roman religion
anyway. Roman religion exists exclusively for Romans.

And Nova Roma was founded not simply to revive the Roman religion in a
general sense, but exactly in order to resurrect the "national", public
religion, exactly to resurrect the religious Roman Republic, to revive the
pious Roman People, creating the New Roman People as an answer to the call
of the Gods what the founders (and many others who joined) heard.

If we are religiously Romans, we are the Roman people, the successors of
Roman "maiores" whom we chose to honour and worship as ancestors. If we are
Romans, we constitute the Roman nation. And, as a Roman nation, we organize
our community into a Roman state.

The founding of the Nova Roman "symbolic" state is a necessary thing if we
want to revive the Roman Republic with its religion.

Was the founding of the Nova Roman Republic a bit premature? Shouldn't we
first found a simple society/movement to organize the founding of a physical
city, and only after the city was founded, to declare it as the New Roman
Republic (probably without real sovereignty, as remaining part of the
hosting state)? Yes, certainly, it would have been much wiser way of action,
but once it was declared and founded, we should not abandon it if we ever
take our sacral connection with the Gods serious. Founded prematurely, the
Nova Roman republic is now only a symbolic entity, but nonetheless we have
to uphold it as we confessed to be Her citizens, conducted sacrifices for
Her, and took Oaths in Her name, for Her glory and Her defense.

Salvete

Comparable to mister and mistress are Dominus and Domina.

It is proper and the polite manner to address a matron as Domina with her nomen; i. e. Domina Tullia. A woman would never be addressed by her praenomen in public (assuming she had a praenomen). Addressed simply by her nomen is also proper in familiar situations, as her nomen signifies she is the daughter of a particular gens. She may likewise be addressed by using her nomen and cognomen to designate her family; i. e. Tullia Scholastica. Calling a woman by a diminuative form of her nomen would imply she is a little girl, or perhaps a sweetheart, as in Tulillia. Today is my granddaughter Livia's fifth birthday, so it would be proper to call her Livilla, and next month is Julia's nineth birthday where she might be called Julilla. But by the age of twelve, or fourteen at least, such diminuative forms would be inappropriate except under certain circumstances; not publicly though.

For men, it can be proper to address the most senior member of a family who is present as Dominus with his nomen; i. e. Dominus Tullius. Normally men should be addressed by praenomen and nomen; i. e. Marcus Tullius. But if Marcus and his father were present, then his father, out of respect for his age, could be addressed as Dominus Tullius. More often though Dominus is used to designate social rank and implies a subservient relationship of the addressee to the one addressed. The emperor was addressed as Dominus by everyone, just as the master of a household would be addressed as Dominus by his servants. A patron is addressed as Dominus by his clientellia, and the emperor was patron over everyone.

Romans were highly conscious of social ranking and therefore very conscious of how they addressed one another. Addressing someone in an improper manner, even if a polite manner, could be taken as a slight. For example, Senator Marinus having been a censor before should be addressed as Censorius Equitius, not as Consularius Equitius Marinus as that might be taken as an insult for not recognizing the highest office he attained. But unless you are a client of Marinus, it is inappropriate to address him as "Domine Equiti" in all situations. Being overly polite to a person, above their station, could also be a form of insult, depending how it was put. Calling someone Dominus could, for example, imply that he has pretensions of becoming emperor. Addressing Cato as Consularius Equitius could also be intended as an insult, as he hasn't attained that office just yet. To the Romans any deviation from the proper address would be an insult.

In our own community, with its more egalitarian social norms, Dominus may be used as a sign of greater respect. So it is appropriate in more instances in Nova Roma than the Romans would have used it.

Another term that designates a relationship is Magister (master). This term can refer to one's teacher, rather than social rank. Even an emperor might address his teacher as Magister. Magister was also a term of office. For example the highest officer in the Fratres Arvales was the Magister. Usually the Magister of a sodalitas like the Fratres Arvales was the newest member or most junior member. (The emperor was always a membe of the Fratres Arvales but never elected as Magister.) So while Magister designates some relationship, it does not designate any social ranking, only some office, and it is improper to use as a general form of address.

Such subtleties are lost in Nova Roma where most do not know the proper cases to use when addressing others. Cato! I saw you write "Cato Appius Galerianus..." when properly it should be "C. Equitius Appio Galeriano s. p. d." or more familiarily "Salve Appi Galeriane." But "Appius Galerianus" is never a proper way to address someone. I only point out Cato's error because he is usually very careful to use proper Latin forms. In our more friendly and familial community, use of any Latin is appreciated and is never really required.

Valete optime
M. Moravius Piscinus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "A. Tullia Scholastica" <fororom@...> wrote:
>
> A. Tullia Scholastica Ti. Galerio Paulino L. Liviae Plautae quiritibus,
> sociis, peregrinisque bonae voluntatis S.P.D.
> >
> > Salvete Romans,
> >
> >
> >
> > How does one say "nanny state" in Latin?
>
> ATS: Well, my English-Latin dictionaries don't even list 'nanny,'
> except as applying to female goats, so I can't help you there. Besides, I
> strongly suspect that the concept of a nanny state was utterly alien to the
> Romans, completely (to borrow a term) unRoman.
>
> Plauta, 'mistress' is simply the full form of the word from which the
> English abbreviations Miss and Mrs., a well as the more correct modern Ms.,
> are derived There is nothing inappropriate about addressing someone as
> Mistress Caeca, for example, any more than saying Master Avitus. The usage
> we learnt in school, however, was that master was the title of prepubescent
> boys, Mr. was the title of adult males, and adolescent males had no title.
> Nonetheless, our modern titles do not fit very well with our Roman names,
> and the titles mistress and master, which some find quaint, are actually
> rather better.
>
> As for using Roman salutations and closings, that is something one
> expects here, but using any such additions is far better than the modern
> lazy custom of omitting all salutations and even a signature, so that one
> cannot discern who wrote the post one is reading. Not everyone here should
> be expected to use Latin salutations, especially not the formal one such as
> what I used above, but one should at least make an effort to greet one's
> readers and sign one's work. That is simply good manners, and good sense.
> It's far better to say 'Master Y' and 'Mistress X' than just to write some
> text with no greeting or closing, or, for that matter, to say 'salve'
> without the name of the person or persons addressed.
>
> Miss Manners must be feeling faint seeing all of these letters without
> so much as the most elementary hint of proper epistolary form...
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Valete
> >
> >
> >
> > Ti. Galerius Paulinus
>
> Valete.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> > From: rory12001@...
> > Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 20:57:45 +0000
> > Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Provincial gatherings, travel costs... - a reminder
> > from the Praetrices
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Ex Officio Pratricum;
> >
> > Please observe Roman forms of address on the Main List.
> >
> > For those who need help here is a link to our web page:
> > http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Latin_for_e-mail and ask Gn. Cornelius Lentulus, A.
> > Tullia Scholastica, G. Petronius Dexter, NR's latinists for help.
> > the Praetrices
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Jennifer Harris <cyannerose@> wrote:
> >>
> >> Esteemed Master Audens,
> >>
> >>
> >> That's what I was thinking, and then also realizing that the number of
> >> increased Legates would also be another problem.. We do not currently at
> >> this time have the populace to do such grandiose things. I was going to go
> >> into a long response of how the Provinces need to be restructured, both the
> >> positions of Governor & Legate need redefining to meet present and future
> >> needs.. But it looks that there a few us thinking along the same lines :-)
> >>
> >>
> >> Vale Optime,
> >> Aeternia
> >>
> >> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:24 PM, James Mathews <JLMTopog@>wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Mistress Aeternia;
> >>>
> >>> Yes, it would and that is certainly the down side of the proposal, and
> >>> a reason that it will probably not be considered. Master Lentulus
> >>> disagrees with me and offers the solution to expand the Provincia to
> >>> include all of the U.S., as I understand his view, and simply engage
> >>> certain parts of the country as regions as the Senate and Governors
> >>> would decide. I personally think that such would be very difficult to
> >>> control and make work. As I said earlier , I will now shift to making
> >>> large urban areas into regions within the Nova Britannia Province, now
> >>> that I have seen the futility of working with a Geographical Region
> >>> (state) and a whole province. It will take some time to establish as
> >>> Master Lentulus has indicated we do not want Regions named with no-one
> >>> in charge. My understanding of selecting provinces that had less than
> >>> five Citizens was with the hope that they would grow. As Senator
> >>> Maximus has indicated, what deadline is there for the major present
> >>> goals of NR, and I would assume that that idea would also apply to
> >>> Provinces authorized with less than five Citizens.
> >>>
> >>> Senator Horatia has indicated that it is not difficult to get people
> >>> together for face-to-face meetings and I am afraid that I cannot agree
> >>> with her. It is difficult to have a Citizen drive for and hour or two
> >>> to attend a meeting that lasts for two hours even with the promise of
> >>> a nice dinner afterward or the meeting planned around such and then
> >>> drive two hours home again. The concerns include gas milage, work,
> >>> study time (many Citizens are still in College), and family, The same
> >>> concerns as other organizations have. I have served as President and
> >>> Commander to several similar organizations and the concerns are always
> >>> the same. Now it may well be that the real problem is with me, and if
> >>> so this year will determine that as soon as I begin to set up some
> >>> meetings. However, before I do that, I shall be pleased to work up an
> >>> agenda to present on the NB Web List to see just how many Citizens are
> >>> even interested in the administrative aspects of a Province or a
> >>> Region. As I find those who are interested I shall certainly appoint
> >>> them as Region Representatives and give them whatever authority they
> >>> need to manage that region. We already have two such in the NB a
> >>> representative for Legio III and a representative for cultural
> >>> activities, a legate for Connecticut, one for Maine, and one for Rhode
> >>> Island.
> >>>
> >>> Respectfully;
> >>>
> >>> Marcus Audens
> >>>
> >
> >
>